John S.:

I'd rather them make them learn to play the violin. Then at least
they could play us something as they keep up the crying...

John

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...


-=jd=- wrote:
On Sat 23 Jul 2005 05:10:16p, "John S." wrote in
message
ps.com:



D Peter Maus wrote:

{snippage}
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.

Well actually the very long post did make that point. And I'm sure
that being able to decode the designator would be useful. I hope
that
is not the sole reason the ARRL has remaining to justify the code
test
however.


So what. There are some police comm systems that still send a
morse
identifier. I suppose it is entertaining and marginally useful
to be
able to decode the id's by oneself, but that's about all.

{snippage}

From my own related personal experience, that automated morse
identifier
satisfies the FCC requirement for periodic identification. It's
cheap and
reliable and the dispatchers don't have to keep track of ID'ing.
Other than
that, I doubt more than 1 out of 200,000 potential listeners would
have the
slightest clue what the Beep-Beeps were.

But on the thread topic, I don't have a problem with the morse
requirement
to get a certain class of license. As long as I'm not asked to do
anything
unreasonable, I don't see any problem. It's not like they are
requiring
folks to stand on one hand and juggle two kittens in the other hand
while
they take the test...

I have an idea. Instead of just requiring morse code lets modernize
the test and make it truly relevant. Lets give prospective hams a
menu
of tests to pick one from: Morse code; Kitten juggling; Controlling
a
horse and carriage with a buggywhip; Riding a 5 foot wave on a
longboard; Completing the 5 borough bike ride in NYC. Any one would
be
as helpful in identifying prospective hams.

Heaven forbid that the prospective hams would actually be tested in
the
safe and courteous operation of radio equipment by requiring them to
go
live under a tutor for a couple of hours.



-=jd=-
--
My Current Disposable Email:

(Remove YOUR HAT to reply directly)