| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Steve N. wrote:
"Sal M. Onella" wrote in message news:Qt3ng.484$RD.249@fed1read08... Hi Sal... I have problems with most characters of four or more elements length. Exceptions are period and Q, for some reason. Since I don't do CW too much anymore, I have similar problems, and I've been at it since 1961! If I did it more, I'd probably get better and I'm not suggesting that you "need more practice", just offering a little empthy... (:-) [... snip ...] Oh yeah -- I know V because the dit-dit-dit-dah sounds like the 1812 overture. Ummm... I believe you are referring to ''Beethoven's fifth" di - di - di - dah. di - di - di - dah. didididah, didididah, didididah... I am realy gald you said that I was thinking it myself but...... 73, Steve, K9DCI |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"an_old_friend" wrote in message ups.com... Steve N. wrote: "Sal M. Onella" wrote in message news:Qt3ng.484$RD.249@fed1read08... Hi Sal... I have problems with most characters of four or more elements length. Exceptions are period and Q, for some reason. Since I don't do CW too much anymore, I have similar problems, and I've been at it since 1961! If I did it more, I'd probably get better and I'm not suggesting that you "need more practice", just offering a little empthy... (:-) [... snip ...] Oh yeah -- I know V because the dit-dit-dit-dah sounds like the 1812 overture. Ummm... I believe you are referring to ''Beethoven's fifth" di - di - di - dah. di - di - di - dah. didididah, didididah, didididah... I am realy gald you said that I was thinking it myself but...... 73, Steve, K9DCI the 5th is the only classical piece i can think of that starts like that but i'm sure there are more. L is easy to remember. "to hell with it". Gravity |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
RE THE SUBJECT TITLE
No one is eliminating the code, only the requirement to obtain a Ham license Many will use CW for many years to come Consider it an optional communication method. RE : Morse musical and word associations the 5th is the only classical piece i can think of that starts like that but i'm sure there are more. L is easy to remember. "to hell with it". Gravity dah dah dit dah Her comes the bride She is a Queen for the day Queen = Q More associations at URL: http://www.afn.org/~afn05925/cw/ dah dah dit dit -- stupid zebra did it di dah di dah dit AR = You Think You Got It -- CL -- I doubt, therefore I might be ! |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"L is easy to remember. "to hell with it". Thank you, I was haveing trouble confusing "F" and "L" I got nothing against CW, but being kept out of amateur radio for 40+ years cus I had difficulty learning the code, sucks. Finally, I got enough right to barely pass the 5 wpm test. Still can't find anybody slow enough for me to copy on the air. If I ever get good enough to use it, I'll try a few homebrew transmitter projects. I expect there are some technically competent people who might be interested in amateur radio, but have no interest in learning code. John |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
If you want easy...and most of the CW whiners do...why don't you just hook
your laptop up to your DSL line and stay the hell off the air? Jeez, you've got a pathetic joke for an exam now with canned questions to memorize and no code to learn. Too bad you're not still in your mother's womb so you don't have to feed yourselves. Though you have deluded yourselves into believing you are "hams," you are hardly believable when you wear that title. The only reason you have been able to slip through into the dumbed-down requirements and some sort of fcc "license" sham is because your appliance manufacturers that make your rigs and the charlatans like the arrl are selling out the hobby so they can sell you things. It's ALL ABOUT THE MONEY and you no-coder idiots have fallen for it. As for traditional, genuine "hams, we may be from the "Stone Age," but once the dinosauers became extinct the pristine landscape took on pollution and overcrowding. You simpletons have all drank the Kool-Aid and cannot see that you are parties to the eventual elimination of ham radio. Thank God for "stone age hams," for at least there is someone still around that knows something about the avocation. "J. D. B." wrote in message ... John, Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the fun is and the copy is much better. A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second channel to display additional information. CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes. MultiPSK, while a bit cluttered and ugly, is a great program you can use. MixW is cleaner looking and very good, but not as many capabilities in the program. Move on and start having fun. JDB JOHN D wrote: I got nothing against CW, but being kept out of amateur radio for 40+ years cus I had difficulty learning the code, sucks. Finally, I got enough right to barely pass the 5 wpm test. Still can't find anybody slow enough for me to copy on the air. If I ever get good enough to use it, I'll try a few homebrew transmitter projects. I expect there are some technically competent people who might be interested in amateur radio, but have no interest in learning code. John |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
JOHN D wrote:
Thank you, I was haveing trouble confusing "F" and "L" Was it embarrassing when you sent "good luck"? -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Sat, 15 Jul 2006 08:15:50 -0500, "Smokey" wrote: As for traditional, genuine "hams, we may be from the "Stone Age," but once the dinosauers became extinct the pristine landscape took on pollution and overcrowding. You simpletons have all drank the Kool-Aid and cannot see that you are parties to the eventual elimination of ham radio. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ LOL! This from someone who calls himself "Smokey" and does not post his callsign. Can you say "troll", boys and girls? Bill, W6WRT |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"J. D. B." wrote in message ... John, Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the fun is and the copy is much better. A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second channel to display additional information. CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes. MultiPSK, while a bit cluttered and ugly, is a great program you can use. MixW is cleaner looking and very good, but not as many capabilities in the program. Move on and start having fun. You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. Based on what I've read about DominoEX, it is a form of Multi-Frequency Shift Keying. This variation looks to be more robust than others, however, anything that can compromise FSK and MFSK has the potential to compromise DominoEX. It will merely be a matter of the degree of severity needed before it becomes unusable. Just because something is old doesn't make it useless or stone age. Pencils have been around far longer and are still highly useful. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Cecil Moore wrote:
JOHN D wrote: Thank you, I was haveing trouble confusing "F" and "L" Was it embarrassing when you sent "good luck"? Actually it was a simple realization on my part that half the alphabet was the mirror of the other. i.e. a/n f/l e/t etc. When I had this epiphany I basically knew the code. All I had to do was learn to receive it which I did successfully twice, once for my novice and once again when I sat for my Tech before my novice license came. Passed both tests. Haven't used it much since. My choice. Dave WD9BDZ |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Dee Flint wrote: "J. D. B." wrote in message ... John, Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the fun is and the copy is much better. A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second channel to display additional information. CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes. MultiPSK, while a bit cluttered and ugly, is a great program you can use. MixW is cleaner looking and very good, but not as many capabilities in the program. Move on and start having fun. You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. no you don't get it CW is in radio terms stone age, simol e fact stone does not mean useless you lack of ability to use english is worse than my problem with it you can't use words even though you can spell em A stone club is still leathal does that mean the army should drill and train with stone weapons? CW is obselete like HMS Canpous at the battle of the Falklands, like the Bowmen that fought with em in the retreat to Dunkirk . utility does not preclude obselenece LEARN ENGLISH esp when yo u lhave played spelling NAZI your self |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Dee Flint wrote:
You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. Thanks Dee, you admitted that CW is not the best mode in any condition. You agree that different modes work better under differing conditions. I agree. That's why is it utterly stupid to test incoming hams on one mode of communication. Finally we agree on something. Based on what I've read about DominoEX, it is a form of Multi-Frequency Shift Keying. This variation looks to be more robust than others, however, anything that can compromise FSK and MFSK has the potential to compromise DominoEX. It will merely be a matter of the degree of severity needed before it becomes unusable. Any mode can become unusable depending on conditions. The best thing is that some digital modes can be decoded when you cannot even hear the signal with a human ear. You just cannot do that with CW. With CW if you cannot hear it, you cannot decode it. Just because something is old doesn't make it useless or stone age. Pencils have been around far longer and are still highly useful. I agree. I never said do away with CW. I like to use it myself. However, tube rigs suck more electricity than solid state rigs and are bad for the environment so old things can be rather useless or damaging. Just like CW, it's not useless, but continuing to have a CW testing requirement is damaging and outdated. Riding horses is fun still, but very few want them for the normal day to day transportation now. They may be useful still, but for everyday transportation they are no longer required. Horses are found more and more out in the pasture where the CW testing requirement belongs. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
an old freind wrote:
A stone club is still leathal does that mean the army should drill and train with stone weapons? I'll bet the special forces do indeed study such subjects. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
J. D. B. wrote:
Thanks Dee, you admitted that CW is not the best mode in any condition. Actually, CW is the best mode for me under average conditions. It's my favorite mode. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Cecil Moore wrote: an old freind wrote: A stone club is still leathal does that mean the army should drill and train with stone weapons? I'll bet the special forces do indeed study such subjects. perhaps they do (and come to think of it I hope you are right) but not most of the Army -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"J. D. B." wrote in message ... Dee Flint wrote: You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. Thanks Dee, you admitted that CW is not the best mode in any condition. You agree that different modes work better under differing conditions. I agree. That's why is it utterly stupid to test incoming hams on one mode of communication. Finally we agree on something. No that has nothing to do with whether it should be tested. We do NOT agree on that issue. CW is a valid and useful mode but it is different in nature from the other modes. All the other digital modes simply require investing perhaps as much as 30 minutes in setting up the hardware and software to get up and running even if you make your own interface. So one can quickly evaluate whether or not they will like it. On the other hand, it is impossible to determine whether you will like CW until you have learned it, which takes some time. Many people who might like it won't tackle it unless it's required as they will have a false impression that it is too hard since there are so many trying to get the code requirement dropped by trying to convince people it is difficult. It is not difficult to learn but it does take time. I've known a number of people who admitted that they wouldn't have tried it unless required to do so but now find that they enjoy it. It's rather like piano lessons. Every adult I know who took piano as a child has made one of the two following statements: a) I'm glad my parents didn't let me quit, or, b) I wish my parents had not let me quit. The very adults who, as a child, were glad to drop piano are the ones who most deeply regret it now. Based on what I've read about DominoEX, it is a form of Multi-Frequency Shift Keying. This variation looks to be more robust than others, however, anything that can compromise FSK and MFSK has the potential to compromise DominoEX. It will merely be a matter of the degree of severity needed before it becomes unusable. Any mode can become unusable depending on conditions. The best thing is that some digital modes can be decoded when you cannot even hear the signal with a human ear. You just cannot do that with CW. With CW if you cannot hear it, you cannot decode it. That is true but it is not a reason to condemn CW. It is merely a working parameter that one must deal with. Besides one can run CW at a higher output without risking damage to the radio to often make up the difference. Keep in mind that if you include the power requirements for the computer and monitor plus radio that a 25watt output signal for the digital mode draws more power than a radio putting out 100watts of CW. I have repeatedly maintained that each mode has its advantages and disadvantages but the anti-CW crowd takes its particular characteristics as a reason to castigate it. They refuse to objectively evaluate their "high-tech" digital modes for their unique advantages and disadvantages. There are times when a voice signal will beat the digital modes in intelligibility. For example, PSK goes belly up with even the slightest auroral disturbance yet voices, while distorted, can still come through. It will take a higher level of auroral activity to knock out voice in comparison to that required to knock out PSK. A well rounded ham should be able to select his/her mode on the basis of conditions and not be limited to by the fact that they were allowed to "slide" on the code training. Just because something is old doesn't make it useless or stone age. Pencils have been around far longer and are still highly useful. I agree. I never said do away with CW. I like to use it myself. However, tube rigs suck more electricity than solid state rigs and are bad for the environment so old things can be rather useless or damaging. Just like CW, it's not useless, but continuing to have a CW testing requirement is damaging and outdated. Who says you have to stick to tube rigs to run CW? I know you know better than that. Tube rigs have largely gone away (except for collectors) simply because its much easier to deal with solid state equipment. Yet if one wants to run a legal limit amp, it's going to be a tube unit as they haven't come up with a way to do it cost effectively any other way. I strongly disagree that a CW testing requirement is damaging or outdated. There simply is not sufficient data to support that point of few. An occasional anecdote does not qualify as valid data. Riding horses is fun still, but very few want them for the normal day to day transportation now. They may be useful still, but for everyday transportation they are no longer required. Horses are found more and more out in the pasture where the CW testing requirement belongs. Again I disagree. That analogy is not really valid. A better one would be comparing it to driving an automobile with a stick shift. I personally feel that every one who drives should be required to know how to drive a stick. They often get better mileage than automatics as an experienced driver can do a better job of selecting the shift point than a mere gadget. More people might select stick shifts if only they knew how to drive one. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message .com... an old freind wrote: A stone club is still leathal does that mean the army should drill and train with stone weapons? I'll bet the special forces do indeed study such subjects. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp And no doubt bare hands, wire, and anything else that may be available. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message .com... J. D. B. wrote: Thanks Dee, you admitted that CW is not the best mode in any condition. Actually, CW is the best mode for me under average conditions. It's my favorite mode. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp Unfortunately the anti-code crowd sees any rational comparison of the modes as supporting their position. I do not support dropping the code requirement. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Dee Flint wrote: "J. D. B." wrote in message ... Dee Flint wrote: You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. Thanks Dee, you admitted that CW is not the best mode in any condition. You agree that different modes work better under differing conditions. I agree. That's why is it utterly stupid to test incoming hams on one mode of communication. Finally we agree on something. No that has nothing to do with whether it should be tested. We do NOT agree on that issue. lying again bitch it certainly has something to do with the issue but then you arenot honest about most thing |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Dee, you can disagree all you want. The fact is that the world is moving
on and away from CW testing. Not the mode, but the testing requirement. It is just outdated and not necessary. If you want to learn it and then use it, great. The time has come to stop forcing an old mode onto people. We can debate the merits of CW all day. In 200 years, no one will be using it. It will die a natural death like all languages because the world evolves. Better things come along. And like many humans, you are resisting change because people hate change. But change is inevitable. You cannot stop this change and it is a change for the better even if you won't admit it. History will show the only way to save the Amateur Radio Service and help its growth is to evolve and change. Out with the old and in with the new. Those that won't evolve will fade from the earth just like stone-age man. Good bye CW testing requirement. Your departure is long, long overdue. Dee Flint wrote: Again I disagree. That analogy is not really valid. A better one would be comparing it to driving an automobile with a stick shift. I personally feel that every one who drives should be required to know how to drive a stick. They often get better mileage than automatics as an experienced driver can do a better job of selecting the shift point than a mere gadget. More people might select stick shifts if only they knew how to drive one. Dee, N8UZE |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Dee Flint wrote:
Unfortunately the anti-code crowd sees any rational comparison of the modes as supporting their position. I do not support dropping the code requirement. It's like riding a bicycle when you could be driving an SUV. If you like to do it, then do it, but don't force others to adopt your particular favorite aspect of our hobby. There's room for many favorite aspects. For communications capability under difficult conditions, CW cannot hold a candle to PACTOR II. For fun, PACTOR II cannot hold a candle to CW. That's my personal experience and opinion. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
In article , "Dee Flint" wrote:
"J. D. B." wrote in message ... John, Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the fun is and the copy is much better. A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second channel to display additional information. CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes. MultiPSK, while a bit cluttered and ugly, is a great program you can use. MixW is cleaner looking and very good, but not as many capabilities in the program. Move on and start having fun. You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice, all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW. Based on what I've read about DominoEX, it is a form of Multi-Frequency Shift Keying. This variation looks to be more robust than others, however, anything that can compromise FSK and MFSK has the potential to compromise DominoEX. It will merely be a matter of the degree of severity needed before it becomes unusable. Just because something is old doesn't make it useless or stone age. Pencils have been around far longer and are still highly useful. Dee, N8UZE Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode" Hymie |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Hymie wrote: In article , "Dee Flint" wrote: Dee, N8UZE Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode" wrong again Hymie |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"J. D. B." wrote in
: John, Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the fun is and the copy is much better. A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second channel to display additional information. CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes. Yes, just as long as it's still required to get a license and the speeds need to be bumped back up to 13 & 20wpm again. SC |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"JOHN D" wrote in
news:gD2ug.2582$k31.2016@trnddc06: "L is easy to remember. "to hell with it". Thank you, I was haveing trouble confusing "F" and "L" I got nothing against CW, but being kept out of amateur radio for 40+ years cus I had difficulty learning the code, sucks. Finally, I got enough right to barely pass the 5 wpm test. Still can't find anybody slow enough for me to copy on the air. If I ever get good enough to use it, I'll try a few homebrew transmitter projects. I expect there are some technically competent people who might be interested in amateur radio, but have no interest in learning code. John They're not interested in being about to communicate in all ways effectively, they just want to be phonies. They they could've stuck to CB for that. |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Sorry Blow Code, but you cannot turn back the hands of time. The 13 & 20
WPM tests are gone forever. And soon, the CW testing requirement will be eliminated completely. It's the will of the majority. It's evolution. You can whine, cry and carry on all you want about the CW testing requirement. It is going the way of the buggy whip, the Ford Model-T, dinosaurs, the carrier pigeons, and a host of other old, outdated, and unnecessary things of the past. Good Bye and Good Riddance. Slow Code wrote: Yes, just as long as it's still required to get a license and the speeds need to be bumped back up to 13 & 20wpm again. SC |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Slow Code wrote:
Yes, just as long as it's still required to get a license and the speeds need to be bumped back up to 13 & 20wpm again. If CW testing is such a good thing, let's bump it up to 50. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
J. D. B. wrote: Sorry Blow Code, but you cannot turn back the hands of time. The 13 & 20 WPM tests are gone forever. And soon, the CW testing requirement will be eliminated completely. It's the will of the majority. It's evolution. You can whine, cry and carry on all you want about the CW testing requirement. It is going the way of the buggy whip, the Ford Model-T, dinosaurs, the carrier pigeons, and a host of other old, outdated, and unnecessary things of the past. Good Bye and Good Riddance. not the majority prehaps it is the will of and judgement of those that are supposed to serve the bets interest of the people the best interest of the people are served but ending code testing and the code culture that has dominated it and sent it on a downword slide not certain we can fix it with NOCode but it will be easier to try Slow Code wrote: Yes, just as long as it's still required to get a license and the speeds need to be bumped back up to 13 & 20wpm again. SC |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"J. D. B." wrote in
: Dee, you can disagree all you want. The fact is that the world is moving on and away from CW testing. Not the mode, but the testing requirement. It is just outdated and not necessary. If you want to learn it and then use it, great. The time has come to stop forcing an old mode onto people. We can debate the merits of CW all day. In 200 years, no one will be using it. It will die a natural death like all languages because the world evolves. Better things come along. And like many humans, you are resisting change because people hate change. But change is inevitable. You cannot stop this change and it is a change for the better even if you won't admit it. History will show the only way to save the Amateur Radio Service and help its growth is to evolve and change. Out with the old and in with the new. Those that won't evolve will fade from the earth just like stone-age man. Good bye CW testing requirement. Your departure is long, long overdue. Dee Flint wrote: Again I disagree. That analogy is not really valid. A better one would be comparing it to driving an automobile with a stick shift. I personally feel that every one who drives should be required to know how to drive a stick. They often get better mileage than automatics as an experienced driver can do a better job of selecting the shift point than a mere gadget. More people might select stick shifts if only they knew how to drive one. Dee, N8UZE As it happens, I do think people should have to learn on a stick shift, but I don't support code testing. If you can't drive a stick shift, you can't drive my car, as every car I've had has had a stick shift and so will every car I buy in future. OTOH, every rig I've bought has come with a mic, and none of them came with a key. Now, I know you can get some QRP rigs that are CW only. The point is, there is a very real chance that it may be necessary to drive someone else's car in an emergency, or even just to help out. What happens when you need to get someone to the emergency room and the only car available is a stick shift? It's no good saying that statistically manual shifts are declining in sales, as there are plenty of us who will never buy an automatic. OK, maybe you can say that you don't own a mic, and all the rigs in your shack are hooked up to a key (good luck on the local repeater!). What then is the realistic scenario where I will have to use one of your radios to save the world? (or even to save the next door neighbour) Doesn't seem to likely, does it? |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
|
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Al Klein wrote: On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:49:00 GMT, (Hymie) wrote: Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode" Even those who tout digital modes - they want to buy an interface and software and "be" on digital. Then they wonder why the signal they're hearing, that sounds just like the digital mode they use, doesn't work on their setup. Maybe because a PSK program won't decode SSTV? learn what you are tlaking about psk31 sounds very little like sstv and most of the programs that can demolate it show you a spectrograhand they look nothing alike there is some time confusion in wether that sgnal BPSK 31 or QPSK31 but the marvels of Windows wallo me to run the output of the sound card interface to at least 2 program so it can be worked out you just want to bash any ham that doesnot follow your morse fetish Reminds me of the GPRS "exerts" who can't understand why changing the "code" on their radios doesn't eliminate the interference from the guy next door. The anti-CW crowd wants no code and a written test you can memorize the answers to. It's their "right" to be on the air, isn't it? Even if they need 2 more clues to be totally clueless? it is our right and everybody else right that any restriction to our access to public spectrum be "neccisary and proper" (one of 3 clauses in the constitution that give the power to regulate the airwave to the govet at all) otherwise the 10 reserving all right and power to the sates or the people applies modifing that is the thrid place where the consititution of US touches on this issue mby making the constitution and the TREATIES made the supreme law of the land according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect for that document |
Eliminating CW will just give retards HF, it won't modernize the service.
Proof: "an_old_friend" wrote in ups.com: it is our right and everybody else right that any restriction to our access to public spectrum be "neccisary and proper" (one of 3 clauses in the constitution that give the power to regulate the airwave to the govet at all) otherwise the 10 reserving all right and power to the sates or the people applies modifing that is the thrid place where the consititution of US touches on this issue mby making the constitution and the TREATIES made the supreme law of the land according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect for that document |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
"J. D. B." wrote in
: Sorry Blow Code, but you cannot turn back the hands of time. The 13 & 20 WPM tests are gone forever. And soon, the CW testing requirement will be eliminated completely. It's the will of the majority. It's evolution. You can whine, cry and carry on all you want about the CW testing requirement. It is going the way of the buggy whip, the Ford Model-T, dinosaurs, the carrier pigeons, and a host of other old, outdated, and unnecessary things of the past. Good Bye and Good Riddance. Spoken like a true appliance operator. If there is any crying and whining after CW is gone, it will be by phonies wondering why their bands sound like CB. SC |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Al Klein wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 01:41:29 GMT, Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize. The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize. No knowledge of electronics required. For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to memorize. when did the test aquire gender Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a schematic and ask them to find a component by function. I can even my wife who frankly does not the why ofof it can tel the component "Knowledge of electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad. if you are that depressed about give it up go fishing but please trying to killthe ARS with your bile |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Al Klein wrote:
For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to memorize. Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a schematic and ask them to find a component by function. "Knowledge of electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad. In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL License Manual in order to get my Conditional license. People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for more than half a century. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: For most people, he written test is also a test of the ability to memorize. Just show most hams licensed in the past 10 years a schematic and ask them to find a component by function. "Knowledge of electronics"? It would be funny if it weren't so sad. In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL License Manual in order to get my Conditional license. People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for more than half a century. at the risk of seeming foolish but the answer will make a point here I think tyour license did PRECEED your becoming an EE didn't it, by some many years -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote: Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize. The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize. No knowledge of electronics required. Rules and regulations are just an exercise in memorization also. They require no knowledge of electronics either. The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language requirement for some college degrees, it rounds out the amateur skills. Dave WD9BDZ |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewith other.
David G. Nagel wrote: Cecil Moore wrote: Al Klein wrote: Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize. The Morse code exam is a test of the ability to memorize. No knowledge of electronics required. Rules and regulations are just an exercise in memorization also. They require no knowledge of electronics either. The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language requirement for some college degrees, it rounds out the amateur skills. an improvement over the drivel most of the procoders are posting although the analogy streches a bit if I ask what college in the wolrd has a requirement for one foreign lang and only one did you submit it in your coments to the FCC? all in all not bad Dave WD9BDZ |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
an old freind wrote:
Cecil Moore wrote: In 1953, as a sophomore in high school, I didn't know any electronics and was therefore forced to memorize the ARRL License Manual in order to get my Conditional license. People like me have been memorizing License Manuals for more than half a century. at the risk of seeming foolish but the answer will make a point here I think your license did PRECEED your becoming an EE didn't it, by some many years My amateur radio license, obtaining by memorizing the ARRL License Manual in 1952-1953, was the catalyst that caused me to seek and obtain a EE degree later in 1959. The point is that an amateur radio license is a learner's permit to exercise certain privileges during a lifetime of learning. It is a permit, not a graduation certificate. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
Elimination of CW is a loss in the number of ways we can communicatewithother.
David G. Nagel wrote:
The CW text requirement is like the requirement for a foreign language requirement for some college degrees, ... I carefully avoided any foreign language requirement for my BS EE. -- 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:07 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com