| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
New club for Morse enthusiasts
A new club has been formed among Amateur Radio operators who are Morse Code
(CW) enthusiasts. It is called The CW Operators' Club (CWops). CWops encourages the use of CW in Amateur communications, and it promotes goodwill among Amateurs around the world by planned CW activities. CWops is international in scope, membership and management. Its focus is the use of CW, whether for contesting, DXing or ragchewing. Moreover, it promotes every form of sending -- if it's CW, CWops supports it! For further information, go to www.cwops.org. There you will find everything that you might want to know about CWops, including our bylaws and articles of incorporation, our planned activities, an explanation of how to become a member, and a list of current members. Jim Talens, N3JT Secretary, CWops --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 2, 8:33�pm, K�HB wrote:
A new club has been formed among Amateur Radio operators who are Morse Co de (CW) enthusiasts. �It is called The CW Operators' Club (CWops). �CWops encourages the use of CW in Amateur communications, and it promotes goodw ill among Amateurs around the world by planned CW activities. CWops is international in scope, membership and management. �Its focus is the use of CW, whether for contesting, DXing or ragchewing. �More over, it promotes every form of sending -- if it's CW, CWops supports it! For further information, go towww.cwops.org. �There you will find everything that you might want to know about CWops, including our bylaws and articles of incorporation, our planned activities, an explanation of how to become a member, and a list of current members. Jim Talens, N3JT Secretary, CWops --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- www.cwops.org page comes back as non-existant. ?? AF6AY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
Full link for the CW Operators Club:
http://www.cwops.org/ -- Some other Morse Code online resources: International Morse Preservation Society, aka FISTS: http://www.fists.org/ -- Straight Key Century Club, aka SKCC: http://www.skccgroup.com/ -- G4FON site: http://www.g4fon.net/ -- Art and Skill of Radiotelegraphy (electronic book, free for the download): http://www.qsl.net/n9bor/n0hff.htm (there are several other download sites) -- Vibroplex: http://www.vibroplex.com/ -- Morse Express: http://www.mtechnologies.com/ -- 73 es HNY de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
wrote in message ... Some other Morse Code online resources: The ultimate Morse web resource --- http://www.morsecode.nl/index2.html --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 3, 1:06�pm, Ivor Jones wrote:
On 03/01/10 20:05, AF6AY wrote: On Jan 2, 8:33 pm, K �wrote: [snip] For further information, go towww.cwops.org. There you will find everything that you might want to know about CWops, including our byla ws and articles of incorporation, our planned activities, an explanation o f how to become a member, and a list of current members. Jim Talens, N3JT Secretary, CWops www.cwops.orgpage comes back as non-existant. �?? AF6AY Ok here at the moment, maybe a temporary server problem..? 73 Ivor G6URP Good thought, Ivor, but it is probably due to lack of space between "to" and the link address. I tried it again on Sunday night and it had the same problem using the link from the message text. Used separately from the browser, it will go to the proper address. 73, Len AF6AY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
What's next? Secret handshakes and weird rituals?
"As described in detail in the Bylaws, to become a CWops member you must be nominated by a current member and sponsored by three other members who have worked you twice within the previous 12 months. The nomination process must be completed within a period of five months. Once you have your sponsors, there is a 30-day waiting period. Absent an objection, you will then receive a formal invitation to join, and after registering and paying the annual dues of $12 U.S., you will become a CWops member and receive your membership number. All of these steps are explained in the Bylaws. " 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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 4, 7:15 pm, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
What's next? Secret handshakes and weird rituals? I read the bylaws and they do seem to be a pretty exclusive group. What I see as the flaw in their system is that they state that they want to create a renaissance in CW. Okay, that's a worthy goal. I do question how they are going about it. But setting the bar at 25 wpm is not going to produce that goal. And reading through their web pages, it is not difficult to derive a conclusion that they are working at a atmosphere of exclusivity. Exclusivity and renaissance are pretty much at odds. Plus there is the strange part in the FAQ about one's sponsors possibly making a applicant take a test. That's just inconsistent and odd, and smacks of sub-groups, and people who are more equal than others. That being said, if a person likes that sort of thing, that's just fine by me. But for myself, I'm happy to be member number 891 in the Second Class Operator's Club. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 5, 10:27 am, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:
On Jan 4, 7:15 pm, Jeffrey D Angus wrote: What's next? Secret handshakes and weird rituals? I read the bylaws and they do seem to be a pretty exclusive group. I'm not a member, but I don't see any secret handshakes or weird rituals. What I do see are requirements that prospective members prove themselves by actually getting on the air and working existing members, using CW, at a given speed or better. What I see as the flaw in their system is that they state that they want to create a renaissance in CW. Okay, that's a worthy goal. I do question how they are going about it. But setting the bar at 25 wpm is not going to produce that goal. Why not? And reading through their web pages, it is not difficult to derive a conclusion that they are working at a atmosphere of exclusivity. Exclusivity and renaissance are pretty much at odds. Plus there is the strange part in the FAQ about one's sponsors possibly making a applicant take a test. That's just inconsistent and odd, and smacks of sub-groups, and people who are more equal than others. I see it very differently. CWOps isn't the only game in town. FISTS has been around a long time, for example. SKCC has attracted thousands of members in just a few years. Second Class Operator's club is another example. All have pretty minimal entry requirements. That's not a bad thing. ISTM that the idea for CWOps is to have a club focused on those with a somewhat-higher level of skill in Morse Code, who actually use the mode on the air regularly. The requirement for QSOs with members looks to me as a way of insuring a personal connection between members. So I think there's room for a club like CWOps, too. It will be interesting to see how membership grows. I'm happy to be member number 891 in the Second Class Operator's Club. Which reminds me - I gotta sign up for that one. --- One thing I remember clearly from my early days in amateur radio is actually seeing and hearing real live Radio Amateurs using Morse Code at a high level of skill. I think it was Field Day 1969 when I encountered a grizzled OT working CW on the low end of 40, working them faster than I could keep track of through the fierce QRM of the crowded band. Even though FD had only been going for a couple of hours he'd made more QSOs than many stations would make all FD. "Which one are you copying?" I asked "All three" said the OT, logging another one. "Now get me another beer" I went to get it, and decided right then that someday I'd have that level of skills. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
|
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On 2010-01-06, Steve Bonine wrote:
I gave up long ago trying to predict what motivates ham radio operators. Personally, this whole idea of having to be nominated by current members turns me off, but I know that I am far from typical in that regard. If the process of obtaining membership in this club actually Morse has transitioned from being the lingua franca of amateur radio to an exclusive club. And folks marvel at its decline... -- Jeff, KE9V |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 5, 2:48 pm, wrote:
What I do see are requirements that prospective members prove themselves by actually getting on the air and working existing members, using CW, at a given speed or better. Yes, exactly. What I see as the flaw in their system is that they state that they want to create a renaissance in CW. Okay, that's a worthy goal. I do question how they are going about it. But setting the bar at 25 wpm is not going to produce that goal. Why not? Let me give an example from my own world. In the PAQSO Party, we like to encourage the use of OOK Morse. That's why we give more points to them. In a year or two, I'm going to increase that point value on the bands above 80 meters to 2 points from 1.5 per CW QSO. That's telling people that if they want to get more points per QSO, all they have to do is use OOK Morse. I'm not telling them they have to do it at a certain speed, just giving a gentle push. And I'm not trying to single out Morse, because I also give out 2 points for PSK31 and RTTY also. I want people to use those modes too. And yes, I have had some Morse enthusiasts who became angry when I added the other modes. They wanted the extra points exclusively for themselves. Sorry, but I'm an equal opportunity promoter. But that does tell me that the increased points per QSO is a powerful incentive. The main reason that I don't believe that they will be successful in promoting Morse code is that they are only open to people who are already proficient in the art. The only rationale I can come up with that comes out as promotion is that someone will really really want to join the CWops, so he practices a lot so he can get to 25 wpm, so they allow him to join. IOW, they are promoting on the side of CW Ops who are already there. In reality, there aren't likely to be too many people who will decide to learn and use OOK Morse in order to join that club. CWOps isn't the only game in town. FISTS has been around a long time, for example. SKCC has attracted thousands of members in just a few years. Second Class Operator's club is another example. All have pretty minimal entry requirements. That's not a bad thing. We Second Class Operators are a little different though, in that our motto is "Competence is tolerated, but not encouraged". We're kind of the antithesis of exclusive, and we make fun of everything, including the other members. Great place to let your hair down - if I had any to let down. 8^) So I think there's room for a club like CWOps, too. It will be interesting to see how membership grows. Absolutely. "Which one are you copying?" I asked "All three" said the OT, logging another one. "Now get me another beer" I went to get it, and decided right then that someday I'd have that level of skills. I'm partway there, I have the beer part down...... ;^) - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Wed, 6 Jan 2010 08:56:38 EST, "Michael J. Coslo"
wrote: In the PAQSO Party, we like to encourage the use of OOK Morse. What is OOK Morse, and how does it differ from regular Morse code? I looked at the PAQSO Party site, and OOK is not defined. Dick AC7EL |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On 2010-01-06, Bert Hyman wrote:
Exclusive? How so? Nobody has to be invited to actually use CW on the air. Membership in this or any other club is not required. True, however, 'exclusive' is implied in the bylaws that call for nomination for membership, pop tests to prove competancy, etc. It's just another form of cronyism by a handful of folks not happy that the hazing requirement to obtain HF privileges has been removed. Nothing wrong with it but the result will be the same hundred old guys who all belong to the same tired hundred clubs all with the same stated purpose of "saving" ham radio by protecting and promoting Morse. Been there, done that, got the shirt and it still doesn't work... If people don't use CW, it's because they don't want to, not because someone won't let them. Also true. Now if I could just make a few contacts without being shaken down for my FISTS, SKCC, NAQCC, etc, etc, etc, numbers.... 73, -- Jeff, KE9V |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 6, 8:13 am, Jeff Davis wrote:
Morse has transitioned from being the lingua franca of amateur radio to a n exclusive club. And folks marvel at its decline... And that worries me. I'll almost certainly never be qualified to become a member of that CWops club due to physical limitations, but I realize that Morse code and it's use in Ham radio is a skill that should never go away. The concept of working the world with a rudimentary radio and no infrastructure is pretty powerful. The features of the mode make it possible, the small bandwidth, the human powered DSP, that's all great stuff. It absolutely needs to be encouraged. It just takes some work. And we must be honest, it takes more work for some of us (like me) than others. But that's okay, I considered the months I put in to get to a paltry 8 wpm well worth it. To me it's hard to call a club that has a lower limit of 25 wpm not exclusive. They are promoting themselves to people who have already made the grade. But enough about them - I don't begrudge them their status, just that I think they are not going to achieve one of their stated goals. Do we want to promote OOK Morse? How about this idea...... Given that there is now a rather large divide between competent Morse operators, and those starting out, there is some serious catching up to do. 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. This so far is kind of like the canned software. But where this departs is that the student can send back and forth to other students. Conversations can be made at really slow speeds, and with people of like skill level. Text messaging can be incorporated to compare notes. And another feature is a mentor can be added to the system. A volunteer could work with the students to increase their proficiency. The "hooks" of such a system are the web based interface, the semi- chat room atmosphere, and the lack of pressure if no pressure is desired. It isn't breaking any technological ground either. The biggest issue is who would host such a thing? My best guess is that the ARRL would be a likely candidate. I believe that would be a much better way to promote OOK Morse. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
wrote: In the PAQSO Party, we like to encourage the use of OOK Morse. What is OOK Morse, and how does it differ from regular Morse code? I looked at the PAQSO Party site, and OOK is not defined. Hi Dick, OOK stands for On/Off keying Morse. It's really what most people call CW. I think the distinction was made when some folks questioned the distinction between Morse and CW, which technically speaking isn't actually CW. Just kind of a semantics thing - I ended up settling on OOK Morse - mostly anyhow - It's probably the most accurate. That being said, everyone does know what we're talking about when we say CW. -73 de Mike N3LI - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 6, 11:12 am, Jeff Davis wrote:
True, however, 'exclusive' is implied in the bylaws that call for nominat ion for membership, pop tests to prove competancy, etc. It's just another for m of cronyism by a handful of folks not happy that the hazing requirement t o obtain HF privileges has been removed. Then don't join. Almost *any* nontrivial requirement is bound to be labeled a "hazing ritual", "cronyism", "luddite" or other derogatory term by somebody. Now if I could just make a few contacts without being shaken down for my FISTS, SKCC, NAQCC, etc, etc, etc, numbers.... You can have a QSO with me, then. I have a bunch of those numbers but I don't ask folks for them during QSOs unless there's a specific reason (such as they ask me). IIRC the whole exchanging-numbers deal came from the Ten-Ten folks, who mostly use 'phone... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
|
New club for Morse enthusiasts
In Jeff Davis
wrote: At 50 I don't think I'm the oldest guy in the room but it sure seems like a long time since I enjoyed a QSO without being asked if I had this or that number to exchange. And I blame that on the endless string of little CW clubs that sprout like mushrooms in the spring... I've been around for a while myself (licensed 49 years -today!) and have adopted and dropped many operating roles in that time. I'm currently strictly a CW operator, recently gave up chasing DX due to the lack of sunspots, and I'm now trying contesting. So, it's been a while since I've had a "real" QSO. Still, if I slide up above 14025, I find US CW operators, obviously relative newcomers, holding what I'd certainly call traditional person-to-person conversations on CW. You know that since they don't have to operate CW any more, they're there because they like it. There's certainly a similar neighborhood on 40 or elsewhere where you'll find the same sort of activity. I'm sure any one of them would welcome the chance to have an extended chat with anyone who's willing to slow down a bit and would probably benefit from the chance to listen to "good" CW. And, I doubt that any of them have any numbers to exchange :-) -- Bert Hyman W0RSB St. Paul, MN |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On 1/6/2010 12:16 PM, Michael J. Coslo wrote:
On Jan 6, 8:13 am, Jeff wrote: Morse has transitioned from being the lingua franca of amateur radio to a n exclusive club. And folks marvel at its decline... And that worries me. (snip) 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 at http://home.comcast.net/~morsekob/ for more information. HTH. Bill, W1AC (Filter QRM for direct replies) |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
Michael J. Coslo wrote:
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? Oddly enough, the only mode that was outlawed by the FCC was spark. Yet some people still carry as if dropping Element 2 was somehow banning CW (Morse Code) from the airwaves. I just don't get it. You know, there's other "out dated" modes that are still in use on the Amateur bands. AM and RTTY to name a couple. And yet, there NEVER was a proficiency test for either mode. Speaking of outdated, there are quite a few people out there that are proficient at sending and receiving telegraph (sounder) based code as well, and not all of them are 85+ years of age. Will somebody please point out that the calender says 2010 not 1930. Things change, but there will always be room for and people who use CW on the Amateur bands. Oh, and in answer to your question, you promote it by using it. And you make a point to tutor others how to use it. And that means putting up with people like me that are a bit rusty when I happen to get on the air. QRS doesn't mean calling CQ on my frequency instead of slowing down so I can copy. 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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote:
Now that element 2 is history, how do we promote the mode? Ten Ways: 1) Use Morse Code on the air. For ragchewing, DXing, contesting, traffic handling, QRP, QRO, QRS, QRQ, whatever floats your boat. If your favorite band is crowded, try another and/or get a sharper filter. If you contest, even a little, send in your logs, photos, soapbox comments, etc. Our presence on the air is essential. 2) Work on your Morse Code skills. Got a Code Proficency certificate? But Morse Code skill is not just speed. Can you send and receive a message in standard form? Can you do it faster than someone on 'phone? Can you do both "head copy" and write it down? How about copying on a mill? Ragchewing? Contesting? Being able to have a QSO at slow as well as fast speeds? All are forms of proficiency. 3) Find a local club that does Field Day and go out with them, particularly if they have little or no Morse Code activity on FD now. Help with their Morse Code efforts however you can - operating, logging, setting up, tearing down, etc. FD is one way to actively demonstrate 21st Century Morse Code *use*. Talking to people about Morse isn't nearly so effective as showing them. 4) Set up a Morse Code demo at a local hamfest/club meeting/air show/ town fair/middle school etc. Not as some sort of nostalgia thing but as a demonstration that Morse Code is alive and in use today. Have handouts and audience-particiaption if possible. 5) Conduct Morse Code training - on the air, in person, over the 'net, whatever. Help anybody who wants to learn. Could be as simple as giving them some code software, tapes or CDs, or as involved as a formal course at a local community center. 6) Elmer anybody who wants help - even if they're not interested in Morse Code at all. Your help and example may inspire them. 7) Write articles for QST/CQ/Worldradio/K9YA Telegraph/Electric Radio/ your local hamclub newsletter etc. Not about the code *test* nor about Morse Code history, the past, etc., but about how to use Morse Code *today*, and how you are using it. How about an article on what rigs are best for Morse Code use, and why? Or about the differences between a bug, single-lever keyer, iambic A and iambic B? Your FD experiences with Morse Code? (QST, June, 1994) Yes, you may be turned down by the first mag you submit it to - but keep submitting. 8) Get involved in NTS, QMN, ARES, whatever, and use Morse Code there. The main reason so much emergency/public service stuff is done on voice is because they don't have the people - skilled operators - to use any other mode. 9) Join FISTS & SKCC and any other group that supports Morse. Give out numbers to those who ask for them even if you're not a contester/award collector. 10) Use the online environment to its fullest. The online training idea is excellent. Another is to post Morse-Code-centric videos on YouTube (one fellow did it with guitar lessons, why not Morse Code lessons?). "The test" is long gone and FCC won't bring it back. FCC won't preserve our standards and values - we have to do it. And our attitude is a key part of that (pun intended). If we're seen as a bunch of old grumpy gus types, not many will want to join us. But if we present ourselves as a fun-loving, welcoming, young-at-heart-and- mind, helpful group with useful skills, people will want to join us. IMHO 73 de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 7, 12:13 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
Oddly enough, the only mode that was outlawed by the FCC was spark. FCC didn't outlaw spark use by hams. The Department of Commerce did; FCC would not exist for several more years. (yes, I'm a stickler for historical accuracy). But it was only outlawed after hams stopped using it (1927 IIRC). Yet some people still carry as if dropping Element 2 was somehow banning CW (Morse Code) from the airwaves. I just don't get it. I think it's a semantics/attitude thing. People write "they dropped the code" not "they dropped the code TEST". Or they name an organization "No-Code..." not "No-Code-Test..." It may be a minor difference to some, but not to others. You know, there's other "out dated" modes that are still in use on the Amateur bands. AM and RTTY to name a couple. And yet, there NEVER was a proficiency test for either mode. People who are going to use AM already know how to speak and listen. And I don't think it's possible to get an amateur license if you can't read, which is the main skill needed to use RTTY. I think the big issue with Morse Code testing was that most would-be hams don't already have the skills needed to use the mode, even at a basic level. So having a test, even a basic 5 wpm test, meant actually learning a new skill. Unlike "book learning", skills take practice and active engagement of the student to learn. All ancient history now. Things change, but there will always be room for and people who use CW on the Amateur bands. I hope so. But there are a few who would completely ban Morse Code *use* if they could. Oh, and in answer to your question, you promote it by using it. And you make a point to tutor others how to use it. And that means putting up with people like me that are a bit rusty when I happen to get on the air. QRS doesn't mean calling CQ on my frequency instead of slowing down so I can copy. Of course. Speed is relative. To the 5 wpm operator, 15 wpm is blazing fast. To the 45 wpm operator, 15 wpm is crawling slow. Speed isn't the only skill, either See you on the low end of 80 and 40. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
Yet some people still carry as if dropping Element 2 was somehow banning CW (Morse Code) from the airwaves. I enjoy cw. It is a positive part of my life. But there is exactly one reason why I have been able to experience this pleasu The FCC _forced_ me to invest the effort, and endure the pain, to build this skill. It was not fun at first. I got my novice license when I had one year to build my code speed to 13 wpm or I would be off the air. At first that process was drudgery. But at some point it became fun. It has been fun ever since. There's a good analogy with learning a foreign language. At some point, it transitions from active effort to being natural. People in their first week of learning Spanish can't comprehend the pleasure of being able to read Don Quixote as the author actually wrote it. Without the FCC's heavy handed pressure, I would not have learned a skill that has given me great pleasure in my life. So now that the requirement is gone, the number of people who have the opportunity to enjoy the pleasure of cw will be much reduced. There are people who will learn cw on their own, but not many. Most new hams won't know that they're missing anything. For those of us who enjoy cw, the issue of no-code was a difficult one. My personal opinion is that, in spite of what I said above, removing the cw requirement was the right decision. Yes, it will deprive some people of an enjoyable experience. But we need new recruits, and the cw requirement was a roadblock to new people entering the hobby. 73, Steve KB9X |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
wrote:
On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote: Now that element 2 is history, how do we promote the mode? Ten Ways: 1) Use Morse Code on the air. OK 2) Work on your Morse Code skills. Got a Code Proficency certificate? OK 5) Conduct Morse Code training - on the air OK 6) Elmer anybody who wants help OK (Note, I didn't list everything due to some hidden agenda, the ones I did highlight are based on personal involvement.) "The test" is long gone and FCC won't bring it back. FCC won't preserve 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? And in another post you wrote: I think the big issue with Morse Code testing was that most would-be hams don't already have the skills needed to use the mode, even at a basic level. So having a test, even a basic 5 wpm test, meant actually learning a new skill. Unlike "book learning", skills take practice and active engagement of the student to learn. Isn't that a bit revisionist? Entry level at the time meant simple equipment. Getting a CW transmitter 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. Secondly, the FCC (and I use that term broadly rather than have to list every iteration of their existence) also wanted a trained pool of radio operators. And as Jeff Davis said, Morse Code was the lingua franca of communications back in the early days. 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. * *With a tongue and cheek reference to the costumes the two guys wore on the Jay Leno Show during a Cellphone Texting VS Morse Code contest. 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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 wrote: Morse has transitioned from being the lingua franca of amateur radio t o a n exclusive club. And folks marvel at its decline... And that worries me. (snip) 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. Another part is that it isn't just copying Morse that is an issue. The abbreviations that Morse Ops use can be a little confusing. They know what they mean, but so many use slightly different ones that a new guy can get really confused. I remember when I first started listening to live CW, I could copy the ARRL practice code okay, but listening to Actual QSO's, I'd copy it down, and think "this has to be wrong, And as a student of Morse who tends to "fly behind the plane", I'd get stuck. So it would be good to slowly work the abbreviations in after a while. - 73 de Mike N3LI - |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, wrote:
On Jan 6, 11:12 am, Jeff Davis wrote: True, however, 'exclusive' is implied in the bylaws that call for nomin ation for membership, pop tests to prove competancy, etc. It's just another f orm of cronyism by a handful of folks not happy that the hazing requirement to obtain HF privileges has been removed. Then don't join. I surely won't. and not for "hazing". I don't see any hazing in effect here, because the requirements are already attained by prospective members. 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. 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. 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. |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 7, 11:15 am, Steve Bonine wrote:
Without the FCC's heavy handed pressure, I would not have learned a skill that has given me great pleasure in my life. And How! I'm not a big user of Morse code, but don't regret a minute spent learning it. My own specialty in amateur radio is Computer based stuff. My shack has 4 computers, one main, one to control the HF rig and run digital modes, one to monitor APRS, and one to record the local repeater for a interferer. Then there's one on the car for my aprs coverage experiments. I wonder if there's a club for computer geeks like me who don't know when to stop? hehe Probably more like a support group. Step away from the computer Mr Coslo, just step away......... |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
On Jan 7, 11:16 am, Jeffrey D Angus wrote:
wrote: On Jan 6, 12:17 pm, "Michael J. Coslo" wrote: Now that element 2 is history, how do we promote the mode? Ten Ways: "The test" is long gone and FCC won't bring it back. FCC won't preserve 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 And in another post you wrote: I think the big issue with Morse Code testing was that most would-be hams don't already have the skills needed to use the mode, even at a basic level. So having a test, even a basic 5 wpm test, meant actually learning a new skill. Unlike "book learning", skills take practice and active engagement of the student to learn. Isn't that a bit revisionist? No, not at all. 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? Entry level at the time meant simple equipment. Getting a CW transmitter 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. Or what that has to do with the discussion. Please elaborate. Secondly, the FCC (and I use that term broadly rather than have to list every iteration of their existence) also wanted a trained pool of radio operators. 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 just can't see inter agency communications between police, fire, medical and the Red Cross being handled by some guy wearing a celluloi d eye shade, sleeve garters and hunched over a code key. * Why not? 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. But Amateur Radio is all about *operating*. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
"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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
New club for Morse enthusiasts
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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:36 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com