"Clint" wrote in part ...

Yet another voice of reason. And there are more of them out there on this
side of the argument than the PCTA's.
__________________________________________________ __________________

Unfortunately, Clint you are not one of them. I find the vast majority of
your arguments to be without merit whatever.

"Clint" wrote in part ...

I remember on the local VHF frequencies once I got in an argument on the
air about (guess what???) cw testing... and the fellow I was arguing with
(oviously several years my elder) tried to belittle and detract from the
factual approach of my argument by referring to me as "young man".... you
know, "let me tell you what, YOUNG MAN, ...... etc etc..."

so I had the PERFECT come back. I told him "okay, we'll end the debate right
here; you are judging the accuracy of the debate and, thus, who wins, solely
on who's older, not who's more correct. I'll go find my friend [not included
here for discreetness], who just celebrated his 82'nd birthday; i'll let him
talk on my behalf and just feed him the lines to say, and since he's OLDER
than YOU, that means i'm automatically right, even if he, vicariously
through me, claims the moon is made out of green cheese, right?" as I
recall, not too much was said after that. it's so easy.
__________________________________________________ _________________

Gee, Clint -- I'm impressed. You sure did show that "old" guy a thing or
two. Without knowing him, I'll wager that he has forgotten more about Ham
radio than you and I will ever learn. Good going, sport. Why don't you
just alienate all the elmers out there while your at it?

Arnie -
KT4ST

"N2EY" wrote


Then answer this question: Why should people who are not interested in
building or fixing their radios have to learn all that theory stuff
for the written tests? Why are all hams tested on all sorts of stuff
they are not interested in?


Because the terms of their license make them responsible for the quality
of their radiated signal(s).

Without demonstrating some familiarity with the basic underlying
science, it would be irresponsible of the regulators to allow an
applicant to establish a radio transmitting station on the public
airways. Familiarize yourself with the concept "tragedy of the
commons".

73, de Hans, K0HB



--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Bill Sohl" wrote ...

That argument/claim found no favor in the past. The reality is that
neither the FCC nor almost every emergency preparedness
organization/operation has no desire or need for morse in their plans.
Individual hams may make the claim, but they aren't executing the claim in
the vast universe of RACES, ARES and other amateur emergency operations.
__________________________________________________ _________________

Where did you get your information, Bill?

In seing the overall preparation, drills, etc of vaious ARES/RACES which
don't include morse at all.

I have found the opposite to be
true. Almost every EMA that I have contact with, has Morse code
capability.
My own agency has four HF sets and *each* one is Morse capable. Having
Morse code capability is an asset to the EM package -- just one more tool
available.

Having almost any HF rig made would include CW capability. That does
not, however, indicate morse is being used or otherwise integrated
into the emergency planning.
Even so, ending morse testing in no way
stops you or anyone else from learning morse, using morse or making
your emergency plans that might include morse.

Why in the world would anyone be against that?

No one, certainly not me nor
NCI is against anyone USING morse if that suits your purpose.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
"Bill Sohl" wrote in part ...

So far the UK, Netherlands and several other countries have done exactly
that. Once all code testing is ended by the FCC will you accept that
action
as supporting the FCC position that morse isn't needed to be a "fully
qualified ham?" Additionally, I don't recall anywhere seeing any FCC
reference to the concept of a "fully qualified ham". Is that a new
license
class?
__________________________________________________ ______________

I believe that a person who aspires to be an Amateur Extra Class *should*
be
able to send/receive Morse Code at a minmum level.

You are certainly entitled to believe whatever you want.

You and I both know that
even if testing for CW goes away, the mode will remain a very popular one
in
the ARS for a very long time.

Which is just another reason there is no NEED for any
morse testing at all.

To me, at least, it just makes sense that a
person holding the highest class of license should have a working
(practical) knowledge of the second most popular mode we have.

How about knowing Spanish, Chineese, etc...two of the most
popular languages used on the air after English?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

Dick Carroll wrote in message
...
Clint wrote:

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...

Keep 1896 alive and well in the hearts of all amateurs.

yea, so much for "advancing the radio art" and so forth... that would
basically turn it into "freeze the radio art in time, and dam any
possible
advancement or progress"

(YAWN!!!) You clowns are more stale than last week's coffee.

in a 40's flophouse, no doubt.

I don't think DICK could afford flophouse rates...

LHA

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Bill Sohl" wrote in part ...

So far the UK, Netherlands and several other countries have done exactly
that. Once all code testing is ended by the FCC will you accept that action
as supporting the FCC position that morse isn't needed to be a "fully
qualified ham?" Additionally, I don't recall anywhere seeing any FCC
reference to the concept of a "fully qualified ham". Is that a new license
class?
_________________________________________________ _______________

I believe that a person who aspires to be an Amateur Extra Class *should* be
able to send/receive Morse Code at a minmum level.

Explain why a TEST is necessary.

You and I both know that
even if testing for CW goes away, the mode will remain a very popular one in
the ARS for a very long time.

"Very long" is very subjective. It is as "long" as the extremes of the
actuarial tables.

If OOK CW is already so damn popular, why are you so insistent that a TEST
for it MUST BE KEPT?

To me, at least, it just makes sense that a
person holding the highest class of license should have a working
(practical) knowledge of the second most popular mode we have.

It only "makes sense" when considering YOU are one.

If everyone else is of the same class, then you aren't either "special" or
"superior" anymore.

You seem to NEED the status, rank, title, and privileges of Amateur Extra
more than what all those privileges allow you to do. All you do is "work
CW?"

Everyone else has to do as you did...because...

LHA

In article , "Arnie Macy"
writes:

"Clint" wrote in part ...

you are mad simply because something that you had to do that was very
difficult has been removed for the most part, and may be totally removed
finally due to it's archaic irrelavence.
_________________________________________________ ____________

Very difficult? Oh please. I passed all three tests (5, 13, 20) with 10 of
10 right on the written and solid copy for each. Passed all five writtens
first time out every time. Hmmmm ... I guess it must be you.

Of course it "must be everyone else." Doesn't the Communications Act
of 1934 state that the abilities of US radio amateurs shall be founded on
the abilities of Arnold Macy?

As to CW
being archaic, well let's have your expert thoughts on those outdated and
archaic modes known as Single Side Band, Amplified Modulation, and RTTY.

Morse code was first used commercially in 1844.

Absolutely NOTHING about single side band (sic), amplified modulation
(sic) and RTTY until the 1900s.

There were some attempts at TTY in landline use but those did not become
viable until around 1880.

"Radio" was first acknowledged as a communications medium in 1896 in
both Italy and Russia.

The only CW radio transmitters of 1900 were the rotary alternators that
could sustain a reasonably pure sine wave at radio frequencies with a
minimum of harmonic content.

Amateurs at the previous turn of the century (1900) could afford only the
damped-wave oscillator sources known as "spark." "Spark" is FAR from
a Continuous Wave source, being a combination AM-FM-PM of highly
variable and rather unstable RF which can ONLY be modulated by on-off
keying.

"Spark," that paragon of once-viable technology among amateurs, is no
ILLEGAL.

I've noticed that the written exams still include material on each of them.

When did the "amateur expert" Arnie Macy last take an amateur radio
test?

I can't find any VEC QPC questions on "spark" transmitters.

Are you still using a "spark" transmitter for amateur communications?

Remember that "spark" was once "viable technology."

Surely you would be in favor of eliminating that irrelevant nonsense as
well, right?

I think you can eliminate all your irrelevant nonsense about trying to keep
US amateur radio DUMBED DOWN to 1930s standards and practices.

Now, why in the hell aren't you OUT THERE as an EM person getting
ready for Isabel's destructive landfall?

We can't read about Macy's marvelous savings of the day through ham
band OOK CW on the ARRL news page if you don't get off the Internet and
be ready for all those disasterous emergencies.

LHA

In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

Clint wrote:

Has anyone come up with that WOW argument that will justify
the need for morse testing? So far, nothing new has been
offered by PCTAs at all.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK




well, no..... all the arguments being given to keep the code testing
are easily broken down into thier base, most center-core reason...

"I HAD TO DO IT, SO THEY SHOULD HAVE TO!!!!!"

And that just falls flat on its face.

Clint yoiu'e been reading way too much NCI propaganda for far too long.
So long in fact that YOU have fell flat on your face, or maybe the other
end.

Poor baby. Can't admit that so few like your favorite radio mode?

Seems like everyone is daft except those that believe in your fantasies.

I am capable of passing any sort of radio traffic by way of
radiotelgraphy, which I learned as a requirement of my licensure as a
ham radio operator.

You are also quite capable of passing gas. We can smell it in here.

There is no reason for you to be exempted from the same.

IF YOU HAD TO DO IT, SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE!

We all knew that, DICK.

LHA

In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

Well you can keep a close watch on developments and keep your fingers
crossed... but whether or not the code test requirement is dropped, it's
still your opinion. Nothing more.

My "l;iking" has nothing to do with it, Clint, just as yours similarly does
not.. If a ham doesn't know Morse code, and can't operat it on the air,
there's
no simply way he can be considered a fully qualified ham, and certainly not an
expert.

THE WAY YOU HAD TO DO IT IS HOW EVERYONE ELSE MUST DO!

The Extra class is named as the Expert clase of radio amateur.
So that's just how it is. Has nothing whatever to do with either your or my
opinion.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...self-promoting definition time again? :-)

That "clase" is called 'Amateur Extra' in the rules, DICK.

Nothing at all about the extra being "expert."

Note that the FCC specifically identifies that "clase" as AMATEUR Extra.

That "clase" has the most privileges of any of the three license "clases,"
DICK. That's all, nothing more.

The remainder of the "expertise" is in your fantasies.

Happy dreaming.

LHA