From: "bb" on Wed,Apr 20 2005 5:28 pm

cl wrote:
"bb" wrote in message

That's what you ask in here for! There are VEs in here, myself
included -
who can give guidance to those who ask.

cl

"Here" is all knowing.

Oh YESSS do these hams KNOW things... :-)

Part 97 doesn't define Morse Code, but specifies that it is to be
tested at 5WPM. Part 97 is silent on Farnsworth Code. Part 97
doesn't
say that the VE's must accomodate variations in testing.

Mama Dee would simply say "It's GOOD for you..." and
withold dessert. :-)

Why does a person have to ask RRAP when they should be able to read it
in the governing regulations???

I'm curious about the same thing. I've gotten all
these "interpretations" on it...which are simply
RATIONALIZATIONS anywhere else.

Part 97 is one of the shortest Parts in Title 47 C.F.R.

But, above all, MORSE must SHINE as the A-number-1
thing to DO!

Strange. 52 years ago the Army didn't require me
to know any morsemanship to operate and maintain
high-power HF transmitters (a mere 3 dozen). No
license, either. A year ago, nobody required me
to possess any license to operate a privately-
owned HF SSB transceiver on a boat. NO morse
needed to operate legally below 30 MHz then.

But, the ARS (Archaic RadioTELEGRAPHY Society)
stoutly maintains that *ALL* MUST test for morse
in order to have the "qualifications" to operate
below 30 MHz! FEDERAL Test! It's the LAW!!!

It's always been done that way...CANNOT be
changed. [been told that]