Morse is History

Future of Ham radio...

Just to remind you guys of three letters;

B
P
L

We're so worried about this code going away issue and turrning it into YET ANOTHER code/no-code debate.

HF will get blown away, we then can't get out on HF because it's being overun by the amount of QRM that will come from BPL. If this is the case, it will then in turn make a mute point out of this constant debate we are having. So keep going at it and by the time we realize it, BPL will run us all off of the HF bands.

Keep being distracted by a minor issue at this point rather than the big one that is little right now, but will bite us later.

Question? What is the most imminent problem?

BPL or the code possibly going away? BPL BY FAR worries me more than the code issue at this point.

I will leave you all with that as food for thought...

73!

 

Tradition, quality of operator, and trial by fire be damned. I just think that cw is cool. I am a no code at the moment because radio is a hobby, and I have alot on my plate; however, I am practicing and hopefully will make it soon. If you don't like it you don't have to use it. I don't think that they should make you know it, it makes for more bandwidth for the rest of the operators. How could you not like the idea of qrp rigs that can work the world for twenty dollars in parts and a wire dipole?

 

Ya know, I really hate to get myself involved in this stupid arguement....but again, I guess it's like the moth and the flame.  Sometimes you just can't resist....so, I would like to take a minute or two of your time to vent my own opinions & observations on the matter.

Firstly, we're talking about dropping morse testing as a requirement for a ham ticket.  I don't know why so many of you seem to take this to mean that dropping the testing is the same as eliminating cw from the operating modes authorized for use. Nothing in the works mentions eliminating cw as a mode of operation.

Secondly, cw is a mode of operation, nothing more and nothing less.  RTTY, packet, PSK, SSB, AM, FM, whatever....all are modes of operation.  There are no special tests for any of the others, so why do we still insist that there has to be a test for morse code?  No one has to demonstrate their ability to recognize baudot characters, ASCII characters, or any of the other non-voice modes.  And yet, we insist it is necessary for morse.  Why??  

Thirdly, if the requirement is dropped (and even if it isn't....) what I would like to see is a question pool developed concerning proper operating proceedures for all the "speciality" modes.  Proceedures are what make ANY mode effective, and alas, from what I've been hearing on the bands, everyone has their own idea of what the proceedures should be.  

Fourthly (is there such a word??), My own opinion is that if the morse test is dropped, there will still be plenty of ops who will still look to the key (key, keyer, keyboard...) as their passport to the wonderful world of radio communications.  In fact, they may even be a better bunch as they will be doing it out of love for the mode, the challange, or whatever.  Not because they had to do it.

Fifth, you are hearing this from a guy who has been a confirmed cw op for over fourty years.  I don't equate good operating with the ability to "pass" a 20wpm code test.  And yes, I did my 20 wpm test in front of an FCC examiner when you had to copy the text, not answer some questions about what was sent.

There are lots of speed demons on the air who think they're doing just great, and I'm sure it impresses the heck out of a lot of newbies to hear them chatting back and forth at 50 wpm.  Now, if they could copy it they may be surprised at the number of times they would hear mistake signs ("?") being sent, words sent over, poor spacing, uncorrected mistakes....etc.  For some reason speed seems to have taken over as the way we rate cw operators.....be it good speed, or bad speed....speed rules!  Well, personally, I'd rather have a qso at 5 or 10 wpm with someone who can actually send well at that speed, then to have to listen to rapid fire mistates being sent and corrected.  Passing the code exam didn't turn everyone into wonderful morse ops!

No, morse isn't on the way out.....and I think making it a personal preference mode might even help it to live a lot longer.

As for the person who wants to eliminate cw bands 'cos they didn't hear any ops on 80 meters in their "prime time".....get real.  I guess by your standards we need to turn 12 meters into cw/data only, 'cos I sure don't hear much in the way of ssb going on there these days (and to a lesser extent 17 meters as well).

Okay, I'm done.....don't know how rational I've been in slapping this togeather, but I did leave enough typing mistakes (and spelling errors) to satisfy the needs of the edit crew that seems to feast on those things.

73 to all....cu on cw!
Jim/k7unz

 

A tougher test? yeah, right.... not under the CURRENT EXAM STRUCTURE!

Today, to take the test, you go out and buy a book, you study the questions and answers, the SAME questions that are on the test, the test might as well be an OPEN BOOK test. There is no longer a requirement to know the subject [and this part is painfully true and very evident if you look at the dumb questions asked on some of the ham radio portals!].

Right now, the code is the only portion of the exam that proves you have knowledge of the subject. The answers to the Element 1 are not posted anywhere.

How about this idea.... why not change the exam stucture, let the questions and answers be secret, let the exam show that the applicant has knowledge of the subject, and then allow the applicant LIMITED HF privledges.

I would like to see a code-free HF license class, but QRP only, maybe even up to 20w ERP.

How about a two level license class, Class B and Class A. Class B would be all bands, all modes, 10W ERP below 30MHz, 100W ERP above 50MHz. Class A would be all bands, all modes, current max legal limit ERP. Class A would require 10wpm code, Class B would not.

This would give all the "no-code" types access to HF and still maintain privledges EARNED prior to any rules change.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KD4LEI @ Aug. 28 2003,19:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Future of Ham radio...

Just to remind you guys of three letters;

B
P
L

We're so worried about this code going away issue and turrning it into YET ANOTHER code/no-code debate.

HF will get blown away, we then can't get out on HF because it's being overun by the amount of QRM that will come from BPL.  If this is the case, it will then in turn make a mute point out of this constant debate we are having.  So keep going at it and by the time we realize it, BPL will run us all off of the HF bands.  

Keep being distracted by a minor issue at this point rather than the big one that is little right now, but will bite us later.

Question?  What is the most imminent problem?

BPL or the code possibly going away?  BPL BY FAR worries me more than the code issue at this point.

I will leave you all with that as food for thought...

73![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
if BPL does come to pass.....then CW will probably be the only mode that you WILL be able to use......

Kevin O'Dell

 

Seems like most of the people who have traditionally griped about the cw requirement just didn't want to do it!....no crime there! These same people don't want to "master" cw at a 5 wpm rate. No crime there either! The interesting part is listening to'em on local repeaters and low bands whining about it. That's ok too! Unlike them I have other portions of the bands to go where I don't hear any griping about it at all. We get to carry on our conversations with "the secret code" ......CW. It's really very pleasant! .....mike

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (W5HTW @ Aug. 28 2003,15:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">What was it Lincoln said?... You cannot create equality by taking from the stong and giving to the weak?   Or was that in another nation?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I think we can attribute that one to W5HTW...

Google is a wonderful tool for verifying quotes.

 

Can't fly air transport ie TWA, Delta, etc. because I'm discrimated against due to failing vision requirements.

Can't ever be NFL or NBA player because I'm discriminated against due to NEVER being good enuf physically.

Can't ever being Nobel winning scientist because I'm not THAT smart.

And I'll never be on the cover of GQ because I'm...well you can figgure that out.

Life is full of filtering processes.
The reality is we are not entitled to everything we want.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AC7XC @ Aug. 28 2003,16:58)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> [url="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0913990531/qid%3D1062114599/sr%3D11-1/ref%3Dsr_11_1/102-1486941-9755361"]Bonnie Crystal co-authored a CB Radio Book[/url]
[b] Bonnie Crystal just wants to sell more books, I'm sure her next book will be for ham radio portable operations while exploring caves. [/b] [img]http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif
I pray that the day is near when Morse code and the debate about it will end. I thank Bonnie for her thoughtful comments on this subject.   [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Thats gotta be an old book - especially with a section on "paying your dues to the FCC".

Citizens band used to be a hospitable place before they pulled the mandatory license. Sure you had a lot of strange lingo "wall to wall and treetop tall", breaker breaker etc

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KG4ROT @ Aug. 28 2003,18:22)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">"Mein Kampf" was also well written. Take it for what its worth.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Are you seriously comparing anything kq6xa wrote with something Adolf Hitler wrote? And actually I read the book - it wasn't well written (might be something in the translation...).

 

The FCC pulled the CB license requirement when they LOST CONTROL of the service, not the other way around as stated.

As for CW in the 21st Century -- it's BS.

K6BBC

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KA2GWR @ Aug. 28 2003,21:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Can't fly air transport ie TWA, Delta, etc. because I'm discrimated against due to failing vision requirements.

Can't ever be NFL or NBA player because I'm discriminated against due to NEVER being good enuf physically.

Can't ever being Nobel winning scientist because I'm not THAT smart.

And I'll never be on the cover of GQ because I'm...well you can figgure that out.

Life is full of filtering processes.
The reality is we are not entitled to everything we want.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Apples and Orange my friend. Good example (hypothetical) - "I can't ever climb a set of stairs because I lost my ability to walk" - well they put ramps everywhere (many of which are legislated) and now handicapped people can enter a lot of the same buildings everyone else does.

I never thought because of my learning disability I'd ever be able to go to college (at one point I was worried about graduating from high school), but I stuck to it and now I have two degrees .

Some unequalities can be overcome or resolved. I think most anyone can learn morse code, but I never had the time, energy or dedication to stick to it until I lost my nice job at Rulespace. At my current job at Stream Int. (quite possibly the hardest job I've ever had) I don't think I could ever find enough time in the day to do any meaningful practice. Contrary to popular belief the ARRL 5 wpm test is actually 15/18 wpm character rate with spacing (seems to vary between 15 and 18) - so its harder to learn than many think - it does require intensive study. I thought 13 real words per minute was actually easier.

I still like my hypothetical replacement for the code test - and especially because a minority few want to make tests harder. Many hams claim CW certification is useful for emergencies - why not require phyisical fitness, the ability to touch type or write in shorthand as well - all of those would be useful in an emergency? Another argument is that CW determines the quality of an operator, or operator skill. Why not have a test in addition to the cw test where you setup a computer and a sound card interface to decode psk31 (speaking from experience decoding took a bit of practice for me)? Many people I talk to every day are computer illiterate and would not be able to complete this task - many hams I have met at clubs and conventions shun computers as well - and if they have one all it does is read email and maybe log contacts.

Anyhow I leave the forum alone for while - gotta work tommorow.

 

After many years of screaming jet engines, machine gun fire, and not wearing ( Not having available. ) ear protection.. I have tried to pass the code test 4 times since I got my no-code ticket... I have taken lessons from the best there is, but when they put those headphones on me it's just a jumble of noise I hear. I have memorized the Gordon West tapes, I can follow my MFJ Code Tutor to the letter at 16 words a minute.. But as soon as I hear those ARRL code test tapes it's all over for me!
I passed the General written, and if I studied for the Extra, I'm sure I could pass that with ease. I'm all in favor of making the written much more interesting( Read that as HARDER.).
Please.. There are people out here that so want to get into this hobby, but they are stopped by the fact that there is a filter that won't let them. It's not that they are stupid, or lazy.. some people just don't get the code.
I guess there is nothing else I can say.. I would love to use the code if it just didn't sound like a bunch of noise to me. W7MAX

 

Excellent article, Bonnie. On my side of the border, I also wish that Industry Canada will step into the 21st century, possibly this autumn.

Personnaly, I consider the increase in new & young radioamateurs on the HF bands much more important for the future and development of our hobby than the Canada/USA reciprocity agreement that benefits only to those who travel across the border. I hope Canada will think about it seriously.

Bravo to all European countries who have dropped the morse-test requirement.

Mario, VA2VA  

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kc0nar @ Aug. 28 2003,16:24)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am not going to open the door on if I approve/disapprove the dropping of the code.  What I dont like is the holier-than-thou attitudes from some hams.Like I am XX years old and can copy XX wpm. Dont forget the "if i can do it anyone can" phrase.Im glad you got your code skill down, however it is not as easy for all of us.  I am 28 and have been trying for 2 and a half years now, close but just cant quite get it. It just seems to me that if the "big guns" of HF are going to look down on us who are struggling, it really takes away a lot of the drive.                        73 KC0NAR      P.S. I will still get Element 1 passed....sometime.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
KC0NAR:

You're right- we're NOT all the same, nor is it easy for everyone.  But you have a positive attitude, a fact which I believe makes all the difference.  You can and will pass it.  

And then, should you develop an interest in the code, plenty of us will be happy to work you on the air.

I'm by no means a 'big gun' on HF, just a guy who prefers code.  There's a difference between those of us who love and use Morse and those who would use it as an excuse to belittle you.  The former encourages and is willing to help while the latter takes the easy route and dismisses you.  

Unfortunately, the former seems somewhat underrepresented on these internet forums. I guess most of us spend more time on the air having fun than we do bickering on here.

All the best,
Brian k2acx