About Us

November 27th 03, 11:15 PM

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article k.net, "KØHB"
writes:

..... it's about the qualifications.

The incessant arguments here on rrap surround the question of whether or not
there should be a Morse TEST for access to HF.

Well, that's the wrong question.

The real question is whether or not you should be Morse qualified for access
to HF.

If there is no regulatory need for Morse qualification, then there is no
need for Morse testing.

The need for Morse qualification, as clearly stated in the 1913 radio
regulations was "The applicant must be able to transmit and receive in
Continental Morse, at a speed sufficient to enable him to recognize distress
calls or the official "keep-out" signals." Since that qualification need
has long since disappeared, then so has the need for the qualification test.

Hans,

If you want people to quit making fun of you, quit posting such laughable
reductio ad absurdum arguments.

Incorrect. The necessity for tested demonstration of morsemanship FOR
LICENSING of any radio operator, any radio service, has disappeared in
the 90 years of time since 1913.

That stated 1913 need for Morse code qualifications is not the only reason
such
qualifications were kept in the rules all these years. There are lots more.

Not to the FCC.

In 1913 (or 1912) there was ONLY on-off keying of so-called CW
RF sources. Despite the Fessenden demonstration of 1906 on
Christmas Eve (done with an ALTERNATOR RF source, NOT a
"spark" transmitter), there was no great rush for establishment
of sound/voice transmissions. TTY was just getting started in
replacing landline manual telegraphy, no facsimile or other "data"
sources. Vacuum tubes were barely out of the laboratory after
5 years from invention...makers were still trying to get good QC in
the "tube factories."

The original 1913 reason for technical qualifications was to prevent
interference to nonamateurs caused by improper adjustment of amateur
transmitters.

Baloney. IMPROPER OPERATION, not "adjustment," and not
just "by amateurs."

Were there bandplans in 1913? I don't think so. Were there any
specific frequencies (wavelengths) assigned then for everyone in
radio? I think not, but you will no doubt explain away "how it was"
from personal experience in 1913. :-)

The exile of U.S. radio amateurs to the "short waves" (shorter
than 200 m) came AFTER World War 1, not before.

How much interference to nonamateurs is caused by improper adjustment of
amateur transmitters today? Reading the FCC enforcement letters, such
interference today seems to be more a case of intentional modification of
amateur equipment by a lawless few to operate on nonamateur frequencies.

In 1913 there was NO Internet to contact the FCC. There wasn't any
FCC until 1934. There was very little landline long-distance telephony
to contact the three different radio regulatory agencies that existed
between 1912 and 1934. "Communications" with any radio regulatory
agency in 1913 was by surface mail...or the "telegram" (a new term
for the mostly-manual-telegraphic message sent via landlines).

So, in the world of today (if you can tear yourself away from the
beloved past), HOW is a continuing requirement of a morse code test
going to "stop" all that improper radio operation?

Answer: It won't. Improper operation isn't due to the mode. It isn't
due to the presence or absence of a code test.

LHA

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
FS: Antique Test Equipment - collectible	4K	Boatanchors	0	December 6th 04 02:13 PM
FS: Antique Test Equipment - collectible	4K	Boatanchors	0	December 6th 04 02:13 PM
Tantalums and test eqpt.	Henry Kolesnik	Homebrew	7	January 25th 04 10:28 PM
My response to Jim Wiley, KL7CC	Brian	Policy	3	October 24th 03 01:02 AM
replace cw test with typing test!	Jim Hampton	Policy	10	July 27th 03 09:36 PM

Menu

About Us