David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

John

On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:31:04 +0000, David Stinson wrote:

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.

John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate
just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent
and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

D.S.

David:

Then your argument must be centered on such as:

.. since parts of the world don't have out hospitals, we should abandon
them for simpler medical practices.

.. americans need more rickshaws.

.. we are going digital tv, we should abandon this, as it will be years or
decades before some of the world updates.

.... get real ... no one should design the world on the least of available
technologies. Instead, at every turn of the road, the bar needs
raised--challenging those lagging to catch up...

John


On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 18:44:44 +0000, David Stinson wrote:

John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate
just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent
and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

D.S.

David Stinson wrote:
John Smith wrote:

David:

Excellent argument for taking the USA to the "rest-of-the-world" and not
the opposite... if they want it, if not, let 'em ride the oxen...

It's not a matter of them "wanting it;"
that is also a U.S.- and Western-centric attitude.
People do not generally choose to ride oxen,
have high infant mortality and suffer from disease.
They do so because they do not have access to the wealth
of the West. You indicate that you think everyone can
just run right down to Wal-Mart and buy a new cell phone
anytime they like. Since they don't have the wealth to do this,
should we discard them as human beings?
These people need to communicate

And the US retianing morse will help them How?

just as you do, and there will be need for intelligence
operations in these communities. Morse is simple,
reliable and- despite the protests of indolent

and findable to RDF jamable

and spoiled rich Westerners- easy to learn.
My suggestion will preserve only a small cadre' of
operators, but that will be enough.
The scorned few have always carried the fire
for the lazy many.

feel free to try and prsrve the mode of your choice I doubt it will die
out. AM hasn't, I doubt Morse Coded CW will either, but at least the
rest of us will not have to be emabrashed by the horse and buggy
aproach

D.S.

David Stinson wrote:
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

Showing your prejudges again

but gee I could get a portable self alining up link downlink for a
couple of garnd these days,and since it was made in China I suspect
that in Uzbekistan they could still get get for under 5 g

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.

10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Dan/W4NTI

"David Stinson" wrote in message
...
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

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Why so little? Should be at least this much:

Morse Code Only Subbands:

1800-1830
3500-3575
7000-7050
10100-10115
14000-14050
18068-18083
21000-21075
24890-24905
28000-28100

Why not?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

Dan/W4NTI wrote:

10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.


Why so little?

I love code, too, but we are going to change, like
it or not. We need to work toward a "win-win" for
both sides of this argument, instead of ending-up
with a "lose-lose" by an "all or nothing" attitude.

One of the chief arguments against Code is the large
slice of spectrum needlessly allocated to it.
The new digital modes are a fact of life we
must accept, and they require spectrum.
That most hams want their CW freqs to end in "0" or "5"
is a matter of convention and laziness, not necessity.
10 KC will handle 15-18 CW QSOs at once with even
modest equipment, and it is rare during non-contest
days to hear that many in the present allocation on
any band at any one time.
After the Code requirement is dropped,
there will be far less CW operators- not more,
and they will need less dedicated spectrum.
Moreover, a request for a 10 or 15 kHz "preserve"
is much more likely to be granted, given the arguments
against the current CW spectrum alocations,
than asking for needless and wasteful swaths of
50 and 100 kHz. A compromise that gives
exclusivity and premium incentives in exchange
for the current wasted spectrum is a good deal
for both the digital and CW communities.

73 Dave S. AB5S

David Stinson wrote:
wrote:
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Why so little?

I love code, too, but we are going to change, like
it or not.

I think the change will be far less than some expect.

Back in 1991 we got a nocodetest license for all of
VHF/UHF. Did we get lots more new hams in the 1991-2000
time period than we got in the 1982-1991 time period?

In 2000 the code test was reduced to 5 wpm only and the
writtens cut almost in half. Yet we have almost 10,000
fewer hams now than in 2000.

We need to work toward a "win-win" for
both sides of this argument, instead of ending-up
with a "lose-lose" by an "all or nothing" attitude.

Here's the win for Morse Code loving hams: Free space

Here's the win for non-Morse-Code loving hams: All the rest.

One of the chief arguments against Code is the large
slice of spectrum needlessly allocated to it.

*WHAT* large slice of spectrum?

There is currently *no* part of the HF/MF ham bands
for Morse Code only in the USA. Not one kHz. All of
the bandspace not allowed to voice/image is open to
digital/data modes like PSK31, MFSK, RTTY, etc.

The technical advances we keep being promised will
be in those modes, not in SSB.

The new digital modes are a fact of life we
must accept, and they require spectrum.

And they have it! Take 80 meters - from 3500 to 3750
is wide open to every digital mode you can imagine, as
long as it isn't digital voice.

That most hams want their CW freqs to end in "0" or "5"
is a matter of convention and laziness, not necessity.
10 KC will handle 15-18 CW QSOs at once with even
modest equipment, and it is rare during non-contest
days to hear that many in the present allocation on
any band at any one time.

Maybe where you are, but I hear a lot more than that on 40 meters at
night.

After the Code requirement is dropped,
there will be far less CW operators- not more,
and they will need less dedicated spectrum.

I would not be so sure.

Hams in Germany report *more* interest in Morse Code
among new hams, not less.

Without a test, new hams will learn Morse at a reasonable
speed (13-16 wpm) from the beginning, sending and receiving, rather
than just the bare minimum to pass the test.

Moreover, a request for a 10 or 15 kHz "preserve"
is much more likely to be granted, given the arguments
against the current CW spectrum alocations,
than asking for needless and wasteful swaths of
50 and 100 kHz.

That's not how FCC works.

Look at the history - every time a compromise has been offered, FCC
goes way beyond it.

Back in 1990, when FCC was pushing a nocodetest license, ARRL
and others suggested a limited-privileges VHF/UHF license. Low
power, no 2 meters, etc. FCC took that as an endorsement of
the nocodetest idea and simply dumped the code test for
Technician, which was not what was wanted at all.

In 1998-1999, various compromises were offered, like the 5 wpm General
and 12 wpm Extra. FCC just went to 5 wpm across the board.

The nocodetest folks don't offer any compromises. I say that
15% of each HF/MF band as Morse Code only space is perfectly
reasonable. The Morse Code using hams will flock there, and
leave the rest of the bands to other modes.

What possible reason is there not to? The voice and digital modes all
have more than 15%.

A compromise that gives
exclusivity and premium incentives in exchange
for the current wasted spectrum is a good deal
for both the digital and CW communities.

What wasted spectrum?

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote in message
oups.com...

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
10 KC? Not enough. At least 25 per HF band.

Why so little? Should be at least this much:

Morse Code Only Subbands:

1800-1830
3500-3575
7000-7050
10100-10115
14000-14050
18068-18083
21000-21075
24890-24905
28000-28100

Why not?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Don't need that much.

Dan/W4NTI