Let us welcome the new additions to our ranks:

As an electrical engineer who has tinkered with electronics for 40 years, I
never found time to practice & learn code. It was obsolete even back then.
If they drop the code requirement, I'll get a ham license and talk as well
as listen.
Zoram

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
Let us welcome the new additions to our ranks:

As a ham radio operator for 40+ years, I agree, but I note that progress has
been made.
Today, not only is Morse code obsolete, but ham radio itself is obsolete!



"Ghost Chip" wrote in message
news:xxT1b.7731$QT5.564@fed1read02...
As an electrical engineer who has tinkered with electronics for 40 years,
I
never found time to practice & learn code. It was obsolete even back
then.
If they drop the code requirement, I'll get a ham license and talk as well
as listen.
Zoram

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
Let us welcome the new additions to our ranks:

BFoelsch wrote:
As a ham radio operator for 40+ years, I agree, but I note that progress has
been made.
Today, not only is Morse code obsolete, but ham radio itself is obsolete!



I've only been a ham for 34 years and as far as I'm concerned it was
obsolete then as it pertains to the over-glorified things like a
"reservoir of skilled technicians and communications experts". No
biggie, but its still a great hobby. I can work DXCC on a cellfone in
less than an hour and I get WAC daily via SPAM.
If efficiency of communications was the only issue then hamming would
have died a long time ago.
Oh, did I mention it as hobby? I don't see RC Airplanes being
"obsolete" because we now have Boeing 757s.

-Bill

BFoelsch wrote:
As a ham radio operator for 40+ years, I agree, but I note that progress has
been made.
Today, not only is Morse code obsolete, but ham radio itself is obsolete!



I suppose that for many the internet has replaced ham radio. (I guess
that makes
hackers the equal of CB'ers, except that the hackers have a MUCH higher IQ!)

I hope that many hams will continue to take some pride in their skill with
morse code and continue to use it. In a true emergency, cw will get through
when nothing else will work. You can build a CW transmitter with the
barest pile of junk salvaged from an old radio or TV set. (well maybe not
a MODERN radio or tv set.....). There is even the story of using a GDO as
an emergency CW transmitter. Let's see you try that on SSB, AM, or some
of the new digital modes!

I finally got my extra class ticket after the code requirement went down
to 5wpm
(I had an advanced class licence, so that makes me a 13wpm extra). The
written
test was hard enough, I had to bone up on college level engineering
stuff. Being
a computer EE I never had to mess with smith charts before. The
technical test
will serve as enough of a barier to keep the riffraff out!

"scharkalvin" wrote in message
...
BFoelsch wrote:
As a ham radio operator for 40+ years, I agree, but I note that progress
has
been made.
Today, not only is Morse code obsolete, but ham radio itself is
obsolete!



I suppose that for many the internet has replaced ham radio. (I guess
that makes
hackers the equal of CB'ers, except that the hackers have a MUCH higher
IQ!)

I hope that many hams will continue to take some pride in their skill with
morse code and continue to use it. In a true emergency, cw will get
through
when nothing else will work. You can build a CW transmitter with the
barest pile of junk salvaged from an old radio or TV set. (well maybe not
a MODERN radio or tv set.....). There is even the story of using a GDO as
an emergency CW transmitter. Let's see you try that on SSB, AM, or some
of the new digital modes!

I finally got my extra class ticket after the code requirement went down
to 5wpm
(I had an advanced class licence, so that makes me a 13wpm extra). The
written
test was hard enough, I had to bone up on college level engineering
stuff. Being
a computer EE I never had to mess with smith charts before. The
technical test
will serve as enough of a barier to keep the riffraff out!



Give em enough time, the whiners will cry to have that simplified too. This
nation is dumbing down, and they wonder why! C.L.

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 22:22:00 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote:

an emergency CW transmitter. Let's see you try that on SSB, AM, or some
of the new digital modes!


I'll horserace you on CW from my PSK31 station any time you like. The
computer copies PSK31 perfectly RIGHT INTO THE NOISE so far you can't
hear the station its typing perfectly......

The CW is better myth is history.....



Larry W4CSC

Maybe we could get the power grid fixed if every politician
regulating the power companies wasn't on their payrolls.

Larry W4CSC wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 22:22:00 -0400, scharkalvin
wrote:


an emergency CW transmitter. Let's see you try that on SSB, AM, or some
of the new digital modes!



I'll horserace you on CW from my PSK31 station any time you like. The
computer copies PSK31 perfectly RIGHT INTO THE NOISE so far you can't
hear the station its typing perfectly......

The CW is better myth is history.....

I've heard some very good things about PSK31, and I'd like to try it. I
need
to build myself an interface for my computer sound card to my rig.

But good as it is, PSK31 still requires a computer and more rig than a
simple CW setup. CW works it's magic using that gray lump between your
ears and the simplest of transmitting and receiving electronics. You'll
never
get PSK31 to work with a one tube rig and no computer.

I used to subscribe to that theory, but no more. There was a time when CW
was the best mode for weak signal work, but as of my last experience (1990
or so) AMTOR had it beat hands down. I hear that AMTOR has since been
replaced with yet more efficient digital modes. Too, the stuff about being
able to put together a CW transmitter is kind of pointless; to wit, what
kind of emergency would find you with nothing except a GDO and power to run
it? It is much more likely today that one would have some kind of rig and
access to a charged car battery.

I fully understand the emotion and the heritage of the argument, but if you
strip out the emotion and the heritage stuff, cw doesn't really have much of
a leg to stand on.

Oh, there will be the odd story about tapping out SOS on one's brake lights,
but aside from that.............................................. ..



"scharkalvin" wrote in message
...
BFoelsch wrote:
As a ham radio operator for 40+ years, I agree, but I note that progress
has
been made.
Today, not only is Morse code obsolete, but ham radio itself is
obsolete!



I suppose that for many the internet has replaced ham radio. (I guess
that makes
hackers the equal of CB'ers, except that the hackers have a MUCH higher
IQ!)

I hope that many hams will continue to take some pride in their skill with
morse code and continue to use it. In a true emergency, cw will get
through
when nothing else will work. You can build a CW transmitter with the
barest pile of junk salvaged from an old radio or TV set. (well maybe not
a MODERN radio or tv set.....). There is even the story of using a GDO as
an emergency CW transmitter. Let's see you try that on SSB, AM, or some
of the new digital modes!

I finally got my extra class ticket after the code requirement went down
to 5wpm
(I had an advanced class licence, so that makes me a 13wpm extra). The
written
test was hard enough, I had to bone up on college level engineering
stuff. Being
a computer EE I never had to mess with smith charts before. The
technical test
will serve as enough of a barier to keep the riffraff out!

I used to subscribe to that theory, but no more. There was a time when CW
was the best mode for weak signal work, but as of my last experience (1990
or so) AMTOR had it beat hands down. I hear that AMTOR has since been
replaced with yet more efficient digital modes.

Sure, if you hoard a few kHz of your bandwidth for your
mode, you're certain to have better data transfer integrity.
The U.S. military has some real bandwidth hogging modes
they use. You're comparing apples-n-oranges to compare
CW to even AMTOR. You should realize that! Are you
trying to support your feeble point of view through deliberate
misrepresentation or are you really this ignorant of radio
emission and spectrum occupation? If it's the latter, I hope
you're no longer licensed or on the air.