**** Post for FREE via your newsreader at post.usenet.com ****

On 23 Sep 2003 05:34:27 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

Dwight:

I hate to sound like a scratched CD, but that reply is unresponsive. If the
above were true, then the very second radio amateurs started using modes
other than CW, the code testing requirement should have been dropped,
for all the same reasons given by the NCTA today. However, it wasn't.
In fact, in the late '60's, over a half-century after the need for military and
commercial stations to be able to shoo-off "those damn hams" from
their frequencies, the Morse code testing requirement was increased
as part of the now lamented "Incentive Licensing" scheme.

Obviously a mistake, then...so what is your rationale for compounding
that mistake by continuing to perpetuate it any longer?

Incentive
Licensing was an ARRL initiative, and it was done to ensure that the
Morse/CW mode would continue to be used in spite of the increasing
popularity of SSB and digital modes.

Another obvious mistake...let's deliberately restrict progress in the
ARS by clinging to archaic technology like koala bears. Real astute
leadership from the League there...NOT!

It was actually a very brilliant plan,

Actually it was a very stupid plan, as shown by the test of time.

but was spoiled by the resentment caused by the lack of full
"grandfathering" of the existing Generals to the new Amateur Extra
class. If only that had been done, we may not be having this debate
today.


To say nothing of the resentment caused by deciding in the face of
rapidly advancing communications technology to remain rooted in an
anachronism left over from before the dawn of the 20th century. If
only that had not been done, the brightest young technological minds
of two full generations might have been drawn to amateur radio instead
of computers and the landline BBSes and finally the Internet, and
there would be no need for this silly debate because the ARS would
have stayed on the cutting ege of communications technology instead of
having made the decision to allow itself to be left in the dust.

During the last ARRL 10-Meter Contest, I worked over 160 QSO's on
10-meters, using only CW. This is on 10-meters, a band famous as a
repository for the 5 WPM Novice/Techs exercising the whole of their HF
phone privileges! During contests covering all HF bands, such as the
November Sweepstakes (CW), it is not possible to work all of the CW
stations participating.

It is not possible to work all of the phone stations participating in
the phone portion of Sweepstakes, either. The question is, did you
work a Clean Sweep?

Well, at least not for me, with my minimal station
in a highly antenna-compromised apartment QTH. However, in spite
of my operating challenges, the CW mode provides endless potential
to make points. During the November SS (Phone) last year, my
club station (W3DOV) was also operating under "marginal" conditions
at the QTH of Mark, KE3UY. Using literally the same power and
antennas as I would at my home QTH, we worked a lot fewer stations
than we could have on CW.

That's what you get for wasting all that time pounding brass instead
of learning some phone operating skills. :-)

It's as simple as that. And, excluding
contests, the CW segments are very alive and full of stations all the
time, largely thanks to FISTS and the old CW-geezers chasing all
that paper.

Excluding contests, the phone segments are also very alive and full of
stations - no thanks to FISTS or to the old CW-geezers chasing all
that paper....and no thanks to the code test, for that matter.


The efforts being made to eliminate the Morse code test requirement
are motivated by one thing and one thing only:

Common sense.

laziness.

Unfortunately, common sense is not necessarily very common.

The laziness
born of a lack of desire to learn and gain reasonable proficiency in a
proven, useful communications skill.

Being a good phone contest operator requires developing some skills
too, Larry. You guys might have done better in Sweepstakes Phone if
you hadn't been to lazy to gain reasonable proficiency in this proven,
useful communications skill - which is even more widely used than CW,
and therefore makes even more sense to take the time to learn.

But, like I said, common sense is... sigh

And, considering the nature of
the ARS, indulging that laziness would be an abomination.

The dicstionary on the shelf here doesn't list "abomination" but it
does define "abominable" as follows:

1. hateful; disgusting: Leprosy is an abominable disease.
2. very unpleasant: abominable manners.

Pretty much sounds like the way that many of us feel about code
testing, and it's probably how some people feel about the code itself,
but the fact remains that this pointless adherence to an anachronism
is an aberration that exists only in the ARS, and nowhere else. Small
wonder that we're the subject of ridicule elsewhere in the radio hobby
community because of it.

Therefore, code testing is not
essential to the Amateur Radio Service.

It most certainly is, if the ARS wishes to continue to develop radio
operators capable of exploiting the many benefits and advantages
of the Morse/CW mode.

And while we're developing radio operators who have proficiency with
an operating mode that nobody but hams uses, we're failing to devlop
operators proficient in the skills that might actually be useful out
there in the real world. Yet, old-timers lament the fact that these
days, having a ham license won't get you a job bagging groceries, let
alone any meaningful work in a communications-related field. Small
wonder, when the ARS itself decided to stay rooted in 19th century
technology, eh?

The FCC has stated repeatedly that whether or not it will have an
interesting in the "continued use of this mode" depends upon a
consensus of the amateur radio community itself.

Half of which, as no-code Techs, has already voted, by deciding not to
join the PCTAs in deluding themselves about the usefulness of an
anachronistic, 19th-century operating mode.

Therefore,
unfortunately, we will be at the mercy of the majority. Us PCTA's
may not like the outcome, but that is the risk one takes when living
in a democracy.

Given time, the results may prove better in the long run for the ARS.
Will you still think it unfortunate if this happens?

As far as the FCC is concerned, it is now
just one more operating mode among the many used within the Amateur Radio
Service. There is no sufficient argument to support the continued existence
of a code testing requirement. As such, the code testing requirement should
be eliminated.

As already stated by N2EY, this particular logic could then be applied to
testing for knowledge of any of the requirements for technical knowledge,
since radio amateurs no longer have the ability to design, build, and repair
state-of-the art communications gear unless they possess professional-
grade technical knowledge, skills, and facilities.

Interesting, isn't it, to note that this separation between
professional-grade technical knowledge and that available in the ARS
started shortly after the ARS decided to remain in the Dark Ages while
the rest of the world took off on the Technology Boom. We stayed in
the Morse age while the rest of the world entered the Information Age.
Yeah, incentive licensing was a great idea. Personally, I'd rank it
right up there with sending troops to Vietnam.

And, since this is the
AMATEUR Radio Service, that is an unreasonable expectation.

Of course it is! Now, an example of a *reasonable* expectation would
be to expect proficiency in a method of communications that is about
150 years old and that nobody else uses anymore. That *really*
encourages people to become part of the ARS and be a part of the
supposed advancement of the radio art that the Basis & Purpose portion
of Part 97 says we're supposed to be all about, doesn't it?

Therefore,
if code testing *is* eliminated, then we may as well also go to a simple
license application process, with, at most, an open-book test on rules and
regulations. That would then serve the needs of the dumbed-down
licensing process you would seem to prefer.

Come on, Larry. There are guys who can do 30, 40, or 50 wpm that can't
even *program* a modern transciever, let alone fix the damned thing
when one of the surface-mount components fails that is too small for
many of us to even *see* let alone solder one onto a PC board. These
rigs have been designed so the owners *can't* fix them, so that they
have to be dragged back to the dealer or shipped to the factory for
service, with appropriate outlay of cash since naturally the component
isn't going to fail until, oh, I dunno, about 6.2 seconds after the
warranty expires. Chances are that the "factory service" involves
removing the board the failed component is on and replacing it with a
brand new one because it isn't cost--effective to do component-level
repairs on mass-produced PC boards.

Following this, the rig gets packed up and shipped back to its owner,
who opens the package, curses a blue streak when he sees the bottom
line on the invoice, makes a New Years' Resolution to become a boat
anchor fanatic, then unpacks the rig and puts it back on the desk in
his shack. It really doesn't matter if the guy doing the unpacking can
copy at 50 wpm or doesn't know a dit from a dah, the result is going
to be the same because that's how the manufacturer designed it. If you
must blame somebody for that, Larry, then I respectfully suggest that
you place the blame not on the NCTAs, but on the design engineers at
YaeComWood, where it rightfully belongs - and remember that some of
them are hams, who apparently have professional-grade technical
knowledge, skills, and facilities, whether they ever passed a code
test or not.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ
Tonawanda, New York

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
*** Usenet.com - The #1 Usenet Newsgroup Service on The Planet! ***
http://www.usenet.com
Unlimited Download - 19 Seperate Servers - 90,000 groups - Uncensored
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=