Paul Keinanen wrote in
:

On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 01:53:39 GMT, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:

VK is abolishing code testing effective January 1st. One more
down...

How many down - and how many to go?

What difference does it make? The number of countries that
have ended or are scheduled to end code testing can
only increase. Not a single of those countries is ever
likly to change back (IMHO).

So I ask again, what difference does it make?

It makes a difference especially in areas, where people frequently
travel or move abroad.

During the transition period, when some countries have removed the
Morse test requirement and some have not, there is quite a mess where
it is possible to operate on HF without a Morse test.

The legal status of the CEPT recommendations T/R 61-01 and T/R 61-02
is unknown, since updated version is still on the (hopefully) final
request for comments period, which ends at the end of this month. When
Finland removed the Morse test requirement starting at November 1st,
the initially proposed regulatory text contained references to the
updated CEPT recommendations, but since these recommendations were not
final at the end of last month, the references to these
recommendations were removed from the Finnish regulatory text.

My guess is that at least most European countries will remove the
Morse test requirement within the next two years, during which period
there is going to be a mess for all those travelling abroad. There was
already a mess a few years ago with the HAREC licenses, when some
countries dropped the speed from 12 WPM to 5 WPM before the HAREC
recommendation was updated.

After this transitional period there will still be countries that will
require "forever" the Morse test. These are most likely countries that
insisted prior to WRC03 that the wording in RR should allow each
administration to decide if the Morse test is required or not (while
most countries supported completely removing the requirement from the
Radio Regulations).

Especially for new hams that have never taken any Morse tests,
travelling to such countries would probably require taking a Morse
test in that country for HF access. There might be some problem taking
the test in the local language (and possibly using the Morse alphabet
used in that country).

Paul OH3LWR


I am not sure you are entirely right, Paul. Where reciprocal agreements
are in place, someone with the stipulated class of licence will be able to
operate with the agreed priviledges, regardless of how they obtained the
licence (saving any nationality or residence restrictions, or limitations
on using a reciprocal licence to gain further reciprocal priviledges).

If the Morse test is abolished in one's own country, and you obtain a
licence without passing a code test, you will be able to operate HF in
countries that honour your licence under a reciprocal agreement, even if a
Morse test is still required in that country.

This will create many odd anomalies, of course.

CEPT may work out slightly differently. Classes 1 and 2 have been merged,
but most national regulations still refer to them seperately, and most
licences still refer to one or the other. So, for a while, codeless hams
may not get HF priviledges under CEPT when they travel. If their licence
refers to a non-existent class 2, and the regs of the host country say
that the non-existent class 2s can only operate above 144 MHz, then that's
all they get.

Once their licence no longer says class 1 or class 2, I assume they would
get class 1 priviledges, even if the national rules of where they are
going remain unchanged and there is still a Morse test there.

Of course, the US issues a separate CEPT letter that you can download, but
the FCC hasn't abolished code testing yet, so I doubt that the text of the
letter will be altered yet. It's a good question, though. Presumably the
FCC should alter the letter anyway, to simply give Techs and above CEPT
operation. This is theoretically unrelated to whether code testing still
exists in the US.

There again, the FCC letter contains limitations on citizenship, even
though there are none in the CEPT agreement, and never have been. There is
an FCC rule that you must be a citizen of the country that issued your
licence to operate in the US under the CEPT, mirroring a similar rule
applying to reciprocal agreements. However, the letter says you must be a
US citizen to operate using a US licence under CEPT, even though there is
nothing to that effect either in FCC rules or in the CEPT agreement. This
additional limitation exists only in the letter itself, and nowhere else.