dxAce wrote:


Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy... and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn business
being in amateur radio.

So I guess you are saying that you don't have to be smart for moon
bounce or meteor scatter...well, I can't argue with "logic" like that.

Get the point dumb****?

Well, at least you're consistent--the usual dx "ace" vulgar, name
calling response rather than intelligently debating the issues...just
like m II pointed out in his right on the mark "Journalism" post-- Ace:
Yeah, but they're ninety percent 'tards, like you are you moronic
screwed up CanaDUHian idiot...

Well, I guess I should be thankful that you didn't call me (gasp, horror
of horrors), a ...Canadian.

You seem like a very angry, bitter and vulgar person, unable to carry on
an intelligent debate and actually address the issues.

Get help.

73,
Carter K8VT

beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 12:14:06 -0700, "an_old_friend"
wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 11:58:58 -0700, "John S." wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.


break

It proves that you have basic working knowledge of a very efficient
form of communication that is used for emergency communications today
and tomorrow. It runs circles around audio communication and can be
much more effective. Under certain conditions, having the ability to
copy morse can can mean the difference between like and death.

name one?



How about being stuck in a POW camp with no wat to communicat other
than taps?

which has what to do with the ARS

beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 12:35:42 -0700, "John S." wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 12:08:56 -0700, "John S." wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 11:58:58 -0700, "John S." wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.



It proves that you have basic working knowledge of a very efficient
form of communication that is used for emergency communications today
and tomorrow. It runs circles around audio communication and can be
much more effective. Under certain conditions, having the ability to
copy morse can can mean the difference between like and death.

Morse code is not used in communications of any consequence in the
western world. Try communicating in morse code to FEMA, the Hurricane
Hunters, local police, fire or medical workers and see how far you get.
Nobody will be listening.


Let's hope I never have to find out, but I'd much rather be safe than
sorry. Btw, do a little band surfing through the cw bands sometime and
see how many signals you get then compare it the other bands. Cw
signals will be there when audio is long gone.

At least I will know where to go when I want to hide from the Ham
radio wannabes....head to the CW areas and get out of the new CB
areas.

But surfing through the bands and finding cw only proves one thing:
That there is a small band of hams that still enjoy an early form of
semi-digital communications. None of the people that do the searching,
rescuing, faghting wars, etc., use morse code. It was THE way to
communicate under difficult conditions, but no more.


Still is and always will be John. I'm assuming that you don't know
code. Would you know code from some other form of communication if you
heard it?

Sure, but whether I or anyone else knows it is pretty much irrelevant
since there are very few practical uses for it any more. I'm not sure
what you meant by: Still is and always will be. If you are saying
there are rescue, search, military or other professional groups in the
western world that use cw actively I would like to have a list.

Funny you should mention the POW camp and taps...

I was just in that situation last week, quite strange the vast numbers
which end up under such circumstances--yep, just lucky for me I do
know CW or I wouldn't be hear to tell about it...

ROFLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

John

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On 21 Jul 2005 12:14:06 -0700, "an_old_friend"

wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On 21 Jul 2005 11:58:58 -0700, "John S." wrote:



beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey

wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in
the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical
driving test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well
start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is
a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the
law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation
of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege
of the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a
language for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on
the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe
and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham
setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.


break

It proves that you have basic working knowledge of a very
efficient
form of communication that is used for emergency communications
today
and tomorrow. It runs circles around audio communication and can
be
much more effective. Under certain conditions, having the ability
to
copy morse can can mean the difference between like and death.

name one?



How about being stuck in a POW camp with no wat to communicat other
than taps?

Peter Maus wrote:
beerbarrel wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:33:52 -0500, "Count Floyd"
wrote:


On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:41:48 UTC, beerbarrel
wrote:


On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:31:02 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



Joel Rubin wrote:


On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:33:36 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:


http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-05-143A1.doc

John


Code ability should be one alternative among other technical tests. It
seems very odd to freeze a technical test in a museum of bygone
technology.

If one cannot learn at least a minimal 5 WPM code then they have absolutely no
business obtaining an amateur license.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Agreed!

Then you should also learn how to ride a horse in order to deliver the
mail on time.



That's apples to oranges....Cw is the most efficient form of
communication in ham radio...




That's a truth not limited to ham radio...pilots have known that
VOR stations identify in Morse coded since the beginning of VOR. As
did/do ADF stations before them. Charts are marked with frequency,
station indentifier, and the Morse equivalent. Knowing the code
saves a lot of time and helps reduce confusion when navigating by
radio.

But what possible connection is there between licensing a ham for
communications on 40 meters and the ability of a pilot to interpret
station designators. Unless the FCC and FAA are merging and they will
be offering one combined license for the amateur Hamilot

I am agains't the FCC dropping CW requirement.I haven't learned any
CW,but I say CW requirement should stay.
cuhulin

If I can one finger hunt and peck (I do have to look up and down at my
cute little hand held Philips Magnavox webtv wireless keyboard and up at
my RCA 26 inch tv screen so I don't make too many typos) then I should
be able to learn CW.UP the FCC!!! Sideways!!!
cuhulin

If folks can't learn how to spell properly,they should not have access
to the internet.What does that have to do with CW? I don't know,but I
think it makes some kind of a point,whatever.Computers are Radios and
computers conversing with other computers are Transceiver Radios.Typing
this right now,I am wirelessly (my wireless keyboard) transmitting via a
glorified Transceiver Radio.OK,let the arguments begin.
cuhulin

Hey, get a clue, if he doesn't have a license right now--he shortly
will when CW has been dropped!!! ROFLOL!!!

Don't ya hope he doesn't off freq one kc on your QSO and have a go?

John

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On 21 Jul 2005 13:12:53 -0700, "John S." wrote:



Peter Maus wrote:
beerbarrel wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:33:52 -0500, "Count Floyd"
wrote:


On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:41:48 UTC, beerbarrel

wrote:


On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 07:31:02 -0400, dxAce

wrote:



Joel Rubin wrote:


On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 19:33:36 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:


http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-05-143A1.doc

John


Code ability should be one alternative among other technical
tests. It
seems very odd to freeze a technical test in a museum of
bygone
technology.

If one cannot learn at least a minimal 5 WPM code then they
have absolutely no
business obtaining an amateur license.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



Agreed!

Then you should also learn how to ride a horse in order to
deliver the
mail on time.



That's apples to oranges....Cw is the most efficient form of
communication in ham radio...




That's a truth not limited to ham radio...pilots have known
that
VOR stations identify in Morse coded since the beginning of VOR.
As
did/do ADF stations before them. Charts are marked with
frequency,
station indentifier, and the Morse equivalent. Knowing the code
saves a lot of time and helps reduce confusion when navigating by
radio.

But what possible connection is there between licensing a ham for
communications on 40 meters and the ability of a pilot to interpret
station designators. Unless the FCC and FAA are merging and they
will
be offering one combined license for the amateur Hamilot


Does not matter...you are for the removal of r=the code requirement.
Whatever the reasons given, you won't accept them. Tell me, do you
have a ham licence?

Hurry, write your congressman, call 911, see if george will take your
call!

ROFLOL!!! This is lovely! And, about damn time the FCC came to its
senses! Your comments decry the need for fresh young minds with fresh
new ideas...

.... being forced to communicate with the same old dried figs on the
nets has grown very tiresome!

John

wrote in message
...
I am agains't the FCC dropping CW requirement.I haven't learned any
CW,but I say CW requirement should stay.
cuhulin

John Smith wrote:
All that can be taken care of with new bandwidth allocations. All we
do is benefit from is finally getting some new and interesting minds
to communicate with. Chatting with ancients farts gets old quickly...


Eleminating the CW test won't bring in any significant numbers of new
minds into ham radio. Ham radio just isn't interesting to the current
generation code test or no code test. All your yapping is for naught.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


John Plimmer wrote:

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in high
school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the
dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no longer spew
out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by the
year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this wonderful
hobby.

Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn the
code? If
so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code?

If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so different
today?

Laziness?

It's like being certified in COBOL when you work on MSSQL, it's a waste of
time.

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:39:12 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



John Plimmer wrote:

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in high
school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the
dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no longer
spew out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by the
year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this wonderful
hobby.

Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn the
code? If
so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code?

If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so different
today?

Laziness?

dxAce
Michigan
USA



BINGO!

It seems everybody wants something for nothing these days.

What do you mean nothing? There's still a test. Remove the CW and make the
tests harder then.

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

The driving test has been a joke for years. Worthless!

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...
It would be more of an incentive for me to get my ticket if I could use
HF.
I have ZERO interest in CW. Maybe open a little HF for techs?

Already is a little of HF Phone open to techs.. segment of 10m as I recall.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


"John S." wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use
of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving
test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.

Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it!

Which proves????

MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


"John S." wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the use
of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical driving
test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.

Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it!

Which proves????

I give up...

Be a lazy 'tard!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Code proficient.

YEAH!!!

Hide all the answers and require 'em to come up with the answers
psychically!!!

ROFLOL! Get real, any college is test smart, any CS/EE technology
student will blow the doors off any test any panel can come up with in
damn short order.

John

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 14:39:12 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



John Plimmer wrote:

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in
high
school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from
the
dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before
with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no
longer
spew out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by
the
year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this
wonderful
hobby.

Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn
the
code? If
so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code?

If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so
different
today?

Laziness?

dxAce
Michigan
USA



BINGO!

It seems everybody wants something for nothing these days.

What do you mean nothing? There's still a test. Remove the CW and
make the
tests harder then.

Becareful not insult COBOL here, they probably think that is a new
state-of-the-art computer language! grin

John

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


John Plimmer wrote:

I couldn't agree more with dropping CW from the ham test.
It reminds me of the legal profession here in South Africa.
It used to be a requirement that lawyers had to pass Latin in
high
school
and have at least two courses in Latin for their law degree.
That was scrapped about ten years ago amid loud protests from the
dinosaurs.
Today the law profession is flourishing more than ever before
with high
quality judges and advocates.
The only thing I have noticed is that the high and mighty no
longer spew
out
Latin quotations = R.I.P.

Our SARL (South African Radio League) ham club is diminishing by
the
year
and the once crowded ham bands are now empty.
We need to make it easier for new entrants to come into this
wonderful
hobby.

Why does everything need to be made easier? Can't the 'tards learn
the
code? If
so, WHY can't the 'tards learn the code?

If ordinary folks could pass the test in years past what is so
different
today?

Laziness?

It's like being certified in COBOL when you work on MSSQL, it's a
waste of
time.

Well, 10 meters is pretty much the stomping grounds of freebanders
here. Some are none too polite either...

John

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...
It would be more of an incentive for me to get my ticket if I could
use
HF.
I have ZERO interest in CW. Maybe open a little HF for techs?

Already is a little of HF Phone open to techs.. segment of 10m as I
recall.

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:51:10 -0500, "MnMikew"
wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


The written test probably does as well. Should that also be dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should be able
to
master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



CW is not going to go away just because they drop the requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having is
worth earning.

I say give techs a piece of HF and if they like HF, they can take the
test
to get access to the rest of it. I'm half-heartedly studying for the tech
test and only really have interest in 2m right now.




I guess I would never agree to that because I worked to pass the test.
It's just like the older guys doing 18 wpm. They don't see 5 wpm as a
test. If they gave Tech's a small piece of the HF band can you imagine
the crowd on that band? I think that you would wind up hating HF
because you would be fighting pile ups all the time. Bottom line, I
think that it would make you feel better to earn it rather than have
it given to you. It makes you appreciate it more.

It's not going to help at all to cut CW. It won't bring more folks
into ham radio. It will only serve to create more traffic on the HF
bands.

As far as 2m goes, It's great for a little while, but it gets boring
pretty quick. HF is they way to go. You will see.

THATS MY POINT! Sure it might get crowded, I doubt it but it could happen.
Seems the more the merrier? So people get bored on 2 and 6m and eventually
drop out of ham radio. Perhaps if their interest was peaked with some HF
they'd get motivated to get the code. Or if they dont like HF, no biggie.

Guess I could always get an amp and a modded Galaxy. :-)

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:40:38 -0500, "Count Floyd"
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:02:22 UTC, beerbarrel
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


The written test probably does as well. Should that also be dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should be able
to master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



CW is not going to go away just because they drop the requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having is
worth earning.
That might have been true in Samuel F.B.Morse's time. Get real, code
is an archaic leftover from the "old days" and has been used merely as
a "stumbling block" to keep the hobby a closed society. In fact,
radio itself seems to be going the way of the dodo bird, what with
satellite, internet, etc. Code is about as useful as C.W. McCall'
song about CB radio back in the 70's. I am not sitting at a key,
wearing gaiters on my sleeves, a green visor and tapping out code over
the air while the ship hits an iceberg. Come into the 21st century
for Christ's sake. Should everybody go back to spark controls on an
automobile? Attic fans and no A/C? McGuffey's Reader? Face it,
people, technology and now rules, have to move on. Of course, I drive
a 1940 Chrysler, so what do I know!




CW is efficient because you only have to understand the signal pattern
and not the signal audio. The narrow signal also takes up little
bandwidth. Not only does this make CW very efficient but also the most
reliable form of communication for a person to use.

Perhaps. But efficiency dosent always equate to fun, which is the goal here
isnt it?

"Carter-K8VT" wrote in message
m...
dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

To state the obvious, CW is just one of *many* modes available to hams;
moon bounce, meteor scatter, lots of digital modes (PSK, MFSK, RTTY,
Hellschrieber and probably a few I missed), slow scan TV, fast scan TV,
APRS and on and on.

CW-just another mode. Why test for it and not test for, say, moon
bounce? You probably missed it, but a while ago the FCC said CW was
required in the old days when CW was primarily used for marine
safety-they didn't want hams to be transmitting over distress calls.
That was it. Period. As you are well aware, CW for maritime applications
is virtually dead.

Before you think I am a whining, sniveling "no coder", I am a 20 wpm
Extra who operates 20% digi modes and 80% CW, fairly comfortable at
25-30 wpm.

And puh-leze, don't even think about trotting out the old saw that "I
had to learn the code so the new guys should too". That's akin to saying
everyone should hand crank the engine on their car rather than using
those new fangled $#@*^! electric starters.

73,
Carter K8VT

Spot on Carter!

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

.. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:04:45 GMT, Carter-K8VT
wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

To state the obvious, CW is just one of *many* modes available to hams;
moon bounce, meteor scatter, lots of digital modes (PSK, MFSK, RTTY,
Hellschrieber and probably a few I missed), slow scan TV, fast scan TV,
APRS and on and on.

CW-just another mode. Why test for it and not test for, say, moon
bounce? You probably missed it, but a while ago the FCC said CW was
required in the old days when CW was primarily used for marine
safety-they didn't want hams to be transmitting over distress calls.
That was it. Period. As you are well aware, CW for maritime applications
is virtually dead.

Before you think I am a whining, sniveling "no coder", I am a 20 wpm
Extra who operates 20% digi modes and 80% CW, fairly comfortable at
25-30 wpm.

And puh-leze, don't even think about trotting out the old saw that "I
had to learn the code so the new guys should too". That's akin to saying
everyone should hand crank the engine on their car rather than using
those new fangled $#@*^! electric starters.

73,
Carter K8VT


Hey! What's wrong with hand cranks!

Nothing, as long as their on a Gatling gun.

Unless the FCC operates very differently from other federal agencies
the fact that they are using a Notice of Public Rulemaking signifies
that they have pretty much made up their collective mind to go ahead
with abolishing the morse requirement.

I wonder if all of those against change have expended as much energy
writing to the FCC as they have repeating the same worn old arguments
here on the news group.

MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

Of course they would! Many of them can't pass the code test. DUH!

A real no brainer.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"John S." wrote:

Unless the FCC operates very differently from other federal agencies
the fact that they are using a Notice of Public Rulemaking signifies
that they have pretty much made up their collective mind to go ahead
with abolishing the morse requirement.

I wonder if all of those against change have expended as much energy
writing to the FCC as they have repeating the same worn old arguments
here on the news group.

The only worn out arguments are those expressed by those who want the code test
dropped. The majority of whom it would seem are to stupid or lazy or both to
take the time to actually learn something.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

MnMikew:

When I got my first amateur license (1969) I had an old karr cb radio
driving a 100 watt amp which drove a final amp of 1200 watts. From
there did couriers, johnsons, cobras, unidens, browning eagles, trams,
etc on CB...

Now I run an old russian 5KW linear. Thing is a battleship (100%
keydown time at 3.5KW in), and 1 to 75MHz bandcoverage. At 1KW with
reduced input voltage and drive it purrs, same russian tubes have been
running in it for over two decades and constant usage, tubes still
check out great. I have a newer 3.5KW unit but the old 5KW is my
favorite.

There is a lot to like about old equipment. I have ran newer amps but
none finer than this old timer... australia is only a quick CQ away,
anyday the band conditions are barely alive...

CB has always been one hell of a lot more fun than amateur radio. I
will always be a CB'er at heart, and an amateur second...

John

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:51:10 -0500, "MnMikew"
wrote:


"beerbarrel" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


The written test probably does as well. Should that also be
dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no
business in
amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should
be able
to
master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



CW is not going to go away just because they drop the
requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm
in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having
is
worth earning.

I say give techs a piece of HF and if they like HF, they can take
the
test
to get access to the rest of it. I'm half-heartedly studying for
the tech
test and only really have interest in 2m right now.




I guess I would never agree to that because I worked to pass the
test.
It's just like the older guys doing 18 wpm. They don't see 5 wpm as
a
test. If they gave Tech's a small piece of the HF band can you
imagine
the crowd on that band? I think that you would wind up hating HF
because you would be fighting pile ups all the time. Bottom line, I
think that it would make you feel better to earn it rather than
have
it given to you. It makes you appreciate it more.

It's not going to help at all to cut CW. It won't bring more folks
into ham radio. It will only serve to create more traffic on the HF
bands.

As far as 2m goes, It's great for a little while, but it gets
boring
pretty quick. HF is they way to go. You will see.

THATS MY POINT! Sure it might get crowded, I doubt it but it could
happen.
Seems the more the merrier? So people get bored on 2 and 6m and
eventually
drop out of ham radio. Perhaps if their interest was peaked with
some HF
they'd get motivated to get the code. Or if they dont like HF, no
biggie.

Guess I could always get an amp and a modded Galaxy. :-)

MnMikew wrote:
"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

more like ten of thousands

I have "something else" that is "wireless"
cuhulin

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...
It would be more of an incentive for me to get my ticket if I could use
HF.
I have ZERO interest in CW. Maybe open a little HF for techs?

Already is a little of HF Phone open to techs.. segment of 10m as I
recall.


Humm, the band allocations and ITU regions are my weak points for the tech
test.

When or if the big s... hits the fan,Shortwave is the ONLY communication
that will work,Period!
cuhulin

MnMikew:

I thought the goal here was to learn CW so that if ever we are
confined in a POW camp we can tap on the walls and have something to
pass the time with.

They probably won't give us books, cd's or let us watch movies
yanno!!! ROFLOL!

John

"MnMikew" wrote in message
...

"beerbarrel" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:40:38 -0500, "Count Floyd"
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 17:02:22 UTC, beerbarrel
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 12:21:35 -0400, dxAce
wrote:


The written test probably does as well. Should that also be
dropped.

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no
business in
amateur
radio. 5 WPM is incredibly easy, heck, even the 'tards should
be able
to master
that.

dxAce
Michigan
USA



CW is not going to go away just because they drop the
requirement.
Like Steve says, It's not that hard. Most anyone can learn 5 wpm
in as
little as a month or less. I think that something worth having
is
worth earning.
That might have been true in Samuel F.B.Morse's time. Get real,
code
is an archaic leftover from the "old days" and has been used
merely as
a "stumbling block" to keep the hobby a closed society. In fact,
radio itself seems to be going the way of the dodo bird, what with
satellite, internet, etc. Code is about as useful as C.W. McCall'
song about CB radio back in the 70's. I am not sitting at a key,
wearing gaiters on my sleeves, a green visor and tapping out code
over
the air while the ship hits an iceberg. Come into the 21st
century
for Christ's sake. Should everybody go back to spark controls on
an
automobile? Attic fans and no A/C? McGuffey's Reader? Face it,
people, technology and now rules, have to move on. Of course, I
drive
a 1940 Chrysler, so what do I know!




CW is efficient because you only have to understand the signal
pattern
and not the signal audio. The narrow signal also takes up little
bandwidth. Not only does this make CW very efficient but also the
most
reliable form of communication for a person to use.

Perhaps. But efficiency dosent always equate to fun, which is the
goal here
isnt it?

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Well, 10 meters is pretty much the stomping grounds of freebanders
here. Some are none too polite either...

If there anything like the clods in rec.radio.cb I can understand.

dxace:

Most won't learn to knit, crochet or tat either!!!

Damn! They could make themselves some damn fine sweaters, slippers
and table cloths too.

Dumb flunkies anyway! ROFLOL!

John

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Carter-K8VT wrote:

dxAce wrote:

If one can't learn even a minimum 5 WPM then they have no
business in
amateur
radio.

Could you please explain why you say that.

Because it's so EASY, that's why 'tard boy..

If it's that easy then why test for it?

. and I don't really give a rats ass
whether or not you're a 20 WPM man anyway. Point is, if some
dumbass 'tard
isn't
smart enough to learn at least 5 WPM of code then he or she has
no damn
business
being in amateur radio.
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

Of course they would! Many of them can't pass the code test. DUH!

A real no brainer.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


MnMikew wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


"John S." wrote:

beerbarrel wrote:
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 13:29:37 -0400, Cmdr Buzz Corey
wrote:

John S. wrote:


Yes, or require that prospective drivers be proficient in the
use
of a
buggy whip in addition to passing a written and practical
driving
test.


If they are going to drive a buggy, it might be a good idea.



Maybe we should just drop the driving test altogether...well start
with your kids.

And that's the point. The written and practical drivers test is a
measure of whether a prospective driver knows something about the
law
and theory of driving and has some proficiency in the operation of a
motor vehicle.

The written amateur test proves that the owner has some knowlege of
the
theory of radio construction and operation.

The morse code test only tests the ability to translate a language
for
which there is no practical use. It does not shed any light on the
ability if the prospective ham to operate a ham radio in a safe and
courteous manner. A live on-the-air test of a prospective ham
setting
up a rig and using voice or one of the digital modes would prove
something about his competence as a radio operator.

Copying morse code proves nothing.

Sure it does you stupid 'tard... it proves one can do it!

Which proves????

I give up...

Be a lazy 'tard!

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Code proficient.

You're sure not phone proficient.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
There are thousands of techs who would disagree.

Of course they would! Many of them can't pass the code test. DUH!

Many don't want to either.

"dxAce" wrote in message
...
The majority of whom it would seem are to stupid or lazy or both to
take the time to actually learn something.

Talk about worn out arguments.

Tell me, what is/are a legitimate argument(s) to keep CW a
requirement, which any sane man/woman could argue with real and
logical conviction?

If such existed, I am sure it could be pressed into service and quite
well stop the removal of the CW requirement.

However, I think any argument posed would have "them", in the end,
considering the person posing the argument booked for a three day stay
in an institution and giving them a mental observation!

Anyone who still poses an "important argument" here and fails to make
others aware of the terrible travesty which is about to be committed
by the dis-continuance of the code requirement is a "TRUE FOOL!!!" and
should hardly be surprised when laughed at here...

John

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...
Unless the FCC operates very differently from other federal agencies
the fact that they are using a Notice of Public Rulemaking signifies
that they have pretty much made up their collective mind to go ahead
with abolishing the morse requirement.

I wonder if all of those against change have expended as much energy
writing to the FCC as they have repeating the same worn old
arguments
here on the news group.