Lew -

I find myself on both sides of this debate.

On the one hand ... Eliminate the code requirement ---

* I agree that perhaps the time for CW TESTING has passed. Not the use of CW
mind you, just the testing. Not the use of CW mind you, just the testing.
CW is still quite popular and active for casual QSOs as well as intense
contesting. It will be a popular mode for awhile. CW is still quite popular
and active for casual QSOs as well as intense contesting. It will be a
popular mode for awhile.As the last generation of Hams who "had to " learn
CW fade away -- perhaps CW will start to wind down too because not enough
people are being introduced to this mode. But that will because of "the will
of the people" not some silly FCC regulation.

*The CW requirement is being dropped in most other jurisdictions in the
world --- not that they are any smarter than we are --- but it clearly is
the trend.

* If I am to be true to my generally conservative beliefs, then the
requirement probably should go. The government should not be using its
regulatory powers to control our hobbies in this manner. Band allocations
yes, emission types - perhaps --- to insure there is no RF anarchy. Beyond
that --- butt out my life.

On the other hand -- keep the code requirements -- AKA no change.

*I believe the argument that code should be dropped because it is killing
the hobby is, at best, specious. I am not at all convinced that dropping CW
is going to breath and great amounts of life into the hobby. NO-CODE
licenses have been available for years. No great influx of young hams in
the VHF/UHF bands.

*From listening to the no-code debate for years, I am convinced that most
(not all) people who want to drop the code requirement because they want the
HF privileges, but they don't want to bother to learn the code. There is no
deep concern for the future of ham radio hidden in there anywhere; Just the
increasingly popular "I want..." but "I don't want to...". I want a lot of
money, but I don't want to work too hard. I want a nice car, but I don't
want to get a job". I want access to Winlink200 for free email while
cruising, but I don't want to learn the code. I don't think that is a
sufficient reason to change the requirement.


Today, kids have so much to pick from. Their communications options are
amazing (compared to 50 years ago --- hell, compared to 10 years ago!) cell
phone voice, cell phone IM, email, internet IM, chatrooms, websites... Back
in the old days those of us who were classified as "geeks" turned to
electronics and ham radio as a way to express our geekiness. Today, the
geeky kids turn to robotics and/or programming. Count the number of
websites devoted to building robotics VS the number devoted to building RF
stuff. Worthy of note --- not much of that communications technology did
anyone much good around ground zero on 9-11 of the hurricanes in Florida
last year, or ... pick your disaster. Cell phone service was pretty much
crippled on the east coast (entire country???) on 9-11. Ham radio kept on
ticking... But, it just where the excitement is right now. I think that is
the biggest challenge to Ham radio's future

If the genesis of ham radio was one of insuring that the country had a good
standby supply of communications technicians available during times of war
(WW1 / WW2 ??) then the history of CW knowledge is very obvious. That
national defense requirements are no longer the same. Now, there may be a
legitimate Homeland Defense, Emergency Readiness need to have back up (or
supplemental) communications in the hands of a larger number of trained and
organized citizens. Ham participation in the aftermath of Hurricanes, in
the aftermath of 9-11, in the aftermath of the next natural/terrorist
disaster may be reasons for the FCC to want to Keep Ham radio alive. I
think that having a good base of ham operators can be a good thing for the
country --- but only if they are ON THE AIR practicing their various
communications specialties.

I am starting to ramble...

To summarize, I am firmly on the fence with conservative tendencies leaning
to - less regulation is better regulation.


"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message
nk.net...
"Gerald" wrote:

If you aren't interested in HAM radio as a hobby, then why should the
hobby have to change to accommodate you?

Depends on whether you expect the HAM hobby to survive.

Unless some serious changes are made, there won't be enough new blood
attracted to the hobby for it to survive when all the existing old farts
are gone.

Lew