|
AS400?
Gawd, does one exist outside the Smithsonian? grin John "beerbarrel" wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 14:14:13 -0500, "MnMikew" wrote: "John Smith" wrote in message ... Well, if you have a very fast processor and no need for speed or the power, java can be pressed into a functional use... However, when you already have the syntax of C++, why tie your hands with java, a pseudo-language really... it steals C syntax to run scripted and byte code... Of course, if you don't understand the difference of a real programming language which is compiled and linked--as opposed to java, it is a moot point... Good luck running that cobol on any modern application servers like Websphere or Weblogic. Yep...I think he programs on a AS400 if memory serves me... |
beerbarrel wrote:
I took a course in COBOL in college and also C++. C++ was by far more difficult to pick up. COBOL was just too wordy for me. I hated writing term papers and that is kinda what in reminded me of. Never took a course in cobol, but used to help students debug their code at the computer center. Wordy is an understatement. It seemed they needed about a page of code to get the title up. At the time, I liked fortran. But it's been years since I had time to write my own software. |
John Kasupski wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:47:56 -0400, dxAce wrote: Difference is 'tard boy... I'm not a dx-idiot! You could've fooled me... Most anyone can fool you...! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-dummy:
Yes, in a pinch, we will except substitutes... However, nothing like a true fool to pull it off with that special "foolish flair." John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Kasupski wrote: On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:47:56 -0400, dxAce wrote: Difference is 'tard boy... I'm not a dx-idiot! You could've fooled me... Most anyone can fool you...! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: Oh really, funny? Well, yah, funny the cobol'ers/fortran'ers don't get a clue... But then look at ham radio, took up till now for CW to be dropped, with the "religious fanatic following" screaming right up till the last moment that CW would live forever. Now they stand looking like "dumbkoffs" and worse... Face it, the only "dumbkoffs" are those who are either too dumb or lazy to learn the code. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-clueless:
Really, my gawd, maybe you are correct... Let me see albert einstein, nope he didn't know cw... steven hawkings, no, no cw... werner von braun, nope, no cw either... hey, are you sure? ROFLOL!!!! John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: Oh really, funny? Well, yah, funny the cobol'ers/fortran'ers don't get a clue... But then look at ham radio, took up till now for CW to be dropped, with the "religious fanatic following" screaming right up till the last moment that CW would live forever. Now they stand looking like "dumbkoffs" and worse... Face it, the only "dumbkoffs" are those who are either too dumb or lazy to learn the code. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John Smith wrote: dx-clueless: Really, my gawd, maybe you are correct... Let me see albert einstein, nope he didn't know cw... steven hawkings, no, no cw... werner von braun, nope, no cw either... hey, are you sure? I'm sure you're a 'tard! Keep trying. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
Lock and Load and Drop One Round! on FCC!
cuhulin |
I will always be a CB'er at heart, and an amateur second...
It's obvious.... :( MK |
I am only two and a half years old,so I am still an amateur.
cuhulin |
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. Here! Here! Using common sense in a post will have the John Smiths of the world chasing their tails. Then again, maybe thats not a half bad idea.... You could call it, autobrownnosing. :/ MK |
Morse code is not used in communications of any consequence in the
western world. B.S. Hams use it quite often. Who cares about emergency workers.. But saying that, I could care less if they do away with it or not. It's not that big a deal to me. But.....I still refuse to stand by and watch people that are totally ignorant of the subject spew their drivel. 5 wpm? Hell, they might as well do away with it.... 5 wpm is nearly useless to anyone in the real world. I can do 55-60 wpm on a good day. I can do 30-40 wpm in my sleep. Sheesh. Code is simple to ones who don't have a mental block, or some other kind of learning problem.. Even I use it less than I used to, but I'm damn glad I *do* know it. It can and will come in handy at one point or the other. I've personally assisted in an marine emergency on the ham bands, with the coast guard involved, and the boater had to switch to CW cuz his batteries were too weak for fone. If I was a lazy dumbass like most of these rabid "non-coders", they might have well been shark bait later that day. But being I was capable of handling the mode, all was groovy in the world. Testing for code is testing for code. Nothing more, nothing less. If they drop code testing , fine with me. Just don't try to convince me the new op's are as capable of operators as the ones that do also know code. Cuz, they ain't. Case closed. They will always be slightly inferior as *operators*. Notice, I didn't say *hams*. MK |
ohhh, much more that that--it is logical!
CB can be much more fun! Of course, there is a certain "lack of prestige" there I suppose. CB'ers don't spy for the gov't, become secret agents, etc... frown Nor do they hold delusions that they do, such as you find in amateur radio with the drama-ridden-"I-am-special"-mentally-disturbed-element you find there, usually under rocks, or belching, passing gass and rag chewing their rants on the unwitting.... Yep, CB is pretty low key, and what-u-c is what-u-get.... ROFLOL!!!! John wrote in message ups.com... I will always be a CB'er at heart, and an amateur second... It's obvious.... :( MK |
Well, you keep teasing us, show us your "common sense", we will let ya
know how we feel about it... .... ya keep talking about it, but frankly, I am beginning to think it is a myth!!! ROFLOL!!! John wrote in message oups.com... 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. Here! Here! Using common sense in a post will have the John Smiths of the world chasing their tails. Then again, maybe thats not a half bad idea.... You could call it, autobrownnosing. :/ MK |
.... say, u ain't onea them guys listenin' to art bell, are ya?
grin John wrote in message oups.com... 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. Here! Here! Using common sense in a post will have the John Smiths of the world chasing their tails. Then again, maybe thats not a half bad idea.... You could call it, autobrownnosing. :/ MK |
"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... 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. Get the point dumb****? Keep on trying to dumb things down... we got your number. dxAce Michigan USA I agree with the 5wpm requirement only because it seems to me kinda like a rite of passage. Everything in life worth doing is that way. -- 73 and good DX. B.H. Brian's Radio Universe http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/500.htm |
What is common sense? All I have is Horse sense.
cuhulin |
Five words per minute.They dumbed it down to public school standards.
cuhulin |
Hams?
Some ancient grey-haired-geriatrics passing gass and ranting that the world is changing in ways they never dreamed possible or like? Someone whose best argument for CW is probably based on "historical reasons?" You propose these peoples opinions are to be considered legit and worth taking the time to consider? Really, you believe the world considers these people of much consequence? Do you even think the world ever considers them as they tap their "hobby keys?" Get a life, put down the opium pipe, welcome back to reality! ROFLOL!!!! John wrote in message ups.com... Morse code is not used in communications of any consequence in the western world. B.S. Hams use it quite often. Who cares about emergency workers.. But saying that, I could care less if they do away with it or not. It's not that big a deal to me. But.....I still refuse to stand by and watch people that are totally ignorant of the subject spew their drivel. 5 wpm? Hell, they might as well do away with it.... 5 wpm is nearly useless to anyone in the real world. I can do 55-60 wpm on a good day. I can do 30-40 wpm in my sleep. Sheesh. Code is simple to ones who don't have a mental block, or some other kind of learning problem.. Even I use it less than I used to, but I'm damn glad I *do* know it. It can and will come in handy at one point or the other. I've personally assisted in an marine emergency on the ham bands, with the coast guard involved, and the boater had to switch to CW cuz his batteries were too weak for fone. If I was a lazy dumbass like most of these rabid "non-coders", they might have well been shark bait later that day. But being I was capable of handling the mode, all was groovy in the world. Testing for code is testing for code. Nothing more, nothing less. If they drop code testing , fine with me. Just don't try to convince me the new op's are as capable of operators as the ones that do also know code. Cuz, they ain't. Case closed. They will always be slightly inferior as *operators*. Notice, I didn't say *hams*. MK |
There are some CB dudes in the Jackson area and for years they have been
and they still are rolling around most of the CB channels (they know enough to stay off of the few CB channels the 18 wheelers frequent) spewing a bunch of crap (such as,I am over here hideing behind the sand pile and stupid nonesense like that (y'all get my driff) from sun up till about ten or eleven o'clock at night.They are a bunch of Jerks.I once got a couple of my old CB radios and I rolled around town with the volume cranked wide open and scraping the antennas agains't each other.y'all ought to have heard them dudes howling! cuhulin |
I can't stand Art Bell and George Noory!
cuhulin |
Who is George Noory...
Sorry, my ignorance is showing... John wrote in message ... I can't stand Art Bell and George Noory! cuhulin |
John Smith wrote: Who is George Noory... Sorry, my ignorance is showing... Yes... you've been spewing it for days! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-dumbarse:
Really, damn, I though you were hanging on my ever word, you cut me to the quick! grin John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: Who is George Noory... Sorry, my ignorance is showing... Yes... you've been spewing it for days! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
|
MnMikew wrote:
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. Techs can listen in on the HF bands and determine if they like it. If so, then let that serve as the incentive toward upgrading their license. The incentive licensing has worked well up until now..if you want more privileges, you put in the study to gain the privileges. No need to have techs given a piece of HF, but they can earn it with the upgrade. Bill KC9CS (Extra) |
Hams? Some ancient grey-haired-geriatrics passing gass and ranting that the world is changing in ways they never dreamed possible or like? You obviously don't know me very well. Someone whose best argument for CW is probably based on "historical reasons?" You propose these peoples opinions are to be considered legit and worth taking the time to consider? I don't propose a thing. You have me confused with someone who really gives a hoot. You think I could care less? It's not going to have any effect on what I do. I can already do it all, being an extra, and nothing is going to change. Really, you believe the world considers these people of much consequence? Do you even think the world ever considers them as they tap their "hobby keys?" Who gives a rats ass what the world thinks. They aren't hams. Get a life, put down the opium pipe, welcome back to reality! You are one to talk. You have your head stuck so far up your ass it would take a cement chisel to pry it out. I see you blather your silly crap all over many groups. You are the lazy flake, not me. You have already admitted you are a problem child of sorts, and has to see some kind of doktor. *You* need to get back to reality. Usenet is not reality. Even if I were smoking an opium pipe, I could still pass that silly slow 5 wpm code test. Am I gifted? Am I special? No. I'm just not lazy, and sit around and whine about it all day. ROFLOL!!!! Doing my best "Gunny Hartman" imitation....Jeeezzuusss H. Christ, I think he's got a hard-on.... MK |
B. Otten:
I don't think anyone is going to "listen in and like it", right now anyway. Rather, let the techs listen in and come up with new ideas on how they can change it and breath some new life in it... if need be, perhaps some Chicken Banders can grab a license and add some help... then implement them with a purpose... No one likes change but a baby with a wet diaper--get ready baby... grin John "B. Otten" wrote in message ... MnMikew wrote: 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. Techs can listen in on the HF bands and determine if they like it. If so, then let that serve as the incentive toward upgrading their license. The incentive licensing has worked well up until now..if you want more privileges, you put in the study to gain the privileges. No need to have techs given a piece of HF, but they can earn it with the upgrade. Bill KC9CS (Extra) |
Well son, perhaps some of those Chicken Banders have degrees in a
mental heath field... perhaps they can offer counseling and make the transition easier... Let's not jump to any conclusions until they get here... John wrote in message oups.com... Hams? Some ancient grey-haired-geriatrics passing gass and ranting that the world is changing in ways they never dreamed possible or like? You obviously don't know me very well. Someone whose best argument for CW is probably based on "historical reasons?" You propose these peoples opinions are to be considered legit and worth taking the time to consider? I don't propose a thing. You have me confused with someone who really gives a hoot. You think I could care less? It's not going to have any effect on what I do. I can already do it all, being an extra, and nothing is going to change. Really, you believe the world considers these people of much consequence? Do you even think the world ever considers them as they tap their "hobby keys?" Who gives a rats ass what the world thinks. They aren't hams. Get a life, put down the opium pipe, welcome back to reality! You are one to talk. You have your head stuck so far up your ass it would take a cement chisel to pry it out. I see you blather your silly crap all over many groups. You are the lazy flake, not me. You have already admitted you are a problem child of sorts, and has to see some kind of doktor. *You* need to get back to reality. Usenet is not reality. Even if I were smoking an opium pipe, I could still pass that silly slow 5 wpm code test. Am I gifted? Am I special? No. I'm just not lazy, and sit around and whine about it all day. ROFLOL!!!! Doing my best "Gunny Hartman" imitation....Jeeezzuusss H. Christ, I think he's got a hard-on.... MK |
Mark:
Your logic and facts, as you present them, are well taken. Indeed, I am anxious to see any arguments which are posed to the contrary... John "Mark Zenier" wrote in message ... In article , John Smith wrote: 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? The real reason for the Morse requirement was, (three quarters of a century ago or so, after WW I), to maintain a pool of people that could be inducted into the military in times of war to maintain communications on the battlefield. Learning Morse is not a natural act. Nor, for more than a small percentage of the population, very easy. Getting a bunch of Signal Corps cannon fodder to train themselves was a great boon. Back about 20 years ago, when Digital Signal Processor ICs were first coming out, I did a bunch of library research on the possiblity of building a box that could match the performance of a human operator. The newest paper I could find on the actual use of CW, in the open literature, was from 1959. They were no longer interested in using it. It takes too long to train an operator, and the data transmission capacity is too low. And if the radio operator gets shot... (There was, reportedly, a lot of expertise in the NSA and its military affiliates in automated CW intercepts, as the Soviet Union and third world still had a lot of tactical comm. in CW at that time). But at that same time, 20 years ago, I got some insight, (at a job interview), into what the miltary was planning for the future. It was automating an entire infantry division with packet radio. Not much reason to learn Morse code when the field radios had 20 kbps (?) packet modems built in, and the field officers could just plug the Grid portable into them. So the military no longer has any need and it's taken 40 years for the ham "community" to figure this out. Mark Zenier Washington State resident |
John Smith wrote: Mark: Your logic and facts, as you present them, are well taken. Indeed, I am anxious to see any arguments which are posed to the contrary... LOL... Argue all you wish, the fact still remains that ANYONE who cannot at least learn 5 WPM is either too stupid or too lazy to do so! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
dx-dunce:
Hmmm... I see I should have clearly stated "logical, reasonable, productive arguments of merit." John "dxAce" wrote in message ... John Smith wrote: Mark: Your logic and facts, as you present them, are well taken. Indeed, I am anxious to see any arguments which are posed to the contrary... LOL... Argue all you wish, the fact still remains that ANYONE who cannot at least learn 5 WPM is either too stupid or too lazy to do so! dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
Mark Zenier wrote: In article , John Smith wrote: 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? The real reason for the Morse requirement was, (three quarters of a century ago or so, after WW I), to maintain a pool of people that could be inducted into the military in times of war to maintain communications on the battlefield. Learning Morse is not a natural act. Nor, for more than a small percentage of the population, very easy. Getting a bunch of Signal Corps cannon fodder to train themselves was a great boon. Back about 20 years ago, when Digital Signal Processor ICs were first coming out, I did a bunch of library research on the possiblity of building a box that could match the performance of a human operator. The newest paper I could find on the actual use of CW, in the open literature, was from 1959. They were no longer interested in using it. It takes too long to train an operator, and the data transmission capacity is too low. And if the radio operator gets shot... (There was, reportedly, a lot of expertise in the NSA and its military affiliates in automated CW intercepts, as the Soviet Union and third world still had a lot of tactical comm. in CW at that time). But at that same time, 20 years ago, I got some insight, (at a job interview), into what the miltary was planning for the future. It was automating an entire infantry division with packet radio. Not much reason to learn Morse code when the field radios had 20 kbps (?) packet modems built in, and the field officers could just plug the Grid portable into them. So the military no longer has any need and it's taken 40 years for the ham "community" to figure this out. Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world. They cling to the outdated notion that group of radio amateurs with the ability to transcribe morse code at some slow speed will serve some useful purpose in an emergency situation. That none of the professional services could hear them if they were to transmit morese code in an emergency seems to escape most currently licensed hams. They seem to enjoy Walter Mitty like daydreams where the hams all hit the spectrum to save the little community when the hurricane hits. I have an EE in the family who helps design communications systems for the defense dept. When the office shop talk turns to hams and mars operators they just sort of chuckle about how far out of date those mostly old guys really are. |
John S.:
So, the reason is, Alzheimer's? Opium pipe? Psychiatric illnesses? Alien mind control? Government disinformation (these are really gov't agents here?) John "John S." wrote in message oups.com... Mark Zenier wrote: In article , John Smith wrote: 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? The real reason for the Morse requirement was, (three quarters of a century ago or so, after WW I), to maintain a pool of people that could be inducted into the military in times of war to maintain communications on the battlefield. Learning Morse is not a natural act. Nor, for more than a small percentage of the population, very easy. Getting a bunch of Signal Corps cannon fodder to train themselves was a great boon. Back about 20 years ago, when Digital Signal Processor ICs were first coming out, I did a bunch of library research on the possiblity of building a box that could match the performance of a human operator. The newest paper I could find on the actual use of CW, in the open literature, was from 1959. They were no longer interested in using it. It takes too long to train an operator, and the data transmission capacity is too low. And if the radio operator gets shot... (There was, reportedly, a lot of expertise in the NSA and its military affiliates in automated CW intercepts, as the Soviet Union and third world still had a lot of tactical comm. in CW at that time). But at that same time, 20 years ago, I got some insight, (at a job interview), into what the miltary was planning for the future. It was automating an entire infantry division with packet radio. Not much reason to learn Morse code when the field radios had 20 kbps (?) packet modems built in, and the field officers could just plug the Grid portable into them. So the military no longer has any need and it's taken 40 years for the ham "community" to figure this out. Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world. They cling to the outdated notion that group of radio amateurs with the ability to transcribe morse code at some slow speed will serve some useful purpose in an emergency situation. That none of the professional services could hear them if they were to transmit morese code in an emergency seems to escape most currently licensed hams. They seem to enjoy Walter Mitty like daydreams where the hams all hit the spectrum to save the little community when the hurricane hits. I have an EE in the family who helps design communications systems for the defense dept. When the office shop talk turns to hams and mars operators they just sort of chuckle about how far out of date those mostly old guys really are. |
John Smith wrote: John S.: So, the reason is, Alzheimer's? Opium pipe? Psychiatric illnesses? Alien mind control? Government disinformation (these are really gov't agents here?) Not sure what you are asking the reason for. But if it is why hams cling to the need to require prospective hams take a purposeless test, I think it is mostly because they had to take the test in a time when knowlege of the code was important. It can be difficult to realize that times have changed and that the morse code test no longer provides a pool of hams with a useful (or useable) skill. |
"John S." wrote: John Smith wrote: John S.: So, the reason is, Alzheimer's? Opium pipe? Psychiatric illnesses? Alien mind control? Government disinformation (these are really gov't agents here?) Not sure what you are asking the reason for. But if it is why hams cling to the need to require prospective hams take a purposeless test, I think it is mostly because they had to take the test in a time when knowlege of the code was important. It can be difficult to realize that times have changed and that the morse code test no longer provides a pool of hams with a useful (or useable) skill. You're still making excuses! The bottom line is that if one cannot learn at minimum 5 WPM then either they are too stupid or too lazy to do so! LMAO at the 'tards who cannot do it. dxAce Michigan USA http://www.iserv.net/~n8kdv/dxpage.htm |
John S.:
You are quite correct in pointing out my question was obscure. None the less, you deduced the correct question. I guess I just find it hard to believe those guys are that far out of touch with reality... but I see it all the time, and carry on arguments on the bands... John "John S." wrote in message oups.com... John Smith wrote: John S.: So, the reason is, Alzheimer's? Opium pipe? Psychiatric illnesses? Alien mind control? Government disinformation (these are really gov't agents here?) Not sure what you are asking the reason for. But if it is why hams cling to the need to require prospective hams take a purposeless test, I think it is mostly because they had to take the test in a time when knowlege of the code was important. It can be difficult to realize that times have changed and that the morse code test no longer provides a pool of hams with a useful (or useable) skill. |
John S. wrote:
Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world. In fact, you are incorrect about this. Repeating our message from earlier this week: Morse Code is used to identify every VOR station in the US. VOR station identification takes place every 30 seconds. Every VOR radio has an ident switch that permits the pilot to hear the Morse Code identifier for the VOR station he's monitoring when navigating by radio. When flying under IFR conditions, this identifier is essential for correct location of the aircraft on the grid by the pilot, and identification of the correct course. I would hardly call that insignificant. So, your premise on it's face is incorrect. Now, to be thorough, here....the Morse identifier for a given station is printed on the sectional chart for that given region of airspace, so, it's not necessary that a pilot actually know the code, but if you've ever tried to read a sectional chart in flight, solo in the cockpit while trying to navigate it can be an unnecessary and unwanted distraction, especially when flying under less than optimum conditions. But many pilots, having learned their Morse Code as Boy Scouts, or in the military, or as part of the Amateur service, find it much simpler to simply hear and understand the code, than to take the time to read and then try to translate it into audible intelligence. You may also be unaware that many V/UHF repeaters also identify by Morse Code, so while it's not exactly a requirement that an operator know the code, even non Code required licensees will find that knowing the code actually facilitates their operations. Especially under unusual propagation conditions, as we're experiencing now in Northern Illinois, where VHF signals are skipping in from greater distances than local repeaters' operating areas would normally fall. In which case, the Morse identifier permits an operator to know if he's actually hearing the correct repeater, or if he's actually hearing a repeater skipping in on anomalous propragation. Again, not insignificant. Especially where operation on a repeater is by membership only and freeloaders are not welcome. And again, to be thorough, non code licensees would still have to be able to hear and understand the code to prevent freeloading, or take the time to look up and translate the audible signal into understandable language for identification. So, there you have two significant and relevant, current applications of Morse Code in the US, alone. There are more, to be sure. For the record, this debate has been going on for decades. And it laways boils down to the unwilling badgering the authority to be granted the privileges that have been otherwise earned through diligent skill acquisition. Even when I was in Jr High, the code test was a bone of contention between members of the Ham Radio Club and applicants. And that was 40 years ago. The fight has only gotten more shrill. And the code requirement itself was widely misunderstood. It was assumed that one had to take one's tests in order of rank and that before one could have phone access to the bands, one was required to spend no less than two years pounding brass. This alone ran off a lot of applicants. Truth is that one only had to know the code to get a license. Which license was largely a matter of preference, with one exception. I know many hams who never went through the Novice or Technician classes, but went straight to General and above. In my own circles, this misunderstood abhorrence of the code drove my friends to CB, rather than to the more exciting and more useful world of the Amateur service. I took a different path, learning the code so I could hear and understand what was on my receiver, but since I had little interest in actually conversing...most of the people I'd want to talk to were in the skip zones anyway, I never pursued it further. I've always enjoyed the listening more than the talking. But, as with many things in life, I've learned that a skill acquired is never without practical application, and have found myself brushing up on my code frequently over the years, for everything from shortwave and ham band listening, to aviation monitoring, to emergency communications monitoring, to silly things like movie/tv watching. There is always a relevant application to the knowledge of Morse Code. Simply abandoning knowledge of something because there are newer, better ways is only smart if the newer better ways can and will never fail. This is fantasy at best. In which case having a fall back, especially in communications, is prudent, even if it does seem like filling up your head with useless baggage at the time. Considering how times emergency communications have failed because of a poor microphone, high noise, or even partial failure of a radio, OOK in Morse Code is often the only option left in an emergency. And, as has been explained here numerous times, unlike any other form of communication which requires ever increasing layers of technology to get the job done, all that's required in Morse Code is one human operator on each end, and the ability to create a signal, regardless of how or what that signal is. Personally, when my ass is on the line, I'd much rather rely on an experienced operator than any piece of technology. Now, like the person sitting in the exitway on an airliner you may be unable, or unwilling to assist in the event of an emergency, and that's your right. But have the decency to get out of the way and let those who are willing and able to assist to do so. Your premise that "morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world," is patently false. |
Peter:
Really, you don't expect to take one or two simple points, stretch them to a whole book with gobs of un-necessary text, then expect someone to read it to the end, do you? Well, if so, this is just to inform you I am not... bet I am not the only fool who just doesn't get how important your long winded rants are! grin John "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... John S. wrote: Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world. In fact, you are incorrect about this. Repeating our message from earlier this week: Morse Code is used to identify every VOR station in the US. VOR station identification takes place every 30 seconds. Every VOR radio has an ident switch that permits the pilot to hear the Morse Code identifier for the VOR station he's monitoring when navigating by radio. When flying under IFR conditions, this identifier is essential for correct location of the aircraft on the grid by the pilot, and identification of the correct course. I would hardly call that insignificant. So, your premise on it's face is incorrect. Now, to be thorough, here....the Morse identifier for a given station is printed on the sectional chart for that given region of airspace, so, it's not necessary that a pilot actually know the code, but if you've ever tried to read a sectional chart in flight, solo in the cockpit while trying to navigate it can be an unnecessary and unwanted distraction, especially when flying under less than optimum conditions. But many pilots, having learned their Morse Code as Boy Scouts, or in the military, or as part of the Amateur service, find it much simpler to simply hear and understand the code, than to take the time to read and then try to translate it into audible intelligence. You may also be unaware that many V/UHF repeaters also identify by Morse Code, so while it's not exactly a requirement that an operator know the code, even non Code required licensees will find that knowing the code actually facilitates their operations. Especially under unusual propagation conditions, as we're experiencing now in Northern Illinois, where VHF signals are skipping in from greater distances than local repeaters' operating areas would normally fall. In which case, the Morse identifier permits an operator to know if he's actually hearing the correct repeater, or if he's actually hearing a repeater skipping in on anomalous propragation. Again, not insignificant. Especially where operation on a repeater is by membership only and freeloaders are not welcome. And again, to be thorough, non code licensees would still have to be able to hear and understand the code to prevent freeloading, or take the time to look up and translate the audible signal into understandable language for identification. So, there you have two significant and relevant, current applications of Morse Code in the US, alone. There are more, to be sure. For the record, this debate has been going on for decades. And it laways boils down to the unwilling badgering the authority to be granted the privileges that have been otherwise earned through diligent skill acquisition. Even when I was in Jr High, the code test was a bone of contention between members of the Ham Radio Club and applicants. And that was 40 years ago. The fight has only gotten more shrill. And the code requirement itself was widely misunderstood. It was assumed that one had to take one's tests in order of rank and that before one could have phone access to the bands, one was required to spend no less than two years pounding brass. This alone ran off a lot of applicants. Truth is that one only had to know the code to get a license. Which license was largely a matter of preference, with one exception. I know many hams who never went through the Novice or Technician classes, but went straight to General and above. In my own circles, this misunderstood abhorrence of the code drove my friends to CB, rather than to the more exciting and more useful world of the Amateur service. I took a different path, learning the code so I could hear and understand what was on my receiver, but since I had little interest in actually conversing...most of the people I'd want to talk to were in the skip zones anyway, I never pursued it further. I've always enjoyed the listening more than the talking. But, as with many things in life, I've learned that a skill acquired is never without practical application, and have found myself brushing up on my code frequently over the years, for everything from shortwave and ham band listening, to aviation monitoring, to emergency communications monitoring, to silly things like movie/tv watching. There is always a relevant application to the knowledge of Morse Code. Simply abandoning knowledge of something because there are newer, better ways is only smart if the newer better ways can and will never fail. This is fantasy at best. In which case having a fall back, especially in communications, is prudent, even if it does seem like filling up your head with useless baggage at the time. Considering how times emergency communications have failed because of a poor microphone, high noise, or even partial failure of a radio, OOK in Morse Code is often the only option left in an emergency. And, as has been explained here numerous times, unlike any other form of communication which requires ever increasing layers of technology to get the job done, all that's required in Morse Code is one human operator on each end, and the ability to create a signal, regardless of how or what that signal is. Personally, when my ass is on the line, I'd much rather rely on an experienced operator than any piece of technology. Now, like the person sitting in the exitway on an airliner you may be unable, or unwilling to assist in the event of an emergency, and that's your right. But have the decency to get out of the way and let those who are willing and able to assist to do so. Your premise that "morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world," is patently false. |
Peter:
Let me give you an example of what I just said above: Keep it short if you want it read! John "D Peter Maus" wrote in message ... John S. wrote: Unfortunately a large portion of the ham community has chosen to ignore the fact that morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world. In fact, you are incorrect about this. Repeating our message from earlier this week: Morse Code is used to identify every VOR station in the US. VOR station identification takes place every 30 seconds. Every VOR radio has an ident switch that permits the pilot to hear the Morse Code identifier for the VOR station he's monitoring when navigating by radio. When flying under IFR conditions, this identifier is essential for correct location of the aircraft on the grid by the pilot, and identification of the correct course. I would hardly call that insignificant. So, your premise on it's face is incorrect. Now, to be thorough, here....the Morse identifier for a given station is printed on the sectional chart for that given region of airspace, so, it's not necessary that a pilot actually know the code, but if you've ever tried to read a sectional chart in flight, solo in the cockpit while trying to navigate it can be an unnecessary and unwanted distraction, especially when flying under less than optimum conditions. But many pilots, having learned their Morse Code as Boy Scouts, or in the military, or as part of the Amateur service, find it much simpler to simply hear and understand the code, than to take the time to read and then try to translate it into audible intelligence. You may also be unaware that many V/UHF repeaters also identify by Morse Code, so while it's not exactly a requirement that an operator know the code, even non Code required licensees will find that knowing the code actually facilitates their operations. Especially under unusual propagation conditions, as we're experiencing now in Northern Illinois, where VHF signals are skipping in from greater distances than local repeaters' operating areas would normally fall. In which case, the Morse identifier permits an operator to know if he's actually hearing the correct repeater, or if he's actually hearing a repeater skipping in on anomalous propragation. Again, not insignificant. Especially where operation on a repeater is by membership only and freeloaders are not welcome. And again, to be thorough, non code licensees would still have to be able to hear and understand the code to prevent freeloading, or take the time to look up and translate the audible signal into understandable language for identification. So, there you have two significant and relevant, current applications of Morse Code in the US, alone. There are more, to be sure. For the record, this debate has been going on for decades. And it laways boils down to the unwilling badgering the authority to be granted the privileges that have been otherwise earned through diligent skill acquisition. Even when I was in Jr High, the code test was a bone of contention between members of the Ham Radio Club and applicants. And that was 40 years ago. The fight has only gotten more shrill. And the code requirement itself was widely misunderstood. It was assumed that one had to take one's tests in order of rank and that before one could have phone access to the bands, one was required to spend no less than two years pounding brass. This alone ran off a lot of applicants. Truth is that one only had to know the code to get a license. Which license was largely a matter of preference, with one exception. I know many hams who never went through the Novice or Technician classes, but went straight to General and above. In my own circles, this misunderstood abhorrence of the code drove my friends to CB, rather than to the more exciting and more useful world of the Amateur service. I took a different path, learning the code so I could hear and understand what was on my receiver, but since I had little interest in actually conversing...most of the people I'd want to talk to were in the skip zones anyway, I never pursued it further. I've always enjoyed the listening more than the talking. But, as with many things in life, I've learned that a skill acquired is never without practical application, and have found myself brushing up on my code frequently over the years, for everything from shortwave and ham band listening, to aviation monitoring, to emergency communications monitoring, to silly things like movie/tv watching. There is always a relevant application to the knowledge of Morse Code. Simply abandoning knowledge of something because there are newer, better ways is only smart if the newer better ways can and will never fail. This is fantasy at best. In which case having a fall back, especially in communications, is prudent, even if it does seem like filling up your head with useless baggage at the time. Considering how times emergency communications have failed because of a poor microphone, high noise, or even partial failure of a radio, OOK in Morse Code is often the only option left in an emergency. And, as has been explained here numerous times, unlike any other form of communication which requires ever increasing layers of technology to get the job done, all that's required in Morse Code is one human operator on each end, and the ability to create a signal, regardless of how or what that signal is. Personally, when my ass is on the line, I'd much rather rely on an experienced operator than any piece of technology. Now, like the person sitting in the exitway on an airliner you may be unable, or unwilling to assist in the event of an emergency, and that's your right. But have the decency to get out of the way and let those who are willing and able to assist to do so. Your premise that "morse code is not used in any significant communications in the western world," is patently false. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:21 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com