In article et,
Joseph Fenn wrote:

If what you say is true then why would the BBC bcst that sample of
CQ CQ CQ in cw and then announce that cw is no longer avilable
to US hams ????

Either the BBC was wrong (very wrong), or you misinterpreted what the
BBC said. Nobody has forbidden US hams to use CW.

You can find out the facts by surfing to any of a number of Web sites,
the "WWW.ARRL.ORG" site being the most obvious first choice, I think.

Take a look at the following band-plan chart, updated only two weeks
ago:

http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg...ands_color.pdf

You'll see that CW is an authorized mode for U.S. hams in *every*
portion of *every* ham band, except for the USB-only 60-meter band.

Or, download the following:

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf

which is the actual text of the FCC Report and Order.

Here's the situation as I understand it:

[1] In 2003, the WRC conference declared that member countries would
no longer be required by treaty to insist that hams be proficient
in Morse Code in order to transmit on frequencies below 30 MHz.
It would be up to each individual country government to decide
whether or not to require code proficiency.

[2] Quite a few countries quickly adopted rules changes, so that their
own hams could have HF privileges without having to prove that they
can use CW. In fact, Great Britain (home of the BBC) dropped the
CW requirement some time ago.

[3] After a great deal of discussion, the FCC has decided to follow
suit. In a month or two from now (probably), the rules change
will go into effect, and it'll be possible for US hams to
upgrade to General or Extra without having to pass a Morse Code
proficiency test.

[4] Nothing in the FCC rulings forbids the use of CW. Period.

[5] There are still many CW contacts, contests, and nets taking
place between US hams. CW remains one of the best available
modes for making contact under weak-signal conditions, and
is probably _the_ best such mode when you don't have computer
assistance available.

Now, there was a different FCC rules change recently... one
which was announced a few months ago, and actually took effect
back on the 16th of this month. This "omnibus" change made a
change in the band-plans for several of the HF bands. It had
the effect of increasing the portion of several HF bands in
which phone traffic can be carried, and reducing the portions of
those bands which is *reserved* for CW and other narrow-bandwidth
modes.

However, it's still legal to for US amateurs to use CW in the "phone"
portions of the band, although most refrain from doing so except under
emergency and other exceptional circumstances.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


************************************************** ************************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************** ************************

"Joseph Fenn" wrote in message
va.net...
There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


The pending rule change has already been posted on the FCC site in its
entirety. Go read it. It will probably be printed in the Federal Register
about mid-January. It's effectivity date will probably be about
mid-February.

There is nothing about banning CW. Matter of fact, it gives all Technicians
the same HF privileges as the Novice & Tech Plus ops. Note that these are
primarily CW privileges. The major thing it says it that element 1 (CW
testing) is no longer required to for any class of license. It also
corrects an omission on an earlier R & O about some data modes. There is
nothing else in it. There is nothing about banning CW. There is nothing
about changing band allocations for CW other than allowing the Techs the
same HF privileges as the Tech Plus ops.

Generally before the FCC makes any significant ruling, they go through a
lengthy process which includes an NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rule Making).
This gives all interested organizations and individuals the chance to submit
comments, data, concerns, etc. There has NEVER been an NPRM on the topic
of banning CW.

News agencies, since they are run by people, can make mistakes.

In this case you have the opportunity to read it directly for yourself
rather than relying on a news agency. Why don't you?

Dee, N8UZE

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 12:29:40 -1000, Joseph Fenn wrote:

There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.

Read http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-06-178A1.pdf
in particular Appendix A beginning on Page 18. That appendix shows the
actual rule changes to Part 97 that will take place on the effective date.
Nowhere is the use of Morse Code prohibited, only the exam requirement.

This is the text of the pending rule action you are refering to. Nothing
will change except that we will know the effective date once it is
published in the Federal Register.

- Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
the pessimist fears this is true."

"Joseph Fenn" wrote in message
va.net...
There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


Well, you are absolutely WRONG and/or you have not read the ruling very
well. What the announcement refers to is the elimination of Element I as
a requirement for a US Amateur license. There is no "prohibition" against
the use of Morse. BBC is mistaken, and since when has the news media gotten
a whole lot right in reporting the news? US Amateur still may certain use CW
to their heart's content, and, indeed, with the exception of the changes
announced prior the CW ruling, the allocations for the USE of CW remain in
place.

I suggest you go back and fully read the actual announcement where you will
find that a "prohibition" against Morse Code is a myth.


J


************************************************** ************************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************** ************************

"Jerry" wrote in message
. ..

"Joseph Fenn" wrote in message
va.net...
There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


Well, you are absolutely WRONG and/or you have not read the ruling very
well. What the announcement refers to is the elimination of Element I
as a requirement for a US Amateur license. There is no "prohibition"
against the use of Morse. BBC is mistaken, and since when has the news
media gotten a whole lot right in reporting the news? US Amateur still may
certain use CW to their heart's content, and, indeed, with the exception
of the changes announced prior the CW ruling, the allocations for the USE
of CW remain in place.

I suggest you go back and fully read the actual announcement where you
will find that a "prohibition" against Morse Code is a myth.


Everyone has told him this and posted links to the actual R&O on the web
page. He absolutely refuses to compare what it says to what the BBC
reported. I suspect that he wants it prohibited and so is indulging in
wishful thinking.


Dee, N8UZE

In article , "Jerry" wrote:

"Joseph Fenn" wrote in message
ava.net...
There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


Well, you are absolutely WRONG and/or you have not read the ruling very
well. What the announcement refers to is the elimination of Element I as
a requirement for a US Amateur license. There is no "prohibition" against
the use of Morse. BBC is mistaken, and since when has the news media gotten
a whole lot right in reporting the news? US Amateur still may certain use CW
to their heart's content, and, indeed, with the exception of the changes
announced prior the CW ruling, the allocations for the USE of CW remain in
place.

I suggest you go back and fully read the actual announcement where you will
find that a "prohibition" against Morse Code is a myth.


J


************************************************** ************************
* Ham since 1937 HiSchool Sophomore ex W9ZUU, KP4EX, W4FAG, KH6ARG KH6JF *
* WW2 Vet since Sep 1940 to just After VJ day. US Signal Corps AACS *
************************************************** ************************

So, how about my Radiotelegraph License. I suppose I will have to renew. Are
the code requirments still in effect? I suppose many of you who got the Extra
Class licesnses like me , also want to strive for the highest and get their
Radiotelegraph License with Ship Radar endorsments, and of course
Rafiotelephone also. I always thought they should have had a higher Amateur
class available.??

N6GS

Greg S wrote:
Jerry wrote:

Joseph Fenn wrote:
There is one more rule pending. I think its due to come out
on Jan 16th or 175h of Jan. Lets see what that one has to say
about CW or NOT.
Joe


Well, you are absolutely WRONG and/or you have not read the ruling very
well. What the announcement refers to is the elimination of Element I
as
a requirement for a US Amateur license. There is no "prohibition"
against
the use of Morse. BBC is mistaken, and since when has the news media
gotten
a whole lot right in reporting the news? US Amateur still may certain use
CW
to their heart's content, and, indeed, with the exception of the changes
announced prior the CW ruling, the allocations for the USE of CW remain
in
place.

I suggest you go back and fully read the actual announcement where you
will
find that a "prohibition" against Morse Code is a myth.


J

So, how about my Radiotelegraph License. I suppose I will have to renew.
Are
the code requirments still in effect? I suppose many of you who got the
Extra
Class licesnses like me, also want to strive for the highest and get their
Radiotelegraph License with Ship Radar endorsments, and of course
Rafiotelephone also. I always thought they should have had a higher
Amateur
class available.??

N6GS

Apparently, the Morse proficiency requirement still stands for the
Commercial Radiotelegraph licenses:

http://wireless.fcc.gov/commoperators/t1.html
and
http://wireless.fcc.gov/commoperators/exam.html

Telegraphy Examinations Elements
Element 1 - 16 code groups per minute.
Element 2 - 20 code groups per minute.
Element 3 - 20 code groups per minute.
Element 4 - 25 code groups per minute

2nd class licensees must pass Element 1 (copy by hand) or Element 2 (copy by
typewriter).
1st class licensees must pass Element 3 (copy by hand) or Element 4 (copy by
typewriter).

An interesting thing to note: "The Commission will grant credit for
Telegraphy Elements 1 and 2 to applicants who hold an unexpired (or within
the grace period) FCC-issued Amateur Extra Class operator license."

So, if I read this right, the new no-code Amateur Extra-class license
holders who wish to apply for the 2nd 'Telegraph license will be given
credit for the Morse proficiency requirement w/o having to prove it.

Bryan WA7PRC

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:28:41 +0000, GregS wrote:

I always thought they should have had a higher Amateur
class available.??

It used to be called the Amateur Extra and then they gave it privileges
with Incentive Licensing back in the '60s. As I understand it, it was an
acheivement certificate that did not confer any additional operating
privileges above General prior to IL.

For all I care they could drop the current names and call it Amateur First
Class, Amateur Second Class, and Amateur Third Class that would map well
to Extra, General, and Technician as they will be after the R&O becomes
effective. Or, as prior to WWII, Class A, Class B, Class C. I guess
that's too logical for today's world. But, I digress. :-)

I suppose that now a person can get their BSEE, MSEE, PhD, etc.

73, de Nate

--

"The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds,
the pessimist fears this is true."

I merely passed on what BBC said. I had no way of denying it.
Nothing was mentioned by the BBC about all that crap you mentioned.
Joe