Carter-K8VT wrote:
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.


Points I already made. I didn't say it was a necessity. Or that
it was required or even suggested. But the statement to which I
responded asserted that the code was not in use in any significant
application. That's not true. It's used regularly.



b) as you say, it's on the chart.


It IS on the chart. Knowing the code, however saves a lot of time
and when things are not going well in the cockpit. Especially when
VFR rules do not apply.



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).



Not always true. Especially in very dense areas. Confirmation by
ident of the station is essential.





d) many use GPS anyway



Far fewer than you thinl.




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".




We may disagree on that, as well.





73,
Carter K8VT

P.S. I *like* CW--it's about 80% of my operating.