wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:16 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote:

"The test" is long gone and FCC won't bring it back. FCC won't preser
ve
our standards and values - we have to do it.
OK, you lost me here. Are these the same standards and values that
were propagated by the code tested licensees on the upper phone
portions on HF?

Now you lost me!

If you're referring to the few folks who make some parts of the 'phone
bands rather nasty, consider the following:

1) Those folks aren't using Morse Code when they behave badly on the
air

2) Those folks also passed written exams that included lots of
questions about the rules & regs

Yes, but the whole argument was "Morse code makes you a better person"
Apparently not in their case.

Suppose that in 1980 someone had developed a wonderful new way to learn

Morse Code that would take a typical person from 0 to 25 wpm in 1 hour,

simply by watching a videotape.

Do you think the code tests would still have been an issue?

I'm certain that they would. All those that passed via that method of
learning would be scorned as "Drive-thru" Licensees. The standard
comments built on the "But 'real hams'" had to...." mindset.

Entry level at the time meant simple equipment. Getting a CW transmitt
er
on the air was the first step. "How can I communicate with a hand key?
"
With Morse code of course. Plugging a microphone into the key jack won
't
work.

Not sure which time you're referring to. Please elaborate.

[ comment about the relevancy to this discussion is at the bottom. ]

Prior to the Novice license, the easiest way to get on the air with a
limited budget and skill set was to make a simple CW transmitter. Of
course, to be able to use it, you're going to have to be able to send
and receive Morse code, unless the only QSL cards you want to receive
are from OO's and / or the FCC.

Yes, you could get your ticket, throw your key away and buy phone stuff
but it was still easier to just get on the air with Morse code.

The Novice license was introduced as a way to get on the air with a
limited skill set, and spend time ON THE AIR to give you the incentive
to upgrade your skills with the promise of frequency agility and phone
operation when you upgraded.

And as Jeff Davis said, Morse Code was the lingua franca of
communications back in the early days.

And was used by other radio services well into the 1990s. A lot depends

on what you consider "the early days".

I know, and the FAA still uses CW to ID beacons. But the write things
like ".-.. .- -..-" on the maps right next to LAX rather than force
pilots to learn Morse code.

And if I remember right, joining the military (as an example) didn't
require you to learn code to use a rifle. If you wanted to learn code
and get a different job, that was up to you.

I just can't see inter agency communications between police, fire,
medical and the Red Cross being handled by some guy wearing a
celluloid eye shade, sleeve garters and hunched over a code key. *

Why not?

Because human life and safety is _dependent_ on quick and accurate
communications. By ANYONE.

The FBI had their own HF nets using Morse Code. The military and
maritime folks used for many decades.

The main reason other services stopped using Morse Code was that they
didn't want to pay skilled operators. It was cheaper for them to buy
more-complex equipment.

The key word here is "had". The additional expenses in the design and
deployment of the new equipment is there to remove the possibility of
human error and make things simple enough for anyone to operate.

But Amateur Radio is all about *operating*.

Operating is not all of it. Nor is operating via a specific mode.
If anything, it is all about communication and having the skill
set (both technical and operational) required to communicate in
the mode with which you are granted the right to use.

Or what that has to do with the discussion.

My comments at the beginning of this discussion were specific to my
opinion that the requirements for joining the CWops club were
restrictive and elitist. With a tongue in cheek reference to the
Masonic Lodge with their secret handshakes and rituals along with
having to be vetted by existing members.

However, as I suspected, the discussion has drifted into the standard
"People that haven't had to learn code like *I* did, or "make the
effort" (as it is sometimes referred to) are somehow less than real
hams."

People should use Morse code as a mode of communicating because it is
a skill and one they should be proud of. NOT because it somehow makes
others less than them. The same could be said of those who chose to
use SSB, AM, PSK, RTTY, FM, EME, packet radio and so forth. But, oddly
you don't hear them talking down to everyone else that do not share
their enthusiasm for their preferred mode of communication.

Jeff-1.0
wa6fwi





--
“Egotism is the anesthetic that dulls the pain of stupidity.”
Frank Leahy, Head coach, Notre Dame 1941-1954

http://www.stay-connect.com

On Jan 3, 12:05�pm, wrote:

Some other Morse Code online resources:

Art and Skill of Radiotelegraphy (electronic book, free for the
download):

http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm

(there are several other download sites)

The author of the 2nd Edition, William G. Pierpont, N0HFF, held a
General class license up to its expiration date of 20 March 2006.
(source: FCC ULS)
Its 2-year grace period was reached on 21 March 2008 when the FCC set
the full expiration date ("Administrative" part of ULS listing).
There is no other
data at the FCC for Mr. Pierpont.

73, Len K6LHA

"Michael J. Coslo" writes:

On Jan 6, 9:13 am, Bert Hyman wrote:

If people don't use CW, it's because they don't want to, not because
someone won't let them.


I think that Jeff was referring to the club in question, not to CW in
general.

At least for me, the issue is promotion of the mode, how new Ops might
be brought into the mix.

For some folks, this is not an issue, for others, it is a concern.
Some of the concern might be historical, some folks just happen to
like something, and therefore like to promote it.

But some of us believe that the mode has merit, and would like to see
it continue. Now that element 2 is history, how do we promote the
mode?

I believe it does need a little promotion, at least at the present
time, because there is a pretty big gulf between people like me,
people that don't know it at all, and the really proficient
operators. There aren't all that many people in the middle any more.
Perhaps after a new balance is achieved, there will be less need for
promotion, but at present, I believe it is critical. We don't need to
convince the already proficient, we need to work with the new people.

- 73 de Mike N3LI -


Just my 2 c worth: back when I first started in ham early 70's, there were a
lot of fast cw ops on the air, and the *average* speed of ops was quite a
bit higher than the *average* today. Back then, 30 wpm was not the rarity it
is today, and you could even hear the occasional 40 and 50 wpm ops. This
latter is almost never heard today.

So...I think a club dedicated to fast cw sending/receiving is not
necessarily a bad thing. I have admiration for anyone who does a thing
competently. Maybe it will inspire others to increase their competence. If
so, not a bad thing at all.

--
Powered by Linux 2.6.31.6-166 Fedora 12
In rotation: Pacific Ocean Blue (D. Wilson) 2.6.31.5-0.1 OpenSUSE 11.2
"Hug your cat today" 2.6.24-16 Mint Elyssa

On 1/7/2010 11:17 AM, Michael J. Coslo wrote:
On Jan 6, 5:28 pm, Bill Horne wrote:
On 1/6/2010 12:16 PM, Michael J. Coslo wrote: On Jan 6, 8:13 am, Jeff Da

I would propose that a web based method of learning OOK Morse might
just do the trick. People have a tendency to be pretty fearful of
learning on the radio, the person on the other end might not be
terribly patient, and there are some people who just get bored
listening to slow Morse.

This system would give feedback on the copy and sending, practice
sessions, and testing.

Such a system already exists, and it's in use by members of the Morse
Telegraph Club, and others who use American Morse. I suggest you contact
Les Kerr, N7RZ, or check the "MorseKOB" website athttp://home.comcast.net
/~morsekob/for more information.


Hi Bill, I looked at the site, and unless I'm missing something, it
isn't what I was proposing. That looks pretty much like the standard
Morse code learning program. I want a place where people can talk to
each other, to bootstrap themselves to competency, as well as having
the standard learning tools. Hang out with their peers for a while.
Morse needs a nursery system, and it might just be easier to get them
involved and up to a speed where they don't make proficient Ops fall
asleep.

I've used the "MorseKOB" system, and it _does_ provide "wires" where
users may use Morse in real time. It requires a central server, and the
code might need modification for Continental code (talk to N7RZ), but
the basics are all there.

HTH.

Bill, W1AC

On Jan 8, 10:03�pm, Rockinghorse Winner wrote:
back when I first started in ham early 70's, there were a
lot of fast cw ops on the air, and the *average* speed of ops was quite a
bit higher than the *average* today.

Until 1990, any US ham you heard heard on CW on the non-novice HF
amateur bands bands had passed at least 10 wpm and most had passed 13
wpm. Any US ham you heard on the Extra parts of the bands had passed 20
wpm. That meant you'd rarely hear anything slower. The Novice bands
were the exception that prived the rule

But with medical waivers in 1990, the reduction to 5 wpm for all
classes in 2000, the change in CW privileges for Novices and Tech
Pluses and the elimination of the code test in 2007, it's not a
surprise that the *average* speed would be lower, or at least seem
that way.

Back then, 30 wpm was not the rarity it
is today, and you could even hear the occasional 40 and 50 wpm ops. This
latter is almost never heard today.

With all due respect, I think it depends when and where you listen.
There are still more than a few who can really pour on the coal.

Of course someone who calls CQ at 45 wpm isn't going to get as many
replies as someone who calls at 25 wpm.

On Field Day we run CQs at about 27-30 wpm and we're not as fast as
many who answer. SS is about the same. The DX contesters tend to go
faster.

So...I think a club dedicated to fast cw sending/receiving is not
necessarily a bad thing. I have admiration for anyone who does a thing
competently. Maybe it will inspire others to increase their competence. I
f
so, not a bad thing at all.

I agree 100%! There's nothing quite like a good CW ragchew when you
slide the weights in and let 'er rip. Just like talking - easier, in
fact, once you have the skills. With good QSK, it's a two-way real-
time conversation. (Other HF modes can't do QSK)

Worked an OE1 on 7012 earlier this evening. 599 and he was really
sailing along.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Jan 7, 4:01�pm, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:16 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote:
"The test" is long gone and FCC won't bring it back. FCC won't preser
ve
our standards and values - we have to do it.
OK, you lost me here. Are these the same standards and values that
were propagated by the code tested licensees on the upper phone
portions on HF?

Now you lost me!

If you're referring to the few folks who make some parts of the 'phone
bands rather nasty, consider the following:

1) Those folks aren't using Morse Code when they behave badly on the
air

2) Those folks also passed written exams that included lots of
questions about the rules & regs

Yes, but the whole argument was "Morse code makes you a better person"
Apparently not in their case.

I don't think "Morse code makes you a better person" was their *whole*
argument.

Let me put it another way:

There's no single one-time test that will absolutely guarantee that
everyone who passes it will be a well-behaved, law-abiding amateur
radio operator. Some bad apples will always squeak through. We see this
in professions and other walks of life that have much more
rigorous admission requirements.

But that doesn't mean testing and other license requirements have no
effect! IOW, just because a test isn't an absolutely perfect filter
doesn't mean it has no effect at all and should be removed.

Suppose that in 1980 someone had developed a wonderful new way to learn
Morse Code that would take a typical person from 0 to 25 wpm in 1 hour,
simply by watching a videotape.

Do you think the code tests would still have been an issue?

I'm certain that they would.

Perhaps I should have worded that differently. What I meant was, do you
think there would have been any real effort to get rid of them? I
don't.

All those that passed via that method of
learning would be scorned as "Drive-thru" Licensees. The standard
comments built on the "But 'real hams'" had to...." mindset.

How would anyone know who used what method to learn unless the person
told them?

Entry level at the time meant simple equipment. Getting a CW transmitt
er
on the air was the first step. "How can I communicate with a hand key?
"
With Morse code of course. Plugging a microphone into the key jack won
't
work.

Not sure which time you're referring to. Please elaborate.

[ comment about the relevancy to this discussion is at the bottom. ]

Prior to the Novice license, the easiest way to get on the air with a
limited budget and skill set was to make a simple CW transmitter. Of
course, to be able to use it, you're going to have to be able to send
and receive Morse code, unless the only QSL cards you want to receive
are from OO's and / or the FCC.

Agreed!

Yes, you could get your ticket, throw your key away and buy phone stuff
but it was still easier to just get on the air with Morse code.

"Easier" in the sense that you could do more with simple, inexpensive
HF equipment.

The Novice license was introduced as a way to get on the air with a
limited skill set, and spend time ON THE AIR to give you the incentive
to upgrade your skills with the promise of frequency agility and phone
operation when you upgraded.

Before 1951, the "standard" US amateur licenses were the Class B and C,
which became the General and Conditional. The Novice was meant as a
sort of "learner's permit" so that new hams could learn-by-doing rather
than having to go straight to 13 wpm code and the General written exam
just to get started. That's why the license wasn't renewable and had a
shorter term.

And as Jeff Davis said, Morse Code was the lingua franca of
communications back in the early days.

And was used by other radio services well into the 1990s. A lot depends
on what you consider "the early days".

I know, and the FAA still uses CW to ID beacons. But the write things
like ".-.. .- -..-" on the maps right next to LAX rather than force
pilots to learn Morse code.

What I meant is that the use of Morse Code for communication by other
radio services continued well into the 1990s.

And if I remember right, joining the military (as an example) didn't
require you to learn code to use a rifle. If you wanted to learn code
and get a different job, that was up to you.

Amateur radio isn't the military.

I just can't see inter agency communications between police, fire,
medical �and the Red Cross being handled by some guy wearing a
celluloid eye shade, sleeve garters and hunched over a code key. *

Why not?

Because human life and safety is _dependent_ on quick and accurate
communications. By ANYONE

Quick and accurate requires skill and training.

The FBI had their own HF nets using Morse Code. The military and
maritime folks used for many decades.

The main reason other services stopped using Morse Code was that they
didn't want to pay skilled operators. It was cheaper for them to buy
more-complex equipment.

The key word here is "had". The additional expenses in the design and
deployment of the new equipment is there to remove the possibility of
human error and make things simple enough for anyone to operate.

Human error is still possible; in fact, it may be more possible if
anyone is allowed to operate.

The big issue IMHO was and is co$t. Skilled personnel cost more than
the equipment that replaced them. Heck, way back in 1912, most ships
with wireless only carried one operator. The Titanic, largest ship in
the world at the time, carried only two. The reason was cost, nothing
more; it took a disaster and regulations to force the shipping
companies to man the wireless 24/7.

But Amateur Radio is all about *operating*.

Operating is not all of it.

Agreed. But operating is what you need a license for. A non-amateur
can do almost everything else.

Nor is operating via a specific mode.

Or with a specific technology, or on a specific band.

If anything, it is all about communication and having the skill
set (both technical and operational) required to communicate in
the mode with which you are granted the right to use.

Exactly! And since Morse Code is one of those modes...

Or what that has to do with the discussion.

My comments at the beginning of this discussion were specific to my
opinion that the requirements for joining the CWops club were
restrictive and elitist. With a tongue in cheek reference to the
Masonic Lodge with their secret handshakes and rituals along with
having to be vetted by existing members.

Well, we could apply for a grant from the Ministry of Silly Walks...

However, as I suspected, the discussion has drifted into the standard
"People that haven't had to learn code like *I* did, or "make the
effort" (as it is sometimes referred to) are somehow less than real
hams."

I don't see where I wrote anything like that.

Pointing out that the requirements are different now isn't saying that.
I have met many amateurs who are completely unaware of the history and
changes in Amateur Radio that led to the present system.

For example, I have met many amateurs who thought that, before
"incentive licensing", all US amateurs witha General or higher had all
privileges, dating back to the beginning of licensing. Every one was
surprised to learn that such was not the case before 1953.

People should use Morse code as a mode of communicating because it is
a skill and one they should be proud of. NOT because it somehow makes
others less than them.

Agreed!

But at the same time, it isn't wrong to have skills, use them, promote
them, and be proud of them.

The same could be said of those who chose to
use SSB, AM, PSK, RTTY, FM, EME, packet radio and so forth. But, oddly
you don't hear them talking down to everyone else that do not share
their enthusiasm for their preferred mode of communication.

I have heard and seen folks who use SSB refer to AM as "ancient
modulation"

I have heard and seen folks who use AM refer to SSB as "Donald Duck",
"slop-bucket" and other terms

I have heard and seen all sorts of derogatory terms used for those who
use and promote the use of Morse Code by those who don't use the mode.

There are lots of other examples. "Life's too short for QRP", is one -
how is a QRPer supposed to take that?

Not by all - just by some. I don't think that all should be blamed for
the actions of a few.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Jan 7, 10:17�am, wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:16 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:

wrote:
On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:

The main reason other services stopped using Morse Code was that they
didn't want to pay skilled operators. It was cheaper for them to buy
more-complex equipment.

This is irrelevant to the subject at hand, namely "CW Clubs." Non-
amateur radio services aren't involved.

As to a typical non-amateur-communications service, an old Teletype
Corporation teleprinter cost less than a quarter of the annual salary of
a skilled morse code specialist and had a service life of at least 10
years. That was before WWII...but it applied just after WWII as well.



But Amateur Radio is all about *operating*.

Curiosity compells a mention that William G. Pierpont, N0HFF, did not
have but a General class license when it expired (officially) in 2006.

If "Amateur Radio is all about 'operating,' then why are there any
technical questions in the written test elements for a USA amateur radio
license?

73, Len K6LHA

On Jan 7, 1:01�pm, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote:
On Jan 7, 11:16 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote:

Suppose that in 1980 someone had developed a wonderful new way to learn
Morse Code that would take a typical person from 0 to 25 wpm in 1 hour,
simply by watching a videotape.

Do you think the code tests would still have been an issue?

I'm certain that they would. All those that passed via that method of
learning would be scorned as "Drive-thru" Licensees. The standard
comments built on the "But 'real hams'" had to...." mindset.

That is - most unfortunately - true. I was reminded again of my
"license gotten by sending in some cereal box tops" this morning. Once
I had accomplished my morning communication, I just shut down. Nobody
needs that sort of attitude.

Prior to the Novice license, the easiest way to get on the air with a
limited budget and skill set was to make a simple CW transmitter. Of
course, to be able to use it, you're going to have to be able to send
and receive Morse code, unless the only QSL cards you want to receive
are from OO's and / or the FCC.

Yes, you could get your ticket, throw your key away and buy phone stuff
but it was still easier to just get on the air with Morse code.

The Novice license was introduced as a way to get on the air with a
limited skill set, and spend time ON THE AIR to give you the incentive
to upgrade your skills with the promise of frequency agility and phone
operation when you upgraded.

Or, at least in the last decade, legally take all tests in one test
session and get the "highest" class license. shrug

I know, and the FAA still uses CW to ID beacons. But the write things
like ".-.. .- -..-" on the maps right next to LAX rather than force
pilots to learn Morse code.

I passed my FAA general aviation written test in 1964 at VNY. There was
no question on that test in regards to any morse code. Back then the
standard method of radionavigation was by VOR (Vhf Omnidirection radio
Range) that did not use a precise singular azimuth of the pre-WWII "A-N"
beacons that were the cause of many early aircraft missed-navigation
errors. One can rather easily triangulate a position over the ground
using just the bearing information from two VORs. That is still there
today.

And if I remember right, joining the military (as an example) didn't
require you to learn code to use a rifle. If you wanted to learn code
and get a different job, that was up to you.

Well, as a vountary enlistee in the U.S. Army in 1952, we didn't have
much choice at all as to assignment. Also we ALL HAD to know how to
"use a rifle." Period. All.

I just can't see inter agency communications between police, fire,
medical �and the Red Cross being handled by some guy wearing a
celluloid eye shade, sleeve garters and hunched over a code key. *

Why not?

Because human life and safety is _dependent_ on quick and accurate
communications. By ANYONE.

Absolutely true! I could expound on that from personal experience but
that would probably be deleted...as has happened before. :-)

However, as I suspected, the discussion has drifted into the standard
"People that haven't had to learn code like *I* did, or "make the
effort" (as it is sometimes referred to) are somehow less than real
hams."

That is endemic in USA amateur radio. Unfortunate for the radio service
and trying to bring in anyone. My first exposure to the BIG World of
radio came in early 1953 (56 7/8 years ago, give or take). I only pull
out that factoid to show where I'm coming from, not to say I'm "better
than anyone." :-)

I've discovered that nothing of my exposure or experience is "good
enough" for amateur radio or their long-timers. ??? :-)

73, Len K6LHA

K6LHA wrote:
wrote:

The main reason other services stopped using Morse Code was that they
didn't want to pay skilled operators. It was cheaper for them to buy
more-complex equipment.

As to a typical non-amateur-communications service, an old Teletype
Corporation teleprinter cost less than a quarter of the annual salary of
a skilled morse code specialist and had a service life of at least 10
years. That was before WWII...but it applied just after WWII as well.

This is a little like saying that the reason commercial shipping moved
from wind power to engines is that they could have a smaller crew. Cost
is only a minor part of why commercial communications services stopped
using cw.

Technology moves forward. That TTY teleprinter might cost less than a
skilled Morse operator, but more important is that it does the job
better. If you're running a commercial service and you're being paid
real money to move message traffic, you invest in the latest technology
to do it because that's the overall most efficient way to get the job done.

While I'm nostalgic about the end of cw in the world of commercial
radio, that has nothing to do with my feeling about its use in ham
radio. One of the things hobbyists do is maintain expertise in skills
that might otherwise be lost forever. I enjoy the mode, and it still
has plenty of application in my hobby.

If others don't enjoy it, fine. I don't enjoy EME, and I feel myself no
less a ham for that. I'm not going to denigrate my fellow ham because
they don't care to operate a mode that I happen to enjoy.

73, Steve KB9X

On Jan 7, 11:17�am, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:
On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, wrote:

I will note that the potential tests the pledge
might have to take, depending on the will of their sponsors is just
odd. There should be a competency test, or their shouldn't be.

I don't think it's odd, but that's just me. If somebody wants to know
my Morse Code skills, I can tell them. If that's not enough, I can
show them.

Almost *any* nontrivial requirement is bound to be labeled a "hazing
ritual", "cronyism", "luddite" or other derogatory term by somebody.

Kind of. I think a large part of the discussion, at least for me, is
the idea that this club furthers the use of Morse code. They state it
as one of their purposes. I don't think that their tactic will work.

Only way to know is to try.

I'd even go so far as to state that I don't really care if they are an
exclusive club. That's no problem. There is a need for people of a
like mind to congregate. But if a club is one thing while purporting
to be another, I'm inclined to remark about it.

Here's an analogy:

I just came in from a morning run. Not to far and not too fast but
definitely running. It's in the twenties here but the sun is out, the
roads are clear of yesterday's snow and the wind isn't too bad. What we
used to call "sweater weather" in western New York State.

There are all sorts of running/jogging clubs and organizations today,
with a wide range of membership requirements. Some are mostly social,
some are general purpose, some focus on competition, some are strictly
about track, cross-country, road racing, etc. All are involved in some
way in promoting running in various forms.

Suppose a club were to form which focused on long distance running,
defined as those who routinely do runs longer than 13.1 miles (half-
marathon and up). Maybe they toss in requirements of having completed
at least one TAC-certified marathon "or equivalent".

Obviously a lot of people who run couldn't join unless they seriously
upped their distance. The membership would be relatively small, but
focused on a specific kind of running.

Seems to me that such a club could and would promote running,
particularly long-distance running. I don't see how that would be a
bad thing.

The new Morse Code club described is similar, IMHO.

---

One thing I have observed among amateurs actually *using* Morse Code is
the friendship and comaraderie (sp?) and general welcoming. I don't
hear the put-downs and such that are claimed by others - not on the
air, anyway. Young or old, newcomer or OT, fast or slow, QRP or high
power, it doesn't make any difference.

The one thing that *does* make a difference among the Morse-Code-using
ops I encounter is consideration and operating skill. Meaning things
like not calling the DX on his frequency when he's working split, not
sending faster than you can receive, having a decent quality signal,
etc. An operator cannot buy those things.

That's one of the things that hooked me on Morse Code more than 42
years ago, and keeps me coming back.

73 de Jim, N2EY

FISTS 4360
SKCC 307
SOC 895