RadioBanter - View Single Post

September 23rd 04, 03:23 AM

(Len Over 21) wrote in
:

In article , Alun
writes:

I'm an Extra too, Len. I had a hard time learning CW upto 20 wpm and
don't even use it. There are two basic ways to respond to that
experience, either somehow rationalise it as a good thing(?), or
realise it was a waste of time and an unnecessary barrier to others.

The third alternative exists: Seeing morse code's faults and the
fact that all other radio services have dropped the mode for any
communications purposes. That happened to me over a half century
ago, altered my thinking about "radio."

Way back then, I'd swallowed the mythos of morse as put forth by
the radio gurus of the mighty morse league and thought it was truth.
It turned out to (rather obviously) be a falsehood of major
proportions. A sudden dose of reality has side-effects for some,
but not really to me. Just "recode" the thinking program and
continue was my way.

I find it truly remarkable that the Pro-Code Test Advocates have
this stubborn obstinacy on forcing all newcomers to test for morse
code for below-30-MHz privileges...a half century later. Other
radio services have long since discarded such a "necessity" and many
don't even require a license test to operate some HF radios (other
than the license-free CB things). [towards the first of this year
I operated a little SGC 2020 on HF and didn't require any showing of
any license to be legal about it...the 2020 is an HF SSB
transceiver, designed by Don Stoner's and Pierre Goral's
company...both sadly SK now]

As I've said before, radio amateurs should not have to have any
dispute over the code test. If it is kept, then it would be prudent
to change the name of the "service" to something as I suggested:
Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society. Or "Service" instead of Society.
Either way, the name would fit what it has become below 30 MHz.

I find it puzzling that there is still the demand for various
"classes" beyond an entry-level one. The only validity to that is
that it is an artificiality to bolster the egos of the participants.
Amateur radio is a hobby. It isn't a professional group, not a
guild, not a union, not a working craft. Why have all those
"classes" that will, auto- matically, lead to internal conflict of
some "better" than others?

Tsk. Those that have made it into the "upper" ranks can afford
to be condescending (to a fault sometimes) to others. That just
furthers the resentment. [not saying you do, Alun, you don't, but
many others are that way]

I tend to think that a single class of licence would be a good idea,
although many people argue that there should also be a beginner's licence,
and I am not totally opposed to that. I don't see a genuine need for more
than two licences, though. Also, I don't think subband restrictions by
licence class make any sense whatsoever, as the propagation is the same for
the whole band.

Ideally, I would give an entry level licence very restricted power on the
whole extent of a limited number of bands in different parts of the
spectrum. Needless to say, I wouldn't have a code test for any licence. The
problem would be the transition from the present situation to such a
scheme. The vested interests of those currently licenced probably make this
idea impracticable.