RadioBanter - Is the code requirement really keeping good people out of ham radio?

wrote:
From: "Dee Flint" on Sun, Oct 22 2006 8:47am
"Opus-" wrote in message

Yes ham radio is supposed to be camaraderie. People are supposed to help
each other.

Then why don't they?

They *do*, Len.

The divisiveness stems from the fact that too many no-coders
appear to want to change the requirements with no knowledge, experience, or
understanding of the requirements.

Nonsense.

No, it's the truth.

Pro-coders do NOT have some "lock" on What The
Requirements Should Be.

Nobody says they do.

They never did, despite all the
pro-code propaganda drilled into your respective psyches.

No such "propaganda", Len.

It should be quite obvious that every other radio service
has either given up on using morse code for communications
or never considered it in the first place.

Why is that important to *amateur radio* policy, Len? Amateurs *do* use
Morse Code - extensively.

Manual radio-
telegraphy has only a slight advantage in communications
with other amateurs using radiotelegraphy who do not speak
English.

Actually, Morse Code has a lot of advantages.

Note: Nowhere in the "requirements" (Title 47 C.F.R. Part
97 for US radio amateurs) is it mandatory for US amateurs
to communicate with foreigners.

That's true. But one of the Basis and Purposes of the Amateur Radio
Service is international good will. Communicating with "foreigners" is
one way to do that.

NB: Non-English speakers
using International Morse Code are, essentially, required
to learn parts of English to understand the English
alphabet (difficult if their native language is syllabic
or has a different alphabet).

Of course. So?

The ITU-R "requirements" (Radio Regulations) no longer
"require" administrations to test ALL their amateurs for
any license having below-30-MHz privileges.

Yep. That changed almost 3-1/2 years ago. Yet FCC has not acted upon
it.

The major
(in population) nation administrations have dropped their
morse code testing or substitute other tests in lieu of
morse code.

How do you know?

Have China, India and the countries making up the former Soviet Union
changed their Morse Code test policy? How about Japan?

Seems to me that the changes have mostly occurred in Western Europe,
the British Commonwealth, and a few South American countries.

Since some of those nations do not have
English as a primary language, those will have some future
difficulty using that (supposed "universal language" of
morse code) for communications with USA radio amateurs.

In addition, most of us have experienced
people who said they could not learn code but upon questioning find that
they did not use a good training method and did not train correctly.

More overtly biased opinion...written AS IF morse code
were an "absolute requirement" when it is merely an old
regulatory hanger-on in USA amateur federal rules.

It's a fact that at least some people use poorly-designed training
methods.

The REGULATION (not "the requirement") for US radio
amateurs is simply a man-made regulation which can be
un-man-made. It is not some God-given commandment of
radio.

That's true. In fact, *all* radio license requirements are man-made.

Indeed, all other US radio services operating
below 30 MHz do NOT use morse code radiotelegraphy.

Why is that so important? Do you think radio amateurs should not use it
either?

Why should radio amateurs be held elevated to some
special significance?

It's not about 'special significance".

Radio amateurs *do* use Morse Code, so it makes sense to test for
knowledge of it.

Except for the older military-trained radiotelegraphers
in US amateur radio, all the tales told (by so-called
successful pro-coders) have them doing basic learning
then trying out on the amateur radio bands for greater
skill in radiotelegraphy.

What's wrong with that?

The basic fallacy of pro-coder thinking is that "all"
have some innate ability to learn morse code.

There are obviously those who cannot learn it - just as there are those
who cannot learn to speak, or read and write, or who cannot pass the
written tests.

That has
been disproven as far back as World War II when the US
military began screening new recruits for the aptitude
to learn morse code.

Nope.

The military aptitude testing was done to find those who could learn
the fastest and reach the highest levels of skill in the least time.
The requirements for military radio telegraphers were much higher than
for amateurs, and the military could not afford lots of time to train
them.

btw, the existence of such aptitude testing proves that the US military
needed large numbers of Morse Code skilled radio operators during WW2.

That fallacy has been disproven
by countless other tales of individuals who tried the
so-called "good training methods" and tried to "train
correctly" (even under strict supervision).

Who are they, Len?

Yet
when they decided they were tired of waiting did learn it and got their
upgrade.

The "upgrade requirements" were lobbied for to emphasize
morse code radiotelegraphy skill. That is history.

Who lobbied for those requirements, Len?

When did they lobby for the requirements?

The fact is that in all the history of US amateur radio licensing,
every increase in Morse Code testing has been accompanied by an
increase in written test requirements. So the emphasis has always been
balanced between written testing and Morse Code testing.

Since 1990 it has not been necessary for anyone with a doctor's note
seeking an FCC-issued amateur license to go beyond the basic 5 wpm
test. Since 2000 it has not been necessary for anyone seeking an
FCC-issued amateur license to go beyond the basic 5 wpm test.

It
would have been difficult to overcome the lobbying of the
ARRL towards such "upgrades through morsemanship."

When did ARRL do such lobbying, Len? 1936?

Yet
there has been efforts by concerned radio amateurs (who
have been tested to the maximum telegraphic radtes) to
eliminate the morse code test entire.

And efforts by others to retain the test.

The 5wpm level is obtainable
although some of the problem do make faster speeds a problem (constant
tinnitus may be a severe problem at 20 wpm for example).

Then they should use "flashing lights or vibrating pads."

The reduction to 5 WPM equivalent word rate was an attempt
of the FCC to satisfy both the pro-morse-code-test citizens
and the (ever-growing) NO-code-test advocates. It satisfied
neither.

In other words, it didn't satisfy *you*

Do you have competitions in your model railroading activity? If you enter
that competition, you all have to follow the published rules with no
exceptions.

Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R. does NOT manadate that US radio
amateurs engage in "competition" radio activity.
Federal law (Communications Act of 1934 plus the Tele-
communications Act of 1996) requires ALL US radio
amateurs to follow its regulations. That is NO contest
nor a "competition" activity. It is merely the LAW.

And it still is! That's a good thing.

As with all US federal agencies, the FCC does accept
citizen commentary to them regarding radio regulations.
The FCC responds to Petitions submitted by US citizens
in regards to those radio regulations. [however, not
with blinding speeds of decision in regards to amateur
radio] Nowhere does the FCC discriminate between those
are already licensed in amateur radio versus those not
licensed. FCC does not treat the group of already-
licensed as some kind of fraternal order of the already-
licensed to be listened to over and above all other
interested citizens.

The FCC accepts comments from everyone - not just citizens.
"Foreigners" and groups/corporations are welcome to comment as well.

How much consideration the comments get is another matter.

The morse code test (for under-30-MHz operating privileges)
affects the non-licensed US citizens.

And those licensed, too. And noncitizens.

It does NOT affect
those already legally licensed as radio amateurs...except
in the limited conditions of certain already-licensed
Technician classes. That code test does NOT legally
affect ANY other already-licensed US radio amateur.

It affects them in many ways. If amateur radio should change for the
worse because
of changes in license requirements, those who are already licensed
would be affected.

For example, if someone wanted to change the real estate zoning in your
neighborhood,
that change would not "legally affect" you or your neighbors, unless
you wanted to build on your property. Your houses would not change.

If
they say it does then they have some emotional disturbance
(not a legal problem nor a regulatory problem).

Not true. If amateur radio is made worse by rules changes, all involved
are affected. You, who are not involved, are unaffected.

If someone wanted to change the real estate zoning in your
neighborhood,
that change would not "legally affect" you or your neighbors, unless
you wanted to build on your property. Your houses would not change.
Would you say that those who resisted such a zoning change have an
"emotional disturbance"?

I know a few model railroaders. As far as I know none
are into "competitions" concerning their hobby. They do
it for the fun of model railroading. As a hobby, not
as a substitute for life...nor advancing the state of
the art in rail transport.

Model railroading does not involve any sort of licensing, nor use of
the radio spectrum. What one model railroader does with his/her layout
does not directly affect what other model railroaders can do with
theirs.

Amateur radio isn't like that. We use a shared and limited resource -
the radio spectrum.

A more valid analogy would be something like operating motor vehicles
for noncommercial purposes, where the medium (the roads) are shared
with many others.

I know many more model builders and model aircraft flyers.
[I have been both] The Academy of Model Aeronautics (AMA)
is a membership organization (about a quarter million
members in the USA) with a large rule set to follow in
flying model aircraft. That rule set is for both
competition flying and for safety; there is special
liability insurance for members of the AMA in regards to
that flying activity. There is no absolute requirement
to be an AMA member to enjoy model airplane flying nor is
there some federal test one must take to be one. It is a
hobby...yet the AMA has successfully petitioned for and
gotten many radio channels expressly for model remote
control.

How many channels? How much total spectrum? How much of it is below 30
MHz?

IIRC, the total amount of spectrum set aside for model control is less
than the narrowest amateur band above 30 MHz.

btw, there has been no Morse Code test requirement in the US for use of
*all* the amateur bands above 30 MHz.

No code test nor license was required. You may
read about it in Part 95, Title 47 C.F.R. under Radio
Control Radio Service.

They got a few channels in a few narrow slices of VHF/UHF. They are
allowed to use only very low power, with almost all their
communications limited to line-of-sight.

Amateur radio is very different.

"Park flyers" are free to fly models, even to radio-control
them, all without being licensed by the FCC or as a member
of the Academy of Model Aeronautics. Add to that the R-C
cars and boats. There is a very large model hobby industry
existing in the USA to provide for such hobbyists. From
the size of that industry the number of modelers would
easily equal the number of USA radio amateurs...if not
exceeding it.

Yet all they need is a small assortment of VHF/UHF channels, low power,
small antennas and line-of-sight radio.

Is that what you think amateur radio should be?

It should be remembered that one of the primary reasons model aircraft
enthusiasts got channels in the ~70 MHz range was the fact that their
27 MHz allocation became unusable due to being effectively taken over
by illegal cb operation.

Your comments in regards to "competitiveness" do not apply
to US citizens seeking to change existing radio regulations
in the USA, any radio service.

FCC does not limit comments to only US citizens.

And when FCC recently asked for comments on the Morse Code test issue,
the majority of those commenting were *against* the complete
elimination of the Morse Code test. The ratio was approximately 55% in
favor of at least some Morse Code testing.