| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#10
April 14th 05, 12:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
wrote:
From: on Wed,Apr 13 2005 4:28 am Dave Heil wrote: wrote: wrote: From: N2EY on Apr 12, 4:20 pm wrote: I simply don't want to read Len's story about ADA again. He's posted it here so many times I can recite it from memory. But he never explains why it has any bearing on amateur radio policy today. I've already explained the "bearing it has" years ago. No, you didn't. Not how *your* experience at ADA (a military radio station) has any bearing, or relevance, to amateur radio policy today. Let's take it again, from the top... Back in the beginning of the 1950s, the U.S. military was NOT using any morse code modes for long-distance point-to-point communications. How do you know this for sure? Granted, you didn't see any "morse code modes" in use at ADA. But to say there was none used at all, anywhere in the US military is a different thing. What's interesting is that you have to qualify the statement as "long-distance point-to-point communications" - because Morse Code was then still being used *extensively* by the US Navy, by the maritime radio services, by aircraft and by many other radio services such as press services. Your tunnel vision of "long-distance point-to-point communications" by the US military is about as relevant as the fact that Morse Code wasn't in use on the AM broadcast band in the 1930s. Most of that message "traffic" was written teleprinter that carried the vast majority of military communications. Yep. And it was on fixed, predetermined frequencies, using equipment most individuals could not afford to buy. And it was *not* the kind of communications that make up the vast majority of amateur radio communications. NO morse code modes were used on such radio circuits afterwards. At some point, anyway. The US Navy was still using Morse Code long after the beginning of the 1950s. So was the Coast Guard. They are "US military". That SHOULD have some meaning to rational persons insofar as the efficacy of morse code for communications... There you go, Len, assuming your conclusion. What you're saying is that because the Army didn't use it, nobody should use it. Here's a hint: Ham radio isn't the US Army. When Uncle Sam is willing to buy radios for all hams, then maybe you'll have a point. in short, morse code was way too slow, For some applications, yes. But not for many applications. too prone to human errors by its operators, All communications modes are prone to operator error. The person typing on a teleprinter can make a mistake, too. and generally so inefficient that, Nope. You just don't like the mode. by now, EVERY other radio service has either DROPPED the mode (if they used it at all in the past) or NEVER CONSIDERED it when that radio service began. So what, Len? That's like saying that since almost all motor vehicles don't have manual transmissions anymore, no vehicles should have them. gave up having The main reason Morse Code was replaced by other modes in other radio services is that it required skilled operators at both ends of the circuit. Skilled operators cost money and have to be taken care of, and the speed and accuracy of communications is limited to their skill level. So the skilled operator was eliminated by technology, to save time and money. What you're saying, then, is that you want to eliminate the skilled operators from ham radio, too. The sole exception is AMATEUR radio... It's all those things - and a lot more. For over half a century (actually, since before WW2) the brunt of messaging in the military has been done by modes OTHER than morse code. Even if true, (it's not) so what? Ham radio isn't "the military", and amateur radio communications isn't only about "messaging". You're argument says that since most US Navy ships stopped relying on the wind for propulsion long ago, nobody should own a sailboat today, even for "a hobby pursuit, a recreation, something done on free time for enjoyment." Very illogical. An approximation of the amount of such military traffic is a minimum of 1 1/2 MILLION messages a MONTH back in 1955. So what? Hams don't have the same resources, nor the same basis and purpose. The old Bell Telephone system handled a lot more than 1.5 million "messages" a month back then, too. It was not trivial, it wasn't confined to a few ship's radio rooms. It was the logistical supply "glue" that enabled the United States military to support itself worldwide. It was necessary to keep "getting the messages through" as the old, and still current, Signal Corps phrase puts it. And it required how many people to do it all? At a cost of how many millions of taxpayer dollars? What possible connection does that have to the self-trained, self-funded amateur radio operator? It should be obvious to rational people that there is NO need for any morse code testing for a hobby radio activity. There's where you make an illogical jump. You hold up what the US military allegedly did, then say it's somehow connected to what hams should do. But you never say what the connection is. Just that "it's obvious to rational people" - which it isn't. It is NOT a "national service." Actually, amateur radio is internationally recognized by treaty, and it's a radio service. It is NOT needed to "maintain a reserve of 'skilled' radio operators" for the nation or even a locality. Sure it is. Just ask those folks who ran the recent emergency drills. They were very appreciative of the contributions of amateur radio operators. What morse code testing for a hobby radio activity has become is a travesty, a gross artificiality kept in there by old-timers who managed to pass such tests and keep insisting that all newcomers MUST do as they did. No, that's simply not true at all. It's just your way of rationalizing your hatred, Len. There is NO rational reason for that. Sure there is. Here ya go: Since amateur radio operators *do* use Morse Code extensively, today, on the air, for a wide variety of activities, it is perfectly obvious to rational people that a basic test of Morse code skill is a reasonable test requirement for a license. That's the whole thing, right there. There is only the artificiality of some hazing exercise so that those who pass can adopt the artificiality of doing something that few can. Nope. It's a bout a basic skill, that's all. Almost anyone can do it. Nonsense. Yes, that's what your arguments and insults amount to. I don't want to read it again. Naturally, since you are one of those old-timers who thinks of little else but morse code operation on the HF amateur bands. No, that's not true at all. That's just one of my interests. You want to enforce your own private desires and accomplishment goals on others regardless of their wishes or the irrationality of your demands. That's a pretty good description of *your* purpose here, Len! You don't want to read it because someone else was able to be in a position to do REAL HF communications all the time. So what hams do, and did, isn't "REAL"? Then why are you so concerned about it? And even you can't do it all the time, Len. That's way above the average amateur experience. No it isn't. It's *different from* the amateur radio experience. Just like riding in a commercial airliner is different from flying your own private aircraft. You resent knowing that another has done it. I don't resent it at all, Len. I'm just bored by your constant repetition of the same old story and illogical conclusions. But...you are going to have to live with it. Why? "It ain't braggin if ya done it..." I did it. All by yourself? Or were there hundreds - thousands - of others there too, backed up by the enormous resources of the USA - both civilian and military? And you still haven't explained how what happened at ADA a half-century ago has any relevance to ham radio today. Here's one more analogy to your alleged logic: Inexpensive calculators have been around for a couple of decades now. Almost nobody in business or the professions relies on manual arithmetic anymore - even the smallest businesses, for example, use electronic cash registers to do the calculations. Where such manual calculation was once done, it has been completely replaced by electronic methods. Manual calculation is too slow, too error-prone, and too dependent on human skill. Therefore, we should not require anyone to learn how to do such calculations as addition, subtraction, multiplication or division, let alone square roots or other techniques. That's what you're saying. And it's nonsense. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Don't forget ! | Broadcasting | |||
| Never Forget... | CB | |||
| Forget E-bay, post your 11 meter amps here. | CB | |||
| Tampa Turd Jail Dale's forgotten FELONY, don't forget Junior | General | |||
Threaded Mode
