wrote in message
oups.com...
As I understand it, the reason for the requirement to display
proficiency in
CW stemmed from times in the ancient past where CW was the primary
(if not
the only) option for communicating, and there was also the
requirement that
we be proficient so that we could understand emergency traffic and
pass it
on / respond to it.

Those were a couple of reasons - but there are others.

And they are?

There is really no valid reason for the retention of CW as a
mandatory
requirement for HF access

Many people agree - but others disagree. What constitutes a valid
reason depends entirely on personal opinion.

For example, Morse code is widely used in the amateur radio service. On
HF it is secondary only to SSB in popularity, and not by much of a
margin. That popularity alone, IMHO, is a valid reason to keep at least
a basic Morse Code test.

Your are of course free to state your opinion, but please do not feel to bad
if it is ridiculed if it is away from the norm. My HF experience has been
that there are far more operators on SSB than CW - and yes I do listen in
the CW segments as well. I would hesitate to describe CW as being used more
often than or in similar amounts as SSB. 80/90 years ago, most if not all
of the activity would have been CW - now it is used less than SSB. In 20
years how popular will it be?? By forcing CW onto people, yes some will
love it and continue, but almost all of my friends and acquaintances in the
radio arena (excluding one or two) who have done the CW testing, did so
purely for the exams, and then never picked up their key since then - what a
terrible waste of time to do that (even if it gave them HF access), wouldn't
we be far better learning more on other areas that would benefit far more?

- many countries around the world have removed it

How many? Most of the countries have retained the test so far,
including Japan, which has had a QRP nocodetest HF ham license for
decades.

Not terribly up to date these days, but the following link is of interest.
http://www.nocode.org/articles.html


and surprisingly enough, now that it is no longer a requirement,
there is
apparently a resurgence of interest in the mode (here in VK for one).
If
you want to keep on using it, feel free, but please don't force
others to
learn a mode that is no longet essential, and indeed only barely
relevant.

Then delete most of the written test too, because most of it is
arguably less relevant.

How so? The main reason forthe theory testing is to demonstrate that you
have the basic proficiencies
The testing for CW merely shows that you have been able to learn CW and pass
a test - there is no real relevance to it in todays radio world - at least
none that would keep a potential amateur off the radio because he couldn't
display the appropriate proficiencies with CW.

Here in VK we removed the CW requirement for HF access just over a
year ago
and while the bands are only slightly more active, there hasn't been
the
flood of moronic operators that were being forecasted.

So there really hasn't been much change.

Could't quantify the actual increase, but HF has become somewhat more active
since the CW requirements were removed. The only change has been positive -
i.e. removal of an unecessary barrier.

P.S. if I use some of the digital data modes, I can send and receive
100%
copy when CW cannot even be heard - go digital modes.
How popular are those digital modes?

Again, I cannot quantify the popularity of these modes, but many amateurs
that I interact with do use multiple different digital modes depending on
what their interests and abilitiies.




Matt

In article , "Matt"
writes:

wrote in message
roups.com...
As I understand it, the reason for the requirement to display
proficiency in
CW stemmed from times in the ancient past where CW was the primary
(if not
the only) option for communicating, and there was also the
requirement that
we be proficient so that we could understand emergency traffic and
pass it
on / respond to it.

Those were a couple of reasons - but there are others.

And they are?

- Popularity of Morse in amateur radio today
- Ability to use almost any radio technology with Morse (old/new,
simple/complex)
- Human/machine interface
- Spectrum economy (most important on HF, where bandspace is most limited)

There is really no valid reason for the retention of CW as a
mandatory requirement for HF access

Many people agree - but others disagree. What constitutes a valid
reason depends entirely on personal opinion.

For example, Morse code is widely used in the amateur radio service. On
HF it is secondary only to SSB in popularity, and not by much of a
margin. That popularity alone, IMHO, is a valid reason to keep at least
a basic Morse Code test.

Your are of course free to state your opinion, but please do not feel to bad
if it is ridiculed if it is away from the norm.

Why should any opinion be ridiculed? I can see that some folks will disagree,
but that's a different thing than ridicule. And if the comments to various FCC
petitions are any indication, "the norm" is to *retain* at least some code
testing.

My HF experience has been
that there are far more operators on SSB than CW - and yes I do listen in
the CW segments as well.

That's one data point. Others' experience shows the difference is not
nearly as great. For example, look at the number of participants and the
total QSO counts in various HF contests. While the SSB totals are
higher, and more hams use that mode, CW is not far behind - despite the
fact that SSB should be faster.

I would hesitate to describe CW as being used more
often than or in similar amounts as SSB.

I don't claim that either. What I do say is:

"On HF it is secondary only to SSB in popularity, and not by much of a
margin."

That still puts SSB first.

80/90 years ago, most if not all
of the activity would have been CW - now it is used less than SSB.

That's true. But 'phone (AM, NBFM, DSB, SSB) operation has been a part of ham
radio since the 1920s, yet CW operation hasn't died out in all those years.

In 20 years how popular will it be??

Who knows?

I've been a ham since 1967, and interested in amateur radio even longer. More
than 40 years ago, there were affordable SSB transceivers all over the amateur
market, and all over the bands. Yet CW operation did not die out on the HF ham
bands.

By forcing CW onto people, yes some will
love it and continue, but almost all of my friends and acquaintances in the
radio arena (excluding one or two) who have done the CW testing, did so
purely for the exams, and then never picked up their key since then
- what a
terrible waste of time to do that (even if it gave them HF access), wouldn't
we be far better learning more on other areas that would benefit far more?

Which areas would you prefer? And how would you answer those who are not
interested in those areas, and want them removed from the test?

For example, in order to get my license, I had to learn about VHF/UHF, SSB and
RTTY, even though I had no interest in those subjects at the time. Why did I
*have to* take a test containing all that stuff just to use HF CW or AM?

- many countries around the world have removed it

How many? Most of the countries have retained the test so far,
including Japan, which has had a QRP nocodetest HF ham license for
decades.

Not terribly up to date these days, but the following link is of interest.
http://www.nocode.org/articles.html

Does it say how many countries have removed it compared to those
that have retained it?

Should the USA follow what other countries do, or what its own citizens want?

and surprisingly enough, now that it is no longer a requirement,
there is
apparently a resurgence of interest in the mode (here in VK for one).
If
you want to keep on using it, feel free, but please don't force
others to
learn a mode that is no longet essential, and indeed only barely
relevant.

Then delete most of the written test too, because most of it is
arguably less relevant.

How so?

Simple - most hams don't do most of the things covered in the written test.

The main reason forthe theory testing is to demonstrate that you
have the basic proficiencies

What basic proficiencies are really needed? Why must a ham memorize all those
band edges if not interested in those bands? Why all the radio theory to use
manufactured, certified equipment with digital readout and few if any
operational adjustments?

Back in the days of analog dials and rigs requiring knowledgeable adjustment,
it could be argued that a ham had to know how a rig worked to avoid
off-frequency operation or poor signal quality. But why must a ham know all
that stuff to use a modern rig?

What it boils down to is that every anticodetest argument can also be used
against the written test.

The testing for CW merely shows that you have been able to learn CW and pass
a test

That's true. The same is true of the written test - the questions are multiple
choice, from a public pool of questions and answers. If you get at least the
required number of questions right, you pass, regardless of real understanding
of radio.

- there is no real relevance to it in todays radio world -

That's simply not true, unless you don't consider amateur radio to be part of
"today's radio world".

And since we're discussing the requirements for an amateur radio license, can
you really say that Morse code skill has no real relevance in today's amateur
radio?

You may say the relevance isn't enough (in your opinion) to justify Element 1,
but to say there's no real relevance at all isn't based in fact.

at least
none that would keep a potential amateur off the radio because he couldn't
display the appropriate proficiencies with CW.

Apply that logic to most of what's in the *written* test.

Consider this: A Technician licensee is allowed to use all authorized (amateur)
modes and frequencies above 30 MHz, based on passing a 35 question written
test. And those modes and frequencies can be used at full 1500W power, as well
as building/repairing/adjusting any sort of equipment to do so.

But to use most of those same modes on amateur HF, a General class license is
needed, with its additional written test. Why? What's so different about
running 1500W of SSB on 2 meters and 20 meters?

And to get full privileges requires an Extra, requiring yet another written.
What's the fundamental difference?

Here in VK we removed the CW requirement for HF access just over a
year ago
and while the bands are only slightly more active, there hasn't been
the
flood of moronic operators that were being forecasted.

So there really hasn't been much change.

Could't quantify the actual increase, but HF has become somewhat more active
since the CW requirements were removed. The only change has been positive -
i.e. removal of an unecessary barrier.

But did you get a flood of new hams, new modes, etc., as has been promised for
the USA?

P.S. if I use some of the digital data modes, I can send and receive
100%
copy when CW cannot even be heard - go digital modes.
How popular are those digital modes?

Again, I cannot quantify the popularity of these modes, but many amateurs
that I interact with do use multiple different digital modes depending on
what their interests and abilitiies.

There's another factor to remember in all this: cultural and societal
differences. Here in the USA we have about 670,000 hams and about 300,000,000
people. How many hams are there in Australia, which has about the same land
area as the USA? What are your written tests like? How expensive is a ham
station?

If the majority of Australians and Canadians who have an opinion on the subject
want to remove code testing, the treaty allows it. But what if the majority of
Americans want to keep it - is that not allowed?

73 de Jim, N2EY