Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
D Peter Maus wrote:
So, there you have two significant and relevant, current applications of Morse Code in the US, alone. D Peter, I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you. For the VOR issue, a) most (or at least many) pilots do not know the code (this from my avionics days in the Air National Guard 30 years ago and my current pilot friends)--and anyway, pilots aren't necessarily hams and thus would not be directly affected by the current FCC issue. b) as you say, it's on the chart. c) they can tell the station by the frequency that they dial in; i.e., if they already know enough to dial in the frequency, they already know the station). d) many use GPS anyway As a member of the Board of Directors for three big city repeaters , I believe it's a real stretch to call a CW repeater ID "significant and relevant"; I would say it's more like "incidental". 73, Carter K8VT P.S. I *like* CW--it's about 80% of my operating. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
FCC proposes to drop CW requirement on HF | CB | |||
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems | Policy | |||
FCC to Drop HF Code Requirement | Boatanchors | |||
There is no International Code Requirement and techs can operate | Policy | |||
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy |