Brian,

If (just if) you are referring to me, my comment was the cw had virtually no
interference and I enjoyed it. I have not been in favor of keeping the cw
requirements; I would, however, like to see some exams that might:
1) be slightly (not severely) more difficult.
2) not have the questions and answers published.

PSK31 is one mode that seems to have quite a bit going for it. Personally,
I like the idea of any mode (ascii, amtor, rtty, psk, packet) that does not
require the intervention of a human to keep the information as close to 100%
accurate as possible. A good cw operator would likely be close, voice is
more suspect (especially of transcribing difficult names/addresses), but any
mode which can keep the human out of it is likely (at least in my opinion)
more valuable for certain traffic. Of course, sstv may be invaluable in
other areas. No one mode is 'ideal' for all situations.

I could, of course, ask you to send just one frame of fast-scan tv via
moonbounce - but, as noted, no one mode is ideal for all situations

BTW (and here it comes - I'm putting on the asbestos underwear), I did join
NCI a long time ago. I simply cannot justify the necessity of cw. It has
been pointed out that in the event of a electromagnetic pulse due to a
nuclear blast, most, if not all, modern gear (computers included) would be
toasted. Yes, perhaps the tube stuff would survive, but I suspect that
would be the least of anyone's problems if they were in the area affected by
the emp. Most likely they would not be incoming missiles, they'd be planted
somewhere by terrorists and if you were to experience emp, you'd likely be
toast seconds later by the blast and nuclear radiation anyways.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"Brian" wrote in message
om...

Hans, though it pains me to do so, I would suggest censuring amateurs
such as DICK, Larry, Steve, Bruice, Kelly, and Jim as they continually
put forth the idea that an amateur that is not versed in Morse is an
incomplete amateur. Nevermind that this amateur can do PSK31 and
FSTV.

Everyone knows that a picture is worth a thousand words, so if Jim can
send a thousand real words (not ARRL numbergrams or Q-signals) in the
space of one FSTV image, ... maybe he shouldn't be censured. Just
maybe. Get back with me if he passes.

Furthermore they exhibit a throwback mentality, which just annoys me.
OK, you've got your marching orders, as far as you can march on a
boat. So be off with you, Master Chief.

Brian/N0iMD


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.514 / Virus Database: 312 - Release Date: 8/28/03

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Everyone knows that a picture is worth a thousand words, so if Jim can
send a thousand real words (not ARRL numbergrams or Q-signals) in the
space of one FSTV image, ... maybe he shouldn't be censured. Just
maybe. Get back with me if he passes.

Well, let's see...

Suppose we consider an FSTV image to be composed of 367,500 pixels (525 lines
of 700 pixels each - aspect ratio 4/3, NTSC black-and-white). Suppose each
pixel contains 8 bits. We'll ignore synchronization and other overhead for the
time being.

Then sending one NTSC/FSTV image requires the transfer of at least 2,940,000
bits.

Of course this can be reduced by compression, but compression isn't allowed in
the comparison.

Sending 1000 words in Morse requires the transfer of 50,000 bits, allowing 50
bits per word (ITU standard)

Now if we try to use OOK/AM to send those bits through a 250 Hz bandwidth, the
2,940,000 bits of the single FSTV image will take 58.8 times as long to
transmit as the 50,000 bits/ 1000 words of Morse will take. Or to put it
another way, 58,800 words can be sent in the time it takes to send one FSTV
image.

That is, if the playing field is level.

It's self-evident that a radio amateur who has no Morse code skills is not a
fully qualified radio amateur, particularly for HF/MF amateur operation. That's
a plain and simple fact.

Whether that means a Morse code skills test *must* be part of the licensing
process is a matter of opinion.

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message igy.com...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
"K0HB" wrote in message
news:b71720b321f483edfb53ce7de21e4078.128005@myga te.mailgate.org...
Between February 14, 1991 and July 5, 1991, the Commission granted 1,925
new Technician class licenses under the no-code provisions. A couple of
guys have done research which shows that 1,880 of those licenses have
not been renewed or upgraded to a higher class license and are beyond
the two year grace period. That equates to a retention rate of only
2.3%.

Any ideas for increasing the reenlistment rate?

73, de Hans, K0HB

Hans, though it pains me to do so, I would suggest censuring amateurs
such as DICK, Larry, Steve, Bruice, Kelly, and Jim as they continually
put forth the idea that an amateur that is not versed in Morse is an
incomplete amateur. Nevermind that this amateur can do PSK31 and
FSTV.

Everyone knows that a picture is worth a thousand words, so if Jim can
send a thousand real words (not ARRL numbergrams or Q-signals) in the
space of one FSTV image, ... maybe he shouldn't be censured. Just
maybe. Get back with me if he passes.

Furthermore they exhibit a throwback mentality, which just annoys me.
OK, you've got your marching orders, as far as you can march on a
boat. So be off with you, Master Chief.

Brian/N0iMD

I doubt that those who dropped out did so because of these people, this
newsgroup, or the activities of hams on the air or on the internet. It's
unlikely they even know about this newsgroup let alone frequent it.

Since this is their daily bread, I would dare say that DICK, Bruice,
Kelley, Steve, and Jim know about aqnd frequent this news group,
DEEEEEE

They
are probably people who lost interest years ago

Perhaps, but they must beeeee hurd.

due to the fact that they
were not into radio as a hobby but simply to talk to spouses and children
around town.

They've never mentioned children, cept DICK who claims grandchildren.

As cell phones became cheap and service improved, there was no
reason for these people to continue in the hobby. We probably also lost
some due to lack of elmering but if they don't let us know they are out
there, we can't find them to elmer.

No $hit, $hurlock. Ever hurd of the Novice Subbands?

You might as well call them Novices' because that's all the attention
they got.

Some of those hams never got even a 2m
handheld let alone another radio. They never followed up by joining a club
to get more exposure to ham radio and elmering in ham radio.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

According to DICK and Kelly, there was more mentoring going on than
you could shake a baton at.

Any ideas for increasing the reenlistment rate?

73, de Hans, K0HB

Hansl:

Yup.

1. - Return U.S. Amateur Radio licensing standards to Pre-Restructuring levels,
including 5, 13, and 20 WPM code testing for Novice, Gen/Adv, and Extra-class
licenses.

2. Tell the entire NCTA to sod off.

3. Get the ARRL to plow every dime's worth of it's net worth into a national,
televised advertising campaign. Get ham radio into the public eye, and stress
the FUN, not the public service (i.e. the work and worry).

4. Get the ARRL to enlist the assistance of any and all celebrity hams in the
accomplishment of #3 above.

5. Get the ARRL to stop pandering to the Welfare State mentality (related to
#1 above.)

73 de Larry, K3LT

"Unclaimed Mysteries" wrote in message
ink.net...

Any ideas for increasing the reenlistment rate?

73, de Hans, K0HB

Better pay.

Oh come on, now! Cut me a little SLACK!

Hams could never be paid enough for what they do. They're "priceless". - And
that's no joke!

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

K0HB wrote:
Between February 14, 1991 and July 5, 1991, the Commission granted 1,925
new Technician class licenses under the no-code provisions. A couple of
guys have done research which shows that 1,880 of those licenses have
not been renewed or upgraded to a higher class license and are beyond
the two year grace period. That equates to a retention rate of only
2.3%.

Somehow the numbers don't seem right, or at least I don't understand
them. For the months of February through June, 2001, when most of these
licenses should have been expiring, the AH0A web site gives these numbers:

Renewals: 7380
Expiries: 2623
Grace Period Renewals: 810
Cancelations: 645

While the 1,880 number might be right, the 1,925 number almost certainly
isn't. The above suggests that about 10,000 Technician licenses came up
for renewal in the 5 month period, or about 2,000 per month. The AH0A
data shows the service has averaged about 1,500 new Tech licenses per
month over the past few years, with the monthly new license total seldom
dropping below 1,000. As the code-free Technician license was reputed
to have more popular in its first few years of existance than later on,
it seems extremely unlikely that there were only 400 new Tech licenses
issued per month between February and July of 1991, especially when
2,000 per month ended up expiring 10 years later.

My guess would be that between 80% and 85% of those licensed as no-code
Techs in that period are still engaged enough to have renewed their license.
This isn't entirely out of line with other license classes. If you picked
a random group of Extra class amateurs (who, I assume, would tend to be older)
only 75% to 80% of them would be around 10 years later.

Dennis Ferguson

You have a point, Dick. I wouldn't have a problem retaining CW for the
highest class; I just don't see it as *absolutely* necessary for all
amateurs.

There are times I think I have a handle on how things should be; then, when
I get a question concerning the length of a dipole from an extra class
licensee, I begin to really wonder. My own belief (and it is personal
opinion) is that all extras could not be renewed at the end of their term.
To gain a new extra (and, indeed, any new extra class licensees), the person
would have to be certified in emergency communications - including
participation in groups. Also, for at least that highest class of license,
the question pool and answers should not be published. Questions as to
resonant frequency, lengths of dipoles, Ohm's law (and, come on guys,
something a little tougher than a simple series or parallel circuit), and
such should be randomly generated at each exam (same program made available
to VEs, just that each exam would be unique). Answers should be fill in the
blank and accurate to 3 places. At least that way we could ensure that at
least one group of amateur operator would be helping to justify the
existence of all. BTW, I am not certified and would hope to be able to
become so sometime in the near future (new job and finally straight days).
Once that level was achieved, the license would be renewable provided
current participation/certification were to be presented. After age 65, it
would be renewable with no further requirements for life.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...
Jim, as you probably know, Johnny Johnston, former longtime head of the
Amateur
and Citizen's Division at FCC, has stated in his own comments to the NCVEC
petition-which he helped to draft- that no amateur not skilled in
radiotelgraphy can
accurately be considerred an expert, an Extra class. So it looks like NCI
is against the
very concept. That should come as no surprise, though considering. After
all, it's only a
"hobby".

Dick




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.514 / Virus Database: 312 - Release Date: 8/28/03

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...
N2EY wrote:

It's self-evident that a radio amateur who has no Morse code skills is
not a
fully qualified radio amateur, particularly for HF/MF amateur operation.
That's
a plain and simple fact.

What is it about plain and simple facts that so confuses NCI members?

Duh!!!

We know you are confused, Brian.

Why does it have to be "particularly for HF/MF operations?"

Because that's where Morse operation by amateurs is most common.

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...
N2EY wrote:

It's self-evident that a radio amateur who has no Morse code skills is
not a
fully qualified radio amateur, particularly for HF/MF amateur operation.
That's
a plain and simple fact.

What is it about plain and simple facts that so confuses NCI members?

Duh!!!

We know you are confused, Brian.

"Duh!!!" doens't indicate a lack of confusion

Why does it have to be "particularly for HF/MF operations?"

Because that's where Morse operation by amateurs is most common.

If a lack of Morse code skills renders one less than a fully qualified
amateur radio operator, I would think "praticularly for VHF+
operation" would have been more appropriate for the very reason you
gave.

Duh!!! again.

"charlesb" wrote in
m:


"Dick Carroll;" wrote in message
...
Well, there ya go, Hans. One of your subjects heard from.
Any further
questions?
Dick

Anybody can have their post answered by a troll. What, did
you think that Hans was troll trolling, or something?

Charles Brabham, N5PVL

Charles,

You are a troll. Have you started to patrol this
newsgroup in addition to the packet ones? When
anyone asks a question, I love your response.
The "go back to CB" posts are not welcome by anyone,
broadcaster.

I love being accused a troll by the troll when I
told you to knock it off.

Now, more people think that you are a troll. I KF'd
you only in the packet newsgroup. Have fun over here
too.

Bill