"Bill Sohl" wrote:

I tend to agree with that prediction since Novice already had code credit
and the only thing between the Novice and Tech has been the written
test itself. If a Novice hasn't upgraded in the last 5 or 10 years,
odds are they have dropped from the ham radio ranks already.

I disagree somewhat. There will always be a segment which is 'inactive', but
will keep their license active so they can pick it up again someday when
they want.

After the restructuring of 2000, I wondered why we didn't see a mass-exodus
from the General and the Advanced ranks to Extra. There has been a continual
decrease in the General/Advanced licenses and increase in the Extra class,
but not as much as I would have expected. Without that nasty, 'hard' 20wpm
code test, wouldn't you expect those licensees to flock to Extra?

Perhaps a segment of those licensees are either inactive, or simply happy
with the operating privileges they have and have no need to upgrade? If so,
wouldn't those same reasons apply to some Novices not upgrading?


My wish for the New Year is that this forum once again become a
place for rational thought and discussion. The personal attacks
and other slimeball commentary by those who know who they are
should end.

When you put most of the nitwits in your killfile, the group is surprisingly
quiet and civil

73
KH6HZ

KH6HZ wrote:
...

73
KH6HZ



I put lot in the kill file and rarely read their posts (only if I feel a
great need to pity someone)--such as those spouting filth and perversion.

The nitwits? I just put 'em in the nitwit file in the brain, I still
read 'em. grin

Regards,
JS

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:
...
Yup, I believe that was also a significant factor. It wouldn't surprise
me if the only reasons they got to it now was because the office was slow
and they wanted to clean up some loose ends before the end of the year.
...
Dee, N8UZE

Like any bureaucracy, the last thing they will do is move to save their
lives. This is what they did here, in a last move and hoping that it is
not too late, they removed the CW test hoping to save the amateur bands
... they know how to save their jobs!

JS

I doubt the number of amateurs would cause them to worry about their jobs.
They have a lot of areas besides amateur radio under them. And they are not
elected officials so they don't have to worry there either.

Dee, N8UZE

"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
"Bill Sohl" wrote:

I tend to agree with that prediction since Novice already had code credit
and the only thing between the Novice and Tech has been the written
test itself. If a Novice hasn't upgraded in the last 5 or 10 years,
odds are they have dropped from the ham radio ranks already.

I disagree somewhat. There will always be a segment which is 'inactive',
but will keep their license active so they can pick it up again someday
when they want.

After the restructuring of 2000, I wondered why we didn't see a
mass-exodus from the General and the Advanced ranks to Extra. There has
been a continual decrease in the General/Advanced licenses and increase in
the Extra class, but not as much as I would have expected. Without that
nasty, 'hard' 20wpm code test, wouldn't you expect those licensees to
flock to Extra?

Perhaps a segment of those licensees are either inactive, or simply happy
with the operating privileges they have and have no need to upgrade? If
so, wouldn't those same reasons apply to some Novices not upgrading?


Yes the same reasons would apply and I do believe that the number of Novice
licensees won't drop to zero. However looking at the slope of the curve
from the time the no-code Tech was implemented to now continues to show a
steep and steady drop. The rate of decline has been nearly constant with no
sign yet of leveling out for that license class. I would expect to see a
few hundred Novices continuing to renew as Novices but they will be
statistically insignificant.

Looking at the lack of activity in the Novice segments of the HF bands, the
novice segments in the 220 band, and the fact that we now have no Novice
licensees left in our local club, it would appear to me that the trend has
been for the active Novices to upgrade and the inactive ones not to renew on
the whole. There will be exceptions of course.


My wish for the New Year is that this forum once again become a
place for rational thought and discussion. The personal attacks
and other slimeball commentary by those who know who they are
should end.

When you put most of the nitwits in your killfile, the group is
surprisingly quiet and civil

73
KH6HZ


Dee, N8UZE

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:

From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:


Len, get a ham licence. You might even enjoy it.

73 de Alun, N3KIP

Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...

I wasn't aware one needed a ham license to purchase and eat ham.

My wife and I had ham during the holidays. He tasted like
chicken...

Best regards,

John Smith I wrote:
Dee Flint wrote:
...
Yup, I believe that was also a significant factor. It wouldn't surprise me
if the only reasons they got to it now was because the office was slow and
they wanted to clean up some loose ends before the end of the year.
...
Dee, N8UZE

Like any bureaucracy, the last thing they will do is move to save their
lives. This is what they did here, in a last move and hoping that it is
not too late, they removed the CW test hoping to save the amateur bands
... they know how to save their jobs!

JS

John, I think your thinking is becoming too focussed about the FCC.

Amateur radio is one of the LESSER radio services the FCC must,
by law of Congress, regulate. That same law does NOT empower
them to "boost" (support, encourage) amateur radio in any way,
despite what so many ardent, life-style radio amateurs think.

Think back on FCC 99-412, the R&O establishing "restructuring."
It was issued on 30 December 1999, just about the last document
released in 1999 by the FCC. Since their official end of commentary
on the NPRM for restructuring was 15 January 1999, that left them
nearly a year to decide on the final R&O.

FCC 06-178 only has to be fitted into the publication schedule of
the Federal Register to become effective...it's all set to go except
for the effective date. It's taken roughly a year for the FCC to
decide on that (give or take a few months).

Given much MORE important subjects before the FCC, such as
the recent decision to allow AT&T to buy BellSouth, amateur radio
pales in significance. All one needs to do is check the home page
of the FCC to see their workload on US civil radio regulations...it
isn't small and those regulations on non-amateur communications
subjects affect millions of Americans more than a hobby radio
activity. Amateur radio is lucky to get as quick decisions as with
other radio services at the FCC.

One thing for sure, it didn't seem that NCI was badgering the FCC
to decide...it took NCI about a week to post the news of the pending
FCC 06-178 R&O! No sweat with the ARRL...the League has two
groups in DC to pester the FCC, a Lobbying service and a legal
firm...they can get "advance" notice of things quicker than a non-
dues civilian group...makes them look as if they are "in the know."

One must be patient. eyebrows akimbo

LA

Dee Flint wrote:
...
I doubt the number of amateurs would cause them to worry about their jobs.
They have a lot of areas besides amateur radio under them. And they are not
elected officials so they don't have to worry there either.

Dee, N8UZE

I think you have little respect for "The Straw Which Broke the Camels
Back" or just plain attrition ... at least in this definition of
attrition: " Attrition refers to a method of achieving a reduction in
personnel by not refilling positions that are vacated through
resignation, reassignment, transfer, retirement, or means other than
layoffs."

Regards,
JS

wrote:
Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...
...



Len:

Yanno, mooseluums don't eat swine! Are you mooseluum?

straight face
JS

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Fri, Dec 29 2006 7:33 am

wrote:
From: Dave Heil on Wed, Dec 27 2006 10:22 am
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote:

I submit that many entered the "Big Leagues of HF Radio" about the same
time as you. You are but one of them.

You betcha, but, as far as I can find, the ONLY one who
posted a photo essay (20 pages worth) about it on the
Internet. See:

http://sujan.hallikainen.org/Broadca...y/My3Years.pdf

Was there a prize for being the only one to post a twenty page photo
essay? You've posted the link a number of times.

So, how do you feel that a station with 40+ transmitters
all at 1 KW MINIMUM RF output on HF is "NOT Big Time?"

If it is the only "big time" you know, it is "big time" to you.

How do you feel over 200,000 messages per month sent is
"NOT Big Time?" How do you feel that a Signal Battalion
directly attached to an area headquarters is "NOT Big
Time?"

To some, it is really "big time", Len. How many messages did you send
each month? Did you folks just send? Were any messages received?

Kiss my yes.

Quit giving orders, Len. You aren't in charge of anything, old sojer.

Wow, you think being IN the Department of State comms "IS"
a bigger time?

I've never made such a claim, Len.

Of course you do.

I've never made such a claim, Len.

ANYTHING you do is
(in your words here) bigger and better than what anyone
else in here has done, ever...

I've never made such a claim, Len.

You are the only one of them
comparing learning the Morse Code to an "AUTISTIC TALENT".

Sorry, sweetums, but I'm the SECOND one intimating that
the "talent" is so. Have you forgetten the words of "John
Smith" (another Angeleno) so quickly?

No, I haven't, Len. John didn't write "AUTISTIC TALENT". You did.

Of course you will.

I've never made such a claim, Len.

You ALWAYS try to "blame" someone else as "being in error"
whenever they disagree with you.

You make plenty of errors, Len, whether I disagree with you or not.

As with so many other things you've written here, you are in error.

Hey, Davie boy, in the immortal words of the ByteBrothers,
* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

I'm not familiar with it, Len. What does it mean?

Typing in
capital letters and adding a "Tsk, tsk" here and there don't make your
views true.

Being the archtypical Prussian pedantic literalist who
only "obeys orders" of directives from the ARRL does NOT
make YOU "true," sweetie.

I'm not Prussian and I take no orders from the ARRL. Are you sweet on
me, Len?

You are one HUMORLESS buzzard whose skin is SO thin that
it rivals the shaving thickness from a microtome output.

I have a great sense of humor, Len. You are currently feeding it.


Leonard, I have little doubt that once all of the smoke clears away,
you'll still be attempting to open the box containing your Extra Class
amateur radio license.

So, other than you and Jimmie Noserve, who gives a ****?

Who is Jimmie Noserve, Leonid?

I got my PROFESSIONAL radio operator license in 1956 and
used it.

That isn't an amateur radio license.


I got my (no test whatsoever) CB license in
1959 and used it.

That isn't an amateur radio license, though you seem to have found your
niche.

I got my COMMERCIAL PLMRS station
license in the 80s (as co-owner but responsible for
technical operation) and used it.

That isn't an amateur radio license, Len.

Are you going to say that an AMATEUR radio license is
"more Big Time" than what I've gotten already?

What's with your "big time" fetish, Len? None of those things you
mention qualify you to operate an amateur radio license.

That I
MUST have a ham license from the FCC to prove my strength,
force, agility, and intelligence MORE than a whole career
IN the radio-electronics industry?!?

This isn't a radio-electronics industry newsgroup, Len. This one is
about amateur radio, something in which you do not participate, despite
your boast of some years back.

Of course you do! Anyone who has done less than you is
always the lesser in your comments.

Of course I do what, Len? You didn't even write a complete sentence.
You provided a lengthy clause beginning with "That I MUST have..."

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

I'm not familiar with that, Len. What does it mean?


If you want to wave a metaphor, make certain that it is a valid one.

Oh! YOU are the Guardian of English as she are wrote?

I can identify something as badly written when I see it. Your stuff is
assuredly not the work of a PROFESSIONAL writer.

Of course you are! You ALWAYS "correct" others' "mistakes"
since they are always lesser than YOU.

I'm not dealing with all others, Len. I'm dealing only with you.
I'll be happy to straighten out your mistakes and factual errors.

Tsk, you should be writing in Hunnish...of which you claimed
to be a Master once in another of your petulant, ****ed-off
rants at me. :-)

I've never claimed to be a "Master" of "Hunnish", whatever that is.

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

What does that mean, Len?


Finally, CW is consigned to the trash
heap with sword swallowing--CW, a skill whose time has come, and gone ...
Sorry, "John", Morse Code is not being consigned to any trash heap. It
is used daily in making thousands of contacts by radio amateurs.

Really? I thought RADIOS were needed first...?

Your juvenile behavior is showing, Leonard.

Tsk, tsk, the pedantic Prussian literalist, in his smug
arrogance, cannot recognize SARCASM?

I'm not Prussian, Len. Was that sarcasm? I'd identified it only as a
poor attempt at humor.

You mean that ALL one needs is closing and opening a circuit
in the proper morse manner? Wow! What a mode!

If that's what you come away with after reading a sentence which
includes the words "by radio amateurs", so be it.

Poor baby, unable to recognize SARCASM and you start in on
another fabricated finger-pointing? "Bad form, old man."

Well, poor Leonard, if you want something to be sarcastic, it should fit
the mold. It looks like a juvenile attempt at humor. My response to it
was sarcastic.

Tell us what OTHER radio services still use morse code for
communications. [that should be easy...there ain't none]

It is then peculiar that I'm still hearing aviation beacons which use
Morse Code.

What, the old pre-WW2 "A-N" beacons on LF? Good grief,
Snoopy, those aren't being used by Real pilots these days.

So they are there just for the hell of it, Len?

If you mean VOR or ILS with the periodic morse code tone
identifier, those ARE being used in civil aviation.

Yes, they are.

But,
the VOR isn't called a "beacon" and the ILS certainly isn't
one of those. The 75 MHz marker beacons are "beacons" but
they do NOT have any morse identifier, just a constant AM
tone denoting Outer, Middle, or Inner beacon.

That's nice.

Your AMATEUR license does NOT authorize you to transmit in
the Aviation Radio Services.

I'll be darned.

I hear utility stations in the HF bands using Morse Code
for two way communication.

Then feel free to listen to those "utility stations" and
enjoy what they have to say, if anything comprehensible to
you.

Some transmit in the clear. Some transmit in the clear but in foreign
languages. Some transmit letter or number groups. I'll listen when I
feel like it. Thanks for giving me the OK.

Your AMATEUR license doesn't authorize you to transmit
outside the HF amateur bands.

I'll be darned. First you write about other services not using Morse
Code. When I tell you about other services using Morse Code, you feel
the need to tell me that I can't transmit outside the amateur bands
using my amateur radio license. I did once, Len. The FCC authorized me
to transmit SSB on 14.351 in 1983. I and the others involved were
authorized to use our amateur callsigns. I have it all properly logged.

That aside, I have little interest in the
modes other radio services use.

Of course you don't...you are a smug, arrogant Extra class
AMATEUR.

....and you are not a radio amateur at all.

You don't seem to give a **** about "the pool of trained
operators" (in amateur radio) for national needs, only
your own.

Wow, such language, Len. Are you losing control of yourself? I care
very much about my country having a trained pool of radio operators.
By being proficient in the use of Morse Code, I have one tool, one
additional mode that not all operators have. I've provided my services
to my country from that pool of trained operators at least three
times--two of them quite lengthy times--in the military and for the U.S.
Department of State.

Since morse code is all but DEAD in all other
US radio services, that "pool of trained" morsemen is so
much ARRL propaganda.

"All but DEAD" isn't the same as "dead". Morse Code is not the only
mode for the pool of trained radio operators. Your anti-ARRL bias is
showing again.

The rest of the radio world just
does NOT need morsemen. Try...TRY to get used to it.

Some of the radio world just might. Perhaps they haven't consulted with
you on the topic.

What's it to you, Len?

NOTHING "in it" for me, pedantic Prussian literalist.

I didn't ask what was in it for you. I asked what it is to you.
I'm not Prussian. I note that you often characterize those who know
something in more detail than yourself as being pedantic.

It's
just a thing to MODERNIZE a HOBBY radio activity.

Amateur radio is not only a hobby. You don't participate in it.
Morse Code use will continue.

Most of the
other radio services in the USA have been modernized, but
amateur radio has been (mostly) stuck in the standards and
practices of the 1930s.

Did you modernize the other services too? There is little indication
that amateur radio is "mostly" or otherwise, stuck in the 1930's. You
are incorrect. You've made another factual error.

You aren't a radio amateur and you aren't likely to be one.

Hey, pedantic Prussian literalist, go auto-fornicate.

Are you losing your self-control, Leonard?

I MIGHT get an amateur radio license later and I MIGHT NOT.

You won't.

It's NOT up to YOU to decide whether I can or can't.

No, it isn't. You've been bound by your own intertia for decades.
You've demonstrated that inertia here for better than a decade.

Don't let your smug, arrogant Prussian attitude go to far
like you did with sentence.

Like I did with sentence?

The US amateur radio regulation morse code test was about
GETTING INTO amateur radio via authorized licensing.

Via authorized licensing? What other kind is there? Is Morse Code
testing what kept you from acting on your decades-long interest?

Since you've been licensed as an AMATEUR since your teen
years, have you spent all your AMATEUR radio time GETTING
INTO amateur radio? I don't think so.

No, Len. I wasted very little time getting into amateur radio.
I was exposed to it in 1962 and obtained a license about a
year-and-a-half later. I didn't dilly-dally for decades. I didn't make
any idle boasts about getting the top license right out of any box.

No matter, pedantic Prussian literalist, the FCC *HAS*
*DECIDED* to END US amateur radio licensing morse code
TESTING. Gone, finito, adieu, bye-bye to it as soon as
the R&O is published in the Federal Register giving the
legal END to that testing.

That still won't grant you that "Extra right out of the box". You'll
actually have to appear before volunteer examiners and pass some exams.

... I made a number of 160m
contacts last night with Nordic and Russian radio amateurs. We used CW.
I do hope that's okay with you. Perhaps we should have thought to
check.

You can do anything LEGAL that you want.

I can do anything, legal or illegal that I want to. My decision to do
so or not to do so depends upon my morals, my ethics or my beliefs
regarding whether I am prepared for pay the penalty for any illegal acts.

It's not up to me
to DICTATE what others do or don't do, what opinions one
"should have" or "should not have." You might reflect on
the latter since you are ALWAYS "telling me" what attitudes
I "should have."

Yet you've attempted to tell radio amateurs that you know best how
amateur radio should be regulated. I guess this is one of those "do as
I say, not as I do" situations for you.

* F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

I'm not familiar with it, Len. What does it mean?

BTW, did any of those Nordic and Russian amateurs have French
amateur radio licenses too?

I don't know, Len. Do you think that a lot of Nordic and Russian ops
have French licenses?

Did you check THEIR authorized
operating privileges?

That isn't my responsibility, Len. I was operating my station under FCC
regs. I was permitted to be where I transmitted.

No one involved had tossed the Morse Code into any dumpster.

The FCC *IS* going to toss morse code TESTING in the big
federal dumpster.

Ahhhhh, now it is "TESTING", is it? Well, that's quite different.

They already announced it. All it takes
is to add the final effective date and publish that in the
Federal Register. [ain't that sumthin' tho?]

It means little to you. You aren't involved.


Wow! In Scouting! Oh, my, I was never in the Scouts.

I have no trouble believing that.

Tsk, you ALWAYS have "trouble believing" whatever I write,
yet you make a Big thing of "believability" when you see
some opening to "win" message points. :-)

....but you just wrote that I "ALWAYS have 'trouble believing' whatever"
you write. Which is it?

My uniform was REAL and the first duty was "closing with
and destroying the enemy." shrug

My Cub Scout and Boy Scout uniforms were very real. One could see and
touch them. We didn't receive any instructions on closing with and
destroying any enemy.

No Primary Duty of soldiering? Tsk, tsk, the Scouts were
originally formed to BE devoted to uniforms, organization,
survival in the wilderness just like the troops of the Boer
War.

Formed to be devoted to uniforms, Len? I was never taught any such
thing. We were never given any soldiering duties. It is becoming very,
very believable that you weren't involved in scouting any more than you
are involved in amateur radio.

Scouting has since changed to be more of a social
organization with lots of fundamental skills that CAN be
gained (but are not absolutely required).

....or so you've been told.

Come to think of it, I never received any instructions from the Air
Force about my duty to close with and destroy any enemies.

Tsk, try to be honest about "your time" in the USAF.

I've been very honest about my time in the military. Not sharing all
details of my military service with you is not the same as dishonesty.
Nonetheless, I've told you that there are web sites which have
information about my work in Vietnam.

Enlisted
specialists were NOT taught-trained-exercised as land soldiers.

They trained us with M-16 rifles, Len. I have a marksmanship ribbon.

During the 1960s. I've seen too many of them of the 50s and
60s to believe they could ever soldier in the field.

I'm sure that is another of your self-perceived fields of expertise, Len.

I put you down as just another braggart REMF who wants to
IMPLY he was "in combat" but never was.

I received combat pay during my entire tour in Vietnam, Len. Live with it.

Just like Robesin
and his "seven hostile actions." I.e., bull****.

Just because you don't know something doesn't mean that it didn't take
place, Leonard. Did you ever draw combat pay?

In your time
in the Army, did you ever close with and/or destroy any enemy, Len?

No, I was never "closing with or destroying any enemy" from
March 1952 through February 1956. What's it to you, Heil?

You told us it was the primary thing for soldiers. You didn't do it.

I voluntarily enlisted in the US Army in March 1952 and
didn't get assigned to the Far East until January 1953.
"Permanent truce" in Korea was established in July 1953.
Did you expect me to violate the UCMJ and go AWOL to Korea
in order to "fight?"

I've known of your antics for so long that I never expected you to do
more than live up to the N2EY profile of your actions.

I stayed where assigned by orders, did my duty. That's all
explained in my photo essay mentioned earlier. I have NO
problem with explaining what I did and what I worked on and
when in Japan during my Army enlistement. But, YOU have a
great deal of "trouble" is going into ANY detail about
exactly what you did and where.

I've never had any "trouble" at all, Len. I've chosen not to reveal
certain aspects of my service in Vietnam to you. You've actually
claimed on a number of occasions that I was assigned to MARS, despite
your being repeatedly told that I was never assigned to a MARS unit
anywhere during my time in the military.

Typical REMF "military
career explanation" just like the Robesin.

There is no one named Robesin. There is a Steve Robeson. His USMC
service is documented on a free web site. Did you ever find it?

Yes, I was assigned to a REAR AREA. You could label me as
a "RE-F" since my sexual partners hadn't - to the best of my
knowledge - been mothers yet.

Don't tell us more than we need to know, Len.

Yep, you were assigned to a rear area in a place where there wasn't any
combat. You're the guy who told us what it was like to go through an
artillery barrage in your classic sphincter post.

But, that REAR AREA duty that
was mine involved HIGH FREQUENCY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS...and
VHF, UHF, and microwave radio communications. Concentration
was on transmitters but also involved receivers.

That's interesting, Leonard. My job in Vietnam involved both
transmitters and receivers. We didn't concentrate on one over the other.

I won't bother asking the pedantic Prussian literalist what
HE did "during the war" as another REMF.

I'm not Prussian and, as we know, anyone who knows more detail about
something than you is likely labeled as pedantic.

He hasn't said and
I don't think he will ever say what it was.

I might say, then again I might not say. What's it to you?

Typical of the
smug, arrogant "I am always better than you extra class."

Yup. You don't know what I did in Vietnam and you aren't a radio
amateur. Live with it.

... I never received any Morse Code training in the Air
Force either, though I passed a Morse Code receiving test as a part of
my Bypassed Specialist exams.

That's what you SAY but somehow it rings false and always has.

It wouldn't ring false to anyone who entered the Air Force during the
mid-sixties through mid-seventies, Leonard. It is what I SAY because
that is exactly what took place. Not only did I have to pass those
radio exams, I had to take and pass a typing exam.

USAF enlisted 'specialists" of the 50s and 60s were NOT some
kind of radio-electronics whizzes in the REAR AREAS.

Why not demonstrate that you have enough knowledge of Air Force
communications to let us know that your wild claim is based on any sort
of reality?

Most
of the enlisted ranks were simply trying to get OUT of being
soldiers on land where the enemy was trying to kill them.

Well, if that was the game, it certainly didn't work for many. You'd
think those saps would have wised up. A lot of those guys were at
itty-bitty uncontrolled air strips where they had hooches right next to
Army units.

Tell us all about the strong, mighty, virile warriors of
the USAF enlisted ranks of the 50s and 60s and how they
conquered the (radio) airwaves then?

To what end, Len--so that you can live out the profile of your actions?

By the time of the
ending of the draft in 1973, the USAF had to smarten-up
and start to make the enlisted ranks be a lot better than
the draft-dodging dummies doing their time before then.

See, you didn't need input from me. You're already describing your
fellow veterans as "draft-dodging dummies doing their time before then."
You're living up to the well-known profile all by yourself.

Weren't you a volunteer, Len? Did you join to avoid the draft? Did you
know that no one was drafted into the Air Force?

As a civilian engineer in the 60s through now, I've seen
the USAF improve their technical smarts a great deal.
But, before the end of the draft, the USAF enlisted smarts
were akin to the AMATEUR hobbyist level of experience in
their 'specialties." That's just how it was, Vietnam REMF.

Didn't you tell us that you never dishonored military vets? Your
paragraph above is filled with numerous factual errors.


I never had to learn any morsemanship in 1952, 1962, 1972,
1982, 1992, 2002...for work or play. shrug

You don't have to learn any now.

Riiiight.

Yes, it is right.

Between 1952 and time now I NEVER had to learn or
use morse code as a PROFESSIONAL *OR* as a hobbyist.

....and you still don't have to.

That's
a 54-year span of time. That's operating a transmitter
LEGALLY in the EM spectrum from VLF to about 25 GHz, all the
decade-wide sections of the spectrum.

Bully for you, Len.

Let's call it one more thing that I know and that you don't.

Let's call it the *ONLY* thing in radio-electronics that
You "know more than I"...as a MORSEMAN on the AMATEUR bands,
using a morse code that has been relatively unchanged since
1844 (162 years ago).

There are likely numerous things I know about radio operations that
you've not done and that you may know nothing about. After all, my HF
radio experience spans 43 years and includes military and government
civilian service. I've never operated only with Morse Code. My
military service involved no Morse Code and I used it only in a couple
of spots during my government civilian service.

That "Extra right out of the box" has certainly given you more trouble,
hasn't it?

No "trouble" at all.

The box remains unopened.

I haven't pursued it in the last six
years.

No kidding. That lends a whole new meaning to "right out of the box".

I lost interest in getting a legal amateur radio
license four decades ago.

Was there an illegal option open to you?

Who needed morse code in the
1960s?

Ohhhhhhh...radio amateurs, maritime ops, military ops, other
governmental ops.

Only the Recreationists trying to copy the "radio
pioneering of the 1920s and 1930s using an already out-of-
date mode.

Your answer indicates that you didn't know who needed Morse Code in the
1960's.


Hardly any sort of "advancing the state of the
communications art" was it?

I don't recall anyone saying that it was. It was and is something which
continues to be used. It doesn't have to be something which advances
that state of the communications art in order to be useful.

Many of us have more experience than you in commercial, military or
governmental HF radio operations. Live with it.

News Flash, pedantic Prussian: That "us" does NOT include YOU.

I'm afraid it does, OT.

Besides, to toss the literalist stuff right back in your face,
"commercial, military or governmental HF radio operations" is
NOT AMATEUR RADIO! :-)

I didn't write that it is. I wrote that many of us have more experience
than you in commericial, military or governmental HF radio operations
than you. I stand by my statement.

Live with THAT! :-)

I've been a radio amateur for 43 years, Len. I'm afraid you'll have to
live with that. If you get an amateur radio license now, you can tie me
if you live to be what--115?


I'd already worked three years on spanning the Pacific Ocean
on HF. With Big radio equipment. Amateur stuff would
somehow "teach me" such things via a federal amateur license?

Yes, Len, it could have.

How in the HELL do YOU know?

I know the difference between "could have" and "would have."


You really need to download my
photo essay and examine what was pictured and what I wrote.

I have no need nor do I have any desire.

Tell us all about the SEMICONDUCTOR-based equipment that ham
radio was using in the 1950s and how "I could have learned from
(getting a ham license)" back then?

In the 1950's? There wasn't much. There wasn't a great deal in the way
of semiconductor HF receiving/transmitting equipment in the commercial
world back then either. The 1960's brought a number of unique items
including:

Davco DR-30
http://www.miami.muohio.edu/garland_...vers/davco.htm

Hammarlund HQ-215
http://www.universal-radio.com/catal...xvr/hq215.html

and hybrids like the Drake 2-C
http://www.dxing.com/rx/2c.htm

You could have learned by becoming proficient in operating techniques in
several modes, through learning HF propagation, not only on a reliable
path basis but on a possible path basis. You could have learned other
than point-to-point HF radio techniques.


You speak BULL****.

You are confusing what I write with what you understand.


Big Dave is the Mighty Macho Morseman...unstoppable in his
refusual to recognize others having a different opinion
than his godly wisdom...

I don't limit myself only to Morse Code use, Len. I have no "refusual"
to recognize that your opinions are different. My argument with you
goes to whether your opinions have any validity.

You don't react well to folks who don't share your opinions, Len.
Google and the FCC electronics records are loaded with examples of how
you react.

Google archives are LOADED WITH EXAMPLES of "how badly YOU
react" to those that don't meet your versions of What Should
Be in US amateur radio.

Thou sayest.

Pedantic Prussianism, literally
quoted from the publications of the ARRL.

I have quoted nothing from the publications of the ARRL. You've made
another factual error. I'm not Prussian and you often label those who
know more about a topic as "pedantic".

My correspondence with the FCC is a matter of public record
and are strongly worded AGAINST morse code testing.

Heh.

In those
public records (which include the "electronic" archives...
actually magnetic archives) you will find that I do NOT
think the FCC's rulings should be to appease the emotional
hunger of the rabid amateur morsemen determined to keep
code testing forever and ever.

Rabid amateur morsemen? Stop, Len! You're cracking me up!


Nobody can tell Big Leonard what to do.

YES they can...and DO. You've been trying to do it for years!

What have I told you to do, Len? Are you receiving orders from me via
HF radio, transmitted in Morse Code?

When the Morse Code exam is
removed, you'll still be trying to open the box holding that Extra ticket.

What "box?" What "ticket?"

Precisely!

I've acquired three other FCC licenses in my time and still
pursue a hobby of electronics and radio in retirement.

Great! Have a good time. I won't worry about you living up to your
boast then.

I am
secure in what I am and what I know.

That is apparent from your postings to rec.radio.amateur.policy

I've made a good living
in radio-electronics over the last half century and don't need
more "licenses."

So that self-declared interest in amateur radio for a period of decades
is just smoke?

I sure as hell don't need to take up an on-off
code "skill" that's been around for 162 years...and then DROPPED
by ALL other radio services (if they ever considered morse code
to begin with)!

Haven't you heard? There isn't going to be any more Morse Code testing?
Your last hurdle in obtaining an HF amateur radio license will have been
removed--except for those written exams.

My object in here was to advocate the ELIMINATION of the code
exam.

In more than a decade of posts, you have never limited youself to only
that aim.

Except for the legal posting in the Federal Register,
THAT ELIMINATION HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED! Learn to live with it.

I'm living with it. I'm still operating. I'll be operating after the
change in regulation is made. I'm betting I won't ever have to contend
with Leonard H. Anderson on the ham bands.


["into the valley of dearth rode the four hundred..."]
How many? Is this quote another of your factual errors?

Note the spelling of the word DEARTH. That's called a play
on words. A bit of HUMOR, a subject that has eluded your
correspondence in here.

So "four hundred" is a play on words? What does it signify?

Humorless pedantic Prussian literalists have GREAT difficulty
with any sort of humor or even whimsy. Try to accept that.

If I run into one, I'll pass it along. Just for the record, do you do
humor or whimsy?

The no-code-test advocates aren't all hidebound to keep code
testing forever and ever, always marching in ranks to the
morse drumbeat under the direction of the ARRL old folks.

You often write as if you aren't all there, Len.

But, the humorless pedantic Prussian literalist will be always
on the lookout for "errors" and chastize those who don't think
as He does...then berate them for not being as good as He is.

You can only do what you can do, Len.

FCC 06-178 is almost LAW. That's a fact of amateur radio
life for those seeking a hobby radio activity.

Others are quite happy with their CB radios, Part 15 devices and the
like. Those have been around for ages.

Too bad for
the adamant pro-coders busy sneering and insulting all the
no-coders.

You aren't a no-coder, Len. You aren't a radio amateur at all.

But, times change, new laws will come in to
change the lives of some.

How'd that zoning thing turn out for you?

The pro-coders have had their
emotional sustenance long enough. Now its time for THEM to
Get Off Federal Welfare and be good hobbyists of modern
times.

So, if I understand you correctly: those who did something for in order
to obtain a license were on welfare. Those who do less and get a
"gimme" are, in effect, doing more. Is that about it?

David, to you as always * F * Y * D * I * T * M * !

I'm not familiar with it. What does it mean, Len?

8.544,

I'll give it a 5.3 since it doesn't have a good beat and the lyrics
don't do much for me.


see IEEE Code of Ethics

Dave K8MN

John Smith I wrote:
wrote:
Hello, Alun. Okay, I'll write a letter to the FDA and post it
Wednesday...
...



Len:

Yanno, mooseluums don't eat swine! Are you mooseluum?

straight face
JS

OK, maybe I'll send a copy to Jimmy Dean...

...I've known a few "mooses" in Japan, BTASE. :-)

warmest regards,
LA