On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, "
wrote in
.com:


snip
Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy
is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY.


Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the
International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23),
satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including
Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for
a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13).

I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a
receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required-
to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication
-can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both)
should the automatic systems fail.


The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio.

It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal.


Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio
communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it
was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively
with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since
before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of
radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for
radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue
to use it.

Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching
(from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about
the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that?








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, "
wrote in
.com:


snip
Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy
is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY.


Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the
International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23),
satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including
Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for
a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13).

I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a
receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required-
to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication
-can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both)
should the automatic systems fail.


The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio.

It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal.


Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio
communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it
was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively
with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since
before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of
radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for
radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue
to use it.

Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching
(from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about
the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that?


That genie got out of the bottle a long time ago and as with most things,
once it's out, you can't put it back in. However there has been some
discussion on it but the tone has been that there's now no likelihood that a
changed can be made.

While I earned my license under the current open question pool system, I
approached my study as if the questions were not published. I chose to
learn the material, memorize equations, learn how to apply the equations,
etc. Then simply used the published questions as a check to see if my
understanding was correct.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...

On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, "
wrote in
ps.com:


snip

Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy
is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY.


Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the
International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23),
satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including
Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for
a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13).

I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a
receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required-
to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication
-can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both)
should the automatic systems fail.



The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio.

It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal.


Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio
communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it
was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively
with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since
before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of
radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for
radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue
to use it.

Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching
(from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about
the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that?



That genie got out of the bottle a long time ago and as with most things,
once it's out, you can't put it back in. However there has been some
discussion on it but the tone has been that there's now no likelihood that a
changed can be made.

The test is no more dumbed down than just about everything else in the
world. I've seen testing regimens where the outcome of incompetence is
possible injury or worse that also use question pools. The student buys
the book, and there they go.


While I earned my license under the current open question pool system, I
approached my study as if the questions were not published. I chose to
learn the material, memorize equations, learn how to apply the equations,
etc. Then simply used the published questions as a check to see if my
understanding was correct.

I still think that the prospective Ham should prepare for his/her
license in similar manner as a thesis defense. Come up with a new radio
related research project, and do a couple years research, then defend it
in front of a panel of "steely eyed" FCC experts...... 8^) Just kidding
of course.

I bought a study guide from 1957 or 58 at a hamfest. It looks
surprisingly like what we have now, save for the mostly hollow-state
emphasis. Given a few days to learn about the VT stuff, I have no doubt
that I would be able to pass any of the tests - except for the Morse
code tests. Some of the questions were amazingly easy. And all from "The
Golden Age" of Amateur Radio! Some time I think I should post some of
the questions.

I have no problem with the tests as they are now. I prepared for the
tests in a similar fashion to the way you did, except I took the on-line
tests as a check, mostly for the questions that have to be memorized,
such as the band edges - stuff like that. I used the tools at hand.

The material is there. If we choose to learn it well, it is a good
starting point. If we don't, we just cheat ourselves. Seems harder to
memorize the entire question pool anyhow.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Frank Gilliland wrote:


Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test.

Sometimes I think that the "dumbing down" is a factor of the maturing
Ham looking at how things appear from the vantage point of time and
accumulated knowledge.

They might remember the test seeming very difficult when they took it.
Then they look at modern tests (if they even do look at them) and
conclude that the modern tests are exceptionally easy, when it is simply
that they have learned much in the years that have passed since their
own tests.


I still don't understand why there is so much bitching
(from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about
the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that?

When we do attempt to discuss something else, for some reason or
another, it gets redirected to the Morse code issue.


- Mike KB3EIA -

KØHB wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/drbfk


I read it. sounds interesting. How we gonna connect the nation at 700 MHz?

I can't make any determination on whether he is right or not. The
article only says that we have it all wrong and Mr O'Brien has the
answers. Okay. Thanks Mr O'Brien.

NO doubt there will be a lot of infrastructure needed, with lots of
brass to be made.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote

How we gonna connect the nation at 700 MHz?

Hi Mike,

The article had nothing to do with "connecting the nation". It has to do with
regional interoperability, the very thing that Katrina aftermath found largely
inadequate.

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote


How we gonna connect the nation at 700 MHz?


Hi Mike,

The article had nothing to do with "connecting the nation". It has to do with
regional interoperability, the very thing that Katrina aftermath found largely
inadequate.


Ahh, so we need another system to connect to the rest of the nation then?

I still find this whole thing another thinly designed bandwidth grab,
when in reality is that the system concept is not working. Seems like
grass is greener stuff to me, unless there is something majik about 700
MHz, and the TV channels.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote


Ahh, so we need another system to connect to the rest of the nation then?


Two things:

Thing #1) I think "the rest of the nation" stayed pretty well connected.
Regional public service interoperability at the incident was the huge gaping
problem area. (As it was 9/11 and any number of other incidents.)

Thing #2) The article doesn't propose to "grab" the 700MHz band..... It's
already slated for public service.

73, de Hans, K0HB

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 11:09:31 -0400, Michael Coslo
wrote in
:



Frank Gilliland wrote:


Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the
code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I
also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the
written test.

Sometimes I think that the "dumbing down" is a factor of the maturing
Ham looking at how things appear from the vantage point of time and
accumulated knowledge.

They might remember the test seeming very difficult when they took it.
Then they look at modern tests (if they even do look at them) and
conclude that the modern tests are exceptionally easy, when it is simply
that they have learned much in the years that have passed since their
own tests.


By "dumbing down" I was referring to the question pool being released
to the public where it can be memorized to some extent. As for the
level of technical expertise, I'm sure the content hasn't changed much
over the years (except maybe for the addition of semiconductors).

But then again, maybe the technical aspects of the test -should- be
'dumbed down'. Modern ham radios have digital PLL tuners, automatic
antenna matchers, audio signal processing..... I even saw one that had
a built-in Morse code decrypter. About all that's left for the ham to
learn anymore is on-air protocol and antennas. It's no wonder so many
hams are becoming appliance operators. Heck, the FCC would do just as
well to turn the service into several CB bands and drop the license.







----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

On Tue, 20 Sep 2005 01:54:09 GMT, KØHB wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/drbfk

Those of us who had to suffer from Morgan O'Brien's backstabbing at
the Commission (anyone remember the failed Chicago Land Mobile
Regional Task Force debacle) give little weight to his posturings,
even if they turn out to be "right" strictly by accident. My public
safety clients give little weight to anything coming out of Nextel
anyhow.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane