I actually agree with you on this one. Even today....well actually for
many years....the 80 meter band is a classic example of wasted space.
Mostly dead air in the "CW" allocations. In particular from 3.5 to 3.6.
Lots of open space from 3.6 to 3.750 if you want to be open minded on this
subject.

40 is another case and it is gonna be real tough to put that mess straight..
hi.

20/15/10 could all use some "CW Trimming" today.

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.

Those that don't.....won't.

Dan/W4NTI

"John Smith" wrote in message
news

Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

As CW continues its' drop, it needs less and less allocations... as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users
and their modes...

John

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 10:09:49 -0700, an_old_friend wrote:

Just why would there need to be a test in order to use this specturm
set aside

One can either USE Morse Code or not

But still the plea that Morse Code needs welfare in order to endure

David Stinson wrote:
Comments submitted to the FCC,
advocating ARRL administration of
Morse license endorsment:
-------------------

18 Aug. 2005
WT Docket 05-235,
Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement.

cuting to save BW

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.


We could and should do this as a gentlemen's' agreement. No
need for FCC micromanagement here.

robert casey wrote:

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.


We could and should do this as a gentlemen's' agreement. No
need for FCC micromanagement here.

well in the eyes of those that see CW under attack they do see still
see a need for a coded reservation, and they fear that they will lose
everything out side of it

"robert casey" wrote in message
.net...

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.


We could and should do this as a gentlemen's' agreement. No
need for FCC micromanagement here.

Works for me. Such is the case already
with ARRL bandplans for USA already.
I'd have no problem with the bottom 25KHz
each HF band being CW only.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

I don't think that will work any longer. Just listen to the low end of 40
meters. Lots of digital types moving down the band. They probably can't
copy cw, or not much, and giving them the benefit of the doubt "may not"
know they are interfering.

Gentleman's agreement wont work.

Dan/W4NTI

"robert casey" wrote in message
.net...


I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.


We could and should do this as a gentlemen's' agreement. No
need for FCC micromanagement here.

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
Even today....well actually for
many years....the 80 meter band is a classic example of wasted space.
Mostly dead air in the "CW" allocations. In particular from
3.5 to 3.6.

I think you meant "3.6 to 3.7"

Lots of open space from 3.6 to 3.750 if you want to be open
minded on this
subject.

All of 80 meters is open to digital modes. You know, the
modes all those new, young, modern hams are going to use
when Element 1 goes away.

If there's so much room, then what's the problem making
3500 to 3575 Morse Code only?

40 is another case and it is gonna be real tough to put that
mess straight..
hi.

Not really. The mess is due to the rest of the world wanting
7100-7300 for SWBC. That's going away, even as we speak, and
more and more of the rest of the world is letting their hams
have 7100-7200. Eventually 7000-7300 will be worldwide
exclusive amateur.

So what's the problem with 7000-7050 being Morse Code only?

20/15/10 could all use some "CW Trimming" today.

Let's cut to the chase. It's about more room for 'phone and
less for Morse Code and digital modes. Some folks talk big
about "new directions" and "modernization" and "fresh ideas",
but what they really mean is more bandspace for SSB.

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.

Those that don't.....won't.

The trouble is that it will take an Extra to get down there.

"John Smith" wrote in message
news

Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics
generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

A year or two is "long tern"? HAW, that's a good one!

(Does this guy know what a sunspot cycle is?)

As CW continues its'

"its".

drop, it needs less and less allocations...

Who says CW is dropping?

as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new users and their modes...

You mean SSB, right? Because there's no Morse-Code-only subbands
on HF-MF in the USA.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: on Aug 20, 5:42 am

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

Even today....well actually for
many years....the 80 meter band is a classic example of wasted space.
Mostly dead air in the "CW" allocations. In particular from
3.5 to 3.6.

I think you meant "3.6 to 3.7"

That may have been 33 years ago while fighting the
commies around the Fulda Gap in Yurp.

Lots of open space from 3.6 to 3.750 if you want to be open
minded on this
subject.

All of 80 meters is open to digital modes. You know, the
modes all those new, young, modern hams are going to use
when Element 1 goes away.

Define "new, young, modern." Did you mean the kind of
electronics typified by all-vacuum-tube, state-of-the-
art, designed by yourself in 1990" new, yound, and
modern?

If there's so much room, then what's the problem making
3500 to 3575 Morse Code only?

What makes you think that a MINORITY has any "right" to
an exclusive radio playground?

40 is another case and it is gonna be real tough to put that
mess straight..
hi.

Not really. The mess is due to the rest of the world wanting
7100-7300 for SWBC. That's going away, even as we speak, and
more and more of the rest of the world is letting their hams
have 7100-7200. Eventually 7000-7300 will be worldwide
exclusive amateur.

Bad "analysis." The "40m issue" has been going on since
1979...for 26 years. The RESOLUTION of it came about in
2003 at WRC-03. 40 meters will be resolved as to who gets
what in 2009...as outlined in the resolutions made in 2003.
That was adequately explained in the WRC-03 REPORT as
written by the U.S. delegation leader and appearing a year
ago on the FCC International Bureau pages.

So what's the problem with 7000-7050 being Morse Code only?

What makes you think that a MINORITY has any "right" to
an exclusive radio playground?

20/15/10 could all use some "CW Trimming" today.

Let's cut to the chase. It's about more room for 'phone and
less for Morse Code and digital modes. Some folks talk big
about "new directions" and "modernization" and "fresh ideas",
but what they really mean is more bandspace for SSB.

...and some folks talk big about "exclusivity for Them,"
"old directions" and "archaic conservatism."

Cutting to the chase, the PCTA insist on EXCLUSIVITY for
their "nobility" as if they were Gods of Radio. They
consider themselves some kind of Elite, a rationalization
for being able to evolve, to cope, to interact with the
rest of the "amateur community."

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY. No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.

Those that don't.....won't.

The trouble is that it will take an Extra to get down there.

Irrelevant. WT Docket 05-235 is NOT about license classes
or the rank/status/privileges of the "ruling class." :-)

"John Smith" wrote in message

Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics
generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

A year or two is "long tern"? HAW, that's a good one!

Do you have a "5-Year Plan" for the Party, Commissar?

(Does this guy know what a sunspot cycle is?)

Does Commisar Miccolis realize that RADIO itself is only 109
years old? Almost "10" in "Sun Years."

Of course, to a 14-year-old, waiting 11 years until 25 seems
like a virtual eternity. It's a mental state, very subjective.

As CW continues its'

"its".

Sister Nun of the Above has a bottomless drawer of rulers.
[she should empty out her drawers...ugh!]

drop, it needs less and less allocations...

Who says CW is dropping?

Tsk, tsk. As in the old saying, "if all you have is a hammer,
everything looks like a nail."

Coders who play in their almost-exclusive radio playground
just can't seem to keep count or recognize the territory.

as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the
new users and their modes...

You mean SSB, right? Because there's no Morse-Code-only subbands
on HF-MF in the USA.

Feeling disenchanted, Jimmie? Contact KH2D and seek to open
up "No SSB International." Technically well-done website of
the past, but stuck in its little Guamian territory in the
middle of the Pacific, totally surrounded by water (it was
all wet in thinking).

Coders ALREADY have TOTAL EXCLUSIVITY for OOK CW in 6m, 2m
bands. They can move on up to those bands and "work" ALL
the "CW" they can, undisturbed by the unwashed masses doing
(hack, ptui) Voice or Data. ALL THEIRS! Think of the
glorious possibilities to "advance the state of the art" of
morse code! [first used in 1844, 161 years ago]

You don't like that idea? Awwwww. It is JUST LIKE CODERS
DID for the no-coders and anti-morse heathen many years ago.
BANISH them to "the world above 30 MHz" in a perfect example
of elitism, gross class bigotry. But, you Coders consider
yourself "above" the mundane, better than best, the "extra"
of the radio world, superior to all others through beeping.

Hang onto your "extra" license obtained through morsemanship,
Jimmie. It may be all you'll have in the future to show
your "greatness" in AMATEUR radio.

key not

wrote in message
oups.com...
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
Even today....well actually for
many years....the 80 meter band is a classic example of wasted space.
Mostly dead air in the "CW" allocations. In particular from
3.5 to 3.6.

I think you meant "3.6 to 3.7"

No I didn't....I don't consider 5 CW stations in 100 KC over use of a
segement. Or should I say "Use of a segement". Nets are there for sure,
but not for long. Then the band is dead again.

Lots of open space from 3.6 to 3.750 if you want to be open
minded on this
subject.

All of 80 meters is open to digital modes. You know, the
modes all those new, young, modern hams are going to use
when Element 1 goes away.

If there's so much room, then what's the problem making
3500 to 3575 Morse Code only?

Because we don't use it now. 25 on the bottom of all bands is plenty IF it
is CW exclusive to ALL classes.


40 is another case and it is gonna be real tough to put that
mess straight..
hi.

Not really. The mess is due to the rest of the world wanting
7100-7300 for SWBC. That's going away, even as we speak, and
more and more of the rest of the world is letting their hams
have 7100-7200. Eventually 7000-7300 will be worldwide
exclusive amateur.

So what's the problem with 7000-7050 being Morse Code only?

See above

20/15/10 could all use some "CW Trimming" today.

Let's cut to the chase. It's about more room for 'phone and
less for Morse Code and digital modes. Some folks talk big
about "new directions" and "modernization" and "fresh ideas",
but what they really mean is more bandspace for SSB.

I still like my suggestion......bottom 25 of ALL HF bands....CW ONLY.
No
digital, etc. That way those that want can.

Those that don't.....won't.

The trouble is that it will take an Extra to get down there.


No it won't. Drop the Extra only and be done with that Dinosaur.
Dan/W4NTI

"John Smith" wrote in message
news

Band allocation should be allocated on long term statistics
generated in
regards to the modes used... (past year or two)

A year or two is "long tern"? HAW, that's a good one!

(Does this guy know what a sunspot cycle is?)

As CW continues its'

"its".

drop, it needs less and less allocations...

Who says CW is dropping?

as
no-coders now enter CW will have to shrink to accommodate the new
users and their modes...

You mean SSB, right? Because there's no Morse-Code-only subbands
on HF-MF in the USA.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Walking was developed way before man ever thought of riding a horse,
camel, oxen, donkey, etc. Indeed, the automobile is only a very recent
development in mankinds' history, even predated by the bicycle...

Yet, few keep horses today as a reliable means of transportation...

Covert operations are mainly don't via the web...

But, nice bit of inaccurate obfuscation... CW will die with ancient
amateurs, however, there is always some faction which will use it, people
still ride oxen...

John

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 17:04:53 +0000, David Stinson wrote:

Comments submitted to the FCC,
advocating ARRL administration of
Morse license endorsment:
-------------------

18 Aug. 2005
WT Docket 05-235,
Amateur Radio Morse Code Testing Requirement.

I respectfully submit that we can relieve
the FCC of the burden and expense of administering
Amateur Radio Element One (Morse Code),
while preserving a skill which has both
a direct bearing on our nation's security
and a "global heritage" aspect.

We should maintain some level of incentive to
preserve and develop skill in Morse Code:

* Morse Code is still in use for covert
and intelligence operations throughout the world,
and will remain so for the foreseeable future.

* Morse code transmitters and receivers
are simple to make and operate,
needing only a handful of low-tech, inexpensive parts,
making them available even in less-developed
areas of the globe, where expensive and complicated
"hi-tech" systems are unavailable and, if present,
are subject to multiple failure modes.

* The only ready and sizable reservoir of trained
Morse operators is the Amateur Radio community.
If we remove any incentive to develop Morse skill,
this valuable asset will quickly cease to exist.

There is also a global historic and "Heritage of Humanity"
aspect to this issue. Morse Code has served as a
reliable means of communications for one and a half centuries.
It has been a primary tool in life-saving and part of
the great communication web that has knit us together,
first spanning neighborhoods, then continents, and
finally the world. As a tool in the evolution of
the global community, it ranks with the sailing ship,
steam ship, railroad and telephone. We preserve early
examples of these other means of connecting with
the larger world; Morse Code surely deserves at least
a modest effort at preservation, just as we preserve
these other "touch-stones" of our progress.
Without some form of incentive,
this important skill will be lost to us.

We can accomplish this while removing the burden
and expense from the FCC.
I respectfully suggest the following steps be adopted:

1. Drop the Element One (Morse Code) testing requirement
from Amateur Radio regulations. The FCC would
no longer be responsible for, or need to allocate
resources to, this task.

2. Reallocate the bottom 10 kiloHertz of each Amateur Radio
spectrum allocation to exclusive Morse Code use.
This is a small window, but is easily sufficient bandwidth
for skilled Morse operators.
It provides an "historic preserve," protected from
new and wider-bandwidth modes and will have
no impact on the development and use of new techniques.

3. Authorize the American Radio Relay League (ARRL) to
administer and issue, through the Volunteer Examiner
program, a license endorsement, attachable to any class
of Amateur Radio license, awarded for demonstration
of Morse skill at 5 WPM or better. Only those Amateur
operators with the endorsement could operate their stations
in the 10 kHz "historic preserves." The ARRL could
establish premiums for contesting and skill certifications
earned within the "preserves."
Continue to allow Morse Code use throughout
the remaining Amateur spectrum, subject to present rules
and/or future reallocations.

These modest steps will preserve this valuable and historic skill,
while removing the administrative burden from the FCC.
I respectfully submit them for your consideration.

Kind Regards,
David L. Stinson AB5S
Field Engineer
Wylie, Texas

John Smith wrote:

Yet, few keep horses today as a reliable means of transportation...

That is a very U.S.- centric comment.
Horses are still very much a "reliable means of transportation"
over a great deal of the world, as are oxen.
Your comments indicate you place no value on the
large segment of humanity that lacks your wealth.
There is no "web" in ItchyScratchyStan, nor
money for $250,000 portable sat downlinks
in other such places; if they have one, it stays
broken most of the time from one of dozens of
failure modes. But one can usually get
hold of a few parts to piece together a CW rig,
*if* they have been wise enough to encourage
the preservation of the skill.

The United States is not the whole world,
and it's past time we remembered that.
D.S.