(N2EY) wrote in message . com...
(Brian) wrote in message . com...
(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

My point exactly.

Yet you said it did.

We know you are confused, Brian.

We? You got a mouse in your pocket?

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,

It does. Get over it.

Can't. I've had Morse whether I liked it or not.

So does lack of a lot of other skills.

What skills do you lack?

I would think "praticularly for VHF+
operation" would have been more appropriate for the very reason you
gave.

That makes no sense at all.

Since everyone presently on HF had to go thru the Morse hoop, and
those on VHF+ didn't necessarily have to do it...

We know you are confused, Brian.

Too bad things must be explained to you in the minutest of detail.

Duh!!! again.

Exactly. You keep proving my point for me. Thanks.

So what do you lack to be a fully qualified radio amateur,
particularly for HF/MF amateur operation?

In article ,
(K0HB) writes:

(N2EY) wrote
In article ilgate.org,
"Hans
Kohb" writes:

hidden in
all that noise and hissing on HF are the reasons I love ham radio.
Reasons like John, 9M2GV, an expat Brit running a rubber plantation
overlooking the Mallacca Straits. Reasons like Sparky, W3UBM/MM making
the Pacific runs on the rusty old SS Manderson Victory. Reasons
like working K0IR (as VK0IR) on three modes and five bands from
Heard Island, almost at the antipode on the low side of the
freckles-del-Sol. In other words, picking out an almost ghostly
signal from the molecular noise of the universe and finding a
friend, a kindred soul playing exhuberantly in the ether.

But...but Hans, we've been told repeatedly that "better modes and
modulations"
have made all that "antiquated, horse and buggy" "electronic paintball war"
stuff "obsolete". The "professionals" don't do any of that - who are we to
stand against "progress"?

Jim,

Your point escapes me.

I'm pointing out that a lot of what you describe has been repeatedly described
by the quoted terms by self-described "professionals in radio".

(Maybe you're just trolling?)

Nope. Just making an observation.

My enjoyment of amateur radio is independent of the particular mode I
happen to be using at the time, and my quote above is equally true
regardless whether the mode-du-jour is antique or progressive.

OK, fine.

Would you enjoy it as much if your QSOs went through a series of automated
digital systems that would insure perfect copy at both ends with no operator
skill required?

And, OBTW,
it's called Amateur Radio.

My point exaclty. Tell it to the professionals.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

My mileage does not vary in the least, Hans. And this is a large part of what
separates the.........

Oh well, probably enough has already been written on the subject.

Dick:

Then allow me to say it. It separates the Real Hams from the unmotivated,
disinterested 2-meter FM jockeys who wouldn't know a challenging and
satisfactory radio operating experience if it landed on their big toe.

---------------------------------------------------------
BTW, I think the last time I turned on my linear amp was when I worked that
etherial signal from the other side of the planet, VK0IR, on a near-dead 20
meter CW band. Their response to my 100 watt calls was "didi dum dum didi",
and "QRZ?"

Running 1400 watts out, the recognition was immediate.

Dick

I'll bet. It would have been interesting to see if 250 watts would have
made the trip.

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article ,
(K0HB) writes:

(N2EY) wrote


Would you enjoy it as much if your QSOs went through a series of automated
digital systems that would insure perfect copy at both ends with no
operator skill required?

Because I'm a 'tinkerer' sort, with a strong sense of curiousity,
certainly yes, at least the first handful of times, just to see what
made it work.

Wouldn't you?

Like you, it would be interesting *the first handful of times*.

But after that?

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,

(K0HB) writes:

(N2EY) wrote


Would you enjoy it as much if your QSOs went through a series of
automated
digital systems that would insure perfect copy at both ends with no
operator skill required?

Because I'm a 'tinkerer' sort, with a strong sense of curiousity,
certainly yes, at least the first handful of times, just to see what
made it work.

Wouldn't you?

Like you, it would be interesting *the first handful of times*.

But after that?

You guys have managed to precisely describe what happened to packet radio,
when packet/internet gateways were intoduced into the network, to "speed
things up", and make it more "reliable".

Hams using HF to route messages over long distances would find that they
could no longer send those messages because they were already there,
forwarded over the Internet in order to "speed things up" and make packet
more "reliable"...

As a direct result of this misuse of packet/internet gateways in order to
"route around" hams using radio, an organized, global HF digital network,
one of the most impressive accomplishments ever by hams around the world,
was undermined and eventually destroyed. Dozens of digital HF stations
around the world had to shut down, deprived of traffic while others were
overloaded by tons of inappropriate overseas traffic shovelled into our
VHF/UHF networks through the packet/internet gateways.

And, as you noted in your post, U.S. hams found the new non-ham network
intrusion to be interesting *the first handful of times*, then they lost
interest in packet altogether. It was no longer ham radio.

The packet/Internet gateways speeded things up as advertised, but in view of
the fact that they undercut and eventually destroyed the network, they could
hardly be said to have made the network more reliable on anything but a
short-term, short-sighted basis.

In Europe, where it was illegal to impose non-ham networking into an amateur
radio network, the packet network continued to advance and grow all the time
that ours was dying away from lack of interest. Interest in the Internet is
often put forward as a cause for the setback in the U.S. digital network,
but it should be noted that European hams had Internet access during this
time as well, and it did not have that affect upon them, despite the fact
that they had cable access to the Internet long before it was common here in
the U.S..

The difference was that the Europeans stuck with ham radio in their digital
ham radio network, and we didn't. It's that simple.

The "series of automated digital systems that would insure perfect copy at
both ends with no operator skill required" took the fun out of packet radio,
here in the U.S., and that is why USPN considers non-ham networking to be
off-topic, irrelevant to the business of rebuilding a digital amateur radio
network here in the U.S., where the misuse and abuse of packet/internet
gateways has already caused us so much damage, and has set us back so far.

Besides, there is the simple, no-brainer fact that you cannot provide
emergency backup for a network that you are dependant upon. - Like a special
number to dial when the phones go dead, systems such as EchoLink and
packet/Internet gateways are inherently useless for emergency communications
and do nothing to advance our understanding and use of radio, and so are
ultimately irrelevant to our purpose as hams.

In the area of packet radio, we are making some great progress in
eliminating this problem here in the U.S... Sad to say, the repeater folks
may have to go through the same crippling slump and lack of interest before
they too begin to clean up their act and get back to ham radio.

Charles Brabham, N5PVL
Director: USPN
http://www.uspacket.net