NCVEC Files No-Code Petition

i have looked at ehe " e - ham " and the " arrl " websites for more information on this topic, and I found NOTHING at all... if there is any truth to all of this, would not ONE or both of these sites have some information about it ? or did I not look in the right places, go look for your self

 

Hello all, I would never think for a minute that we have to follow other countries. Just because they dropped the code requirements does not mean that we should follow them to poor skills and lazy op's. I am sure of one thing even if a person applies themself to something and is set in getting something accomplished then they can do it. Simple really!! Some may say they will never need to know code but,what happens when there's no access to repeaters and hfphone or digital stuck somewhere with only the possibilty of using the ptt to try and make contact. You never know!! It's the best known signal of all in the world. If a person does'nt like code or does nto want to educate themselves even for a little 5WPM for the privliges of HF then stay as a no-code! Thats fine peole have a choice to make. Make the choice that so many little kids do 5 year olds and 10 year olds will be better op's in the future because they have a mind that's open too learning something new and usefull(CW!&#33.It's a great mode to have contacts and general qso's with folks. I know there are many new and fun digital modes out there but even they don't always get an answer.I know i do them all except pactor. I made the difference to myself and my elmers I made the effort to do code and use it. For those folks that say i hate code fine. It's a shame that you will never get the satisfaction of doing something you thought was not possible. It is sad to be afraid or be a quitter! Oh well I really hope the folks out there is this hobby fight the system and not give in to BS. CW is TRADITION in this country and in this field how can you better something by taking away the one requirement that sets us apart from the rest. All you folks that got into this hobby knew what the requirements were so don't cry about it. I say keep the code and make all the test even harder to weed out those who don't want to at least try. 5 wpm is the easiest test of all. It only takes as much time as the person puts into it. Apply yourself a little! If they do dicide to drop the code then, I say make the General and the Extra both 1/3 longer on the questions and a passing score of at least 85%. Oh but, that would only make the people who don't like to read get all upset! Oh well we shall see I for one will be sending cw and will be glad to here your cw call on the bands. To all a very 73 and God Bless.. de n1zw Rob

 

Excellent petition !!!  I support dropping morse code examinations 100%, not only in the USA, in Canada too!!

 

eHam is running it: http://www.eham.net/articles/6111

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k1ya @ July 31 2003,20:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">So learning code and taking the test is a "stressful experience".   I say Boo Hoo.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I thought that was taking it too far, too.  I support removing the code test, but NOT because I consider it "stressful" or "too hard".  In fact, I agree that 5 wpm is reasonable for its intended purpose, and I've enjoyed studying it so far because it will eventually open up a new aspect of ham radio for me regardless of whether or not I have to be tested on it.

I'd have to agree with the old timers on this one, though...the "stressful experience" argument is weak and kind of embarassing.

- Doug

 

oh yes it sure is..at a very IMPORTANT area ( third down from the top of the list , and falling with every hour ) { wow, thrilling }...now how about the " arrl " website ?, where is it in their website ( in the BRIEFS section, if at all ? )

 

kd4amg</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">oh yes it sure is..at a very IMPORTANT area ( third down from the top of the list , and falling with every hour ) { wow, thrilling }...now how about the " arrl " website ?, where is it in their website ( in the BRIEFS section, if at all ? )[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Look, you asked so I posted the link. As far as the ARRL? I'm kind of disappointed with their silence on the issue. I think they may feel that they are in a 'damned-if-they-do-and-damned-if-they-don't' situation. It would be nice if they had the lower oscillators to come out on one side or the other... or (gasp!) ask the members.

 

 The Extra Class is supposed be the "Elite" operator, and by that I do NOT bean exclusion or snobbishness, just that the Extra Class operators are supposed to know more technologically, and be GOOD examples of operating procedures. (WA9SVD


I don't think the word "elite" is the appropriate word.  The word should be "expert."(W5HTW)

===================================================================

Thank you, ED. Expert is the more appropriate word I was looking for.

 

First off, I am an Extra class licensee that took all his tests in FCC field offices. I have seen the testing procedures change radically since I got my extra in 1980. I bellyached mightily when the No-Code licenses were first issued, prophesying the demise of Amateur Radio as it was known then.

Boy was I wrong! No Code has been one of the best things to happen to Amateur Radio in the 32+ years I have been hamming. I have many many ham friends that I would have never met if the code-requirement had not been dropped for the entry-level license.

I haven’t read all the posts on this thread, but of the ones I read, not one has given a technical reason to keep CW as a requirement. With the advent of PSK-31 and portable stations, the old tale of “CW works when nothing else does” is no longer true, I have copied PSK-31 messages way below my hearing threshold, and I consider myself a good CW op.

What I have read is “I did it, so should you.” This, in my opinion, is a self-righteous arrogant viewpoint that neither improves the ham community, nor welcomes new hams. Conceit does not help our cause at all.

I realize that, to be and effective service to the nation, we must meet the needs of those we serve. Morse, like Latin, is now a dead language officially. Sure, many study and learn and enjoy the language. I’d rather use CW on HF then SSB any day of the week. I also realize that we must conform the testing to the needs of those we serve.

CW Testing, may it rest in peace

 

If you all want to remove the Morse Code requirement, that is fine. But replace it with something else. Amateur Radio needs to have some kind of practical test so that prospective licensees can demonstrate some kind of needed skill in order to get the license. If not, then make the test much more heavy in electrical theory.

In either case, we CANNOT -- we MUST NOT - allow Amateur Radio to become an easy-to-get license. Do we want a spectrum full of CB operators? NO! That is what will happen if we sit by and let this happen.

Keep the Morse Code requirement. Or replace it with some other practical test. Regardless of what you do, don't make the license so easy to get that people will start to ignore the rules and do their own thing.

And for those who whine about not wanting to meet the requirements of the higher licenses -- if you feel that you want a higher class license and think that you should not have to do anything to earn it -- then turn in your license and get off the air!


Paul, N0JAA

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (kd4amg @ July 31 2003,19:12)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> i have looked at ehe " e - ham " and the " arrl " websites for more information on this topic, and I found NOTHING at all... if there is any truth to all of this, would not ONE or both of these sites have some information about it ? or did I not look in the right places, go look for your self ??? ???[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Check out:

http://www.eham.net/articles/6111

The same petition in its entirety and a long scrolling page of posts follow.

 

I agree let the Morse code test go away. I have been trying to learn it. But I know after I pass the test I will never use it again. With all the technology we have today we don't need morse code any way.

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (n0jaa @ July 31 2003,14:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In either case, we CANNOT -- we MUST NOT - allow Amateur Radio to become an easy-to-get license.  [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Too Late -- Happened in 91 with the intro of no-coders!

DE kX5G
CW testiing, May it Rest in Peace

 

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nt7c @ July 30 2003,13:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Without regard to which side of this argument you are on, let's set one argument straight.

This is NOT Fred's (W5YI) petition.  This is a petition sponsored as a result of a democratic process (as decided by a majority vote by its members) of the National Conference of VEC's. An organization that includes the ARRL among its membership.

Will Fred benefit from removal of the code requirement in amateur licensing?  Probably in the area of written exam study material, but just as likely, he will loose revenue from a loss of sales in code study materials.  Exactly in the same proportion that the ARRL will gain and loose revenue I would suspect.

As we bemoan the fact that the 'newbies' will not understand code, our grandfathers are still bemoaning what sissies we were for riding the school bus.

Change is the only constant (my apologies for the cliche).  Let's start a new thread on a greater challenge.  How will we integrate the new operators into our ranks in a way to make our service stronger?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Thank you Monroe for this clarification.

In addition, Fred Maia - W5YI, retired from the study material publication and distribution business in October of 2000 when he sold his business. At the same time he retired from his FCC appointment as a VEC and is not an active part of the operations of the W5YI-VEC. Fred serves in an elected position on the NCVEC Question Pool Committee and as Chairman of the Rules Committee.

As to the petition, the NCVEC is only one of many that have already filed petitions with the FCC.
We can expect to see many different proposals tossed about before any final decision is rendered.

One thing we can be assured of, any single opinion or view on this issue will not change this or any other amateur rules. The FCC will always review all comments and act in accordance with what they view as the wishes of the majority in the amateur community.

Composing your comments for filing to the FCC is time better spent than beating up or down on posted opinions.
73

 

The sky is not falling.

All those who want to retain CW as a ham filter, please look into the future 50 years. Do you see anybody learning morse? I don't. Will the bands be overrun by c.b. ers? You can get on 6 and 2 meters today without learning a dit or a dah. I live in the Los Angeles. There are scores of repeaters. Most of them are silent most of the time. The band is not overrun at all. In fact, the only repeater that I can tell is consistently active in the infamous 147.435 machine. If the truth be told, the reason the other reapeaters are probably so quite is the only interesting QSOs to be heard are on 435.

Where CW is concerned, let it go folks. It's the past.

K6BBC