ad: Morse-1

Morse Codes trumps SMS in head to head combat

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by KF6KDA, May 7, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Subscribe
  1. PE1RDW

    PE1RDW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I´m not sure how things with emcomm are in the usa but in europe emcomm work is 95% vhf uhf.
    For that any licence class can help, including NCT.

    I just did a quick scan of the member base of our emcomm group, about 65% of those I know never passed a CW test, 20% I know have passed a CW test leaving 15% unknown.

    I guess it is more about attitude then a CW test.
  2. W5MJL

    W5MJL Ham Member QRZ Page

    Of course it is about attitude. It's about attitude here as well. Personally, I wouldn't want anyone in an emergency situation who wouldn't do what HAD TO BE DONE. The NCT's that refuse to learn code are part of a group that WILL NOT DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE. They are more likely to be the people that would gripe about an assignment given to them that they didn't like.

    I would compare this with the military. In the military YOU FOLLOW ORDERS. The worst thing that can happen in the military is for everyone to DO THEIR OWN THING. There are times when one can ask questions, and there are times where you just have to DO IT.
  3. AC0GT

    AC0GT Ham Member QRZ Page

    The "you" mentioned was inclusive of your cohorts.  Perhaps I should use the colloquial "y'all" in the future?  Y'all claim on how IMC knowledge is so vital to Amateur radio but the examples given rarely, if ever, actually involve Amateur radio.

    More personal attacks and table pounding.  Your fist must be bloody by now from hitting the table so hard and so often.  I've said this before but you did not seem to read it then, the FCC has to answer to the public, I am one member of that public.  Does the FCC have to answer to me?  Yes, just as much as they have to answer to you.  If they drop the IMC requirement completely they will also have to give a good reason.  The explanation already exists in the R&Os they published years ago.  But of course you say I read them wrong.  So tomorrow I'm going to petition my grade school for my money back as they did not teach me how to read.  I'm also going to send my bachelor degrees back to the university with a note of how it was given in error.  I'd do it today but I have to find my crayons and figure out how to lick a stamp.
  4. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    A simple gross generalization. I understand.

    An appropriate action considering your reading comprehension.

    Here's a hint. When you lick the stamp, lick the side with the glue and it goes on the envelope sticky side down.

    The secret is only having 3 fingers and a thumb in the fist that hits the table.

    This post was fun, but it didn't further your point of telegraphy test removal. Running out of patient arguments from NCI?
  5. KC0NBW

    KC0NBW Ham Member QRZ Page

    what is the total area of your country ?

    what is the total area of europe compared to the united states?

    most european countries are small by comparison to some states over here.

    i live in minnesota, it has a total area of 86,943 square miles.

    the county i live in is just short of 7,000 square miles !

    it would be difficult to cover the entire state via direct vhf/uhf radio let alone trying to cover a multi state area except for the new england area.
  6. kd4mxe

    kd4mxe QRZ Member QRZ Page

  7. PE1RDW

    PE1RDW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I´m not doubting that hf can have it´s use, I´m just curius how likely it is to have the need to cover a whole state or several states.
    My guess that that is only needed when a major huricane makes landfall and even then most of the work is done on a local scale.
    What I´m saying is that it is nice that you can get a message out of the state but that message first has to get to you and messages have to be moved localy.
    I hope everyone knows that moving local trafic is what vhf and uhf is best at, you could try it on 80 meters using nvis setups but from all the data I have seen it works less reliable then vhf and uhf.

    as for the area, have a look at the cia website it is all there
  8. KC0NBW

    KC0NBW Ham Member QRZ Page

    have you ever been to this country ?

    if not, it would be hard for you to visualize how sparsely populated some parts are.

    the single largest area in the continental 48 states where it is possible to get more than 5 miles(8.05 kilometers) from a road is in the arrowhead area of minnesota !

    i live in an unorganized( no local government structure) township where 21 of the 36 square miles have neither a house or a road in them.

    the 41,526 square kilometers of your country converts to 16,033 square miles.

    your country is only 2.6 times larger than the county i live in and has a population of 16 million people

    minnesota has a total population of about 4.9 million and the largest portion of that is in the 10 country metro area around st. paul and minneapolis .

    st louis county, where i live, is 6225 square miles and has a total population of about 200,000 people !

    well over half of the population is within 15 miles of the city of duluth !

    while it is possible to cover most european counties via vhf/uhf simplex, it just can't be done for most of the western part of the united states.

    this is a lot of area to try to cover with short range, line of sight radio !
  9. AB0WR

    AB0WR Ham Member QRZ Page

    " the single largest area in the continental 48 states where it is possible to get more than 5 miles(8.05 kilometers) from a road is in the arrowhead area of minnesota !"

    Not to nitpick but my wife's aunt lived on a ranch in NW Oklahoma and SW Kansas where the driveway to the ranchhouse alone is more than 5 miles.  [​IMG]

    I don't think people outside of this country understand just how sparsly populated some of it is - west Texas and areas of Montana have *lots* more of just about any critter you care to name than people.

    When you have to worry about the curvature of the earth to determine if you can hit repeaters (rather than obstructions) you know you have a problem using VHF/UHF for emergency links.

    tim ab0wr
  10. KY5U

    KY5U Subscriber QRZ Page

    Looks like the debate here is winding down, so before LXK starts popping in every couple of days and leaving a pot shot so he can convince himself he won, let me make a couple of comments.

    1. Who won this debate? In my opinion nobody did because there was no exchange of information. LXK held to his NCI points like a crack adict on his last rock refusing to acknowledge the simplest of points for fear his little NCT world would crash around his ears. And being the warm sensitive guy I am, I dug my heels in as well.

    2. What was proved in this debate? The obvious thing is that if someone like LXK has his head up and locked, there is little opportunity for common sense and compromise to work. He was the personfication of the NCI view. His goal is to remove telegrphy testing. He argued for 30 pages with someone who supports removal of telegraphy testing because my solution is a win-win compromise. What was proved is that the hard corps no coder does not want win-win unless both wins are for them.

    3. Was anything new said? I believe there is potential in investigating both the reasons why people get into Amateur Radio and why they leave Amateur Radio. There is low hanging fruit to "save" from what the ARRL already knows about 15% of new amateurs never getting on the air. I think the info about frequent users of IMC being better operators deserves a formal study and report. I believe we now know that a majority of young people probably could care less about Amateur Radio. We now know that IMC is not dead as a technology mode with SSCW, etc. We know that modes that young people want based on marketing research are modes that won't have needed bandwidth on HF. We know that with Japan's decision the chances of a majority of countries dropping IMC rests with us. Info on those that have already dropped the requirement is nice to know but irrelevent.

    4. Any new info on people involved? I believe that we now should look at info related to NCI and conflicts of interest with anti-amateur activity. We need to guard NCTs from being used by these people where it happens.

    5. What about the FCC? It is unknown what they will do. If they are logical and look at the facts, they will see a compromise is both easiest and most effective. Alot depends on our comments to the NPRM whatever it says. To the extent the FCC is willing to listen to new info since 98-143 will make the difference.

    6. What is the worst case scenario? Turning NCTs loose on HF with a General upgrade they did not earn by at least a written test. If I need to explain this to you, you'll never get it.

    7. What is the best scenario? Putting NCTs on HF in segmented band areas where the experiment can be monitored. All the honest complaints about IMC barring new applicants would be removed. The only difference between a NCT on HF and a General that passed elemet 1 would be more spectrum available. Surely an IMC skill test of 5wpm is not an imposition for more spectrum, but their bands would be a reasonable accomodation for NCTs.

    I enjoy debates and have no problem continuing with this one provided LXK can come up with something other than his opinion or NCI dogma. Otherwise, LXK, you have the last word. If it isn't really goofy, I'll let it alone.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page