| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes: "Larry Roll K3LT" wrote: How many CW contacts have you made in your ham "career?" I'm into the multiple thousands. If you have less than 500, then you're not even close to being qualified to render a judgment against code testing. And exactly how does the number of CW contacts made qualify one to make a judgement about the value of code testing as a license requirement? Dwight: Simply by serving as an indication of your level of experience in that particular mode. Again, code testing is not, and never has been, solely for the benefit of Amateur Radio (or solely to benefit CW operations on those bands). I see. Then perhaps you can tell us how it "benefits" photography, cooking, stamp collecting, or any other activity which isn't Amateur Radio? Code use is declining here and around the world. Not really. In fact, the only place where it has "declined" is within the military and commercial communications arenas, where there were relatively few Morse/CW operators compared to the Amateur Radio Service. And, since everything I'm discussing here is related ONLY to the Amateur Radio Service, that's the only group of Morse/CW users who are being considered by me in any of my postings. Looking solely at Amateur Radio, even the majority of those operators don't use code/cw on any routine or regular basis. Because of these facts, the need for a code testing requirement has vanished. The total number of hams who don't use Morse code is relatively high, but only due to the fact that there are many other modes for radio amateurs to employ. I've never demonstrated any confusion on that point, therefore, you are raising an irrelevant and invalid argument here. Twenty-two plus years of OTA HF experience as a radio amateur, which has been about 80 percent CW, 19 percent RTTY and other digital modes, and 1 percent phone. What's your breakdown? I believe the question was what experience you have that makes you UNIQUELY qualified to judge the value of a specific TESTING REQUIREMENT. I don't see anything above that would make you uniquely qualified in this subject. Obviously, since you are in disagreement. That doesn't make you right when you say I'm not a qualified judge of the code testing requirement -- it just means you have an axe to grind which makes it necessary for you to attempt to discredit me. Again, code testing is not, and never has been, solely for the benefit of Amateur Radio (or operations in those bands). And, once again, you fail to mention who or what is benefited by it, if not the ARS. Please provide an answer, or quite wasting our time with this illogical statement. Therefore, the FCC is not going to judge the value of code testing based solely on Amateur Radio. Then WHAT besides the ARS are they going to judge it by? The ARS is the only communications service currently using the Morse/CW mode to any extent which would require the regulatory attention of the FCC. Therefore, the Coast Guard, MARS, the Maritime service, etc. etc. are all entirely irrelevant and unresponsive to this issue. You have to look at the larger picture, Larry. At this point, you're still too narrowly focused. I am focused on the Amateur Radio Service, Dwight. I realize you're thinking about all the other radio services which, for purely economic reasons, have dropped the use of Morse/CW and therefore the necessity to undergo the expensive process of recruiting, training, and providing pay and benefits to Morse/CW operators. This has no impact in the ARS -- but you, in true NCTA fashion, fail to grasp this very simple concept. The plain fact is that the ARS has no personnel- based "cost" at all. Therefore, your argument is irrelevant and unresponsive. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Larry Roll K3LT" wrote:
"Dwight writes: Again, code testing is not, and never has been, solely for the benefit of Amateur Radio (or solely to benefit CW operations on those bands). (snip) I see. Then perhaps you can tell us how it "benefits" photography, cooking, stamp collecting, or any other activity which isn't Amateur Radio? (snip) And, once again, you fail to mention who or what is benefited by it, if not the ARS. Please provide an answer, or quite wasting our time with this illogical statement. Larry, I know you are not so dumb as to not know how Morse Code/CW has fit into the history of Amateur Radio and how Amateur Radio has fit into the other radio services throughout that history. Knowing that, your request above could only be considered factitious. Therefore, I will treat it as such. (snip) And, since everything I'm discussing here is related ONLY to the Amateur Radio Service, that's the only group of Morse/CW users who are being considered by me in any of my postings. (snip) Well, that may be what you're discussing, but I'm discussing Morse Code testing - a discussion which, by it's very nature, cannot be limited to just Amateur Radio. However, if the discussion were limited to just Amateur Radio, your arguments would have no more weight since most ham operators today don't use code/cw on any routine or regular basis. There is little reason to maintain testing for a mode that is seldom used by more than a relatively small minority. Dwight Stewart (W5NET) http://www.qsl.net/w5net/ |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Dwight Stewart" wrote ...
Well, that may be what you're discussing, but I'm discussing Morse Code testing - a discussion which, by it's very nature, cannot be limited to just Amateur Radio. However, if the discussion were limited to just Amateur Radio, your arguments would have no more weight since most ham operators today don't use code/cw on any routine or regular basis. There is little reason to maintain testing for a mode that is seldom used by more than a relatively small minority. __________________________________________________ ________________ Where did you get your information, Dwight? According to the ARRL (the primary ARS organization in the US) -- CW is the second most popular mode in the ARS -- Just behind SSB. That on its face would mean that there are still a whole bunch of folks out there still using it. Arnie - KT4ST |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Where did you get your information, Dwight? According to the ARRL (the primary ARS organization in the US) -- CW is the second most popular mode in the ARS -- Just behind SSB. And that's only *half* the truth. The *REST* of the story is that this is not a static relationship; the use of SSB is growing while that of CW is declining, as each year the number of prominently morse code users either change over, quit operating ham radio or go silent key. Clint KB5ZHT |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
your request
above could only be considered factitious. Therefore, I will treat it as such. Ah. Denial. Clint KB5ZHT |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes: And, once again, you fail to mention who or what is benefited by it, if not the ARS. Please provide an answer, or quite wasting our time with this illogical statement. Larry, I know you are not so dumb as to not know how Morse Code/CW has fit into the history of Amateur Radio and how Amateur Radio has fit into the other radio services throughout that history. Knowing that, your request above could only be considered factitious. Therefore, I will treat it as such. Dwight: I wasn't being facetious, I was asking a question based on a logical premise which you yourself raised. So, you either answer it, or your original premise is insupportable. Which is it? (snip) And, since everything I'm discussing here is related ONLY to the Amateur Radio Service, that's the only group of Morse/CW users who are being considered by me in any of my postings. (snip) Well, that may be what you're discussing, but I'm discussing Morse Code testing - a discussion which, by it's very nature, cannot be limited to just Amateur Radio. OK, fine. Now, then, precisely which OTHER radio services currently require Morse code testing??? However, if the discussion were limited to just Amateur Radio, your arguments would have no more weight since most ham operators today don't use code/cw on any routine or regular basis. There is little reason to maintain testing for a mode that is seldom used by more than a relatively small minority. Hmmm. Funny how that "small minority" seems to come out of the woodwork in vast quantities during CW contests, Field Day, or whenever some rare DX pops up on the air! 73 de Larry, K3LT |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| How does a 6146B fail? | Boatanchors | |||