Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 01:47 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 162
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?

I haven't really been following this thread, so I'll assume it
originated by someone who thinks the code requirement (here in the USA)
should be removed from the license requirements. Personally, I don't
think it needs to be removed because with a little practice, anyone can
do 5 WPM. In fact, I recall a young man of about 5 years old getting his
license many years ago...it used to be written up in one of the chapters
of the ARRL handbook. If you don't want to learn code, we have the
Technician class license for that. Anyhow, where in the rules does it
say a ham is required to know code to possibly save a life one day?
It's just something they came up with to use in testing for a license.
From the FCC rules:

97.3 Definitions.
(a) The definitions of terms used in Part 97 a


(4) Amateur service. A radiocommunication service for the purpose of
self-training,
intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs,
that is,
duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a
personal aim
and without pecuniary interest.


Unless one does know the distress signal in Morse, why would anyone consider
that someone was signaling a problem. They could just as easily have
thought it was some kids goofing off.

Dee, N8UZE



Good thing you dont stand watch.

  #2   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 01:57 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 618
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?


"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
I haven't really been following this thread, so I'll assume it originated
by someone who thinks the code requirement (here in the USA) should be
removed from the license requirements. Personally, I don't think it needs
to be removed because with a little practice, anyone can do 5 WPM. In fact,
I recall a young man of about 5 years old getting his license many years
ago...it used to be written up in one of the chapters of the ARRL handbook.
If you don't want to learn code, we have the Technician class license for
that. Anyhow, where in the rules does it say a ham is required to know
code to possibly save a life one day? It's just something they came up with
to use in testing for a license.


[snip]

Personally I happen to believe it should be kept simply because it is one of
the basics of ham radio. Even if one never uses it after, it should be
learned at a basic (i.e. 5wpm) level. This later enables the individual to
later decide if they want to pursue it to a higher level. If they are not
required to learn the basic level, they may forever falsely believe that
code is too hard for them.

Dee, N8UZE


  #3   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 07:33 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 444
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?

wrote:

SNIPPED

bull**** Maxwell equations are the true basis of Radio
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Ignoring the profanity [when profanity surfaces in a discussion it is evidence
that you are losing the argument], Maxwell's Equations are first of all NOT
Maxwell's equations. They are Heaviside's Equations [go do a rigorous check].

Secondly, the equations describe physics, not operating practice.

Thirdly, the equations and their understanding are not requirements for a
license. Most hams cannot perform the vector calculus or solve the second order
differential equations necessary to solve those equations [Many professional
broadcast engineers probably can't solve them either]. After 40+ years from my
EE degree I know I can't solve them without some refresher math courses.

Finally, increasing one's personal skills in the radio communications art and
technique for personal improvement, not $ gain, is the requirement for a ham
license, at least here in the USA.

Increasing personal skills ... does not mean becoming an appliance operator.

  #4   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 07:38 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?


Dave wrote:
wrote:

SNIPPED

bull**** Maxwell equations are the true basis of Radio
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Ignoring the profanity [when profanity surfaces in a discussion it is evidence
that you are losing the argument], Maxwell's Equations are first of all NOT
Maxwell's equations. They are Heaviside's Equations [go do a rigorous check].

nope he lost any credit years ago

and Bull**** is not profanity is is vulagrity and the spellcop has lost
befor e he starts

  #5   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 11:16 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 183
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?

an_old_friend wrote:
Dave wrote:

wrote:

SNIPPED


bull**** Maxwell equations are the true basis of Radio
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Ignoring the profanity [when profanity surfaces in a discussion it is evidence
that you are losing the argument], Maxwell's Equations are first of all NOT
Maxwell's equations. They are Heaviside's Equations [go do a rigorous check].


nope he lost any credit years ago

and Bull**** is not profanity is is vulagrity and the spellcop has lost
befor e he starts



It doesn't matter which. It's use indicated an inability to express ones
self in an informed and educated manner. Such use is generally
indicative of losing ones side of the argument.

a different Dave


  #6   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 07:39 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?


Dave wrote:
wrote:

SNIPPED


Thirdly, the equations and their understanding are not requirements for a
license.

never said they were

  #8   Report Post  
Old October 22nd 06, 07:51 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 183
Default Has morse code saved any lives recently?

wrote:

On Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:57:45 -0400, "Dee Flint"
wrote:


"Scott" wrote in message
...

I haven't really been following this thread, so I'll assume it originated
by someone who thinks the code requirement (here in the USA) should be
removed from the license requirements. Personally, I don't think it needs
to be removed because with a little practice, anyone can do 5 WPM. In fact,
I recall a young man of about 5 years old getting his license many years
ago...it used to be written up in one of the chapters of the ARRL handbook.
If you don't want to learn code, we have the Technician class license for
that. Anyhow, where in the rules does it say a ham is required to know
code to possibly save a life one day? It's just something they came up with
to use in testing for a license.


[snip]

Personally I happen to believe it should be kept simply because it is one of
the basics of ham radio.


bull**** Maxwell equations are the true basis of Radio
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/



"BASICS" AND "BASIS" are two different words with different meanings.

Basics include Basis among other topics, while Basis is Basic to any topic.

What is meant here, which you deliberately misunderstand, is that to
obtain the title of "Amateur Radio Operator" you must first understand
"Basic" electronics, Elementary communications "LAW", "Basic" radio
operating procedures, "Basic" radio theory, multiple operating
techniques, including: Voice, Digital, various modes i.e. AM, FM, etc.
Those of us that support the inclusion of a "BASIC" understanding of CW
communications do so because CW is "BASIC" to Amateur Radio
Communications. With out the CW ability you are just a partial HAM. With
the CW ability you have a more rounder understanding of our hobby. There
is no necessity to use CW at anytime in your Amateur Radio lifetime
after you demonstrate the ability to receive 25 letters/numbers/punction
characters within one minute with out error.
One of the reasons that I don't use CW is that years ago when I got my
Novice I was in a QSO with a station and it took me atleast 5 minutes to
correctly "HEAR" his call sign. I kept running the letters together. So
much for my CW ability. I did , however, pass the Element 1 CW test
twice. Once for my novice and once when I went for Tech before I got my
Novice ticket. This was taken at the FCC examination site.

Remember your opinions are just as valuable as mine and are of equal
status no matter what you may think of mine.

Dave WD9BDZ
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If you had to use CW to save someone's life, would that person die? Dirk Policy 1057 December 21st 06 01:29 PM
You'll probably never have to use CW to save a life. Slow Code Policy 189 December 14th 06 10:46 AM
Proof of the Necessity of Amatuer Radio Jerry Policy 127 September 22nd 05 03:34 AM
FCC proposes to drop CW requirement on HF John Smith Shortwave 224 September 6th 05 05:06 PM
BBC Says Morse Code Still Alive and Well In UK Steve Robeson K4CAP Policy 0 October 21st 04 09:38 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017