"Bert Craig" wrote in
:

"Alun" wrote in message
...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in
news:20040921201024.04815.00000600@mb- m17.aol.com:

In article et,
"KØHB" writes:

"N2EY" wrote


Is the 5 wpm test really such a big deal?


Yes.

Why?

73 de Jim, N2EY


It puts people off, especially those who have no plans to ever use CW,
and there are a lot of those.

If I remember correctly, this is why the no-code Tech license was
created.

Oh, want increased "privileges?" Earn them. Sometimes earning something
(Like a degree, for example.) means "learning" a few things that you
may never use.

Heaven forbid we should teach this concept to our kids. Instead they
have a whole generation of underachevers who would rather whine than
achieve. Remember the Regents!

It "puts people off," it'd almost be funny...if it weren't so sad.


You are (deliberately) confusing the issue of having to learn more theory
to upgrade with the issue of learning to use CW in order to use HF phone.
This has nothing to do with teaching kids they should get something for
nothing, if that's what you are saying. But then, if you regard CW as a
holy sacrament, your argument would make sense, which it doesn't.

Alun, N3KIP

(Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ...
Subject: US Licensing Restructuring ??? When ???
From: "Phil Kane"
Date: 9/21/2004 1:13 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

On 21 Sep 2004 00:12:02 GMT, Alun wrote:

The US may be the last country to abolish the code test, the way things are
going. Mind you, AFAIK the code test has still not been abolished in Spain
or Italy(?), although I don't think there's a code test anywhere else much
in Europe anymore.

Most of the countries where the code test has been dropped do not
have the same requirement for rules changes that the US has, such as
consideration of public input and comments, publication of notice of
rulemaking, petitions for reconsideration and court appeals, etc.

They just DO it ..... (usually because someone in the regulatory
Administration thinks that it is a good thing to do without public
input....)

But Phil, after the opening of the No Code Tech in 91 along with the FCC's
stated psoition on the relevence of Code testing, along with the tons of papaer
they've received on it already, just how many more "hearings" or comments do
they need?

Doesn't matter, Steve. Once they decided to go the NPRM route, the
wheels will turn at their designated speed.

Note also that the quoted code-test positions of FCC are close to 5
years old. (The Report and Order for 98-143 was written in late 1999).
Maybe all the comments have had an impact.

If the code test is such a "barrier" to would-be hams, why aren't they
telling FCC? When you total up the comments *by author*, you find that
most people who bother to comment want to keep at least some code
testing. You also find that most commenters already have a ham
license. What you do not see are large numbers of nonhams telling FCC
that they'd become hams if the code test were removed. So wouldn't it
make sense for FCC to conclude that there are *not* a lot of people
who are "being kept out" by the code test?

I think N8UZE has a very valid point that all the proposals simply
slow the machinery down. Note that NCVEC has *two* proposals!

73 de Jim, N2EY

(Len Over 21) wrote in news:20040921232140.06972.00000803
@mb-m03.aol.com:

In article , Alun
writes:

(Brian Kelly) wrote in
.com:

"Joe Guthart" wrote in message
...
What's going on here ... the talk of restructuring to remove morse
code requirements has been going on for over 18 months. Many, many
countries have already removed the morse code requirement to gain
access to HF.

Kindly note that "other countries" don't generally lead the U.S.
around by it's nose. The U.S. seldom blindly buys into "many many
foreign goverments'"internal policies. We ain't EU/UN sheep. Take your
pick.

Sure
there's been a lot of backlash from those who still want to keep code
alive.

It's not a "backlash", a very large precentage of the U.S. ham
population favors the retention of the code test. The FCC is quite
aware of this divide within the hobby and as a result continues to let
the matter cook on one of their sub-basement back burners until they
manage to get back to the matter. Typical bush-league bureaucratic
work and aggravation avoidance ploy. Keeps their inbox flak & spam
levels down.

I know this is the government, but, what is taking so long?

Because the public has no vested interest at all in whether the ham
code test goes away or not. The FCC has *much* bigger fish to fry with
it's scarce resources. For instance the public needs the FCC to focus
it's assets on dramatically reshuffling the whole upper RF spectrum to
accomodate wireless broadband access to the Internet far more than the
public needs the FCC to diddle with rules changes which allow more
codeless hobbyists access to the HF ham bands.

Can't they come to some decision quickly.

Joesph did you just get off the boat at Ellis Island Joe??

Anyone have a proposed timeline of when this will be settled.

Nice troll Joe. At least in on-topic for once.

w3rv


That's not a troll

Alun, Kelly's remarks are "civil discourse" of PCTA extras. :-)

As a sidelight, Ellis Island has been closed for immigration
purposes for years. My mother and her family came through
there in 1924, my father and his brother through there in 1928.
Both parents became naturalized U.S. citizens later.

Apparently the "Kelly" surname is native to North America,
judging by the tenor of the "civil discourse." :-)

[this is beginning to sound like the PCTA are a branch of
the DAR...:-) ]




I'm an Extra too, Len. I had a hard time learning CW upto 20 wpm and don't
even use it. There are two basic ways to respond to that experience, either
somehow rationalise it as a good thing(?), or realise it was a waste of
time and an unnecessary barrier to others.

"N2EY" wrote

So wouldn't it make sense for FCC to conclude
that there are *not* a lot of people
who are "being kept out" by the code test?

I don't think the code test keeps anyone out of the Amateur Radio
service.

On a somewhat related matter, I also don't think that we need a code
test to prove anyone's worthiness to operate on amateur frequencies
below 30MHz.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and
finds
himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of
people
who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way."
-- Bokonon

Oh, want increased "privileges?" Earn them. Sometimes earning something
(Like a degree, for example.) means "learning" a few things that you may
never use.

One can't "sell" the hobby while imposing things no longer necessary
to it.


Heaven forbid we should teach this concept to our kids. Instead they have a
whole generation of underachevers who would rather whine than achieve.
Remember the Regents!


People have been saying that since day one. So what else is new...

I think N8UZE has a very valid point that all the proposals simply
slow the machinery down. Note that NCVEC has *two* proposals!


That machinery is probably a few brearucrats that will get to
it when there's nothing else to do....

Alun wrote:
(Len Over 21) wrote in news:20040921232140.06972.00000803
@mb-m03.aol.com:


In article , Alun
writes:


(Brian Kelly) wrote in
e.com:


"Joe Guthart" wrote in message
...

What's going on here ... the talk of restructuring to remove morse
code requirements has been going on for over 18 months. Many, many
countries have already removed the morse code requirement to gain
access to HF.

Kindly note that "other countries" don't generally lead the U.S.
around by it's nose. The U.S. seldom blindly buys into "many many
foreign goverments'"internal policies. We ain't EU/UN sheep. Take your
pick.


Sure
there's been a lot of backlash from those who still want to keep code
alive.

It's not a "backlash", a very large precentage of the U.S. ham
population favors the retention of the code test. The FCC is quite
aware of this divide within the hobby and as a result continues to let
the matter cook on one of their sub-basement back burners until they
manage to get back to the matter. Typical bush-league bureaucratic
work and aggravation avoidance ploy. Keeps their inbox flak & spam
levels down.


I know this is the government, but, what is taking so long?

Because the public has no vested interest at all in whether the ham
code test goes away or not. The FCC has *much* bigger fish to fry with
it's scarce resources. For instance the public needs the FCC to focus
it's assets on dramatically reshuffling the whole upper RF spectrum to
accomodate wireless broadband access to the Internet far more than the
public needs the FCC to diddle with rules changes which allow more
codeless hobbyists access to the HF ham bands.


Can't they come to some decision quickly.

Joesph did you just get off the boat at Ellis Island Joe??


Anyone have a proposed timeline of when this will be settled.

Nice troll Joe. At least in on-topic for once.

w3rv


That's not a troll

Alun, Kelly's remarks are "civil discourse" of PCTA extras. :-)

As a sidelight, Ellis Island has been closed for immigration
purposes for years. My mother and her family came through
there in 1924, my father and his brother through there in 1928.
Both parents became naturalized U.S. citizens later.

Apparently the "Kelly" surname is native to North America,
judging by the tenor of the "civil discourse." :-)

[this is beginning to sound like the PCTA are a branch of
the DAR...:-) ]





I'm an Extra too, Len. I had a hard time learning CW upto 20 wpm and don't
even use it. There are two basic ways to respond to that experience, either
somehow rationalise it as a good thing(?), or realise it was a waste of
time and an unnecessary barrier to others.


Yes, if you can also rationalize all the other parts of the test that
you don't use.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , "Bert Craig"
writes:

"Alun" wrote in message
.. .
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in news:20040921201024.04815.00000600@mb-
m17.aol.com:

In article et, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote


Is the 5 wpm test really such a big deal?


Yes.

Why?

73 de Jim, N2EY


It puts people off, especially those who have no plans to ever use CW, and
there are a lot of those.

If I remember correctly, this is why the no-code Tech license was created.

Then you should also remember that no-code-TEST Techs were
forbidden operation below 30 MHz in the USA.

Somehow some amateurs still believe in the myth that morsemanship
is "essential" (enough for "qualifications") to operate below 30 MHz.

Oh, want increased "privileges?" Earn them. Sometimes earning something
(Like a degree, for example.) means "learning" a few things that you may
never use.

The alleged "need" to do morse code below 30 MHz is an artificiality.

That doesn't bother the qualifications of all those other radio services
operating below 30 MHz. Tsk, tsk.

Heaven forbid we should teach this concept to our kids. Instead they have a
whole generation of underachevers who would rather whine than achieve.
Remember the Regents!

[you spelled "reagent" wrong...but that's perhaps too subtle...]

Yes, heaven forbid that ANYONE EVER be allowed to transmit
below 30 MHz without full and complete "qualifications" by testing
in morsemanship! :-)

It "puts people off," it'd almost be funny...if it weren't so sad.

The "sadness" is that the PCTA simply can't get up to speed
on the newer technology nor do they want to change their ways.
Tsk, tsk.

Everyone must do as they do...or else! :-)

Code and Riley suck!
"KØHB" wrote in message
nk.net...

"N2EY" wrote


Is the 5 wpm test really such a big deal?


Yes.

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004 11:52:21 GMT, Bert Craig wrote:

Heaven forbid we should teach this concept to our kids. Instead they have a
whole generation of underachevers who would rather whine than achieve.
Remember the Regents!

Are the Regents' Exams no longer given in NY? I discovered ham
radio in HS, and wished that there was a Regents in that subject so
I could ace it.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane