N2EY wrote:
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:


"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...

As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI.

How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick?


Lots and lots.

How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl?

btw, the FISTS member list is online.


I've given it a read. It sounds pretty good, I agree with it for the
most part, and it is doomed. Won't happen. Not in a million years.

It's not the way we are heading.

How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in
a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency
right now.

It's not the way we are heading.

Perhaps some day they will see the value, just like all the people who
build houses in flood plains - Hey, those areas are dry 99.5 percent of
the time!

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in
a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency
right now.

It's especially hard when the emergency management agencies have
no use for a cadre of CW ops ... it's not the type of communications
that they want or need.

Just as the CW NTS nets are anachronisms ...

Carl - wk3c

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in
a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency
right now.

It's especially hard when the emergency management agencies have
no use for a cadre of CW ops ... it's not the type of communications
that they want or need.

KT4ST has shown that to be untrue. However, with all due respect, Carl, I don't
think you'd be the most effective salesman for the mode...

Just as the CW NTS nets are anachronisms ...

What about SSB NTS nets? Are they anachronisms?

A CW NTS net can handle more traffic in less time using less spectrum than an
SSB NTS net. Been there, done that.

73 de Jim, N2EY

(N2EY) wrote in
:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed
in a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an
emergency right now.

It's especially hard when the emergency management agencies have
no use for a cadre of CW ops ... it's not the type of communications
that they want or need.

KT4ST has shown that to be untrue. However, with all due respect, Carl,
I don't think you'd be the most effective salesman for the mode...

Just as the CW NTS nets are anachronisms ...

What about SSB NTS nets? Are they anachronisms?


Yes! NTS is an anachronism, period. Quaint, perhaps charming, but an
anachronism. Sorry.


A CW NTS net can handle more traffic in less time using less spectrum
than an SSB NTS net. Been there, done that.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:


"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...

As you may know, FISTS has many times the membership numbers of NCI.

How many *US* licensees are members of FISTS, Dick?


Lots and lots.

How many *US* licensees are members of NCI, Carl?

btw, the FISTS member list is online.


I've given it a read. It sounds pretty good, I agree with it for the
most part, and it is doomed. Won't happen. Not in a million years.

It's not the way we are heading.

Maybe it will make a difference, maybe it won't. But no matter what happens,
there will have been a proposal and a lot of commentary opposing the dropping
of all code tests.

How do you justify a trained group of communicators that are versed in
a mode that is as useful and needed as CW is? There isn't an emergency
right now.

It's not the way we are heading.

True - the "fashion" for the past 25+ years has been to reduce the license test
requirements - code *and* written.

Perhaps some day they will see the value, just like all the people who
build houses in flood plains - Hey, those areas are dry 99.5 percent of
the time!

Let it never be said that there was no opposition.

73 de Jim, N2EY