In a message dated 9/4/05 8:50:38 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
This is really tiring to hear. CW subbands has always been the short
way of saying the frequency segments where voice (and later other wide
modes) are not allowed.
Yup, but a lot of us say CW/data
Message -
From: Vic K2VCO [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: EricJ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 1:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
EricJ wrote:
Despite this oft repeated myth, CW is RARELY ever used in emergency
communications
Come on, Vic. Where is a CW operator going to set up? Are they going to set
up some place like the Superdome with all that pandemonium? Are they going
to walk around operating HF with 10' poles sticking out of their back pocket
like W0RW/PM? It just doesn't make sense when a ham on foot with a
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 7:10 AM
To: Vic K2VCO; EricJ
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
Check out the following nets http://www.aa8vs.org/nren both CW and Winlink
http://www.qsl.net/w8ihx CW net been running since '35
OK, guys, get ready to hate me.
Here in Alaska, (that's a bit North of Michigan, to our flatlander
friends) - Aurora is the norm. As in - every day, 365 days a year.
Some days it's no big deal, some days it eats your lunch, it's just a
fact of life.
As often as not, SSB will get
.
73 Chuck AA8VS
- Original Message -
From: Jim Wiley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 2:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
OK, guys, get ready to hate me.
Here in Alaska, (that's a bit North of Michigan, to our
] On Behalf Of Jim Wiley
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 11:43 AM
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
OK, guys, get ready to hate me.
Here in Alaska, (that's a bit North of Michigan, to our flatlander
friends) - Aurora is the norm. As in - every day, 365
EricJ wrote:
Come on, Vic. Where is a CW operator going to set up? Are they going to set
up some place like the Superdome with all that pandemonium? Are they going
to walk around operating HF with 10' poles sticking out of their back pocket
like W0RW/PM? It just doesn't make sense when a ham on
EricJ wrote:
Another point that is missed is that emergency traffic is not just endless
numbered messages relayed verbatim.
But this is exactly what health welfare traffic is. It is slightly
lower priority than emergency traffic, but it is very high volume. The
police, etc., have their
-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim Wiley
Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 2:43 PM
Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
OK, guys, get ready to hate me.
Here in Alaska, (that's a bit North of Michigan, to our flatlander
Jim, KL7CC wrote:
As often as not, SSB will get through when CW won't. FACT - not a typo!
==
When I lived in Michigan (closer to the magnetic north pole than Alaska),
the aurora didn't make a hoot of difference on HF between SSB and CW --
weak CW was still easier to copy than weak
, September 05, 2005 5:55 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
Jim, KL7CC wrote:
As often as not, SSB will get through when CW won't. FACT - not a typo!
==
When I lived in Michigan (closer to the magnetic north pole than Alaska
This is really tiring to hear. CW subbands has always been the short
way of saying the frequency segments where voice (and later other wide
modes) are not allowed. Nobody actually thinks that CW is restricted
to those frequencies or that only CW is allowed to be used in them.
Next someone
Emergency communications where the power lines are dead and the
repeaters are down. I've been in a few of those situations and the
saving grace was battery powered rigs and CW.
Are there any novel and compelling reasons for keeping the code test?
--
73 de Thomas M. Beaudry K8LA / YS1ZTM
There was a time when getting an extra class license in the
USA required first having years of experience as an Amateur
Radio licensee, then passing tests significantly harder than
the those for the other exams, both theory and code.
Two years licensed as a General or Advanced when I sat for
Well, I took both the Amateur Extra and the First Class
Commercial Radiotelephone back in 1974. At that time
at least, they were comparable.
I even remember someone (ARRL?) petitioning the FCC to grant written
credit for the Extra if you had passed the First Class Commercial and
vice-versa
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:07:24 -0400, Thomas M.Beaudry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Emergency communications where the power lines are dead and the
repeaters are down. I've been in a few of those situations and the
saving grace was battery powered rigs and CW.
Are there any novel and compelling
] Dropping the Code Test
On Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:07:24 -0400, Thomas M.Beaudry [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Emergency communications where the power lines are dead and the
repeaters are down. I've been in a few of those situations and the
saving grace was battery powered rigs and CW.
Are there any
EricJ wrote:
Despite this oft repeated myth, CW is RARELY ever used in emergency
communications.
...these days. It certainly was in the past.
Otherwise, no one there could come
up with a single emergency services group using CW ops for any purpose.
...because it's hard to find competent
In a message dated 9/3/05 1:29:28 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So doesn't that make those portions of a band where other modes are not
allowed CW Only?
There are only two such subbands in the USA: 50.0 to 50.1 and 144.0 to 144.1
MHz.
What some folks call the CW
In a message dated 9/3/05 1:19:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
The Extra written exam is significantly harder today than
it was 30 years ago.
That all depends on what you mean by harder.
With all due respect, the youngest Extra on record was 8 years old
and in the
On Sep 3, 2005, at 1:20 AM, EricJ wrote:
So doesn't that make those portions of a band where other modes are
not
allowed CW Only?
The only portions of the amateur radio spectrum that are CW only are
50.0-50.1 MHz and 144.0-144.1 MHz.
On HF, CW is permitted everywhere. Digital
On Sep 3, 2005, at 10:03 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Plus the current 50 question Extra contains everything needed to go
from
General to Extra. Between 1967 and 2000, the step from General to
Extra took two
written
exams totaling 90 questions. A valid comparison would look at the
Bill Coleman wrote:
As I remember the 1980-era Extra exam was a lot easier than the
Advanced. Of course, you also had to deal with the 20 wpm code test,
too. But, one certainly didn't need to be an EE to pass the Extra exam
at that time.
Bill Coleman, AA4LR, PP-ASELMail: [EMAIL
When I took the Extra exam in 1968, it was several years after taking the
General exam and there was no Advanced class. I had to study for it quite a
lot.
Those who got their Extra license earlier would tell me that the exam was
much easier when I took it than when they did as they needed
On Sat, 3 Sep 2005 10:03:28 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But will dropping Element 1 cause the bands to be full? Is the Morse Code
exam so difficult that it stops large numbers of would-be hams?
The ability to read Morse Code is a talent which people possess to a
greater or lessor degree.
I guess I have to ask myself how many people have we picked up since the 13
and 20 went away. Aren't we hearing the same old arguments for 5 now? I
don't think folks are going to come flocking in unless we find ways to make
the hobby appealing.
In fact one of the rumors I heard was that 'No
AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
In a message dated 9/3/05 1:19:06 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Should the license exams be aboout what hams actually do? Or should they
be about what some people consider
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Could it be that the sort of folks who really want to be hams are looking for
a
challenge, and not the easiest path?
73 de Jim, N2EY
___
Exactly right Jim,
73 Deni GM3SKN / F5VJC
K21188
In a message dated 9/1/05 4:30:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are a great many of us who would at least like to see a CW
requirement maintained for the Extra Class exam. There is a very
small (but real) chance that the FCC would do that
At 09:09 AM 9/2/2005 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 9/1/05 4:30:13 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
There are a great many of us who would at least like to see a
CW
requirement maintained for the Extra
Are there any novel and compelling reasons for keeping the
code test? I'm not sure there are. None of N2EY's points are
really good reasons for keeping the code test. For example,
he points out that CW is still quite popular with only a 5
wpm requirement. I rather doubt that dropping the test
Are there any novel and compelling reasons for keeping the
code test?
Since we seem to be opening this topic again, let me repeat something I said
before: The written tests (at least the Extra Class exam) already require
knowledge of the fine details of certain modes, such as the level of
I'm a little behind on QRP-L, and I'm trying to avoid contributing
noise on the topic, but this one slipped through and caught my attention.
I'm not sure how compelling this might be to the FCC, but it means a
lot to me: I think of Extra Class licensees as elmers and mentors. As
Jessie:
Your point is well taken. If you have not already done so, I would
encourage you to repeat it in a filing to the FCC.
73,
Steve
AA4AK
At 02:12 PM 9/2/2005 -0700, Jessie Oberreuter wrote:
I'm a little behind on QRP-L, and I'm trying to avoid contributing
noise on the topic,
Dan:
See interposed comments.
73,
Steve
AA4AK
Instead of wasting time complaining about the FCC dropping the testing
requirement, CW enthusiasts should be promoting its use.
***
I am not asking the list members to waste their time with recreational
complaining.
I am asking
Instead of wasting time complaining about the FCC dropping the testing
requirement, CW enthusiasts should be promoting its use.
Strongly agree. I'm a CW guy. I own some mics, but I work SSB only for
contests.
Last night I tuned around the CW portions of 80, 40, 30, and 20. This morning,
I
On Sep 2, 2005, at 11:07 AM, Stephen W. Kercel wrote:
Your HO includes quite a bit of wisdom.
A few specific reactions:
1) Speaking only for myself, I have no objection
opening the HF bands to people only interested in digital; so
long as
they keep out of the CW-only
I disagree. The Extra written exam is significantly harder today than
it was 30 years ago. There is a lot more detailed EE theory in it now
than there was back then. I took the test twice - in 1974, when I
didn't have the EE knowledge (but _was_ a student in EE), and last
October (well
So doesn't that make those portions of a band where other modes are not
allowed CW Only?
Eric
KE6US
www.ke6us.com
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bill Coleman
CW is allowed EVERYWHERE. Other modes are currently confined to restricted
Elecrafters:
I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is more
a call to action than simply venting a complaint.
FCC Notice 05-235 has come out in the Federal Register and comments are due
by October 31.
There are a great many of us who would at least like to see
Elecrafters:
I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is
more a call to action than simply venting a complaint.
FCC Notice 05-235 has come out in the Federal Register and comments
are due by October 31.
There are a great many of us who would
@mailman.qth.net
Sent: Thursday, September 01, 2005 4:28 PM
Subject: [Elecraft] Dropping the Code Test
Elecrafters:
I realize that this issue has been visited before, but this message is
more
a call to action than simply venting a complaint.
FCC Notice 05-235 has come out in the Federal Register
43 matches
Mail list logo
