cl wrote:
"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...

The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Maybe you never will use it
again. There are many things you learn in life and may never use again,
unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated.

Guess that explains Creationism. They either forgot or just
never did get biology class. And get upset when science
contradicts a trivial off topic section of the Bible.
But there is hope that some people will "get it" and
be able to do something with it. Of course the school
or FCC has to pick and choose what the kids should try
to learn. Spending less time on European medieval kings and
more on Vietnam would make sense, as modern governments are
no longer kings sitting around in castles getting bored
and deciding to have wars for the fun of it. Well, today kings
are called "dictators" anyway. Now to bring this back to
ham radio, is requiring code worth the time prospective
hams would have to spend on it, or maybe more theory should
be asked for today?

I seriously doubt that the FCC would increase code speed for
extras. The medical wavier issue would crop up again, and
the FCC found that to be a PITA. Besides it would be hard
for the FCC to tell old extras from newer extras as IIRC they
didn't keep track of who was who as old extras came up for
renewal.


I'm not so sure "more" theory is the answer either. Used to be, you HAD to
know electronics when you went for the exams. NO ONE told you what was on
the exams. Then some lazy ******* got some political pull and they started
to dumb down the theory and put "ALL" possible questions and answers in a
book - for someone to read and recall.

Almost all standardized testing is done that way these days. Actually I
don't know of any that isn't


That isn't teaching anyone -
anything. Any idiot can learn that way, to the extent needed. It doesn't do
anything to reinforce it in their heads as to what to do with it after. IF
they make it more theory, then they'll just make the "idiot" books cover it,
and again, you'll have a bunch of people who learned A, B, C or D, not the
real meat and potatoes of Electronics.

I have never been able to see the difference between reading a book
that contains the answers to questions, and reading a question pool.
Both are entered into my memory the same way. Did you know the answers
are often scrambled, that is that the letter answer on the test is not
the letter answer in the pool?



I've seen them come away and not know
what a fuse does or some of simplest of schematic symbols they "should"
know.

I've been in the field for a long time, and there are some things that
slip me once in a while. Do you help these folks when they make a newbie
mistake?

Give me a break. Those books today teach them NOTHING. They're nothing
more than the sugar coating of it all. Just enough to get by and HOPE they
plan to pursue it further on their own, which MOST - DO NOT. Again, due to
LAZINESS.

Wow! I've got a copy of the "Now You're Talking" book. A person would
have to work pretty hard do learn nothing from that.

You're right about the History though, not to lay so much on the past, but
work on current affairs. Past is good, but often TOO much time is spent on
it. That stuff is building blocks to some extent, history does have a
propensity to repeat itself, so you can't "ignore" it as a whole, but
spending say a week learning about King Arthur just doesn't get it. I recall
our teacher trying to drill **** in our heads about Genghis Khan (sp?). I
could give a **** less what he did. What I DID come to ignore and have a
need for later in life, was that stuff covered in Health class. I ended up
using it a few years out of school.
I wished then I had paid more attention to it. So, I had to "relearn" most
of it. Some things DO have their uses.

As to code, actually, it isn't so bad to know - really.

Morse code is VERY good to know. Good enough that it should continue to
be a part of the test.


Think about it. You
have sign language for deaf. IF you plan to talk to a person who is deaf,
you better learn it real fast. If you plan to travel - you may need to learn
some foreign language, even though most can speak English now. Code "can"
have benefits. We had 9 miners trapped about a year ago. They communicated
that there were nine, by 9 raps on the pole stuck in the ground. Had someone
in the ground and above ground knew code, a more detailed description could
have been issued. It could have helped. Before they got the elevator in to
get them, they had no idea what "physical" shape the guys were in or any
pending dangers under the ground. Maybe you won't use code again once
learned, but at some point, it may save a life with the user's intervention.
If you're in an auto accident, down in a gully, you have a radio. The mic is
broken, so you can't talk. You could key the radio with a key or something
and send a message. Hopefully someone knowing code would hear it and be able
to let others know. There are many reasons people can give to "not" learn
code, but there are just as many as to it's benefits. If it saves only one
life, it is worth it.

Yup, one of so many reasons that Morse code is a good thing. Hams are
all about communication, and communications in all manner of situations.
I love the latest technology, but that technology is sometimes fragile.
Sometimes life and death, health and welfare might just come down to two
skilled operators who can make an old communications method on primitive
equipment sing its simple yet powerful song.

- Mike KB3EIA -

cl wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Mel A. Nomah wrote:
"Hamguy" wrote in message
...

: http://www.hamwave.com/cgi-bin/index...iewnews&id=689

That link supposes that the fcc will delete the Morse requirement.

Other insiders suggest fcc will NPRM will delete Morse only for
General
license, and will INCREASE the test to 20WPM for renewed Extra
class,
downgrading all current "Extra Lite" licenses to resurrected
Advanced
license (the second time this license has risen from the ashes).
ARRL
giveaway program will be denied.

All it really says is that the FCC is working on an NPRM that may
be
out as soon as next month or as late as July. That NPRM will
obviously
contain what FCC wants to do as a result of WRC 2003 and the 18
restructuring petitions.

Once the NPRM becomes public, there will be a comment period, then
a
reply comment period. Couple of months at least, maybe longer.
Probably
the end of 2005 before comments close.

Then FCC will decide what to do and formulate a Report and Order.
Last
time they did this it took almost a year. Which translates to fall
2006. Then a couple months before the new rules become effective -
maybe end of 2006.

Of course it could take even longer, or maybe a bit less. But I
wouldn't expect any changes before summer 2006 - and wouldn't be
surprised if it were summer 2007.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Those who defy wanting to learn the code jump at any chance to
perpetuate
rumors of code being eliminated.

Similarly, those who promote Morse Code will latch on to any idea, no
matter how wrong, to claim the Code Exam remains valid.

You're right, it will take a while, even if
they were to decide to write a NPRM to do such. If these people
jumped into
Alligator infested waters as fast as they do rumors, the population
would
take a sudden drop. I'm not a "lover" of code, but I have hold a
license
which required code.

Ditto.

5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few
minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test. 2
weeks is not long,

It may be impossible for some. I learned it over a considerably longer
period of time with frequent practice.

you probably drove longer on a permit before being
allowed to drive on your own. Probably studied the book longer too!
It takes
little effort.

I disagree. It took a great effort.

The biggest problem with most is "laziness".

Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have
learned the code in under a week?

Maybe you never
will use it again.

Perhaps. I've found little use for it so far. Maybe once I'm an old
fart, have loads of time, and wax nostalgic for things that never were,
I'll take it up and enjoy it, and demand that all learn it.

There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the
skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't
mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated. But,
it was
"required". It's not a big deal people. Once you get past the "do I
have to"
and start doing it, you'll amaze yourself at how fast and easy it can
be.

Indeed. I never had the "do I have to?" attitude as there was no
code-free license when I became a ham. Yet it took me about 9 weeks of
daily practice.

I
DO use code now and then, but not daily like many others do. Everyone
has
their own thing. Some are into Packet, RTTY, AMTOR, etc, I'm not...
To each
his own. But we all had to learn "something" about those modes to
pass an
exam.

cl

Use it all you want. I'm against the Code Exam as an unnecessary
government requirement.

"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...

cl wrote:

A whole bunch snipped.

Those who defy wanting to learn the code jump at any chance to
perpetuate
rumors of code being eliminated.

Similarly, those who promote Morse Code will latch on to any idea, no
matter how wrong, to claim the Code Exam remains valid.


Leave it in, take it out, the riff raff is already invading the bands.

You're right, it will take a while, even if
they were to decide to write a NPRM to do such. If these people
jumped into
Alligator infested waters as fast as they do rumors, the population
would
take a sudden drop. I'm not a "lover" of code, but I have hold a
license
which required code.

Ditto.

5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few
minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test. 2
weeks is not long,

It may be impossible for some. I learned it over a considerably longer
period of time with frequent practice.

you probably drove longer on a permit before being
allowed to drive on your own. Probably studied the book longer too!
It takes
little effort.

I disagree. It took a great effort.


For some - it may! One argument I've heard, is that those musically inclined
pick it up quicker than others, yet I knew some who "were" musically
inclined and claimed to have a hell of a time with it. Reason? I don't know.
I can't get inside their head.

The biggest problem with most is "laziness".

Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have
learned the code in under a week?


Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now an
Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s.
Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed myself.
Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such. Besides, at that time,
I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium. Most recommendations are
15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a week. I
used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than others,
that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn
ANYTHING. You can't absorb it through osmosis. Back to the timing thing, I
hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time they
were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram".

Maybe you never
will use it again.

Perhaps. I've found little use for it so far. Maybe once I'm an old
fart, have loads of time, and wax nostalgic for things that never were,
I'll take it up and enjoy it, and demand that all learn it.


Probably the same age bracket as me. I do listen to call signs now and then
on the scanner to pick out the services they represent - if I don't
immediately know who the service is. I do listen some times to code on the
H.F. Bands.

There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the
skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't
mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated. But,
it was
"required". It's not a big deal people. Once you get past the "do I
have to"
and start doing it, you'll amaze yourself at how fast and easy it can
be.

Indeed. I never had the "do I have to?" attitude as there was no
code-free license when I became a ham. Yet it took me about 9 weeks of
daily practice.


And you stuck with it!!!!!!!! You didn't quit, and it got you where you
wanted to be. OR had to be - for your class of license. 2 weeks, 9 weeks, so
what... you did it. A milestone to be proud of. No one can fault you for
that effort.

I
DO use code now and then, but not daily like many others do. Everyone
has
their own thing. Some are into Packet, RTTY, AMTOR, etc, I'm not...
To each
his own. But we all had to learn "something" about those modes to
pass an
exam.

cl

Use it all you want. I'm against the Code Exam as an unnecessary
government requirement.


Funny thing is, we're all arguing pros and cons and in the end, it won't
matter. WE do not have control. So, if we're going to debate the issues we
have no control over, may as well keep it clean. Hardly any of us know the
other and it isn't worth making enemies over. Certainly not worth name
calling.... Whether I'm right or wrong, I do value opposing view points.
Everyone has a right to his/her own opinion. It sure will be interesting to
see how it all unfolds. I think in the end, we both know the answer to that.
Pro or con, it is a matter of time. May be a year, may be 5, but it will
come to pass.

cl

cl wrote:



For some - it may! One argument I've heard, is that those musically inclined
pick it up quicker than others, yet I knew some who "were" musically
inclined and claimed to have a hell of a time with it. Reason? I don't know.
I can't get inside their head.

I used to teach Novice classes, and I always assumed that anyone could
learn the code if they really wanted to. I found that some people had
difficulty telling the difference between a dit from a dah unless it was
sent very slowy and the dah made a lot longer than the dit, but when
sending a character that contained several dits or dahs or combinations,
they simply could not tell one from the other. It wasn't that they
lacked the skill to learn the code, I could right out characters in dits
and dahs on the board and they could recoginize them, it was an
interpertation problem with the brain of telling the sound of a dit from
the sound of a dah. People with hearing aids often had a difficult time.

From: "cl" on Sun,Apr 17 2005 11:33 pm

"bb" wrote in message
roups.com...

cl wrote:



The biggest problem with most is "laziness".

Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have
learned the code in under a week?


Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now
an
Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s.
Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed
myself.
Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such.

Sorry, according to many in here you have to approach it as
THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN YOUR LIFE!!! :-)

Besides, at that time,
I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium.

Excuses, excuses, excuses! :-)

Most recommendations are
15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a
week. I
used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than
others,
that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn
ANYTHING. You can't absorb it through osmosis. Back to the timing
thing, I
hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time
they
were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram".

"Caveat," I was in the military, the United States Army,
voluntary enlistment beginning 13 March 1953. Went from
Basic to Signal School at Fort Monmouth, NJ. Amount of
Signal School time spent on morse code? ZERO! NO class,
NO "cramming."

At that time the ONLY military occupation specialty
in the Army requiring morsemanship was Field Radio.

Field Radio then required passing 20 WPM, was taught
at Camp Gordon (later Fort Gordon, now the home of the
Signal Corps). Drop-out rate was roughly a quarter of
all starting...that I know about. Those that didn't
make it, but had some apitude for electronics, got to
go to Inside Plant Telephone, Outside Plant Telephone,
Carrier, Teleprinter Operator, Field Wireman...or the
Infantry. :-)

My Signal School classes taught Microwave Radio Relay
(at a time when there was little of such operational).
Radar was also taught at Fort Monmouth, had the same
basic electronics as Microwave. I got assigned to a
Fixed Station Transmitter site in Japan. Got all of
about a day's worth of on-site "training" to operate
one of three dozen HF transmitters having a minimum of
1 KW output. NO MORSEMANSHIP NEEDED THERE. NO MORSE
USED at the third-largest station in the Army Command
and Administrative Network.


Maybe you never will use it again.

Perhaps. I've found little use for it so far. Maybe once I'm an
old
fart, have loads of time, and wax nostalgic for things that never
were,
I'll take it up and enjoy it, and demand that all learn it.

Probably the same age bracket as me. I do listen to call signs now and
then
on the scanner to pick out the services they represent - if I don't
immediately know who the service is. I do listen some times to code on
the
H.F. Bands.

...or what you think is morse. :-) There's very LITTLE
morse code on HF nowadays...EXCEPT inside the ham bands.

There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy.

Tell that to Ken Jennings! :-)

Many people learned the skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't
mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated. But,
it was
"required". It's not a big deal people. Once you get past the "do I
have to"
and start doing it, you'll amaze yourself at how fast and easy it
can
be.

Indeed. I never had the "do I have to?" attitude as there was no
code-free license when I became a ham. Yet it took me about 9 weeks
of
daily practice.

And you stuck with it!!!!!!!! You didn't quit, and it got you where
you
wanted to be. OR had to be - for your class of license. 2 weeks, 9
weeks, so
what... you did it. A milestone to be proud of. No one can fault you
for
that effort.

Riiiight, Coach Lector. :-)

After my release from active duty in 1956, I thought it
good to get a Commercial Radiotelephone License. Lots of
job opportunities with that then. Couldn't find a Q&A
book in town but I got a copy of the entire FCC regulations
from a good guy at a local broadcast station, studied that
and got my First 'Phone on the first sitting in Chicago,
90 miles away (didn't walk, rode the train, kept my shoes
on even if there was no snow). Moved to L.A. at the end of
'56, started at Art Center School of Design to become an
illustrator. Worked during the day at Hughes Aircraft,
found out that illustrators didn't make much money, liked
electronics (already spent three years in Army
communications) and switched to Electronics Engineering.
Took me 15 years to complete that due to job requirements
making me miss whole semesters. Got engineering
responsibility, title, and pay before any "certificate"
(suitable for framing) awarded (sheep did not sacrifice
their skins for graduates, regardless of what is said).

In between semesters, I thought it a neat thing to learn
this morse code stuff, get a fancy callsign to "sign
after my name" (youth can be misleading on what is
important). Got to roughly 8 WPM clean copy using
practice tapes (magnetic, reel-to-reel, cassettes had
not yet been invented in those 60s days). Stopped after
that plateau, wondered "whatinhell am I doing spending
all this time on morse?" I'd already spent three full
years on Army communications at a major station (220
thousand messages a month in 1955), had become a
supervisor, did finally work on microwave radio relay
operations in the service, was now an employee of Ramo-
Wooldridge Corp. in electronic warfare group, and the
Class D CBs had already started. I'd gotten the First
'Phone, worked on HF, was now working on more of the EM
spectrum than any ham of today can use, already had a
good home workshop and was coming along on professional
design. I didn't "NEED MORSE" to GET ON THE AIR. I had
already done that, perfectly legal, without fault.

I had tossed the idea of getting a "title" (the callsign)
since there was MUCH MORE electronics coming along. The
first of the ICs had already hit the market and some of
us were tinkering with the first personal computers,
rolling our own without benefit of MITs or Apple or SwTP
kits (hadn't come out yet). PLENTY of fun and games in
electronics AND radio to be interested in.

I DO use code now and then, but not daily like many others do.
Everyone has
their own thing. Some are into Packet, RTTY, AMTOR, etc, I'm
not...To each
his own. But we all had to learn "something" about those modes to
pass an
exam.

Oooooo! "PASS THE (code) EXAM!"

Geez, poor babies, like an amateur exam is "Nobel
Laureate" material? Like "rocket science?" Yeah...
a "life accomplishment!" :-)

I used to "pass a test" every week...on payday. If
I didn't KNOW what was needed on the job, to do the
things my bosses had given me responsibility for, I
wouldn't "pass that exam." No paycheck. Bye.

I never failed such an exam. I never failed any exam
in college courses, either. I just kept on working
in engineering design...and having to constantly keep
on learning. The state of the electronics arts have
NOT ceased to advance...not one iota of stopping.


Funny thing is, we're all arguing pros and cons and in the end, it
won't
matter. WE do not have control.

NO NO NO!!! WRONG IN HERE!!!

The NO-CODE TEST ADVOCATE extras "HAVE CONTROL!" At
least three have "forbidden" any non-amateur to EVER
say anything about getting INTO amateur radio! Such
folk are, as these gods of radio put it, "NOT INVOLVED!"

Damn the First Amendment (say those three). THEY "rule"
on What Shall Be in U.S. amateur radio!

Their clubhouse door is CLOSED to "outsiders." [so are
their minds, BTASE...)

So, if we're going to debate the issues we
have no control over, may as well keep it clean.

What is "clean?" Anything done the way the ARRL says
is "clean?" Anything done to show "committment" and
"dedication" to amateurism is "clean?" Does "clean"
mean that ALL must obey the olde-fahrt amateur extras
who cuss at all the (evil) no-coders?

Does "clean" mean the usual Double Standard in this
newsgroup? All the PCTA extras can cuss at others
but everyone else has to be OH so polite, civil,
obediant, and respectful to their MIGHTY personal
accomplishments?

Hardly any of us know the
other and it isn't worth making enemies over.

Quite true, but that is NOT practiced in here. Look
at the labels of "PUTZ," "LIAR," "COWARD" that are
tossed out freely by these MIGHTY PCTA extras!

Certainly not worth name calling....

It MUST be "worth it" to these stalwart, noble, good
and true MORSEMEN. They seem to thrive on it.

Whether I'm right or wrong, I do value opposing view points.
Everyone has a right to his/her own opinion.

Commendable and should be the operative ethic in here.

Unfortunately, it is NOT SO.

Pro or con, it is a matter of time. May be a year, may be 5, but it
will
come to pass.

Absolutely. But...that will be the END of the ARS
(Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society).



retired (from regular hours) electronic engineer person

cl wrote:




Leave it in, take it out, the riff raff is already invading the bands.


Like the clowns that hung out at 14.313 back in the days
when hams who could operate there had to pass a
13WPM or higher code test?

I'm not a "lover" of code, but I have hold a
license
which required code.


Requirements are fine as long as they are sensible. Back
50 years ago it made sense to require code. Today...?

cl wrote:
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...

cl wrote:

A whole bunch snipped.

Those who defy wanting to learn the code jump at any chance to
perpetuate
rumors of code being eliminated.

Similarly, those who promote Morse Code will latch on to any idea,
no
matter how wrong, to claim the Code Exam remains valid.


Leave it in, take it out, the riff raff is already invading the
bands.

My comments with respect to the NPRM were, "What I fear most about
changing the Morse Code exam requirements is a lack of enforcement, and
what I fear most about maintaining the status quo is a lack of
enforcement."

You're right, it will take a while, even if
they were to decide to write a NPRM to do such. If these people
jumped into
Alligator infested waters as fast as they do rumors, the
population
would
take a sudden drop. I'm not a "lover" of code, but I have hold a
license
which required code.

Ditto.

5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few
minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a
test. 2
weeks is not long,

It may be impossible for some. I learned it over a considerably
longer
period of time with frequent practice.

you probably drove longer on a permit before being
allowed to drive on your own. Probably studied the book longer
too!
It takes
little effort.

I disagree. It took a great effort.

For some - it may! One argument I've heard, is that those musically
inclined
pick it up quicker than others, yet I knew some who "were" musically
inclined and claimed to have a hell of a time with it. Reason? I
don't know.
I can't get inside their head.

Steve can. He can even have them incarcerated with a simple phone
calls.

The biggest problem with most is "laziness".

Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have
learned the code in under a week?

Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now
an
Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s.
Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed
myself.

That wasn't my point. My point is that everyone is different, and the
length of time it takes to learn 5WPM varies greatly. The time it
takes to learn 20WPM could be lifetimes. Not everyone is even capable
of 13WPM.

Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such. Besides, at
that time,
I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium.

I've been told that is absolutely no excuse. Nothing in your personal
or professional life can be more important than learning the code.

Most recommendations are
15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a
week. I
used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than
others,
that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn
ANYTHING. You can't absorb it through osmosis. Back to the timing
thing, I
hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time
they
were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram".

They've finally left the group. They were paid to learn the code, and
they kept getting paid even if they failed. Of course, insteading of
doing intercept comms, they were peeling potatoes.

Maybe you never
will use it again.

Perhaps. I've found little use for it so far. Maybe once I'm an
old
fart, have loads of time, and wax nostalgic for things that never
were,
I'll take it up and enjoy it, and demand that all learn it.

Probably the same age bracket as me. I do listen to call signs now
and then
on the scanner to pick out the services they represent - if I don't
immediately know who the service is. I do listen some times to code
on the
H.F. Bands.

I don't dislike the code. It was difficult for me to make the few
QSO's that I did make as a novice. I'd like to pick it up again
someday.

There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned
the
skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It
doesn't
mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated.
But,
it was
"required". It's not a big deal people. Once you get past the "do
I
have to"
and start doing it, you'll amaze yourself at how fast and easy it
can
be.

Indeed. I never had the "do I have to?" attitude as there was no
code-free license when I became a ham. Yet it took me about 9
weeks of
daily practice.

And you stuck with it!!!!!!!! You didn't quit, and it got you where
you
wanted to be. OR had to be - for your class of license. 2 weeks, 9
weeks, so
what... you did it. A milestone to be proud of. No one can fault you
for
that effort.

My ex-wife certainly can.

I
DO use code now and then, but not daily like many others do.
Everyone
has
their own thing. Some are into Packet, RTTY, AMTOR, etc, I'm
not...
To each
his own. But we all had to learn "something" about those modes to
pass an
exam.

cl

Use it all you want. I'm against the Code Exam as an unnecessary
government requirement.

Funny thing is, we're all arguing pros and cons and in the end, it
won't
matter. WE do not have control. So, if we're going to debate the
issues we
have no control over, may as well keep it clean. Hardly any of us
know the
other and it isn't worth making enemies over. Certainly not worth
name
calling.... Whether I'm right or wrong, I do value opposing view
points.
Everyone has a right to his/her own opinion. It sure will be
interesting to
see how it all unfolds. I think in the end, we both know the answer
to that.
Pro or con, it is a matter of time. May be a year, may be 5, but it
will
come to pass.

cl

I don't think that's 100% correct. You and me don't write the FCC
regulations, but the FCC looked to the ARRL to put forth modern exam
requirements. The ARRL movers and shakers wrung their hands and bit
"thier" knuckles and said that there was no concensus. So the FCC
plowed ahead with modernization, and the ARRL came up with reductions
in the Morse requirements lickety split. Amazing, all that.

So in the end, if more folks has been exposed to viewpoints other than
the ARRL's, there just might have been a concensus.

Just my opinions, of course, but by tomorrow I'll probably be labeled a
liar, a homosexual, and maybe even a horse thief.

"cl" wrote in message
o.verio.net...

I hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how
much time they were given to get the code down. I think
they had to "Cram".

Navy RM "A" School, the basic school which trained Navy Radiomen, was 13-weeks
long. Morse practice was 3 hours per day, 4 days per week, but students could
come in after-hours for additional practice. Graduation requirement was to be
able to copy 5-letter coded groups at 18WPM for 10 minutes, with 3 uncorrected
errors allowed.

73, de Hans, K0HB

cl wrote:


which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few
minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a test.

Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get
to 5 wpm.

I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some
understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people.

I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a
lot of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid.

- Mike KB3EIA -

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


which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a
few
minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a test.

Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get
to 5 wpm.

I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some
understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people.

I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a
lot of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid.

- Mike KB3EIA -

For some, Mike, the "code" (i.e., even just the connotation in the word
"code") is all they got.

Kim W5TIT