Alun wrote:

(William) wrote in
om:


Dave Heil wrote in message
...


I have little sympathy for anyone who would claim that learning morse
at a speed of five words per minute is a lot of work or that it
requires a long time to learn.

Dave K8MN

Your sympathy was not solicited, and it or the lack of it doesn't
change the fact that for many, learning code at 5wpm is difficult and
takes a long time to learn. The real pity are all of the 20WPM
Code-Tape Extras that have never used code.



That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a good
method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What was the
point of me learning 20wpm?

What is the point of learning anything that you don't want to learn?.
Why should people learn to spell now that we have spell checking?

Since 90 percent of my time on the air is PSK31 why did I have to learn
about anything else?

- Mike KB3EIA -

Alun wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in
om:


Alun wrote in message
...

(Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord ) wrote in
:


I think that since Morse Code is old, but not completely useless, I
feel it should no longer be made to be learned to gain access to the
HF bands.

Do I feel that Amateur Radio be made a free for all? No, it should
not. There should be a test, but not a really hard test, but not a
easy one either.

I'll even admit, I'll never get a new Icom 7800, at $10,000.00 -
I'll be lucky to maybe get a used 706 at about 400 or 500 or so.


Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/


The ITU requirement for a code test was dropped on July 5th, 2003, so
evidently a majority around the world agree with you.

A majority of the world's governments that bothered to attend and vote
on the issue.

And all they did was change the rules so each country can decide for
itself what is required - just like the written test.

Although a suggested standard for written tests was added at the same
WRC, it's really more of a suggestion than anything else. Countries
can have wide-ranging interpretations of what's "needed". For example,
do you think ol' JY1 and his family had to sit for written and code
exams that were equivalent to what US or UK hams had to pass for the
same privileges? Or do you think the US writtens compare with, say,
those in the UK?

If I'm not mistaken, getting a license in some countries *requires*
successful completion of an approved training course. (I know the
"Foundation" license has this requirement). Doesn't matter if someone
is a Ph.D. in EE, they have to attend and pass the ham radio classes
to get the license - even though such courses are not part of any
treaty and not required in many other countries.


Actually, they only have to do the practical assesments, it's not necessary
to attend the course.


Imagine the reaction here in the USA if the code test were dropped
*and* getting a license required attendance at an approved ham radio
training course. Not a "one day wonder" course such as was recently
the subject of an article on the ARRL website ("Is Your License Class
Efficient" or some such title), but rather a multisession course with
quizzes and a final test that were not from a published pool.

Point is, just because it's not in the treaty anymore doesn't mean all
countries will or should drop it.


I think the FCC will drop it, but they move at a snail's pace.

They're busy with other things. And perhaps they don't see what all
the fuss is about. After all, we're talking about a 5 wpm code test
that can be passed in a number of ways, with all sorts of adaptations
and accomodations (tone, volume, headphones, typewriter, flashing
light, Farnsworth, etc.) Add to this the fact that today there are
training aids undreamed of in the past - most of them free or quite
inexpensive.



I doubt if they even think about any of that


I didn't think it would survive
for as long as a year after it was no longer needed, but it's only
nine months so far, so I could still be right.

I think you meant 'no longer required by treaty'. Whether something is
needed as a license requirement is purely a matter of opinion.



I meant both, since I agree with the FCC that it was only needed because of
the treaty


It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.



That may be, although I still think it will be earlier than that. How do we
stand with the pool, BTW?


Most of all, note that the 2000 restructuring did not result in lots
of new hams, even though the requirements for all classes of license
were lowered and the whole structure simplified.

73 de Jim, N2EY



I think abolishing the code test will remove a block in the system, but
won't have much effect unless we actively do something to recruit new hams.
I don't really see much of that happening right now.

I guess the question is "What are YOU doing to recruit more hams",
Alun? The torch is being passed, and it is being passed to those that
"won" the code/no code debate.

I'm pretty new as a Ham, I try to recruit whenever possible, and will
welcome new hams regardless of their education. Some people might feel
otherwise at this point, having the wind knocked out of their sails, so
to speak.

You guys won. You have the ball now. Using the NCI's polled membership
as an example, you now want to make all Technicians Generals, and
advanced, Extra's. A drastic reduction in entrance requirements seems to
be the rationale du jour for the brave new Amateur Radio Service.

Really it's your ball and your game now. Godspeed!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Alun wrote:

I have short legs


I'm getting this image of Hank Hill's father.......



- Mike KB3EIA -

"William" wrote in message
om...

Do you know what the prefix for Canada is?

Gee, Duhhhhhhhhhh, let the think.......Uh......maybe it's a VE or a VA
or some other strange letters depending what part of a seal arse you are
celebrating that month. Sound right?

And yes I do know that Canada is allowed to operate in what the US calls the
'CW Segements'. And that has what to do with what I said?

Dan/W4NTI

"Alun" wrote in message
...
(William) wrote in
om:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

I have little sympathy for anyone who would claim that learning morse
at a speed of five words per minute is a lot of work or that it
requires a long time to learn.

Dave K8MN

Your sympathy was not solicited, and it or the lack of it doesn't
change the fact that for many, learning code at 5wpm is difficult and
takes a long time to learn. The real pity are all of the 20WPM
Code-Tape Extras that have never used code.


That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a good
method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What was the
point of me learning 20wpm?

Uh,,,,,,,maybe.....lets see now......to use it on the air to
communicate?......Duhhhhhh.

Dan/W4NTI

"Alun" wrote in message
...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/8/2004 9:30 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a
good method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What
was the point of me learning 20wpm?

Uhhhhhhhhhh....passing Element 1C...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ











So let me rephrase that. Why should I have had to pass 1C to get the
bottom
ends of the phone subbands? Actually, that's where the DX used to be, but
it seems to have moved up to avoid the 'hernia nets' that now seem to
occupy that spectrum.

Among other things getting the Extra will allow you to work the DX where you
hear it. Assuming of course they are in the US phone bands. CW don't have
that problem. Because the DX hangs low, and everyone in the world can work
it.

Dan/W4NTI

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Alun wrote:

(William) wrote in
om:


Dave Heil wrote in message
...


I have little sympathy for anyone who would claim that learning morse
at a speed of five words per minute is a lot of work or that it
requires a long time to learn.

Dave K8MN

Your sympathy was not solicited, and it or the lack of it doesn't
change the fact that for many, learning code at 5wpm is difficult and
takes a long time to learn. The real pity are all of the 20WPM
Code-Tape Extras that have never used code.



That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a
good
method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What was the
point of me learning 20wpm?

What is the point of learning anything that you don't want to learn?.
Why should people learn to spell now that we have spell checking?

Since 90 percent of my time on the air is PSK31 why did I have to learn
about anything else?

- Mike KB3EIA -


How about the good feeling of knowing something that the vast majority of
humanity doesn't?

Dan/W4NTI

"Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord " wrote in message
...
It is already headed that way. Ummmm K1MAN? 14.313? 75 meters?


Yes man I know that, but does'nt that blow a hole for those folks who code
to
stay as a filter?

Hows that? Most of the people doing that stupitidy are multiple guess
receive only cw test takers. In other words, they can't do it either.

Dan/W4NTI

"Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord " wrote in message
...
Anyway Llllllloooooooyyyyyyyydddddd no one gives a crap what you think.


Hey Dan, nice to see we are still freinds. LOL.

Seriously, I have left you alone. Why can't you just let me post my
opinions?
I made no personal attack on you with this post. Just for that, expect
to see
more and more of me in this newsgroup.

Bye bye -

I guess its just that I think your a puke. Nice hearing from you again.

Bye Bye

Dan/W4NTI

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Alun wrote:


(William) wrote in
e.com:



Dave Heil wrote in message
...



I have little sympathy for anyone who would claim that learning morse
at a speed of five words per minute is a lot of work or that it
requires a long time to learn.

Dave K8MN

Your sympathy was not solicited, and it or the lack of it doesn't
change the fact that for many, learning code at 5wpm is difficult and
takes a long time to learn. The real pity are all of the 20WPM
Code-Tape Extras that have never used code.



That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a

good

method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What was the
point of me learning 20wpm?

What is the point of learning anything that you don't want to learn?.
Why should people learn to spell now that we have spell checking?

Since 90 percent of my time on the air is PSK31 why did I have to learn
about anything else?

- Mike KB3EIA -



How about the good feeling of knowing something that the vast majority of
humanity doesn't?

Never though of that, but yeah, that works for me!

- Mike KB3EIA

On 7 May 2004 06:51:21 GMT, Alun wrote:

Likely the FCC brearucracy just hasn't gotten around to it yet. They
have bigger fish to
fry, and will likely get to it when there's nothing better to do.

Sad but true. You only have to look at their home page to see where we are
in their priorities, i.e. not even on their radar atall.

Yes but....

The reality is that the "first hoop" at the Commission is the amateur
radio specialist - currently an individual named Bill Cross, a
licensed amateur, BTW. He's the successor to Johnny Johnston, W3BE.

His specialty is formulation of amateur radio rules and policy. Light
his fire, and see how fast the matter moves through the pipeline.

Sometimes it's better if the issue is "under the radar" so the
politicians who inhabit the Eighth Floor don't get involved with
photo ops and sound bites as they have been with BPL, for instance.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote:

It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.

The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop
Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so
without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the
mark).

The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't
been lighted. This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with
when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from
without.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Alun wrote in message . ..
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/8/2004 10:29 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

If one reflects back on the history and demograpics of the
Amateur Radio
Service, there have been those who obtained licensure for a myriad of
reasons, but those who really get in it and stick with it have
recurring central interests...Two types come to mind. First are
those who are facinated by radio for radio's sake...Gadgets.


I don't think I've ever got over my facination with how radio waves
bridge huge distances. It still seems like magic even though I have
studied how it works.

Ditto! And altho I can "work" somone in Australia on the pooter,
I liken
it to fishing with hand grenades!...

It takes skill to drop that line in and coax "the big one" onto
the hook!

I am the same way with aircraft. I used to live at the junction
of two
low-level military training routes in Sequatchie County, Tennessee, and
was routinely treated to impromptu "airshows" courtesy of the United
States Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps. I could hear the "whistling"
of the engines coming up the valley and would run out to catch a
glimpse.

When the U.S. was gearing up for Kosovo, B-1B Lancers and F15
Eagles were
regulars along the route.

Most of the "active" folks are the gadget operators and ES
types, so let's
go to where they are rather than wait for them to find us..."Popular
Science" and "Popular Mechanics" magazine..."Journal of Emergency
Medical Services", "Emergency Medical Services", etc etc etc.


Agreed. Mind you, ads in Popular Mecanics are incredibly expensive

I agree, but what price would we pay if we lost Amateur Radio
altogether
due to low census? With the dollar-figures the ARRL posts every year
they can afford to put at least one full page ad in those mags per
quarter, at least!

Element 1 only adds access to about 2.5% of all Amateur
allocations.
Those that really wanted HF priviledges only saw the Code test as a
hurdle...Not a brick wall.

My recollection of hurdles in school sports is mostly of falling over
the bl**dy things, HI!

Jump higher, Alun! =)

73

Steve, K4YZ







I have short legs

You're a tad short in some other respects to . .

"Alun" wrote in message
...
(William) wrote in
om:

Dave Heil wrote in message
...

I have little sympathy for anyone who would claim that learning morse
at a speed of five words per minute is a lot of work or that it
requires a long time to learn.

Dave K8MN

Your sympathy was not solicited, and it or the lack of it doesn't
change the fact that for many, learning code at 5wpm is difficult and
takes a long time to learn. The real pity are all of the 20WPM
Code-Tape Extras that have never used code.


That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a good
method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What was the
point of me learning 20wpm?

Discipline, knowledge, achievement...shall I go on? I know these are bad
words in today's "I just want what I want" world.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

I guess its just that I think your a puke.

(Dr Phil mode on )

Why do you think Lloyd is a puke?
(Dr Phil mode off )



Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/

Hows that? Most of the people doing that stupitidy are multiple guess
receive only cw test takers

Do you have some proof?

Learning code does not make the quality of the operator! Look at David Castle,
look at ex-WB2OTK, Roger Wiseman, etc.

Need I say more??


Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/

You see I am more interested in
putting down LLLlllllloooooyyyyyydddddd whenever I can.

Why?

What have I done to you?

I thought we buried the hatchet?


Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/

"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote:

It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.

The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop
Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so
without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the
mark).

I recall that even before any petitions were filed, both of us agreed
that if FCC "wanted to", Element 1 could be simply dropped once the
treaty changed. I believe the procedure is called "Memorandum Report
and Order" (could be some other name) but in any event a lot quicker
and simpler than a complete NPRM cycle.

The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't
been lighted.

Right. Could also be that "someone" doesn't want to get in the middle
of the catfight and get scratched by both sides. In which case the
thing to do is to entertain all sorts of petitions, (we're up to what
- 17-18 of them so far?!) collect comments and reply comments and even
ex partes on each of them, and allow the whole thing to percolate
through the great bureaucratic machine. Then, when the flood of
petitions has been reduced to a trickle, issue an NPRM with long
comment time (like 98-143). Resolution of the issue could take years -
and every new petition just resets the clock.

IOW, don't hold yer breath. Lookit how long it took for the "incentive
licensing" proposals of the '60s to take place. First proposals in
1963, final plan in 1966, major changes in 1968 and 1969. And they had
far fewer proposals back then.

This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with
when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from
without.

"Welcome To The Monkey House" ...

73 de Jim, N2EY

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Alun wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in
om:


Alun wrote in message
...


The ITU requirement for a code test was dropped on July 5th, 2003, so
evidently a majority around the world agree with you.

A majority of the world's governments that bothered to attend and vote
on the issue.

And all they did was change the rules so each country can decide for
itself what is required - just like the written test.

Although a suggested standard for written tests was added at the same
WRC, it's really more of a suggestion than anything else. Countries
can have wide-ranging interpretations of what's "needed". For example,
do you think ol' JY1 and his family had to sit for written and code
exams that were equivalent to what US or UK hams had to pass for the
same privileges? Or do you think the US writtens compare with, say,
those in the UK?

If I'm not mistaken, getting a license in some countries *requires*
successful completion of an approved training course. (I know the
"Foundation" license has this requirement). Doesn't matter if someone
is a Ph.D. in EE, they have to attend and pass the ham radio classes
to get the license - even though such courses are not part of any
treaty and not required in many other countries.

Actually, they only have to do the practical assesments, it's not necessary
to attend the course.

"Practical Assesmants" - as in tests? What, exactly, is required?

Imagine the reaction here in the USA if the code test were dropped
*and* getting a license required attendance at an approved ham radio
training course. Not a "one day wonder" course such as was recently
the subject of an article on the ARRL website ("Is Your License Class
Efficient" or some such title), but rather a multisession course with
quizzes and a final test that were not from a published pool.

Point is, just because it's not in the treaty anymore doesn't mean all
countries will or should drop it.

Another point is that requirements vary from country to country, even
with CEPT and S25.5

I think the FCC will drop it, but they move at a snail's pace.

They're busy with other things. And perhaps they don't see what all
the fuss is about. After all, we're talking about a 5 wpm code test
that can be passed in a number of ways, with all sorts of adaptations
and accomodations (tone, volume, headphones, typewriter, flashing
light, Farnsworth, etc.) Add to this the fact that today there are
training aids undreamed of in the past - most of them free or quite
inexpensive.

I doubt if they even think about any of that

Why? Those accomodations and adaptations are all part of the rules. In
fact, a lot is left to the VE's judgement. For example, a *sending*
test can be substituted for the receiving test if the VEs think it is
justified.

I didn't think it would survive
for as long as a year after it was no longer needed, but it's only
nine months so far, so I could still be right.

I think you meant 'no longer required by treaty'. Whether something is
needed as a license requirement is purely a matter of opinion.

I meant both, since I agree with the FCC that it was only needed because of
the treaty

It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.

That may be, although I still think it will be earlier than that. How do we
stand with the pool, BTW?

I just did an update. Google up the thread - WK3C wanted to change his
date!

Most of all, note that the 2000 restructuring did not result in lots
of new hams, even though the requirements for all classes of license
were lowered and the whole structure simplified.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think abolishing the code test will remove a block in the system, but
won't have much effect unless we actively do something to recruit new hams.
I don't really see much of that happening right now.

What would you suggest?

Here's what one ham is doing - and has been doing for years. I don't
know this ham personally, but he is right here in EPA. Note the
results and the reactions he gets. The following is a direct quote:

BEGIN QUOTE

I have had the privilege of teaching an after school activity, at the
local
middle school, for five years. I named it Tune in the World, and it
covers
many aspects of radio and television, and of course, pushes ham radio.
Each
year I have had several students, both boys and girls, obtain their
license
and try to help them continue on the hobby.

With this as my basis, I can tell you that 95% of the students were a
pleasure to work with and each year the district offers me a nice
salary to
teach the class and each year I decline it. Yes, it is a lot of work,
but
the students enjoy it and come away with a very positive idea of ham
radio.
The attention span varies, but I have found that I have to work at
making
sure I have an interesting program and that no part of it goes on and
on and
on. I set the rules at the first meeting and have not had any serious
problems. (My son and his friends have been my biggest problem.)

If one expects the students to sit in their chairs and listen to a
presentation for an hour, after being in school all day, they good
luck. I
combine power point presentations, live demonstrations, parts of ARRL
videos
short movies, simple building projects and computers. Interestingly,
the
students are always VERY interested in the Morse code and seem less so
in
modes connected with the computer.

I am not a STRONG disciplinarian, but we have rules and the kids obey
them
and something must be going right, a few kids who were in the previous
class
always take the next year's class and we always have 35 to 40
students. In
fact, my biggest problem is that other students want to join the class
after
it has been on a few weeks.

Last year at the last minute, I offer the Radio Merit Badge at Boy
Scout
Camp. I was given a terrible time and hoped for six kids. I had over
1/4
of the camp at the classes and more wanted to attend. We got a dozen
hams
out of that one.

So, if we want to get new, young hams, then think about reaching out
to the
Middle Schools, and Scout Camps. Just the camp alone, with eight
weeks of
camp, would produce between 80 and 100 new hams....with about 400
Scout
Camps in the USA, (Cub and Boy Scout) that would mean a very nice
increase
in our membership.

I do agree, that like every previous generation, the new hams need
help in
getting into the hobby and if nothing else, get their email address
and send
them info as well as forwarding the address to the ARRL, and local
clubs.
We can sit here and complain about the lack of young people in our
hobby, or
we can do something, or expect someone else to do it. Ahhh, it is
easier to
complain...right?

END QUOTE

Note particularly when he writes:

"the students are always VERY interested in the Morse code and seem
less so in
modes connected with the computer."

A block to the license process?

I guess the question is "What are YOU doing to recruit more hams",
Alun? The torch is being passed, and it is being passed to those that
"won" the code/no code debate.

Exactly.

I'm pretty new as a Ham, I try to recruit whenever possible, and will
welcome new hams regardless of their education. Some people might feel
otherwise at this point, having the wind knocked out of their sails, so
to speak.

My policy has always been that if they have the license, they're a
ham.

You guys won. You have the ball now. Using the NCI's polled membership
as an example, you now want to make all Technicians Generals, and
advanced, Extra's. A drastic reduction in entrance requirements seems to
be the rationale du jour for the brave new Amateur Radio Service.

Exactly!

And who can really argue against it? Remember the question "why does
someone have to learn code to operate voice"? Well, if you accept that
argument, then what do you say when someone says "Why does it take a
Technician license to operate legal limit SSB on 2 meters but a
General to do the same thing on most of 20 meters?" and "Since the
Technician written allows maximum authorized power on all authorized
modes allocated to hams above 30 MHz,why is more theory testing needed
to do the same thing below 30 MHz?"

Etc.

Really it's your ball and your game now. Godspeed!

Don't hold yer breath, Mike.

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...

On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote:


It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.

The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop
Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so
without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the
mark).


I recall that even before any petitions were filed, both of us agreed
that if FCC "wanted to", Element 1 could be simply dropped once the
treaty changed. I believe the procedure is called "Memorandum Report
and Order" (could be some other name) but in any event a lot quicker
and simpler than a complete NPRM cycle.

Yup! And do me that is the most damning indictement of the NCI crowd.
Simply petitioning to simply dropo Element 1 would have been consistent
with what we had heard their aims were all along.

But that wasn't quite enough was it?

The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't
been lighted.


Right. Could also be that "someone" doesn't want to get in the middle
of the catfight and get scratched by both sides. In which case the
thing to do is to entertain all sorts of petitions, (we're up to what
- 17-18 of them so far?!) collect comments and reply comments and even
ex partes on each of them, and allow the whole thing to percolate
through the great bureaucratic machine. Then, when the flood of
petitions has been reduced to a trickle, issue an NPRM with long
comment time (like 98-143). Resolution of the issue could take years -
and every new petition just resets the clock.

With all the complicated petitinos out there, I think it is time to add
mine. Maybe in a year or so, when the initial furor dies down....

IOW, don't hold yer breath. Lookit how long it took for the "incentive
licensing" proposals of the '60s to take place. First proposals in
1963, final plan in 1966, major changes in 1968 and 1969. And they had
far fewer proposals back then.

I *really* like my prediction in the poll. 8^)


This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with
when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from
without.


"Welcome To The Monkey House" ...

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:03 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

If you are right, then the US will be the last country with a code test,
decades after it no longer exists anywhere else. I don't think it will take
that long, though.

I was afraid of this.

Despite supporting Code testing, I am also of the mind that once the
majority has spoken, it's time to move on.

They could have pre-empted all this by stating something to the effect of
"based upon recent previous commnets on the subject, we are suspending the
requirement for Element 1 for access to HF licensure"....But noooooooooooo...

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

They really don't care about ANY radio, if you pay close attention to
thier "thought processes" in other actions, Alun. I really don't think there
are too many people up there who have a clear picture of what's going on in ANY
radio service.

Secondly, I don't think they will wait for any more petitions.

Sure they will! They are BUREAUCRATS! They are all about" petitions,
applications, hearings, and the PROCESS of administering...They are poorly
prepared to deal with the EFFECTS of thier actions!

Thirdly, I think that when the dust settles they will just do what they
were going to do anyway. Eliminate Element 1.

Months and months later.....

1) Re-farming the Novice frequencies an increasing the phone allocations.
Here there is already an NPRM, and I think they will carry it out. It just
gives the same amount of additional spectrum to phone as is now Novice CW.
This is what they are going to do. It's less than I wanted, and even less
than the ARRL or the NCVEC asked for, but I'm betting it's all done;

I dunno.....

There's been what...a half dozen petitions in the last five or six years
asking for the same thing and the FCC keeps thumbing thier noses at it...I
don't understand why since the Novice license hasn't generated much interest
since 1987

2) Eliminating supefluous licence classes. They will ultimately just do the
obvious, i.e. give Novices and Advanceds a free upgrade. They won't revive
the Novice and kill off the Tech. They will view that as a waste of time.
The FCC is all for simplification, and they will point to the petitions as
providing the consensus they were looking for, even thought they are
slightly different.

I really doubt they will "upgrade" the Novice since it's rapidly withering
to nothingness...The Advanced...?!?! Maybe, but a lot of the Advanced guys see
THIER license as being the last readily evident class as having been
13WPM/Old School tested and want nothing to do with "upgrades".

73

Steve, K4YZ

Alun wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in
om:


"Phil Kane" wrote in message
t.net...

On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote:


It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given
FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months
before we even get to the NPRM stage.

The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop
Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so
without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the
mark).

I recall that even before any petitions were filed, both of us agreed
that if FCC "wanted to", Element 1 could be simply dropped once the
treaty changed. I believe the procedure is called "Memorandum Report
and Order" (could be some other name) but in any event a lot quicker
and simpler than a complete NPRM cycle.

The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't
been lighted.

Right. Could also be that "someone" doesn't want to get in the middle
of the catfight and get scratched by both sides. In which case the
thing to do is to entertain all sorts of petitions, (we're up to what
- 17-18 of them so far?!) collect comments and reply comments and even
ex partes on each of them, and allow the whole thing to percolate
through the great bureaucratic machine. Then, when the flood of
petitions has been reduced to a trickle, issue an NPRM with long
comment time (like 98-143). Resolution of the issue could take years -
and every new petition just resets the clock.

IOW, don't hold yer breath. Lookit how long it took for the "incentive
licensing" proposals of the '60s to take place. First proposals in
1963, final plan in 1966, major changes in 1968 and 1969. And they had
far fewer proposals back then.


This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with
when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from
without.

"Welcome To The Monkey House" ...

73 de Jim, N2EY



If you are right, then the US will be the last country with a code test,
decades after it no longer exists anywhere else. I don't think it will take
that long, though.

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

Secondly, I don't think they will wait for any more petitions.

Thirdly, I think that when the dust settles they will just do what they
were going to do anyway. Eliminate Element 1.

Let's hope it ends that way, Alun!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts a
couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The troop leader
is more interested in finding someone for the computer badge.

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

PS: The requirement for a CW QSO has been dropped from the badge, which
makes it more practical for me to do it!

Examiners have always had it at thier discretion to send random letters
and check for character count. In the long run, I bet more folks have passed
the test because it WAS a "QSO" since they could go back and fill in missing
letters....ITS N T T AT ARD TO FI L IN THE BL NKS ON E YOU BACK U
AN LOOK AT W T YOU WR TE DO N.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 9:06 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I think maybe you are a bit confused, so I guess I need to explain a little
more. The radio merit badge used to require the boys to participate in 2 CW
QSOs and 1 phone QSO. Now that requirement is just for 1 QSO in any mode.
Some phone ops used to teach the badge and do CW QSOs by computer, which
had the added advantage that the boys could see what was being said, whilst
others used to get a CW op to participate (the counselor tests the boys,
but anyone can provide the instruction/demos).

Ahhhhhhh....I see...You were speaking of the REAL "Merit Badges"....!

Yes, you were correct, of course...I stand corrected.

The QSO requirement is only one from a long list, and can be satisfied by
boys with a ham licence if they submit 5 QSL cards from 3 call districts.
The boys who are not hams (obviously the vast majority) just have to sit in
on a QSO instead.

One of the other requirements is to draw a frequency chart, and there are
very specific rules about what it has to show. The funny thing is, the
example in the book doesn't comply. It was done by the ARRL, but I don't
think it was created specially for the purpose. I think it was just
something that already existed that they let the boy scouts use. One of the
questions I am contemplating is whether I should give credit for copying
it, or whether they should have to do it properly?

The FCC has a real nice chart available from GPO and is all inclusive from
a few KHz up to, I beleive, 300GHz. It might go higher.

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Alun" wrote in message
...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts a
couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The troop
leader is more interested in finding someone for the computer badge.

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder
for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

PS: The requirement for a CW QSO has been dropped from the badge, which
makes it more practical for me to do it!

Examiners have always had it at thier discretion to send random
letters
and check for character count. In the long run, I bet more folks have
passed the test because it WAS a "QSO" since they could go back and
fill in missing letters....ITS N T T AT ARD TO FI L IN THE BL
NKS ON E YOU BACK U AN LOOK AT W T YOU WR TE DO N.

73

Steve, K4YZ








I think maybe you are a bit confused, so I guess I need to explain a
little
more. The radio merit badge used to require the boys to participate in 2
CW
QSOs and 1 phone QSO. Now that requirement is just for 1 QSO in any mode.
Some phone ops used to teach the badge and do CW QSOs by computer, which
had the added advantage that the boys could see what was being said,
whilst
others used to get a CW op to participate (the counselor tests the boys,
but anyone can provide the instruction/demos).

The QSO requirement is only one from a long list, and can be satisfied by
boys with a ham licence if they submit 5 QSL cards from 3 call districts.
The boys who are not hams (obviously the vast majority) just have to sit
in
on a QSO instead.

One of the other requirements is to draw a frequency chart, and there are
very specific rules about what it has to show. The funny thing is, the
example in the book doesn't comply. It was done by the ARRL, but I don't
think it was created specially for the purpose. I think it was just
something that already existed that they let the boy scouts use. One of
the
questions I am contemplating is whether I should give credit for copying
it, or whether they should have to do it properly?

73 de Alun, N3KIP

I'd say make them do the chart by the rules of the merit badge. There's
very little to be learned just by copying a pre-existing chart. Of course
they should be allowed to use the ARRL one (and others) as an information
resource.

In the real world of work, one frequently has to reformat information to
meet customer formatting requirements.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Alun wrote in message . ..
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

The FCC has a real nice chart available from GPO and is all
inclusive from
a few KHz up to, I beleive, 300GHz. It might go higher.

73

Steve, K4YZ

That's a good point. I understand that Icom has one you can download,
although I don't know if it meets the requirements. I'm sure the FCC chart
meets all possible requirements, though.

I wonder if it shows the MARS frequencies separate from the Amateur frequencies?

After all, " "MARS IS "Amateur Radio". "

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
:


"Alun" wrote in message
...
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for
all? From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts
a couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The
troop leader is more interested in finding someone for the computer
badge.

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder
for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

PS: The requirement for a CW QSO has been dropped from the badge,
which makes it more practical for me to do it!

Examiners have always had it at thier discretion to send
random letters
and check for character count. In the long run, I bet more folks
have passed the test because it WAS a "QSO" since they could go back
and fill in missing letters....ITS N T T AT ARD TO FI L IN
THE BL NKS ON E YOU BACK U AN LOOK AT W T YOU WR TE DO N.

73

Steve, K4YZ








I think maybe you are a bit confused, so I guess I need to explain a
little more. The radio merit badge used to require the boys to
participate in 2 CW QSOs and 1 phone QSO. Now that requirement is just
for 1 QSO in any mode. Some phone ops used to teach the badge and do
CW QSOs by computer, which had the added advantage that the boys could
see what was being said, whilst others used to get a CW op to
participate (the counselor tests the boys, but anyone can provide the
instruction/demos).

The QSO requirement is only one from a long list, and can be satisfied
by boys with a ham licence if they submit 5 QSL cards from 3 call
districts. The boys who are not hams (obviously the vast majority)
just have to sit in on a QSO instead.

One of the other requirements is to draw a frequency chart, and there
are very specific rules about what it has to show. The funny thing is,
the example in the book doesn't comply. It was done by the ARRL, but I
don't think it was created specially for the purpose. I think it was
just something that already existed that they let the boy scouts use.
One of the questions I am contemplating is whether I should give
credit for copying it, or whether they should have to do it properly?

73 de Alun, N3KIP

I'd say make them do the chart by the rules of the merit badge.
There's very little to be learned just by copying a pre-existing chart.
Of course they should be allowed to use the ARRL one (and others) as
an information resource.

In the real world of work, one frequently has to reformat information
to meet customer formatting requirements.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



That's pretty much what I was thinking. I just wanted to see if others
would agree. The league's chart in the scout merit badge book covers a
slightly wrong frequency range, and it doesn't really show the required 8
services. At least, it sort of does, but it mixes some services together
while separating some users that are part of the same service.

I was wondering if I was being too pedantic, but I tend to think that maybe
it is best to ignore that chart and show them one that is more correct. I
imagine the FCC chart is super correct There again, were the scouts really
meaning to imply the proper definition of a 'service' in their
requirements? Maybe they had something vaguer in mind?

Alun wrote in message . ..
(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in
:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/8/2004 9:30 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

That would be me. Not just tapes, in fact I didn't find tapes to be a
good method of learning, but I've never attached a key to a rig. What
was the point of me learning 20wpm?

Uhhhhhhhhhh....passing Element 1C...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ


So let me rephrase that. Why should I have had to pass 1C to get the bottom
ends of the phone subbands?

Because that's what Steve and Jim had to do.

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message nk.net...
"William" wrote in message
om...

Dansan said: " I don't know where its from but I am hearing a lot
more phone activity in the CW bands of late. And not speaking
Spanish. English. But who knows. "

Do you know what the prefix for Canada is?

Gee, Duhhhhhhhhhh, let the think.......Uh......maybe it's a VE or a VA
or some other strange letters depending what part of a seal arse you are
celebrating that month. Sound right?

Wow. You're a quick study.

And yes I do know that Canada is allowed to operate in what the US calls the
'CW Segements'. And that has what to do with what I said?

Some citizens of Canada speak English, and some even operate phone in
our CW subband while speaking English.

I don't know how much more related it can get to what you said. Any
ideas?

"Lloyd Davies - The Time Lord " wrote in message
...
Hows that? Most of the people doing that stupitidy are multiple guess
receive only cw test takers

Do you have some proof?

Learning code does not make the quality of the operator! Look at David
Castle,
look at ex-WB2OTK, Roger Wiseman, etc.

Need I say more??


Lloyd Davies - Time Lord and Talk show host
"On the Domestic Front"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/domesticfront/

Gotta admit you got me on that one.

Dan/W4NTI

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Alun
Date: 5/9/2004 8:12 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


I applied to be a counselor for the radio merit badge in boy scouts a
couple of months ago, but haven't heard anything back yet. The troop leader
is more interested in finding someone for the computer badge.


From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder for the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

It's an unfortunate situation. I've worked with kids before, and have
gone through the pertinent background checks. In most respects, it's no
big deal.

It is getting harder to find people that will voluntarily go through
such things anymore though.

Think of it. You could be a perfectly normal person, but one dumb
clerical error could not only keep you from coaching your kid or being a
merit badge counselor, but ruin your entire life! Its not likely to
happen, but.....


It's harder to get people to help period!

- Mike KB3EIA -

Subject: Let's debate: Should Amateur Radio be made a free for all?
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 5/9/2004 9:21 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:

From what I read in the papaers, it's getting harder and harder for
the
Scouts to find leaders who want to be leaders and not molesters....

It's an unfortunate situation. I've worked with kids before, and have
gone through the pertinent background checks. In most respects, it's no
big deal.

Yep.

CAP instituted it's background check program over 15 years ago and it's
worked well.

It is getting harder to find people that will voluntarily go through
such things anymore though.

All they have to do for us is go to the local SO or PD and get the prints
done. Here in Franklin County, TN, the local SO will do it for free.

Think of it. You could be a perfectly normal person, but one dumb
clerical error could not only keep you from coaching your kid or being a
merit badge counselor, but ruin your entire life! Its not likely to
happen, but.....

My concern is what people today call "child abuse"...

We see "abuse" in the ER all the time that is nothing of the sort...It's
estranged parents arguing over who's the better parent or trying to use Junior
as a pawn in thier on-going domestic disputes...Most of the time the "charges"
are on the person who thought to bring charges second...

The BIG problem is getting that crap cleared off...Even if no actual
charges are substantiated, there's always a record of "allegations" that are
out there...The "innocent until proven guilty" thing sounds good as the
disclaimer on an episode of "COPS", but unfortunately is not necessarrily a
fact of life.

It's harder to get people to help period!

Yep. "Everybody" wants "Somebody" to "do it", but "Nobody" has the time to
do it.

73

Steve, K4YZ

On 9 May 2004 13:03:29 GMT, Alun wrote:

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

The "they" is really one individual, the specialist who has to
start the ball rolling by drafting the new rules and the discussion
and justification therefor, and AFAIK the current incumbent in that
slot is an active amateur. After that, his job is to sell it up the
ladder, where ham radio is on the bottom of the totem pole, and he
may see that there is a barrier upstream of him and may be doing
nothing because of that. Were it me, I'd have the rules and the
text all ready to go in my wordprocessor files by now.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

"Welcome To The Monkey House" ...




So how many bananas will this require? :-)

"Phil Kane" wrote in
et:

On 9 May 2004 13:03:29 GMT, Alun wrote:

Firstly, I think the reason they didn't go for a memorandum report and
order is more mundane. They don't care about any catfight because they
don't care about amateur radio, period.

The "they" is really one individual, the specialist who has to
start the ball rolling by drafting the new rules and the discussion
and justification therefor, and AFAIK the current incumbent in that
slot is an active amateur. After that, his job is to sell it up the
ladder, where ham radio is on the bottom of the totem pole, and he
may see that there is a barrier upstream of him and may be doing
nothing because of that. Were it me, I'd have the rules and the
text all ready to go in my wordprocessor files by now.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane




I knew it was one person, but didn't know he was a ham. I still don't think
the FCC as a whole gives a fig for ham radio.