Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...

RST Engineering wrote:
Nobody ever claimed that it is a dead mode.

Yes, they have.

The anonymouse "John Smith" has claimed that repeatedly.
He's wrong, of course.

Obviously they haven't actually
listened to the parts of the ham bands where
Morse Code is used.

Model Ts aren't dead.
Tailwheel airplanes aren't dead. Neither is CW.

True enough.

However, the driver's license test doesn't include hand-
cranking Model T
engines, nor does the airplane certificate test include
3-point landings in tailwheel airplanes.

That's because the percentage of autos with handcranks is very
small. So is the percentage of taildragger aircraft.

Better example from the auto anology is manual gearboxes.
There are significant numbers of new vehicles made every
day which have manual gearboxes...but no state mandates
driver testing on a manual gearbox to be able to drive one.

Last statistics I saw were that 5% of new cars have manual
transmissions. The other 95% sold today are automatics.

Agreed, but in terms of total vehicles sold new each year
in the US, that is several hundred thousand vehicles
with stick shifts every year.

Out of total sales in the millions. A tiny niche market. In fact,
almost all cars can be ordered with an automatic transmission, but many
*cannot* be ordered with a manual transmission.

Morse Code accounts for a lot more than 5% of amateur radio
HF/MF operation.

The point still reverts to the exclusivity (i.e. stand-alone)
testing for one mode and one mode only. No other mode, or
subject area is so tested for an amateur license.

Sure - because no other popular mode requires skills the
average person does not already posess.

How many hams would have to learn to talk in order to use voice
modes? How many would have to learn to read and type to use keyboard
modes?

What's different about Morse Code is that most new hams today have to
learn it just for amateur radio. And that, IMHO, is what bugs some
folks so much.

But the percentage of ham stations on HF/MF using Morse
Code is much, much higher.

So? Nothing in the amateur rules requires anyone to every
make a CW QSO, or, for that matter any contact
using any mode at all.

Exactly. Yet there are all sorts of test questions on things no ham is
required to do.

Why?

Read again the following:
The point still reverts to the exclusivity (i.e. stand-alone)
testing for one mode and one mode only. No other mode, or
subject area is so tested for an amateur license.

The issue is and always has been
the exclusive CW test in comparison to knowledge
tested for any other modes.

Without knowledge of those other modes, you can't get a
license, even if all you want to do is to use Morse Code.

Wrong....you can ignore or not learn about several specific
subject areas...one or more modes of operation, etc. and
still get a passing test grade.

That depends entirely on what you consider a "subject area". If you
define "subject area" as "questions about SSB voice", one could
probably get all the questions about SSB voice wrong and still pass -
*if* almost all of the others were answered correctly.

But if you define "subject area" as "questions about voice modes", it's
doubtful that one could get all the questions about voice modes wrong
and still pass - even if almost all of the others were answered
correctly.

However, the remaining Morse Code test is probably
going away soon.

Just a matter of time.

Probably.

Why hang on to an obsolete technology on the EXAM for
those who choose not to participate in the obsolete mode?

"Obsolete"? Morse Code is the second most popular mode
in HF amateur radio.

Why are there written exams with questions on electronics for
those who chose not to build their radios?

No separate test exists for only the electronics.

Nope - but try to pass the exam without electronics knowledge.

It still isn't a separate exclusive test.

Doesn't have to be.

If you get all
the other stuff (rules, regs, etc) 100%, you can miss
a greater percentage of electronic questions then
if it was a separate subject area test.

But you can't miss all of them.

The fact of the matter is that the current written tests involve a lot
of subject areas, but not in a lot of depth. Morse Code testing
involves one subject area, in somewhat more depth (although at 5 wpm,
"depth" becomes somewhat questionable).

It's like saying we have a manual-transmission test where the
person must get the car in first gear and drive around an empty parking
lot at 5 mph for one minute. And folks say that's too much to ask!

The written is
scored on an overall basis....not on a subject area stand-alone basis.
Add some CW questions (similar in format to existing
questions on the phonetic alphabet) to the tests then.

What Canada has done solves that problem.

Works for me.

Moreover, there aren't special lanes on the road for Model
Ts,
nor are there special runways for tailwheel airplanes.

But there are special lanes on some roads for cars
only, high-occupancy vehicles only, etc.

There are sidewalks and trails on which motor vehicles
are banned.

Why are there special segments of
the band for CW.

The only CW-only parts of the US ham bands are 50.0-50.1 MHz and
144.0-144.1 MHz. All other HF "CW" subbands are shared with
digital/data modes.

Correct.

So would you support a reasonable set of Morse Code only subbands,
Bill? Say, the bottom 10-15% of each HF ham band?

Cheers and I see my July 06 prediction becoming more of a
possibility every day that passes now.

Let's see...comments close sometime this fall...FCC takes six months to
produce the R&O, coming out in early spring 2006...effective early summer 2006.

You may be the winnah!

The Pool is still ongoing.


One thing I notice about FCC R&Os for the amateur service is that
they almost never put changes into effect on the first of a month -
always midmonth or something like that.

73 de Jim, N2EY