LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #27   Report Post  
Old August 4th 03, 12:29 PM
Bill Sohl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"lk" wrote in message
...
Good point Jon. As I said when I tabulated the WT Docket 98-143 comments,
the amateur radio community is more or less divide on the Morse code exam
issue.


Of course that was 5 years ago. Convential wisdom has it that, if anything,
the shift over time would result in less support for code testing today than
then.

The issue can not be decide consensus or polls.


The FCC was pretty clear in their assessment as stated in
the R&O. No reason for code testing other than the
former treaty.

Commission will
dispose of this issue in due course. There is no good reason for the ARRL
to waste any more funds on the Morse code matter. At WRC 2003 not one

radio
administration spoke in favor of retaining the mandatory international

Morse
code requirement.


Agreed.

The ARRL did a lot of good work in getting a an agreement of the

realigment
of 40 meters.


Agree also.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK



 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If you value SW or HAM radio.... yea right Antenna 60 June 12th 04 05:15 PM
FUD ALERT !!!!! (was With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind?) Carl R. Stevenson General 17 July 31st 03 11:11 PM
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? Dee D. Flint General 18 July 25th 03 01:13 AM
With CW gone, can the CW allocations be far behind? Dee D. Flint Policy 1 July 21st 03 08:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017