Remember Me?
Menu
Home
Search
Today's Posts
Home
Search
Today's Posts
RadioBanter
»
rec.radio
»
Scanner
>
It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
LinkBack
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Display Modes
Prev
Next
#
15
October 16th 06, 12:24 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
[email protected]
external usenet poster
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:
If an amateur had to relay a through a country and the amateurs didn't
know each other language they still could have passed it by CW and the
message could have been delivered to someone that could read it. Not no
more.
What can be passed by CW that cannot be passed by voice???
Adhere to the ICAO's phonetic alphabet, and there need be no
bi-lingualism nor a CW requirement.
Since 1955 for international civil aviation. It's taken
from the NATO approved phonetic alphabet which came out
earlier the same year. I remember it well since I had to
learn the "new" phonetic alphabet in a hurry while in the
Army then. :-)
It took me about 20 minutes during a mid-shift to learn it.
When things start failing communication wise worldwide, amateur radio
might be all there is to relay messages, and the ITU just removed one of
the legs of a three leg stool.
Dear Slow, air traffic controllers don't use Morris Code, and they
communicate with foreign speakers JUST FINE!
Ever since 1955 the worldwide common language for civil
aviation communications on airways has been English
spoken as well as (now) data. That includes pilots as
well as controllers, even in and over their native
country; a non-English speaking country MAY use their
native language but the civil airways can have many
nations' aircraft in it.
Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.
With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own excrement
off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us hit ake on
that.
The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)
Slow is, well, slow.
Reply With Quote
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Show Printable Version
Search this Thread
:
Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode
Switch to Hybrid Mode
Threaded Mode
Posting Rules
Smilies
are
On
[IMG]
code is
On
HTML code is
Off
Trackbacks
are
On
Pingbacks
are
On
Refbacks
are
On
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
Slow Code
Policy
59
October 30th 06
12:55 AM
It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
Slow Code
Antenna
37
October 28th 06
11:07 PM
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems
Paul
Policy
0
January 10th 05
05:41 PM
Eliminate the CW requirement for General & Extra, BUT THEN...
Bill Wright
Policy
12
December 9th 03
03:20 AM
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement.
Keith
Policy
1
July 31st 03
03:46 AM
All times are GMT +1. The time now is
01:54 AM
.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
Contact Us
RadioBanter forum home
Privacy Statement
Copyright © 2017
LinkBack
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks