sending and receiving CW isn't a building block
to anything else.....

Yes, it is.

okay, time to fish or cut bait... in what way is CW
a building block to the operation of a ham radio
that you can't say about so many other more
modern, up to date and applicable modes?

I mean, ORIGINALLY, the first communication that
was EVER sent was a spark with a spark generator.
The do not require you to show profeciency in building
a spark generator and using it; if you say "well, we just
SKIP that step and go to CW", then you can say that
about EVERY step along the way of learning
ham radio.


Clint
KB5ZHT

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article , "Clint"
rattlehead@computronDOTnet writes:

sending and receiving CW isn't a building block
to anything else.....

Yes, it is.

First, it's a building block to the use of the mode on the air. Although other
services have pretty much stopped using Morse Code, hams use it extensivley,
and an amateur license is permission to operate an amateur station, not a
station in another service.

Roger that, Reverend Jim...IN the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service...

Note that the Morse Code tests are at a very
basic level. They're entry-level, nothing more.

Well, "there ya go."

Second, if someone wants to actually design and build radio equipment, having
skill in Morse Code permits them to use almost anything from very simple to
very sophisticated equipment to good advantage. Would you expect a newcomer
to radio to build an SSB transceiver as a first project?

I built a simple battery powered voice transmitter back in 1948. Single
tube,
very low power, worked fine for a whole block. Was 14 then. :-)

now, the electrical principals of what a CW
transmission is, and a knowledge test of that is a good idea, but
that's comparing apples and oranges.

Comparing apples and oranges is fine for the produce market, Rev. Jim.

Why should there be *any* written test on theory if all a person wants to do
is
operate manufactured radios? If someone doesn't want to build a rig, why
should
they have to memorize all those symbols, diagrams and formulas?

Well then, you WANT type-accepted radios in amateur radio?!?

Why would you WANT such a thing?

I think most of the PCTA
is being disingenuous when they come up with "good reasons"
to keep CW testing alive;

Why?

You've been GIVEN all the "whys" you can possibly handle.

Maybe you are suffering from "information overload" and can't accept
all those valid reasons?

I think the true deeper reason lies
somewhere in the "I had to do it so everybody should" relm,
as i've stated before.

You can think what you want, but you're mistaken on that account.

Nope. NO ONE is "mistaken" on that account.

You WANT an exclusive Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service.

You ought to petition for an RM with the FCC. Start a movement to make
the ARS all-code, no voice, no data, nothing else but on-off-keying morse.

That would make you happy, right, Reverend Jim?

LHA

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article , "Clint"
rattlehead@computronDOTnet writes:

sending and receiving CW isn't a building block
to anything else.....

Yes, it is.

First, it's a building block to the use of the mode on the air. Although other
services have pretty much stopped using Morse Code, hams use it extensivley,
and an amateur license is permission to operate an amateur station, not a
station in another service.

Roger that, Reverend Jim...

Who is "Reverend Jim", Len? You and Brian Burke keep using that name
to address someone.

It can't be me, because I graduated from electrical engineering
school, not divinity school. And my name isn't Ignatowski ;-)

What engineering school did you graduate from, Len?

IN the Archaic Radiotelegraphy Service...

No such thing exists.

I've been "in" the Amateur Radio Service for almost 36 years. You have
not done so for even one day.

Note that the Morse Code tests are at a very
basic level. They're entry-level, nothing more.

Well, "there ya go."

Glad you agree!

Second, if someone wants to actually design and build radio equipment, having
skill in Morse Code permits them to use almost anything from very simple to
very sophisticated equipment to good advantage. Would you expect a newcomer
to radio to build an SSB transceiver as a first project?

I built a simple battery powered voice transmitter back in 1948.

That's nice, Len. On what amateur band did you bootleg with it? Or was
it a broadcast band device so you could pretend you were on "Ted
Mack's Amateur Hour"? ;-)

I built a simple *AC line powered* Morse/CW transmitter back in 1967.
Covered the 80 and 40 meter bands. Required a valid Amateur Radio
license to operate.

Single tube, very low power, worked fine for a whole block.

Ah - several hundred feet.

My transmitter was single tube, 10 watts, worked fine for several
hundred *miles*. Despite my homemade receiver, lackluster antenna and
entry-level skills. ;-) :-) ;-P

Was 14 then. :-)

I was 13 then ;-) :-) ;-) --;

Perhaps that's why you want FCC to stop licensing people under the age
of 14 - they might do things you did not do at that age. Oh wait, some
of us have already done so.....

now, the electrical principals of what a CW
transmission is, and a knowledge test of that is a good idea, but
that's comparing apples and oranges.

Comparing apples and oranges is fine for the produce market,

Are you a fruit, Len? ;-)

Why should there be *any* written test on theory if all a person wants to do
is
operate manufactured radios? If someone doesn't want to build a rig, why
should
they have to memorize all those symbols, diagrams and formulas?

Well then, you WANT type-accepted radios in amateur radio?!?

Not me.

Was your 1948 'transmitter' type-accepted?

Why would you WANT such a thing?

I don't. Why do you think I want such a thing?

I simply asked:

"Why should there be *any* written test on theory if all a person
wants to
do is operate manufactured radios? If someone doesn't want to build a
rig,
why should they have to memorize all those symbols, diagrams and
formulas?"

Nothing about "type-accepted radios" - which term isn't used any more,
anyway.

Why are you avoiding that simple question?

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

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

"shephed" wrote in message
...
If your not a retarded mouth breeding NCI member, there is a CW contest
going one right now.

If you are a retarded mouth breeding NCI member, then never mind, it's a
Ham
Radio thing. You would not understand.

10-73's!

Rev. Jim is going to chastise you for your dirty mouth.

Who are you talking about, Brian?

"Shephed"

Then you weren't talking about me at all. OK.

Oh, never mind, it's a PCTA thing.

You mean like the way you never censure Len or Carl (or anybody else who
happens to oppose code tests), no matter what they say or how they say it?

Never?

I can't recall you ever censuring Len or Carl or anybody else who is against
code tests. Can you give us an example where you took them to task for their
behavior here?

Rev. Jim, even little lies will get you turned away from the gate.

Who are you talking to?

Oh, never mind, it's an NCTA double standards thing.

I guess as long as "shephed" is spouting the party line, its OK with
you that he calls people "retarded mouth-breeding NCI members."

No, it's not OK.

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

I guess as long as "shephed" is spouting the party line, its OK with
you that he calls people "retarded mouth-breeding NCI members."

No, it's not OK.

Wow, you REALLY "censured" those name-callers! :-)

LHA

In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

Bill Sohl wrote:

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
. com...

"Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet wrote in message
...
When I took my drivers test years ago to get a license
to drive an automobile, the never required me to
prove that I could hitch a horse team to a wagon.
The youngsters today, likewise, tell me that the
departments of motor vehicles around the country
do not ask them to prove they are proficient with
buggy whips.

Enough said.

Clint

The youngsters today still tell me that they must learn to use a pencil
and
learn to write script. Typing and word processing are taught AFTER they
have learned to write manually. Enough said.

Bad anology since morse isn't a foundation to any other
body of radio knowledge and/or language skills or
writing skills.

Wrong, because radiotelegraphy IS the most basic radio communications mode,
the use of which is possible only if the operator has self-trained enough to
be able to make use of it.

Tsk, tsk. A push-to-talk voice transmitter and an ordinary receiver is all
the
BASICS to effect communications by radio.

No need for "self-trained" morsemen...or even those trained by the military.

Morsemen are needed at BOTH ends of the radio circuit. Very specialized
and NOT at all "basic."

Bad logic, senior.

In article .net, "Bill Sohl"
writes:

"shephed" wrote in message
.. .

"Clint" rattlehead@computronDOTnet wrote in message
...
LOL!

A good liberal? you have NO idea..... I'm as right wing
and conservative as they come... evidently you don't read
my other posts or in other NG's either, where i'm referred
to as the "jim birch devil"

Clint
KB5ZHT

You can't be a conservative, we believe in earning your way in life, not
having "things" given to you because you are to lazy to EARN them. Sound
familiar Liberal boy?

Conservative my ass!

Earning your way is fine...as long as the requirement(s)
is relevent...that's were you lose your argument.

"Shepherd" LOST his argument when he started tawkin tuff with a pseudonym
refusing to identify herself.

Must have "caught" something from one of the sheep... :-)

LHA

In article ,
(Brian) writes:

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

"shephed" wrote in message
...
If your not a retarded mouth breeding NCI member, there is a CW contest
going one right now.

If you are a retarded mouth breeding NCI member, then never mind, it's a
Ham
Radio thing. You would not understand.

10-73's!

Rev. Jim is going to chastise you for your dirty mouth.

Who are you talking about, Brian?

"Shephed"

...everyone knows what shepherds do with sheep... :-)


Oh, never mind, it's a PCTA thing.

You mean like the way you never censure Len or Carl (or anybody else who
happens to oppose code tests), no matter what they say or how they say it?

Never? Rev. Jim, even little lies will get you turned away from the
gate.

Reverend Jim thinks the radio world revolves around his ideas.

Too bad that all that morse addiction robbed his reasoning faculties.

:-(


Oh, never mind, it's an NCTA double standards thing.

I guess as long as "shephed" is spouting the party line, its OK with
you that he calls people "retarded mouth-breeding NCI members."

Poor gutless "shepherd" unable to give his name, callsign, or any other
ID.

Very little courage on his part. Tsk, tsk.

Or maybe one of his sheep didn't put out? Who knows.

LHA

In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

Clint wrote:

If you refuse to learn how to handle radio's most basic mode you can never
be
able to regard yourself as fully qualified in ham radio communciations.
That's just the Way it Is. Live with it.

I'm sorry but that is YOUR oppinion. What counts is the decision of those in
authority, namely the FCC.

Son, you might want to learn somewhere along the way that opinion is
sometimes congruent with fact, sometimes not.

"Congruent?" :-)

No matter what the FCC says or does, it can't alter facts. And nowhere have
they ever said that a no-code license is a fully qualified ham.

The FDA qualifies ham, senior.

The FCC does NOT use the term "ham" in Part 97. That's the LAW.

For NEW amateur radio licensees, the FCC "qualifies" radio amateurs in
three license classes. One of those is the "no-code-test" Technician.

In fact, the
retired Chief of the Amateur and Citizen's Division of FCC (now called
something
else) stated in his comments on the NCVEC pettion
(which BTW he helped write) that it was an oxymoron to expect an Extra class
ham to be a expert on ham radio if he doesn't know Morse code. Thus he
supports
a code test for Extras.

That is a RETIREE's OPINION, senior.

And it should be obvious, to anyone who actually owns and uses a thought
process
- when Morse code is a widely-used mode within ham radio, *anyone* who can't
use it simply and factually *cannot* be a fully qualified ham - No matter
what
license or privileges the FCC gives them.

The FCC does NOT agree with you, senior.

ANYONE granted a US amateur radio license, ANY CLASS, is a licensed
radio amateur.

That's just the way it is. Live with it.


And YOU will have to live with the decisions THEY
make.

Which can't change facts. Facts are immutable. Live with it. Any ham not able
to operate CW is simply and factually not fully qualified.

For the 1930s or on Fantasy Island where you seem to live... ?

LHA

"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...


The FCC does NOT use the term "ham" in Part 97. That's the LAW.

interesting topic spin-off, but I once researched where the term "ham" came
from... the only thing I could find was that it was simply a *******ization
of
the term "amateur"

clint
kb5zht