Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Can we put this one to REST?? - Don't pick lemons. See all the new 2007 cars at Yahoo! Autos.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
A few years ago, my wife was thinking about upgrading to General but found a similar situation where the dits and dahs sound roughly the same to her. She decided that it was not something she wanted to spend that many resources in trying to learn, since the only possible use she would have for a General would be HF portable operation to enhance what we do now with repeaters. Because the test had dropped to such a slow speed at 5 wpm, it was practical to consider alternate methods of reception, such as flashing light or tactile feel. Some deaf hams have been able to hear CW by lightly touching a speaker cone and sensing the vibrations. For some, it is one of the few ways they could communicate. Computers have helped tremenously in being able to display text and images. If digital modes were extremely important for emergency communication, it is not unreasonable that the government might include some kind of certification for typing skills when you consider the Part 97 basis and purpose of amateur radio, but it does not seem to be viewed as an important skill for the radio amateur. Speech to text technology has improved somewhat over the last decade and even QST had an article a while back with a ham that used this for sending PSK31, rather than having to type the message on the keyboard. On one of my farm internet discussion groups, we have at least on blind participant and I know some who use speech to text to write their posts. It is even possible for a deaf person to communicate with a blind person using these kinds of technology. Just one of the extra benefits of our digital modes:) 73, Rick, KV9U James Wilson wrote: Glad you learned it. I have spent at least 80 hours trying to learn code using every method possible. I was getting ready to go to the doctors to figure out what was wrong with me. It's hard to explain I just can't hear the sounds. Dit's and Dah's continue to sound the same. I consider myself fairly intelligent but just couldn't learn code. After they dropped code I said ok this is good, but I still want to learn it. It's low power, ability to work in all situations then I learned about PSK and the beauty of PSK. Now I agree with the CW guys there should be a skills requirement for current technology. If you can't type 20 words per minute your drop down to a tech, 30 words to be an extra. Come on, anyone can learn how to type and 30 wpm isn't that fast.
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
It is even possible for a deaf person to communicate with a blind person I have had a few patients with severe motor strokes but with preserved cognitive functioning use Morse code as the only means of communication with the world. My opinion is that it is hard for me to believe that the tiny bit of spectrum W1AW uses for code practice is really meaningful to argue about. I personally would not like to see Morse code continue to be sunned and thereby relegated to museums. We should do what we can as hams to keep the art alive. Because you never know how or when this skill will save a life. Michael K3MH _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KV9U Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 6:13 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? A few years ago, my wife was thinking about upgrading to General but found a similar situation where the dits and dahs sound roughly the same to her. She decided that it was not something she wanted to spend that many resources in trying to learn, since the only possible use she would have for a General would be HF portable operation to enhance what we do now with repeaters. Because the test had dropped to such a slow speed at 5 wpm, it was practical to consider alternate methods of reception, such as flashing light or tactile feel. Some deaf hams have been able to hear CW by lightly touching a speaker cone and sensing the vibrations. For some, it is one of the few ways they could communicate. Computers have helped tremenously in being able to display text and images. If digital modes were extremely important for emergency communication, it is not unreasonable that the government might include some kind of certification for typing skills when you consider the Part 97 basis and purpose of amateur radio, but it does not seem to be viewed as an important skill for the radio amateur. Speech to text technology has improved somewhat over the last decade and even QST had an article a while back with a ham that used this for sending PSK31, rather than having to type the message on the keyboard. On one of my farm internet discussion groups, we have at least on blind participant and I know some who use speech to text to write their posts. It is even possible for a deaf person to communicate with a blind person using these kinds of technology. Just one of the extra benefits of our digital modes:) 73, Rick, KV9U James Wilson wrote: Glad you learned it. I have spent at least 80 hours trying to learn code using every method possible. I was getting ready to go to the doctors to figure out what was wrong with me. It's hard to explain I just can't hear the sounds. Dit's and Dah's continue to sound the same. I consider myself fairly intelligent but just couldn't learn code. After they dropped code I said ok this is good, but I still want to learn it. It's low power, ability to work in all situations then I learned about PSK and the beauty of PSK. Now I agree with the CW guys there should be a skills requirement for current technology. If you can't type 20 words per minute your drop down to a tech, 30 words to be an extra. Come on, anyone can learn how to type and 30 wpm isn't that fast.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I know that you have read or heard of this before but if you are having hearing problems, learning the code, try learning from a very slow speed.. eg 1 or 2 wpm and slowing going faster... Larry ve3fxq - Original Message - From: James Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 12:57 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Glad you learned it. I have spent at least 80 hours trying to learn code using every method possible. I was getting ready to go to the doctors to figure out what was wrong with me. It's hard to explain I just can't hear the sounds. Dit's and Dah's continue to sound the same. I consider myself fairly intelligent but just couldn't learn code. After they dropped code I said ok this is good, but I still want to learn it. It's low power, ability to work in all situations then I learned about PSK and the beauty of PSK. Now I agree with the CW guys there should be a skills requirement for current technology. If you can't type 20 words per minute your drop down to a tech, 30 words to be an extra. Come on, anyone can learn how to type and 30 wpm isn't that fast. - Original Message - From: KV9U To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:36 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. The military (except for some special personnel) no longer use it, MARS dropped it as well. It is a huge sea change for sure. Voice modes were fairly popular as the technology improved and it was not necessary to promote specific skills since we already know how to do that. Digital is a relatively small special interest area of radio amateurs and only in the past few years has become a bit more important and that is reflected in the number and types of digital questions asked in the exams. Only CW requires a special skill to operate unless you include typing skills for keyboarding. In fact, I have found that one of things holding back more deployment of non voice digital modes is the inability of the operator to have those skills. Will there still be a few hams who will want to learn CW? Yes, a few. But many fewer than we had in the past. I am a good example. I hated CW and hated the idea that that I had to do it. And I only later was able to pass the 13 wpm and later the 20 wpm exams at an FCC examining site prior to the VE program, but it took a huge amount of effort. If I had not had to learn CW, there is no question that I never would have expended that much time. And I would never have realized that it can be an interesting mode to use. And I would never realize what I would have missed. It was only that I was required to do it that pushed me to do it. That is all gone now. It will be quite interesting to see how many do try it and become proficient in CW. But maybe only half as many? 20% as many? 10% as many? 73, Rick, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
My wifes sister in law, had a patient in Washington state, who couldnt speak, and could barely move. Just a young girl. I recommended they teach her to blink code, as she was already blinking for yes and no. I sicced them on Handy Hams in the area. The sister in law moved and took a job at a new area, so I never heard the follow up conclusions on the patient, but she seemed to be well on the way to communicating that way. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: Michael Hatzakis Jr MD To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 11:05 AM Subject: RE: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? It is even possible for a deaf person to communicate with a blind person I have had a few patients with severe motor strokes but with preserved cognitive functioning use Morse code as the only means of communication with the world. My opinion is that it is hard for me to believe that the tiny bit of spectrum W1AW uses for code practice is really meaningful to argue about. I personally would not like to see Morse code continue to be sunned and thereby relegated to museums. We should do what we can as hams to keep the art alive. Because you never know how or when this skill will save a life. Michael K3MH -- From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KV9U Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 6:13 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? A few years ago, my wife was thinking about upgrading to General but found a similar situation where the dits and dahs sound roughly the same to her. She decided that it was not something she wanted to spend that many resources in trying to learn, since the only possible use she would have for a General would be HF portable operation to enhance what we do now with repeaters. Because the test had dropped to such a slow speed at 5 wpm, it was practical to consider alternate methods of reception, such as flashing light or tactile feel. Some deaf hams have been able to hear CW by lightly touching a speaker cone and sensing the vibrations. For some, it is one of the few ways they could communicate. Computers have helped tremenously in being able to display text and images. If digital modes were extremely important for emergency communication, it is not unreasonable that the government might include some kind of certification for typing skills when you consider the Part 97 basis and purpose of amateur radio, but it does not seem to be viewed as an important skill for the radio amateur. Speech to text technology has improved somewhat over the last decade and even QST had an article a while back with a ham that used this for sending PSK31, rather than having to type the message on the keyboard. On one of my farm internet discussion groups, we have at least on blind participant and I know some who use speech to text to write their posts. It is even possible for a deaf person to communicate with a blind person using these kinds of technology. Just one of the extra benefits of our digital modes:) 73, Rick, KV9U James Wilson wrote: Glad you learned it. I have spent at least 80 hours trying to learn code using every method possible. I was getting ready to go to the doctors to figure out what was wrong with me. It's hard to explain I just can't hear the sounds. Dit's and Dah's continue to sound the same. I consider myself fairly intelligent but just couldn't learn code. After they dropped code I said ok this is good, but I still want to learn it. It's low power, ability to work in all situations then I learned about PSK and the beauty of PSK. Now I agree with the CW guys there should be a skills requirement for current technology. If you can't type 20 words per minute your drop down to a tech, 30 words to be an extra. Come on, anyone can learn how to type and 30 wpm isn't that fast. -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.2/692 - Release Date: 2/18/2007 4:35 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
My opinion is that it is hard for me to believe that the tiny bit of spectrum W1AW uses for code practice is really meaningful to argue about. I personally would not like to see Morse code continue to be sunned and thereby relegated to museums. We should do what we can as hams to keep the art alive. Because you never know how or when this skill will save a life. Michael K3MH It is less about the tiny sliver of spectrum than it is about bureaucratic arrogance and an absense of accountability. It is mostly about do as I say not as I do on the part of the ARRL. They preach no QRM, then they QRM. They preach follow the bandplan then they violate the bandplan. They preach no cw is OK then they QRM and violate the bandplan to promote cw. They preach the value of elmering by example yet they demonstrate selective anarchy -- precisely the thing we do not want former CBers to bring from that world into ours. To say that the message from the ARRL is muddled is an understatement. -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
But does this mean that the cw operators should be squeezed out of the hobby?... And what happens when those using voice get tired of it?... Larry ve3fxq - Original Message - From: Charlie Wilber [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 12:22 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. == No reasonable person can deny what? That CW is no longer a necessary skill or that the FCC no longer considers it to be so? If you meant the former, your arrogant generalization is unfortunate and incorrect. If the latter, we need only remember that the FCC also considers BPL to be a benign technology that has no effect on amateur radio to understand the error of that statement. Any reasonable person will understand that. Charlie Wilber N1AOK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
--- larry allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But does this mean that the cw operators should be squeezed out of the hobby?... No it doesn't 99.9% of us who do not believe CW has any meaning in the testing for new HAMS would never support any move to outlaw it. REMEMBER SPAM ? That's a old problem now but back years ago there was a move to ban AM because some thought it was a unneeded mode. AM is still here. Interesting that now CW is not a requirement I hear those who opposed it wanting to learn the mode anyway Now they are not being forced too. Doom sayers go back in your cave CW is not going anywhere .. Have a burning question? Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I have to agree. I never thought of the US government as the yardstick to measure appropriate behavior. In fact, it has been the Amateur community over the last 10o years that has helped the FCC drive policy and technology adoption and this is, partly, why we enjoy so much spectrum and as much freedom as we do. Many pushed for elimination of CW to improve access to licensing, but I really do not believe we should allow this to make us believe that CW is superfluous. I mean, PSK31 is not necessary for licensure and is not considered a necessary skill, and is not a requirement for licensure, yet, no-one is saying that PSK is unnecessary and should be eliminated. CW is a basic form of communication. Lets embrace it. Michael K3MH _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charlie Wilber Sent: Monday, February 19, 2007 9:23 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:mrfarm%40mwt.net wrote: Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. == No reasonable person can deny what? That CW is no longer a necessary skill or that the FCC no longer considers it to be so? If you meant the former, your arrogant generalization is unfortunate and incorrect. If the latter, we need only remember that the FCC also considers BPL to be a benign technology that has no effect on amateur radio to understand the error of that statement. Any reasonable person will understand that. Charlie Wilber N1AOK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
The United States was the LAST country of the world requiring it for testing. Now there is NO country requiring it. Does that not say something? It's fun, it's great, it has some definite uses but so does RTTY. Should that be required too? I teach it to my kids in school. They drive teachers bonkers with it. They will never cease using it. But they also use many other digital modes. 73 Les At 12:42 PM 2/19/2007, you wrote: Charlie, No reasonable person can deny that the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill for radio amateurs to have. At one time it was something of significance, now it is not. At one time, CW skills were something the government wanted maintained within a subset of the population because it might be needed during wartime. This is no longer true since even the military (with a few exceptions) no longer uses CW. CW was only a necessary skill on amateur frequencies during the earliest days. Once voice modes, and much later, RTTY modes, became common, CW was no longer a necessary skill for ham radio. For many hams, CW was abandoned for the remainder of their operating years. The percentage of radio amateurs who operate CW for at least part of their operating time, has been decreasing drastically and will likely continue to decrease, but this is something left up to each individual to decide. If you listen to the ham bands today, compared to a few decades ago, it would be obvious that there are many fewer operators sending CW. BPL issues just go to show you how incorrect bureaucrats can be when it comes to new technology. Just because something is new, does not necessarily make it useful or even desirable. 73, Rick, KV9U Charlie Wilber wrote: KV9U mailto:mrfarm%40mwt.net[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. == No reasonable person can deny what? That CW is no longer a necessary skill or that the FCC no longer considers it to be so? If you meant the former, your arrogant generalization is unfortunate and incorrect. If the latter, we need only remember that the FCC also considers BPL to be a benign technology that has no effect on amateur radio to understand the error of that statement. Any reasonable person will understand that. Charlie Wilber N1AOK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Kids do seem to like CW. I have taught two 3rd grade classes as part of a unit on the physics of sound and am about to do a third. Every kid was interested, therewere a few kids in each class who were hyper-interested. Leigh/WA5ZNU On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 1:11 pm, Les Warriner wrote: The United States was the LAST country of the world requiring it for testing. Now there is NO country requiring it. Does that not say something? It's fun, it's great, it has some definite uses but so does RTTY. Should that be required too? I teach it to my kids in school. They drive teachers bonkers with it. They will never cease using it. But they also use many other digital modes. 73 Les At 12:42 PM 2/19/2007, you wrote: Charlie, No reasonable person can deny that the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill for radio amateurs to have. At one time it was something of significance, now it is not. At one time, CW skills were something the government wanted maintained within a subset of the population because it might be needed during wartime. This is no longer true since even the military (with a few exceptions) no longer uses CW. CW was only a necessary skill on amateur frequencies during the earliest days. Once voice modes, and much later, RTTY modes, became common, CW was no longer a necessary skill for ham radio. For many hams, CW was abandoned for the remainder of their operating years. The percentage of radio amateurs who operate CW for at least part of their operating time, has been decreasing drastically and will likely continue to decrease, but this is something left up to each individual to decide. If you listen to the ham bands today, compared to a few decades ago, it would be obvious that there are many fewer operators sending CW. BPL issues just go to show you how incorrect bureaucrats can be when it comes to new technology. Just because something is new, does not necessarily make it useful or even desirable. 73, Rick, KV9U Charlie Wilber wrote: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. == No reasonable person can deny what? That CW is no longer a necessary skill or that the FCC no longer considers it to be so? If you meant the former, your arrogant generalization is unfortunate and incorrect. If the latter, we need only remember that the FCC also considers BPL to be a benign technology that has no effect on amateur radio to understand the error of that statement. Any reasonable person will understand that. Charlie Wilber N1AOK
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
At 09:54 PM 2/17/2007, you wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Morse Code is no longer a requirement for a license - true statement. The FCC justified their decision in part based on their determination that it was no longer valuable enough to require. It's more like it was based on Political Correctness
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I wish I had all your free time to look this up all the time At 07:06 PM 2/17/2007, you wrote: It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins;
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Some thoughts on this: 1. I am mostly retired except for the farming operation and we no longer have any livestock over the winter so that means minimal chores other than keeping the woodstove burning. 2. It only takes a few seconds to look it up as I have Part 97 on my computer as a basic .doc file and can do a quick search to find the pertinent information. 3. I try to keep up my understanding of rules, both for my own interest and so that I keep it straight when I teach ham classes or do any mentoring. Maybe it even keeps the brain going? 73, Rick, KV9U John Becker wrote: I wish I had all your free time to look this up all the time At 07:06 PM 2/17/2007, you wrote: It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins;
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 10:54 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Morse Code is no longer a requirement for a license - true statement. The FCC justified their decision in part based on their determination that it was no longer valuable enough to require. Morse Code practice transmissions are absurd - your personal opinion. No, absurd in the face of the FCC's decision. It sounds like you want to force your opinion on those of us who still use or want to improve our skills in Morse Code. I made no statement of opinion re. the code, I happen to be a 20WPM Extra. BTW: Ad hominem attacks are silly. Using and improving CW skills requires no ARRL broadcasts -- there are hundreds of CW QSOs to copy every day -- from regular Hams across the HF spectrum. -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. =0
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. The military (except for some special personnel) no longer use it, MARS dropped it as well. It is a huge sea change for sure. Voice modes were fairly popular as the technology improved and it was not necessary to promote specific skills since we already know how to do that. Digital is a relatively small special interest area of radio amateurs and only in the past few years has become a bit more important and that is reflected in the number and types of digital questions asked in the exams. Only CW requires a special skill to operate unless you include typing skills for keyboarding. In fact, I have found that one of things holding back more deployment of non voice digital modes is the inability of the operator to have those skills. Will there still be a few hams who will want to learn CW? Yes, a few. But many fewer than we had in the past. I am a good example. I hated CW and hated the idea that that I had to do it. And I only later was able to pass the 13 wpm and later the 20 wpm exams at an FCC examining site prior to the VE program, but it took a huge amount of effort. If I had not had to learn CW, there is no question that I never would have expended that much time. And I would never have realized that it can be an interesting mode to use. And I would never realize what I would have missed. It was only that I was required to do it that pushed me to do it. That is all gone now. It will be quite interesting to see how many do try it and become proficient in CW. But maybe only half as many? 20% as many? 10% as many? 73, Rick, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Rod, I agree with your assessment of EMP issues and have thought about this a bit over the years. I keep one rig off line in a closet with the hope that it might survive an EMP event. It might not though, as it has no special shielding. I suppose I should at least short out the antenna connector. Sometimes I wish I could have a Faraday shielded ham shack. Maybe we should consider doing that if we ever build a new home. It would only cost a small amount of money to wrap a room with some hardware cloth under the paneling, ceiling and floor. Digital modes generally require computers and most of them would be damaged except perhaps some lap tops that might have been disconnected. We don't really know with absolute certainly how large an area the EMP event could cover with a specific damage level. But it would definitely cause impacts to anything connected to wires for a long way from the detonation point. I don't recall anyone ever saying that CW has no use. I have not seen anyone debate this at all here on this group. In fact, I know that there will be a few hams who will try it and who will have a natural or native ability to learn it and will find it a lot of fun. But probably not a lot of them. Your last comment is what the folks who do anything new generally say to the OT's. 73, Rick, KV9U Rodney Kraft wrote: Personally, should someone fire off a nuke, or a series of nukes, the EM Pules would wipe out MOST electronics, at least those that are operational at the time and most of what isn't shielded! Phone systems, especially Cell phones, would be history! The Trunking communications systems (they require rather large computer databases to keep them running) would fail. Basically, the majority of all communications, GPS, Navigational... systems would be toast! CW has proven itself to be reliable in the most adverse conditions and always will be. To say that it has NO use is a stupid statement! Yes, it HAS become rather obsolete, with all the other forms of Data communications, but wouldn't you at least like to know that SOME form of RELIABLE communications is actually in use and people are LEARNING and honing their skills? This debate is rather stupid because all the FCC has done is to STOP the REQUIREMENT for CW in getting your license. It has NOT stopped or forbidden its use! GET OVER IT!!! ADAPT!! Rod KC7CJO
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
The amazing thing today, at the Frost Fest in Richmond Va, was the number of people in line outside the rooms where the upgrade tests were being given. Probably 90 percent, or more, used the excuse that CW was too hard, and now that its a gimmie were there in mass. I would be interested to see how many of them, who were not willing to do the work to learn CW, stick with ham radio (at least hf) now. It has always seemed clear to me that those who really stick with things are those who worked to get it. I also noted several people looking over the digital interface units on hand. Sadly, just about the only place I saw with many such units, had only Rigblaster NOMICs or units with NO ability. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:36 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. The military (except for some special personnel) no longer use it, MARS dropped it as well. It is a huge sea change for sure. Voice modes were fairly popular as the technology improved and it was not necessary to promote specific skills since we already know how to do that. Digital is a relatively small special interest area of radio amateurs and only in the past few years has become a bit more important and that is reflected in the number and types of digital questions asked in the exams. Only CW requires a special skill to operate unless you include typing skills for keyboarding. In fact, I have found that one of things holding back more deployment of non voice digital modes is the inability of the operator to have those skills. Will there still be a few hams who will want to learn CW? Yes, a few. But many fewer than we had in the past. I am a good example. I hated CW and hated the idea that that I had to do it. And I only later was able to pass the 13 wpm and later the 20 wpm exams at an FCC examining site prior to the VE program, but it took a huge amount of effort. If I had not had to learn CW, there is no question that I never would have expended that much time. And I would never have realized that it can be an interesting mode to use. And I would never realize what I would have missed. It was only that I was required to do it that pushed me to do it. That is all gone now. It will be quite interesting to see how many do try it and become proficient in CW. But maybe only half as many? 20% as many? 10% as many? 73, Rick, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP Announce your digital presence via our DX Cluster telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Our other groups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.2/692 - Release Date: 2/18/2007 4:35 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I know of at least three local technician class hams (including myself) that are looking forward to learning CW *after* getting our general. Requiring Morse to get the general stopped us from even trying in the past. How can you learn without practice? Especially in today's hectic world. Further, I think it will encourage further development of better CW software decoders for those that are less interested in learning the code than using it. Will this work out as well as the old system? Only time will tell. I suspect it will work far better, though the transition may be a bit bumpy. But this has nothing to do with the topic of this group, so I will no longer talk of this here... Artie KC2MFS 73 Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. The military (except for some special personnel) no longer use it, MARS dropped it as well. It is a huge sea change for sure. Voice modes were fairly popular as the technology improved and it was not necessary to promote specific skills since we already know how to do that. Digital is a relatively small special interest area of radio amateurs and only in the past few years has become a bit more important and that is reflected in the number and types of digital questions asked in the exams. Only CW requires a special skill to operate unless you include typing skills for keyboarding. In fact, I have found that one of things holding back more deployment of non voice digital modes is the inability of the operator to have those skills. Will there still be a few hams who will want to learn CW? Yes, a few. But many fewer than we had in the past. I am a good example. I hated CW and hated the idea that that I had to do it. And I only later was able to pass the 13 wpm and later the 20 wpm exams at an FCC examining site prior to the VE program, but it took a huge amount of effort. If I had not had to learn CW, there is no question that I never would have expended that much time. And I would never have realized that it can be an interesting mode to use. And I would never realize what I would have missed. It was only that I was required to do it that pushed me to do it. That is all gone now. It will be quite interesting to see how many do try it and become proficient in CW. But maybe only half as many? 20% as many? 10% as many? 73, Rick, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
A good place/area for stored equpment is in a storm cellar, buried under the earth, with a steel reinforced ceiling over it. Sadly, it appears that fewer and fewer people, even in the tornado alley, both to put in storm cellers. I was amazed to return to Texas and find all the new housing without any such protection at all. When I was a kid there, every house either had one, or their was a designated neighbor to suddenly visit when the sirens went off. Even we school kids had an assigned celler to flee too, when given the warnings. Back then, few if any were ever killed from such storms. No longer the case. Florida, with its ever increasing numbers of tornados, of course has no such capability due to the high water levels. Dig down three feet, and you have a well. Danny Douglas N7DC ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB all DX 2-6 years each . QSL LOTW-buro- direct As courtesy I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to LOTW or hard card. moderator [EMAIL PROTECTED] moderator http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk - Original Message - From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 5:48 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Rod, I agree with your assessment of EMP issues and have thought about this a bit over the years. I keep one rig off line in a closet with the hope that it might survive an EMP event. It might not though, as it has no special shielding. I suppose I should at least short out the antenna connector. Sometimes I wish I could have a Faraday shielded ham shack. Maybe we should consider doing that if we ever build a new home. It would only cost a small amount of money to wrap a room with some hardware cloth under the paneling, ceiling and floor. Digital modes generally require computers and most of them would be damaged except perhaps some lap tops that might have been disconnected. We don't really know with absolute certainly how large an area the EMP event could cover with a specific damage level. But it would definitely cause impacts to anything connected to wires for a long way from the detonation point. I don't recall anyone ever saying that CW has no use. I have not seen anyone debate this at all here on this group. In fact, I know that there will be a few hams who will try it and who will have a natural or native ability to learn it and will find it a lot of fun. But probably not a lot of them. Your last comment is what the folks who do anything new generally say to the OT's. 73, Rick, KV9U Rodney Kraft wrote: Personally, should someone fire off a nuke, or a series of nukes, the EM Pules would wipe out MOST electronics, at least those that are operational at the time and most of what isn't shielded! Phone systems, especially Cell phones, would be history! The Trunking communications systems (they require rather large computer databases to keep them running) would fail. Basically, the majority of all communications, GPS, Navigational... systems would be toast! CW has proven itself to be reliable in the most adverse conditions and always will be. To say that it has NO use is a stupid statement! Yes, it HAS become rather obsolete, with all the other forms of Data communications, but wouldn't you at least like to know that SOME form of RELIABLE communications is actually in use and people are LEARNING and honing their skills? This debate is rather stupid because all the FCC has done is to STOP the REQUIREMENT for CW in getting your license. It has NOT stopped or forbidden its use! GET OVER IT!!! ADAPT!! Rod KC7CJO Announce your digital presence via our DX Cluster telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Our other groups: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 Yahoo! Groups Links -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.2/692 - Release Date: 2/18/2007 4:35 PM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Glad you learned it. I have spent at least 80 hours trying to learn code using every method possible. I was getting ready to go to the doctors to figure out what was wrong with me. It's hard to explain I just can't hear the sounds. Dit's and Dah's continue to sound the same. I consider myself fairly intelligent but just couldn't learn code. After they dropped code I said ok this is good, but I still want to learn it. It's low power, ability to work in all situations then I learned about PSK and the beauty of PSK. Now I agree with the CW guys there should be a skills requirement for current technology. If you can't type 20 words per minute your drop down to a tech, 30 words to be an extra. Come on, anyone can learn how to type and 30 wpm isn't that fast. - Original Message - From: KV9U To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2007 2:36 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Clearly, the FCC no longer considers CW a necessary skill. No reasonable person can deny that. The military (except for some special personnel) no longer use it, MARS dropped it as well. It is a huge sea change for sure. Voice modes were fairly popular as the technology improved and it was not necessary to promote specific skills since we already know how to do that. Digital is a relatively small special interest area of radio amateurs and only in the past few years has become a bit more important and that is reflected in the number and types of digital questions asked in the exams. Only CW requires a special skill to operate unless you include typing skills for keyboarding. In fact, I have found that one of things holding back more deployment of non voice digital modes is the inability of the operator to have those skills. Will there still be a few hams who will want to learn CW? Yes, a few. But many fewer than we had in the past. I am a good example. I hated CW and hated the idea that that I had to do it. And I only later was able to pass the 13 wpm and later the 20 wpm exams at an FCC examining site prior to the VE program, but it took a huge amount of effort. If I had not had to learn CW, there is no question that I never would have expended that much time. And I would never have realized that it can be an interesting mode to use. And I would never realize what I would have missed. It was only that I was required to do it that pushed me to do it. That is all gone now. It will be quite interesting to see how many do try it and become proficient in CW. But maybe only half as many? 20% as many? 10% as many? 73, Rick, KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am wondering why CW, as a mode, becomes less valuable just because there is no upfront test prior to licensing. Were Digital and SSB modes previously considered less valuable than CW because there was prerequiste testing in either mode before we got our licenses? Maybe Digital operators could have been subjected to a keyboarding test and SSB operators subjected to picking callsigns out of heavy QRM! Now, all three modes are on similar footing. You pass the test, get your license and work the mode or modes that you wish to use. I just don't understand why the elimination of a licensing requirement means that folks won't want to learn CW or improve their existing CW skills. In my case, I was away from CW for a number of years. I can still copy a CW QSO at 12-15 WPM but the format of a typical CW QSO is pretty predictable, easy to follow and copy. I prefer the practice that W1AW offers me as it gives me some good text to copy and a quick way to compare my copy with what was actually sent. 73 es DX Russ WA3FRP
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Did this very same subject not come up last fall? If I recall that horse was beat well past a bloody death. I think you will get the very same answers as then.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
I believe that w1aw has the rights (perhaps a better word can be found) to it's accepted frequencies in the same way that more modern repeaters have their rights to accepted frequencies. Larry ve3fxq - Original Message - From: John Becker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 10:17 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? Did this very same subject not come up last fall? If I recall that horse was beat well past a bloody death. I think you will get the very same answers as then.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
They actually do have a station operator during the simultaneous transmissions. They had claimed in the past that the operator listens on each band and if necessary tweaks the frequency a bit if it is right on a QSO that can be heard. The W1AW signal is an excellent one and I can easily see that they could step on stations that can hear each other well but can not be heard by W1AW's operator. I have to say that with all the computer practice CW available now, and since it is no longer necessary to operate at any particular speed to pass a code test, the code practice transmissions are pretty much obsolete. For those who might remember what it was like as a new Novice, we would timidly listen around and hear someone calling CQ at a speed we hoped that we could copy and then answer them. With computers, it is possible to get some assistance by using the computer to help you if you miss something. This assumes the other op has a reasonably good fist and lets face it, many ops have really poor sending ability. If a computer can not decode your fist, then you know you need to improve it. That includes OT's as well, many of whom have difficulty with timing, word separation, etc. Then again there are those who are really savvy and can do a good job and are a pleasure to chat with on CW. I hope to hear some slow ops trying CW on the 80/40/15 meter text data areas of the band that all hams, including Technicans will be able to operate on in about 6 days from today. The very best way to increase your code speed, and certainly the most fun way, is to actually get on the air and use it. Of course, most will want to try SSB voice and maybe even some digital on 10 meters. 73, Rick, KV9U Bill McLaughlin wrote: Hi Danny, I know it has been asked before; sadly. I cc'd them at HQ with the same question, to be fair. I agree re their 160 meters ops also. It was a marginal problem on 80 under the older FCC constraints but the recent changes only amplify the issue. Many of us predicted the effects of digital modes all being pressed into an RF corner and think with level-heads we can work it all out (like we have options?). We (or just I) do not need the mess compounded by (envious look inserted) a signal of W1AW's magnitude dumped on an already saturated digital mode band-space without the inkling of listening before transmitting. It is seemingly unattended operation that by statute is limited to frequencies not where they are. As for 160, do not believe there is any FCC allocation for unattended ops (as W1AW seems to be)...if there is let me know as a few actual researchers for propogation are looking for a frequency to beacon... the ARRL has it in the bandplan but the FCC does not have it in the regs. 73 and be well, thanks for your comments, Bill N9DSJ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Yes I do agree that computers are being used to copy cw.. But I also hope that the new no-code hams, when phone looses it's appeal, will give cw a change, even using computers After hearing cw, and copying via computer, perhaps the no-code operators will give learning cw a chanceEven those who claim they just can not copy above a certain speed... Slow speed is better than no speed... Larry ve3fxq p.s. When I was just new to ham radio, I was on crystal controlled (dx-60) for the first year, but when I finally got my vfo, ham friends reminded me to stay away from w1aw frequencies. They were respected frequencies to stay way from. Give those wanting the code practice, and not so good receivers, their time and frequency windows to do code practice... - Original Message - From: KV9U [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Saturday, February 17, 2007 11:38 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? They actually do have a station operator during the simultaneous transmissions. They had claimed in the past that the operator listens on each band and if necessary tweaks the frequency a bit if it is right on a QSO that can be heard. The W1AW signal is an excellent one and I can easily see that they could step on stations that can hear each other well but can not be heard by W1AW's operator. I have to say that with all the computer practice CW available now, and since it is no longer necessary to operate at any particular speed to pass a code test, the code practice transmissions are pretty much obsolete. For those who might remember what it was like as a new Novice, we would timidly listen around and hear someone calling CQ at a speed we hoped that we could copy and then answer them. With computers, it is possible to get some assistance by using the computer to help you if you miss something. This assumes the other op has a reasonably good fist and lets face it, many ops have really poor sending ability. If a computer can not decode your fist, then you know you need to improve it. That includes OT's as well, many of whom have difficulty with timing, word separation, etc. Then again there are those who are really savvy and can do a good job and are a pleasure to chat with on CW. I hope to hear some slow ops trying CW on the 80/40/15 meter text data areas of the band that all hams, including Technicans will be able to operate on in about 6 days from today. The very best way to increase your code speed, and certainly the most fun way, is to actually get on the air and use it. Of course, most will want to try SSB voice and maybe even some digital on 10 meters. 73, Rick, KV9U Bill McLaughlin wrote: Hi Danny, I know it has been asked before; sadly. I cc'd them at HQ with the same question, to be fair. I agree re their 160 meters ops also. It was a marginal problem on 80 under the older FCC constraints but the recent changes only amplify the issue. Many of us predicted the effects of digital modes all being pressed into an RF corner and think with level-heads we can work it all out (like we have options?). We (or just I) do not need the mess compounded by (envious look inserted) a signal of W1AW's magnitude dumped on an already saturated digital mode band-space without the inkling of listening before transmitting. It is seemingly unattended operation that by statute is limited to frequencies not where they are. As for 160, do not believe there is any FCC allocation for unattended ops (as W1AW seems to be)...if there is let me know as a few actual researchers for propogation are looking for a frequency to beacon... the ARRL has it in the bandplan but the FCC does not have it in the regs. 73 and be well, thanks for your comments, Bill N9DSJ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins; It would not come under the same rules as repeaters since they are placed by permission of the frequency coordinator which is whatever group is formed by the radio amateurs in that area or section, etc. The FCC considers them to hold the most weight. 97.3 Definitions. /(22) Frequency coordinator/. An entity, recognized in a local or regional area by amateur operators whose stations are eligible to be auxiliary or repeater stations, that recommends transmit/receive channels and associated operating and technical parameters for such stations in order to avoid or minimize potential interference. Any uncoordinated station needs to resolve interference to a coordinated station. Under Part 97.113 Prohibited Transmissions, there are some exceptions for even the operators of a code practice station. This was tailor made specifically for the ARRL operators and placed into the rules by request from the ARRL. (d) The control operator of a club station may accept compensation for the periods of time when the station is transmitting telegraphy practice or information bulletins, provided that the station transmits such telegraphy practice and bulletins for at least 40 hours per week; schedules operations on at least six amateur service MF and HF bands using reasonable measures to maximize coverage; where the schedule of normal operating times and frequencies is published at least 30 days in advance of the actual transmissions; and where the control operator does not accept any direct or indirect compensation for any other service as a control operator. 73, Rick, KV9U larry allen wrote: I believe that w1aw has the rights (perhaps a better word can be found) to it's accepted frequencies in the same way that more modern repeaters have their rights to accepted frequencies. Larry ve3fxq
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
KV9U wrote: It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins; station. It is odd that the FCC did not strike 97.111(b)(5) since it is rendered somewhat absurd effective Feb. 23rd. It cannot be considered important when it has been removed from the qualifications for HF access. It still remains true that Do as I say and not as I do is a lousy leadership motto. The ARRL wants everyone else to avoid QRMing others and to honor voluntary bandplans but they carelessly violate both -- and unnecessarily so. If they want to operate a SW broadcasting station why not apply for a license to do so and liberate more precious spectrum for 2-way Ham communications? Just wondering ... -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Morse Code is no longer a requirement for a license - true statement. Morse Code practice transmissions are absurd - your personal opinion. It sounds like you want to force your opinion on those of us who still use or want to improve our skills in Morse Code. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 8:33 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? KV9U wrote: It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins; station. It is odd that the FCC did not strike 97.111(b)(5) since it is rendered somewhat absurd effective Feb. 23rd. It cannot be considered important when it has been removed from the qualifications for HF access. It still remains true that Do as I say and not as I do is a lousy leadership motto. The ARRL wants everyone else to avoid QRMing others and to honor voluntary bandplans but they carelessly violate both -- and unnecessarily so. If they want to operate a SW broadcasting station why not apply for a license to do so and liberate more precious spectrum for 2-way Ham communications? Just wondering ... -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. =0
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
Morse Code practice transmissions are absurd - your personal opinion. Hummm this debate will never die . --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Morse Code is no longer a requirement for a license - true statement. Morse Code practice transmissions are absurd - your personal opinion. It sounds like you want to force your opinion on those of us who still use or want to improve our skills in Morse Code. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Sat, 17 Feb 2007 8:33 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580? KV9U wrote: It is legal under FCC rules for W1AW to transmit code practice under 97.111 Authorized transmissions. (b) In addition to one-way transmissions specifically authorized elsewhere in this Part, an amateur station may transmit the following types of one-way communications: (5) Transmissions necessary to assisting persons learning, or improving proficiency in, the international Morse code; (6) Transmissions necessary to disseminate information bulletins; station. It is odd that the FCC did not strike 97.111(b)(5) since it is rendered somewhat absurd effective Feb. 23rd. It cannot be considered important when it has been removed from the qualifications for HF access. It still remains true that Do as I say and not as I do is a lousy leadership motto. The ARRL wants everyone else to avoid QRMing others and to honor voluntary bandplans but they carelessly violate both -- and unnecessarily so. If they want to operate a SW broadcasting station why not apply for a license to do so and liberate more precious spectrum for 2-way Ham communications? Just wondering ... -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. =0 8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time with the Yahoo! Search movie showtime shortcut. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/shortcuts/#news
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Why still the W1AW CW non-listening stuff on 3.580?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Morse Code is no longer a requirement for a license - true statement. The FCC justified their decision in part based on their determination that it was no longer valuable enough to require. Morse Code practice transmissions are absurd - your personal opinion. No, absurd in the face of the FCC's decision. It sounds like you want to force your opinion on those of us who still use or want to improve our skills in Morse Code. I made no statement of opinion re. the code, I happen to be a 20WPM Extra. BTW: Ad hominem attacks are silly. Using and improving CW skills requires no ARRL broadcasts -- there are hundreds of CW QSOs to copy every day -- from regular Hams across the HF spectrum. -- Thanks! 73, doc, KD4E ~~ Projects: http://ham-macguyver.bibleseven.com Personal: http://bibleseven.com ~~
