GK User wrote in
:

PS With the advent of the internet and new technologies, that
require more bandwidth, I feel anything we can do to increase the
ranks of Amateur Radio operators is a good thing and if that means
sacrificing the code to save the hobby then I'm all for that. What we
must not give up is education into the rules and operating procedures
as well as basic theory and operation. We still need "educated"
professional operators.



Ham radio will be lucky if it survives to 2010. Go to any hamfest and
figure out the average age of the attendees is around 60, the few ham kids
included. Most kids can't figure out why they'd ever want a ham radio when
they can simply boot their computers, now with broadband, and talk to their
friends in Hong Kong without some old coot bitching at them that they are
on his private frequency he's been on since 1948 with his other old coot
friends. The old coots are killing ham radio. They hate kids on the air.

Naw...Not only has the code outlived itself by 30 years....so hasn't ham
radio.

73 DE W4CSC
old coot since 1957

NNNN

OK Larry!

Let's make a deal (and save me the time of reading through all the
commentary).

The next time this topic comes up, it will be when the code requirements
have been eliminated.

Until that day, I won't get my hopes up or refresh for the written exam.

Steve
s/v Good Intentions

"Steve" wrote in
:

Until that day, I won't get my hopes up or refresh for the written exam.


Won't be long, now. The whole world is dumping Morse.

--
Larry

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"Steve" wrote in
:

Until that day, I won't get my hopes up or refresh for the written exam.


Won't be long, now. The whole world is dumping Morse.

--
Larry

But has the ITU changed the treaty? Nothing can happen until then.

Doug, k3qt

Lines: 19
Message-ID:
X-Complaints-To:
X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling
X-Trace: ldjgbllpbapjglppdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcboho ngokabmdmmdnomhboeneagdmedomkfbiglifmdmhcokdcphkho kdiamdhmfinjdkplkmhbobemncobpghcbabcenbiedfgjhbebg ikachfdklb
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 19:24:43 EDT
Organization: BellSouth Internet Group
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 23:24:43 GMT
Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.boats.cruising:264959 rec.boats.electronics:61353


On 2005-08-19 dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom said:
But has the ITU changed the treaty? Nothing can happen until then.
Yep, did that at the last warc conference, I think 1999.

73



Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b
active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz
REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email

--



agood captain is one who is hoisting his first drink in a
bar when the storm hits.

"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in
:

But has the ITU changed the treaty? Nothing can happen until then.

Doug, k3qt



Long time ago. ARRL did what it could to prevent ITU from changing its
mind, but common sense prevailed. Code hasn't been an ITU requirement in
years. ARRL pulled out all the stops to prevent ham radio from having a
new flood of new hams without code on the old codgers' HF bands.

Now, we need to get rid of this stupid caste system and get down to ONE
license with all frequencies available to ALL, without CODE SUBBANDS, which
I predict are the next on the chopping block! USA hams may be heard from
14.100-14.150 on SSB before I die! What a concept....joining the rest of
the world on this precious slice of frequencies....all on PHONE.

--
Larry

Actually the ITU ended the code requirement in July of 2003 at WRC-03.

--
Glenn Ashmore

I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack
there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com
Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in
:

But has the ITU changed the treaty? Nothing can happen until then.

Doug, k3qt



Long time ago. ARRL did what it could to prevent ITU from changing its
mind, but common sense prevailed. Code hasn't been an ITU requirement in
years. ARRL pulled out all the stops to prevent ham radio from having a
new flood of new hams without code on the old codgers' HF bands.

Now, we need to get rid of this stupid caste system and get down to ONE
license with all frequencies available to ALL, without CODE SUBBANDS,
which
I predict are the next on the chopping block! USA hams may be heard from
14.100-14.150 on SSB before I die! What a concept....joining the rest of
the world on this precious slice of frequencies....all on PHONE.

--
Larry

"Larry" wrote in message
...
"Doug Dotson" dougdotson@NOSPAMcablespeedNOSPAMcom wrote in
:

But has the ITU changed the treaty? Nothing can happen until then.

Doug, k3qt



Long time ago. ARRL did what it could to prevent ITU from changing its
mind, but common sense prevailed. Code hasn't been an ITU requirement in
years. ARRL pulled out all the stops to prevent ham radio from having a
new flood of new hams without code on the old codgers' HF bands.

Now, we need to get rid of this stupid caste system and get down to ONE
license with all frequencies available to ALL, without CODE SUBBANDS,
which
I predict are the next on the chopping block! USA hams may be heard from
14.100-14.150 on SSB before I die! What a concept....joining the rest of
the world on this precious slice of frequencies....all on PHONE.

--
Larry

Yea! Welcome to the next generation of CB.