| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
jds wrote:
well, call me an old fart then. if someone is too damn lazy to learn code, let em be limited to a technician. i use cw 99% of the time. try talking to some guy in italy that doesnt speak english any better than i speak italian, add accent= wtf did he say??? an "a" is .- in any language. jeez , 5wpm is a real obsticle?? i could copy 10 before i even attempted my novice test. j.d. kc7mpd Sounds like a merit badge you have to learn to enter the club. Bet you still have your Capt'n Midnight decoder ring. Seriously, if you choose to use code, so be it. I have better things to do with my time than learning to use a totally dead language. I'm not interested in ham radio as a hobby, I already have too many. For me is it strictly a communication tool when I'm on then water. Nothing more, nothing less. Want to make ham radio a PITA to use, be my guest, there are other options. Lew |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message k.net... jds wrote: well, call me an old fart then. if someone is too damn lazy to learn code, let em be limited to a technician. i use cw 99% of the time. try talking to some guy in italy that doesnt speak english any better than i speak italian, add accent= wtf did he say??? an "a" is .- in any language. jeez , 5wpm is a real obsticle?? i could copy 10 before i even attempted my novice test. j.d. kc7mpd Sounds like a merit badge you have to learn to enter the club. Bet you still have your Capt'n Midnight decoder ring. Seriously, if you choose to use code, so be it. I have better things to do with my time than learning to use a totally dead language. I'm not interested in ham radio as a hobby, I already have too many. For me is it strictly a communication tool when I'm on then water. Nothing more, nothing less. If you aren't interested in HAM radio as a hobby, then why should the hobby have to change to accommodate you? Why not expect the licensing test to drop all the electronics requirements since you don't expect to build / design / modify any radios. If you plan on having a marine installer hook up your radio to a backstay, knowing about antenna design seems like a waste of time. Even if you do, you should probably need to prove you know something about rigging too. Well Lew, if you want to communicate, use marine SSB, or Marine VHF, or CB, or FRS, or GMRS, or your cell phone. Want to talk to HAMS? Get a HAM license. Want another potentially usefull communications option? If you do much offshore work, you should consider getting a hand held Aviation VHF radio with a AA battery pack to put in your "ditch bag". Legal to own? yes. Legal to operate? Not with out an appropriate license. But, if you just stepped up from your boat into your life raft, it might be nice to talk with commercial airline pilots overhead while the rescue people figure out who the unregistred EPIRB you activated belongs to. --- ILLEGAL ??? COME ARREST ME --- PLEASE ---- NOW!!!! Then there is that damn USCG Master License test. You need to know inland river rules when you only operate in the atlantic coast. You need to know how many bolts on a 6 inch fire hose coupling when you only operate a 50 foot motor vessel. They actually expect you to know how to navigate with a chart, dividers, parallel ruler and a pencil --- how archaic is that? Everyone uses GPSs now. .They really need to dumb that test down too to accomodate those too dumb, lazy or uninterested enough to be bothered to learn. Lew Jerry USCG Near Coastal Master / with towing and sailing endorsements Amateur Advanced |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-08-09 22:06:01 +1000, "Gerald" said:
"Lew Hodgett" wrote in message k.net... jds wrote: well, call me an old fart then. if someone is too damn lazy to learn code, let em be limited to a technician. i use cw 99% of the time. try talking to some guy in italy that doesnt speak english any better than i speak italian, add accent= wtf did he say??? an "a" is .- in any language. jeez , 5wpm is a real obsticle?? i could copy 10 before i even attempted my novice test. j.d. kc7mpd Sounds like a merit badge you have to learn to enter the club. Bet you still have your Capt'n Midnight decoder ring. Seriously, if you choose to use code, so be it. I have better things to do with my time than learning to use a totally dead language. I'm not interested in ham radio as a hobby, I already have too many. For me is it strictly a communication tool when I'm on then water. Nothing more, nothing less. If you aren't interested in HAM radio as a hobby, then why should the hobby have to change to accommodate you? Why not expect the licensing test to drop all the electronics requirements since you don't expect to build / design / modify any radios. If you plan on having a marine installer hook up your radio to a backstay, knowing about antenna design seems like a waste of time. Even if you do, you should probably need to prove you know something about rigging too. Well Lew, if you want to communicate, use marine SSB, or Marine VHF, or CB, or FRS, or GMRS, or your cell phone. Want to talk to HAMS? Get a HAM license. Want another potentially usefull communications option? If you do much offshore work, you should consider getting a hand held Aviation VHF radio with a AA battery pack to put in your "ditch bag". Legal to own? yes. Legal to operate? Not with out an appropriate license. But, if you just stepped up from your boat into your life raft, it might be nice to talk with commercial airline pilots overhead while the rescue people figure out who the unregistred EPIRB you activated belongs to. --- ILLEGAL ??? COME ARREST ME --- PLEASE ---- NOW!!!! Then there is that damn USCG Master License test. You need to know inland river rules when you only operate in the atlantic coast. You need to know how many bolts on a 6 inch fire hose coupling when you only operate a 50 foot motor vessel. They actually expect you to know how to navigate with a chart, dividers, parallel ruler and a pencil --- how archaic is that? Everyone uses GPSs now. .They really need to dumb that test down too to accomodate those too dumb, lazy or uninterested enough to be bothered to learn. Lew Jerry USCG Near Coastal Master / with towing and sailing endorsements Amateur Advanced That was the best rebuttal of the "you need to dumb things down so I too can pass this test!" Amen Jerry. PS. I am through all the practical reqirements for our AYF Coastal Skipper Certification and working towards the Offshore Certificate. -- Regards, John Proctor VK3JP, VKV6789 S/V Chagall |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
"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 |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
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 |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Plus -
I still have and use paper charts right next to my GPS fed computer with charting software. Which is all located at my nav station where I keep my sextent that I enjoy using whenever I am offshore. It is good to be able to verify that the GPS is working ok! A little of the new, a little of the old. "Gerald" wrote in message ... 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 |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Gerald" wrote in
: 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... [Lots of clipping from the above post] So what did morse code have to do with the above? How much of the communication during the hurricane(s) was code vs voice? I can guess that it was probably close to 100% voice. I would also point out that cell service was disrupted in the immediate area around the 911 disaster, but the rest of the country wasn't effected, other than perhaps overloaded circuits. Q: How did the reports from the hijacked plane that crashed into the field come in? A: Cell phones. -- Geoff |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Geoff --
"Geoff Schultz" wrote in message 6... "Gerald" wrote in : 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... [Lots of clipping from the above post] So what did morse code have to do with the above? Absolutly nothing. Just a litttle "pro ham radio" note. How much of the communication during the hurricane(s) was code vs voice? I can guess that it was probably close to 100% voice. I would also point out that cell service was disrupted in the immediate area around the 911 disaster, but the rest of the country wasn't effected, other than perhaps overloaded circuits. And the differnece bwtween overloaded circuits and any other disruption when you need to get a call through and cann't is......? Q: How did the reports from the hijacked plane that crashed into the field come in? A: Cell phones. And your point is?????? I think we are loosing some sense of where this thread came from and is about. -- Geoff |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Ham Radio Licenses | Electronics | |||
| Code Flags | ASA | |||
| Ignorant Dupes | ASA | |||
Hybrid Mode
