D Peter Maus wrote:
John S. wrote:

Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore
the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications
in the western world.


In fact, you are incorrect about this.


Repeating our message from earlier this week:


Morse Code is used to identify every VOR station in the US. VOR
station identification takes place every 30 seconds. Every VOR radio has
an ident switch that permits the pilot to hear the Morse Code identifier
for the VOR station he's monitoring when navigating by radio. When
flying under IFR conditions, this identifier is essential for correct
location of the aircraft on the grid by the pilot, and identification of
the correct course.

As mentioned earlier, what possible relevance does that have to
requiring a ham radio operator to pass a more code exam.


I would hardly call that insignificant. So, your premise on it's face
is incorrect.
You are way out in left field with this comparison.



Now, to be thorough, here....the Morse identifier for a given station
is printed on the sectional chart for that given region of airspace, so,
it's not necessary that a pilot actually know the code, but if you've
ever tried to read a sectional chart in flight, solo in the cockpit
while trying to navigate it can be an unnecessary and unwanted
distraction, especially when flying under less than optimum conditions.
But many pilots, having learned their Morse Code as Boy Scouts, or in
the military, or as part of the Amateur service, find it much simpler to
simply hear and understand the code, than to take the time to read and
then try to translate it into audible intelligence.

You may also be unaware that many V/UHF repeaters also identify by
Morse Code, so while it's not exactly a requirement that an operator
know the code, even non Code required licensees will find that knowing
the code actually facilitates their operations. Especially under unusual
propagation conditions, as we're experiencing now in Northern Illinois,
where VHF signals are skipping in from greater distances than local
repeaters' operating areas would normally fall. In which case, the Morse
identifier permits an operator to know if he's actually hearing the
correct repeater, or if he's actually hearing a repeater skipping in on
anomalous propragation.

So what. There are some police comm systems that still send a morse
identifier. I suppose it is entertaining and marginally useful to be
able to decode the id's by oneself, but that's about all.


Again, not insignificant. Especially where operation on a repeater is
by membership only and freeloaders are not welcome.

And again, to be thorough, non code licensees would still have to be
able to hear and understand the code to prevent freeloading, or take the
time to look up and translate the audible signal into understandable
language for identification.

So, there you have two significant and relevant, current applications
of Morse Code in the US, alone. There are more, to be sure.



For the record, this debate has been going on for decades. And it
laways boils down to the unwilling badgering the authority to be granted
the privileges that have been otherwise earned through diligent skill
acquisition. Even when I was in Jr High, the code test was a bone of
contention between members of the Ham Radio Club and applicants. And
that was 40 years ago. The fight has only gotten more shrill.

Yes, yes, I know and in every junior and high school there was once a
radio club with lots of junior sparkies having a lot of fun. But my
friend, along with narrow lapel natural shoulder grey flannel suits,
narrow dark ties and white buck shoes those times are long since gone.


And the code requirement itself was widely misunderstood. It was
assumed that one had to take one's tests in order of rank and that
before one could have phone access to the bands, one was required to
spend no less than two years pounding brass. This alone ran off a lot of
applicants. Truth is that one only had to know the code to get a
license. Which license was largely a matter of preference, with one
exception. I know many hams who never went through the Novice or
Technician classes, but went straight to General and above.

In my own circles, this misunderstood abhorrence of the code drove my
friends to CB, rather than to the more exciting and more useful world of
the Amateur service. I took a different path, learning the code so I
could hear and understand what was on my receiver, but since I had
little interest in actually conversing...most of the people I'd want to
talk to were in the skip zones anyway, I never pursued it further. I've
always enjoyed the listening more than the talking. But, as with many
things in life, I've learned that a skill acquired is never without
practical application, and have found myself brushing up on my code
frequently over the years, for everything from shortwave and ham band
listening, to aviation monitoring, to emergency communications
monitoring, to silly things like movie/tv watching. There is always a
relevant application to the knowledge of Morse Code.

Simply abandoning knowledge of something because there are newer,
better ways is only smart if the newer better ways can and will never
fail. This is fantasy at best. In which case having a fall back,
especially in communications, is prudent, even if it does seem like
filling up your head with useless baggage at the time. Considering how
times emergency communications have failed because of a poor microphone,
high noise, or even partial failure of a radio, OOK in Morse Code is
often the only option left in an emergency. And, as has been explained
here numerous times, unlike any other form of communication which
requires ever increasing layers of technology to get the job done, all
that's required in Morse Code is one human operator on each end, and the
ability to create a signal, regardless of how or what that signal is.

But there is nobody of consequence to talk with using morse code.
Other than other hams. If you send morse code signals to some federal
or state agency during an emergency there is a high likelihood they
won't even hear you. If an operator happens to hear you there is every
chance you will not be understood. The world has moved on from buggy
whips and horse drawn carriages.


Personally, when my ass is on the line, I'd much rather rely on an
experienced operator than any piece of technology.

Now, like the person sitting in the exitway on an airliner you may be
unable, or unwilling to assist in the event of an emergency, and that's
your right. But have the decency to get out of the way and let those who
are willing and able to assist to do so.


Your premise that "morse code is not used in any significant
communications in the western world," is patently false.

My, my you do like to write long and windy posts don't you.
Obfuscation by volume or something similar. The supposed justification
for requiring a morse code test of prospective hams is to establish a
corps of citizen communicators who can communicate with authgorities,
rescure agencies, etc., during some local, regional or national
emergency. Guess what...none of the agencies who those hams are
supposed to communicate with still use morse code. Sure, a ham can
passively decode VOR or other id's. I suppose that is fun for a while.
The only other real world use for morse code is a handful of hams to
communicate with one another. They can't talk to anyone else using
morse code because nobody else uses it to 2 way comms.