In article , ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY) writes:


Folks,

Recently there has been mention of a paper by KL7CC titled "Amateur
Radio in the 21st Century". It can be downloaded in Word format from:

http://www.qsl.net/al7fs/NCVECplan.doc

That document spells out what the NCVEC leaders are thinking about in
terms of changes to the license structure as a result of WRC 2003.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Having given this document due consideration, I can't say that it changes my
mind about anything code testing. I find this one passage particularly
interesting:

"Morse will probably retain most of it's exclusive band segments, at least
for now. We are not addressing this issue at this time. This may change in
the
future. Several countries no longer have exclusive segments, but depend
instead on voluntary band plans. In fact, our 160-meter band works this way
today, with surprisingly few problems"

Maia et. al. are obviously leaving the door wide open to reduce or eliminate
exclusive CW/data segments, even possibly moving toward a totally "open"
bandplan on all amateur allocations. I cannot support this.

Nor I!

What I find interesting, too, is that the CW/data parts of the bands are always
referred to as "exclusive CW" with no mention that all of them on HF are also
shared by data modes. In fact, there is very little mention of data modes at
all.

The main
pressure for band segment re-allocation will come primarily from users of
SSB. This is simply because it's the easiest mode for any amateur to
implement in his/her own station, and if there should be an increase in the
total number of licensed radio amateurs, that's where there will be a need
for more "lebensraum."

Getting awful close to Godwin's Law there, Larry!

Again quoting:

" Are you proud that you "made it"?

Yes, I am. Is there something wrong with pride of achievement? Should I be
ashamed?

Can you not find something that another
person can do that you would find extremely difficult if not impossible?
Could you win the Tour de France bicycle race - even if you trained every day
for the rest of your life? Could you invent the Laser? Could you paint the
Mona Lisa? Not that painting a work of art or riding a bicycle has all that
much to do with radio, it's just to point out that while you may have been
able
to master the code with some degree of success, that doesn't necessarily mean
that everyone has the same ability as you.

Note that passing the 5 wpm code test is being compared to world-class
achievements in the worlds of art, sport, and science. That's just not a valid
comparison at all. 5 wpm is more like riding a bike at 5 mph for a mile on a
level road, painting a recognizable human face or assembling a flashlight.

More quotes

So, who's to say that mastering Morse code skills makes a better ham? I
would
not be so arrogant as to think such a thing.

It's equally "arrogant" to support either side. Which is to say, not arrogant
at all.


Final quote:

"CW is a great mode. It's fun. I enjoy it. And, it's time to move on.

What exactly does "time to move on" mean here?

We
no longer require applicants to draw schematic diagrams, demonstrate how to
neutralize a triode vacuum tube amplifier, lots of other things. Lets be
gentlemen and give CW a decent, respectful, wave. Remembering our old
friend,
but looking forward, not backward."

It sounds more and more like he wants the mode, not just the test, to go away.


Wiley has stated that it is incumbent on those of us who know and use the
Morse/CW mode to encourage newcomers to learn it and love it as much as we
do.
Therefore, as a licensing requirement, it only deserves a "respectful wave"
in
the future. Well, unfortunately, in this age of advanced technology where
our
own equipment is no longer within the technical capabilities of average radio
amateurs to build and/or service,

WHOA! I disagree!

He says the same thing ('most of us took the practical approach and bought a
manufactured rig') and it's simply not true.


He goes on for pages
about
his new entry-level license class, which, IMHO, is unnecessary. The present
Technician syllabus is proven to be achievable by people from all walks of
life.

Heck, the General has been achieved by a six-year-old and the Extra - the old
prerestructuring 5 written tests Extra - by an eight-year-old.

If there are any serious RF or electrical safety issues to be
addressed,
I would submit that perhaps we need to add some emphasis there, rather than
further reducing licensing standards simply for the nebulous purpose of
allowing more and younger hams to "get their feet wet"
as it were.

The biggest problems I have with the entry-level proposal are the removal of
"radio law" questions from its test and the free upgrades for Techs and
Advanceds.

The code test stuff is predictable and, IMHO, not the most important thing in
the paper at all. What's far more important is the "what happens after the code
test goes" stuff, which contains some very good ideas and some very bad ideas.

73 de Jim, N2EY