"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

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


I am just relaying what came off the BBC and circulated world wide.
so dont blame me on their mistake if it truly is a mistake.
I hear more revisions from FCC are due out in Feb oo MARCH so maybe
it will rear its ugly head again.
Joe

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:13:51 -1000, Joseph Fenn wrote:


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


I am just relaying what came off the BBC and circulated world wide.
so dont blame me on their mistake if it truly is a mistake.
I hear more revisions from FCC are due out in Feb oo MARCH so maybe
it will rear its ugly head again.

What revisions? There is nothing pending on the table right now as the
latest Report and Order will be the last one we see for some time.
Nothing is going to be revised. Did you bother to read the links that were
posted to the FCC's own web site, their own documents? Since when is the
BBC's word gospel and more importantly, why do you trust their "reporting"
more than the documents on your own regulatory agency's site?

Truly amazing...

- Nate

--

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

Nate Bargmann ) writes:
On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 14:13:51 -1000, Joseph Fenn wrote:


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


I am just relaying what came off the BBC and circulated world wide.
so dont blame me on their mistake if it truly is a mistake.
I hear more revisions from FCC are due out in Feb oo MARCH so maybe
it will rear its ugly head again.

What revisions? There is nothing pending on the table right now as the
latest Report and Order will be the last one we see for some time.
Nothing is going to be revised. Did you bother to read the links that were
posted to the FCC's own web site, their own documents? Since when is the
BBC's word gospel and more importantly, why do you trust their "reporting"
more than the documents on your own regulatory agency's site?

I got curious about this "BBC story", and did some searches last night.
Didn't find an article that came from the BBC, but there was a story from
some US newspaper (I didn't not the URL or which one) that had similar
wording. SOmething like "for people used to talking in dots and dashes..."
It was simply badly worded, but it had the tone that CW was now dead.

So I can imagine the BBC having some badly worded piece that said
that CW was gone.

Of course, there are two other possibilities. Someone is spoofing
the BBC, and figures if they credit such a well-known institution
people will believe that CW is now killed off.

The other possibility is that somehow the BBC talked to someone
who wanted to make some statement, or even honestly believed
that CW is gone, and the BBC took that statement on faith.

Michael VE2BVW

Any of your scenerios could be correct, Michael.

In retrospect, I would assume a BBC reporter to do their homework. Also,
a BBC reporter covering this issue *should* know that the UK dropped the
code exam requirement sometime back and that the FCC is merely following
suit.

I'm still puzzled as to why Mr. Fenn continues to say "wait and see" when
there is clearly nothing to "wait and see" for and he has been given
plenty of links to documentation showing that the exam requirement will be
eliminated but that Morse Code is still legal on all amateur radio
frequencies except for 60m.

I would like to know *what* revisions he "hears" will be made and from
*whom*.

- Nate

--

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