Jim:

The truth is, only hams who know the Morse code have the capability
to fall back on the CW mode when other modes are unavailable. Why
do hams know the Morse code? Because they had to learn it to pass
the code tests to become licensed or obtain upgrades. In the absence
of a code testing requirement, why will they learn it?

If the people, like you, that do love it, it will live on through proper
promotion of it. It's just that simple. Of all the "coded hams" out there,
not ALL of them are code lovers, and I would place a bet that some couldn't
pass the current 5wpm test as they have not used it since their
examinations. But in the same turn there are some that love it and will
pass it on. As long as it is mentored properly.

How will we
convince new hams to invest the time and effort to learn this useful
communications skill when they are not offered the incentive of
increased operating privileges?

Gee, if it is so useful, then why bribe them?? It should be sooooo damned
good as you say, they should automatically want to flock right to it.
People will invest the time and effort if they see value and usefullness in
it.

I'm asking you because I don't have
the answers. I'm one of those hams who learned the code because
I wanted to be a ham, and the requirement was there. Ony *after*
learning the code and becoming a reasonably proficient CW operator
did I become aware of it's benefits and advantages. Personally, I'm
grateful that the code testing requirement existed when I became a
ham. Had it not, I never would have become a CW operator...and
neither will most hams in the ECTA (Era of Code Test Abolition).


Oh jeesh Larry, add more to the alphabet soup eh? (PCTA, NCTA, ECTA,
etc.)



--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

Oh jeesh Larry, add more to the alphabet soup eh? (PCTA, NCTA, ECTA,
etc.)

Ryan:

Y knot?

73 de Larry, K3LT

Jim:

The truth is, only hams who know the Morse code have the capability
to fall back on the CW mode when other modes are unavailable.

True.

Now explain why hams know how to use "other modes" when there isn't
a profeciency test to MAKE them do it in the first place.

Clint

"Clint" rattlehead at computron dot net wrote in message ...
Jim:

The truth is, only hams who know the Morse code have the capability
to fall back on the CW mode when other modes are unavailable.

True.

Now explain why hams know how to use "other modes" when there isn't
a profeciency test to MAKE them do it in the first place.

Clint

Some forgot where they put their microphones.

Why should 'B' class license holders take a Morse Test, at any speed, to
become a dinosaur like most, not all, 'A' License holders?

We were good enough to pass the RAE Exam!

Those who wish to use Morse can. I have on CAT but, just for the experience
you understand.

Use it by all means but, do not keep those off the air who enjoy Telephony.

The airwaves are for the use of all those qualified.

What would you rather, the frequency used, or lost, because of an outdated
and backward looking 'elite'

RH (G1EZV)

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

writes:

An excellent idea. I for one would be very interested in seeing the
logic and rationale that folks have for keeping or retiring the code
test. By removing the emotion, personal opinion and bias from the
discussion, some quite interesting points may well be raised.

Unfortunately, it is pretty much impossible to remove personal opinion
from the
discussion. That's because every reason for keeping or removing the test
ultimately comes down to an opinion question.

For example, take the "Morse is needed for emergencies" reason.

On the one hand, Morse is not used very much in emergency communication.
On the
other hand, it *is* still used occasionally, by hams, in emergency
communications. More important, there *are* times when it when it is the
only
available mode that would get through in the situation.
(Note that phrase "only available mode")


Absolutely, Jim! And, as an added commentary to the above, it would be my
hope that many in the EmComm interest of ham radio would push CW at every
chance they had. When I was in a position of leadership in EmComm, I always
pushed CW--and there was not portion of the group that moaned or forsaked
it. Everyone recognized its value, and the value that those who use and
understand it brought to the table.


All of the above are documented facts.

The problem is, does the occasional use of Morse in emergencies mean that
*all*
hams *must* be tested on the mode? Some say yes, some say no, some say
it's a
piece of the reason. All based on personal opinion, nothing more.


I say no. It is no reason for keeping CW as a tested element for licensing.
That is my personal opinion.


Boil down any of the arguments on either side, and what you wind up with
is
personal opinion.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Exactly. If I am asked to explain my personal opinion, that is when it gets
ugly--although from my perspective it gets ugly from an intial onslaught of
insults and uglies from people who differ from my opinion. My return to
them is going to be in like manner--but *ONLY* toward the attitude they
display. I have no problem at all with anyone's opinion or beliefs on CW.
All are quite valid, and I think the trend only reflects majority *opinion,*
not display of force or argument from either side.

Kim W5TIT

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences. Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ... we'll see how the other side deals
with it ...

73,
Carl - wk3c

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.


In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)


I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.


Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

I agree that the Tech's on average have been more likely to do public
support in my area. i'm also in a University town, so that can skew the
results.

But that's okay as far as my argument goes. As long as things average
out, its consistent with my statement.

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...


I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.


I think I've met the challenge ...


Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.


Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences. Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.


We shall see ...


My statement is that there is no direct relationship.


The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

True enough. My main purpose here is to see if any of those who declare
that PCTA's are behind the times can come up with anything substantial.


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

My experience has been different. But let's talk about yours.

First off, with all due respect, I would submit that Carl is perhaps
not the optimum salesperson for convincing people to take code tests
in order to get a license.

Carl's claim, as I read it, is that he knows RF engineers who would
have become hams but for the code test. Some of them have become hams
in spite of that test, or since it was lowered to 5 wpm for all
classes.

The question I ask is this: What does it matter to amateur radio what
a person's job is, unless that person actually uses their job-related
skills for amateur radio? And how many RF engineers will put that
experience to work in amateur radio if the code test is removed that
are allegedly being stopped today?

I remember back in 1990 that this same argument was being used against
the Technician code test. We were told that ham radio would get lots
of new technical folks to push development of the VHF/UHF spectrum,
and that such folks weren't interested in taking code tests. Yet here
it is a dozen years later and there hasn't been any techno-revolution
in amateur VHF/UHF. That doesn't mean there hasn't been progress, just
that there hasn't been massive changes.

Indeed, consider the recent developments in 24 GHz EME. Several
enterprising hams have built stations for that band capable of EME
QSOs (USA to Czech Republic is the current record, IIRC) using only
small (~ 2 meter diameter) dishes and less than 100 watts output from
the TWTs.

And the mode used?

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

I've found more homebrewers among CW ops than any other part of ham
radio.

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...

Of course.

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Almost.

You wrote:

"were unwilling to waste their valuable time lear[n]ing Morse"

and

"jumped through the 5 wpm hoop"

which some folks would take as abrasive and/or insulting.

Why not just say:

"were unwilling to spend the time and effort"

and

"passed the 5 wpm test simply to meet the requirement"

?

Is an RF engineer's time more valuable than, say, a doctor's or
lawyer's?

Suppose a doctor or lawyer wants to be a ham, but doesn't want to
spend the time learning all the material in the written tests just to
use a manufactured rig to chase DX. Would you say such a person did
not want to waste their valuable time learning the theory needed for
the Extra test? Or, perhaps, did not want to jump through the written
test hoop?

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences.

Agreed.

Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...

Of course.


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

I think I've done that.

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

One can find anecdotes for almost any position.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ...

Except for the "waste their valuable time" and "hoop" stuff, I'd
agree.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think Jim was stretching it a little far to decide to be offended by the
phrase "jump through the hoop" and "waste their valuable time." But, that's
my opinion...

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to
waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they
don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

My experience has been different. But let's talk about yours.

First off, with all due respect, I would submit that Carl is perhaps
not the optimum salesperson for convincing people to take code tests
in order to get a license.

Carl's claim, as I read it, is that he knows RF engineers who would
have become hams but for the code test. Some of them have become hams
in spite of that test, or since it was lowered to 5 wpm for all
classes.

The question I ask is this: What does it matter to amateur radio what
a person's job is, unless that person actually uses their job-related
skills for amateur radio? And how many RF engineers will put that
experience to work in amateur radio if the code test is removed that
are allegedly being stopped today?

I remember back in 1990 that this same argument was being used against
the Technician code test. We were told that ham radio would get lots
of new technical folks to push development of the VHF/UHF spectrum,
and that such folks weren't interested in taking code tests. Yet here
it is a dozen years later and there hasn't been any techno-revolution
in amateur VHF/UHF. That doesn't mean there hasn't been progress, just
that there hasn't been massive changes.

Indeed, consider the recent developments in 24 GHz EME. Several
enterprising hams have built stations for that band capable of EME
QSOs (USA to Czech Republic is the current record, IIRC) using only
small (~ 2 meter diameter) dishes and less than 100 watts output from
the TWTs.

And the mode used?

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical
backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the
operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical
side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined
than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in
public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being
"users"
rather than tinkerers ...

I've found more homebrewers among CW ops than any other part of ham
radio.

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ
from
yours, YMMV ...

Of course.

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or
insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Almost.

You wrote:

"were unwilling to waste their valuable time lear[n]ing Morse"

and

"jumped through the 5 wpm hoop"

which some folks would take as abrasive and/or insulting.

Why not just say:

"were unwilling to spend the time and effort"

and

"passed the 5 wpm test simply to meet the requirement"

?

Is an RF engineer's time more valuable than, say, a doctor's or
lawyer's?

Suppose a doctor or lawyer wants to be a ham, but doesn't want to
spend the time learning all the material in the written tests just to
use a manufactured rig to chase DX. Would you say such a person did
not want to waste their valuable time learning the theory needed for
the Extra test? Or, perhaps, did not want to jump through the written
test hoop?

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably
never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of
their
own
personal experiences.

Agreed.

Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and
ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold,
even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...

Of course.


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

I think I've done that.

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

One can find anecdotes for almost any position.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ...

Except for the "waste their valuable time" and "hoop" stuff, I'd
agree.

73 de Jim, N2EY