Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Brian wrote:
The key word is "implemented" - not increased. You just play word games. You should have corrected that in your last post, but no, you thought you could just play it off and keep it a big secret. Lets see now, the amateurs were on the air communicating with code long before it was required they be licensed. Likely, most amateurs could easily do 10 wpm or more. Now along comes licensing *implementing* a 10 wpm code speed (may have orginally been 5 wpm but I can't document that) test along with a technical test. So with amateurs already being able to copy code, just how was this 10 wpm test going to reduce the number of amateurs? It is not a word play, the key word is *implemented*. The code was not *implemented* to reduce the number of amateurs, it was part of the standard to be met to be licensed. If anything the technical part was more likely to reduce the number of amateurs from being licensed than the code. The code may have been *increased* later to in an attempt to limit the numbers of licensees, but it was not *implemented* orginally for that purpose. At the time, the thing which was thought would do the task of reducing, even eleminating the amatures would be to relegate them to 200 meters. Those wavelengths were thought to be of no use for communications and the amatures would not be able to get a signal out of their back yards, thus in time the amateurs would loose interest and amateur radio would, for all practical purposes, die away. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx | |||
BPL, the ARRL and the UPLC | Homebrew | |||
NEWS: N2DUP announces for ARRL section manager in Minnesota | General | |||
ARRL FUD about BPL | General |