RadioBanter - View Single Post

AJ Lake · September 21st 08, 11:30 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.homebrew

wrote:

AJ Lake wrote:

I do have a [treaty] source. [3 listed]

But if the treaty had not required a code test for the 220 MHz Tech in
the license change of 1951, do you think the hams of the day (both
inside and outside the FCC) would have allowed a codeless ham to
exist? It would have been scary to even express those thoughts aloud
in those days, considering what you hear now, 50+ years later...

I haven't been an ARRL member since the dark days.
When were these "dark days"?

Incentive Licensing. I have always voted with my wallet.

The license is for operating, not building.

The Technician was meant for those who were more interested in VHF/UHF
experimentation than HF operating.

The basic argument against the code test comes down to this:
Why should anyone have to learn it if they don't intend to use it?

I've heard that argument, but that's not why they quit the code test.

The reasons for a code test that once applied are no longer valid. No
more military CW. No more ship to shore CW. No more WW2 ops needed.
Ect ect ect. CW is now really obsolete for anything but hobby use.
Making involuntary human modems has little value to the government any
more.

What happens is that the argument, taken to its logical conclusion,
says there should be no real test at all.

The ham test should be about *modern* technology. Testing about past
obsolete technology and practices such as tubes, mechanical RTTY, and
code ect just doesn't make sense.