I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the
last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for
General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement
was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the
ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action
to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Vito" wrote in message
...
"Michael Sutton" wrote
"Doug Dotson" wrote
It is true that the code requirement is part of international treaty.

Not since the last (ITU?) convention just last year. It was dropped and
several countries (Japan & Canada?) quit code testing. The US FCC still
requires 5 wpm for General and Extra (ie, to use HF) but ARRL has
petitioned
FCC to drop it. Don't hold your breath - FCC is OK but is still an
American
bureaucracy so I'm sure anyone here can learn 5 wpm faster than it'll act
on
the petition.

So if you already have your code from Novice at 5wpm, .....

Volunteer Examiners will give you credit if you have proof you passed it -
eg if you have a Novice or a Tech license dated before the advent of
no-code
tech. In fact those who did code + novice written to become Novices, then
took the General written exam to become Techs can apply to get
grandfathered
to General.

BTW, my child bride heads a W5YI VE team that admin's tests every other
month in Fredricksburg VA. If some of you want to take an exam in VA's
No.Neck or Middle Peninsula area she could prolly help.

K3DWW

Doug Dotson wrote:

I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the
last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for
General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement
was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the
ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action
to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay.

I am a bit worried about the bands going the way of CB if it gets to
easy but the code requirement really needs to go. I would like to see
the writtens get a lot tougher or at least not publish the actual
questions and answers in study books. Anybody with half a brain can
memorize a book from Radio Shack and pass it now.

--
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

I have agree with that. But I found that learning the stuff was
alot easier than memorizing all the questions in the test
bank.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Glenn Ashmore" wrote in message
news:Fqdoc.12635$Lm3.9028@lakeread04...


Doug Dotson wrote:

I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the
last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for
General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement
was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the
ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action
to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay.

I am a bit worried about the bands going the way of CB if it gets to
easy but the code requirement really needs to go. I would like to see
the writtens get a lot tougher or at least not publish the actual
questions and answers in study books. Anybody with half a brain can
memorize a book from Radio Shack and pass it now.

--
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

Doug Dotson wrote:

I have agree with that. But I found that learning the stuff was
alot easier than memorizing all the questions in the test
bank.


Maybe you are left brained and I am right. Take that Back! Probably
the other way around. :-) I found the written easy but only passed the
code test by the grace of a generous examiner.

--
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

Glenn Ashmore wrote in
news:WIeoc.12640$Lm3.1248@lakeread04:



Doug Dotson wrote:

I have agree with that. But I found that learning the stuff was
alot easier than memorizing all the questions in the test
bank.


Maybe you are left brained and I am right. Take that Back! Probably
the other way around. :-) I found the written easy but only passed the
code test by the grace of a generous examiner.


I've been a ham since 1957, so I guess that makes me an old-timer, now.
I've always felt sorry for the many very nice people who would make great
hams, but were too dyslexic or had other physical problems that prevented
them from learning the STUPID, unnecessary code most old hams used as
punishment and in their attempt to keep the ham bands for themselves.

As to the anti-CB myth nonsense you ALWAYS see in any kind of discussion
like this, some of the best hams in Charleston were once illegal CBers
running 5KW on CB for years. The argument didn't wash then, and is a moot
question now as CBers, just like many of us inactive hams, are carrying
around full-duplex cellphones with unlimited service and are using
internet, instead of radios, to chat around the world. The ARRL's chief
VEC examiner, here, who is also the FCC's own volunteer GROL examiner now,
was once the "Mud Duck" on CB running several KW into stacked Telrex beams
at 90'. He's one of the most active hams in SC and is a great asset to ham
radio, no matter what his past history in CB was. Over half my radio club
membership has CB to thank for getting them into ham radio in the first
place.

Ham radio is dying of old age and curmudgeonry (sp?). Go to any hamfest
and estimate the average age of the crowd. My guess is around 60, now.
These are the guys who grew up with tube radios and are scared to death of
computers/internet/new technology. Most young people shrug their shoulders
and say, "I swapped full-motion color video with Werner in Berlin this
morning. Why would I want ham radio?" And, he'd be right. He no longer
needs ham radio to talk to the world. Morse code requirements have been
killing ham radio, slowly but surely, since Morse code became moot with the
invention of AM, FM and SSB. If you hear any old farts prompting the same
old line that CW can get through when all else fails, then go download
Winwarbler from:
http://www.qsl.net/winwarbler/
install it and tune your SSB receiver to 14.070 Mhz USB. In the 4 Khz
bandwidth of any SSB receiver, you'll find lots of PSK31 digital mode QSOs
going on in 31 Hz of total bandwidth from 10-20 watt transmitters around
the world. PSK31's tones and any cheap PC's sound card can decode and
display perfect text on a signal so weak YOU can't make it out, even with a
narrowband receiver listing to just the one station! Use any SSB receiver,
this free software (which can simultaneously monitor THREE conversations at
once!) with the headphone jack of the receiver plugged into your computer
sound card line input and give it a try, whether you are a ham or not.
PSK31, PSK63 were invented by hams for hams. It's simply the finest
digital mode we ever had and is SO efficient in spectrum usage. It's
faster than you can type.

I, for one old ham, am glad the world is finally coming to its senses and
getting rid of manual code requirements they should have dumped after WW2.

73 Larry W4CSC aka KN4IM, WB4THE, WN2IWH when I was 11.
Leaving for sea tonight so won't be replying to this message....
Best of luck to all those coming into ham radio! For me, it's been a
helluva great ride these past 47 years!

NNNN (We always put that at the end of important-looking teletype messages
to impress everyone.)

SK

There are exemptions from the code requirement. Not sure exactly
what constitutes an exemption, but a friend of mine was exempted
from the code requirement because he is hearing impaired. I know
the certain folks have a legitimate reason (dyslexia or some other
LD type of problem) that they cannot learn code.

Doug, k3qt
s/v Callista

"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message
...
Glenn Ashmore wrote in
news:WIeoc.12640$Lm3.1248@lakeread04:



Doug Dotson wrote:

I have agree with that. But I found that learning the stuff was
alot easier than memorizing all the questions in the test
bank.


Maybe you are left brained and I am right. Take that Back! Probably
the other way around. :-) I found the written easy but only passed the
code test by the grace of a generous examiner.


I've been a ham since 1957, so I guess that makes me an old-timer, now.
I've always felt sorry for the many very nice people who would make great
hams, but were too dyslexic or had other physical problems that prevented
them from learning the STUPID, unnecessary code most old hams used as
punishment and in their attempt to keep the ham bands for themselves.

As to the anti-CB myth nonsense you ALWAYS see in any kind of discussion
like this, some of the best hams in Charleston were once illegal CBers
running 5KW on CB for years. The argument didn't wash then, and is a moot
question now as CBers, just like many of us inactive hams, are carrying
around full-duplex cellphones with unlimited service and are using
internet, instead of radios, to chat around the world. The ARRL's chief
VEC examiner, here, who is also the FCC's own volunteer GROL examiner now,
was once the "Mud Duck" on CB running several KW into stacked Telrex beams
at 90'. He's one of the most active hams in SC and is a great asset to
ham
radio, no matter what his past history in CB was. Over half my radio club
membership has CB to thank for getting them into ham radio in the first
place.

Ham radio is dying of old age and curmudgeonry (sp?). Go to any hamfest
and estimate the average age of the crowd. My guess is around 60, now.
These are the guys who grew up with tube radios and are scared to death of
computers/internet/new technology. Most young people shrug their
shoulders
and say, "I swapped full-motion color video with Werner in Berlin this
morning. Why would I want ham radio?" And, he'd be right. He no longer
needs ham radio to talk to the world. Morse code requirements have been
killing ham radio, slowly but surely, since Morse code became moot with
the
invention of AM, FM and SSB. If you hear any old farts prompting the same
old line that CW can get through when all else fails, then go download
Winwarbler from:
http://www.qsl.net/winwarbler/
install it and tune your SSB receiver to 14.070 Mhz USB. In the 4 Khz
bandwidth of any SSB receiver, you'll find lots of PSK31 digital mode QSOs
going on in 31 Hz of total bandwidth from 10-20 watt transmitters around
the world. PSK31's tones and any cheap PC's sound card can decode and
display perfect text on a signal so weak YOU can't make it out, even with
a
narrowband receiver listing to just the one station! Use any SSB
receiver,
this free software (which can simultaneously monitor THREE conversations
at
once!) with the headphone jack of the receiver plugged into your computer
sound card line input and give it a try, whether you are a ham or not.
PSK31, PSK63 were invented by hams for hams. It's simply the finest
digital mode we ever had and is SO efficient in spectrum usage. It's
faster than you can type.

I, for one old ham, am glad the world is finally coming to its senses and
getting rid of manual code requirements they should have dumped after WW2.

73 Larry W4CSC aka KN4IM, WB4THE, WN2IWH when I was 11.
Leaving for sea tonight so won't be replying to this message....
Best of luck to all those coming into ham radio! For me, it's been a
helluva great ride these past 47 years!

NNNN (We always put that at the end of important-looking teletype messages
to impress everyone.)

SK

I agree about code: over 50+ years as a ham, I've seen many people with
multiple intelligences try very hard and fail to copy morse code well.
They just don't have THAT intelligence. Some people can't tell that they
can't carry a tune, and can't put a basketball thru the net in 20 tries.
But they can remember details of schematics 20 years later, and know the
pinout today of both a 12AX7 and a 7430, and how to find stuff real fast
in REGEDIT.

My wife has a lot of background in Education, is a Librarian and a
Gifted/Talented coordinator, and she's still constantly amazed at the
variety of talents and untalents that kids have.

I believe that 20 years from now, the 'credentialing' that hidebound
'trades' use for self-job-protection will fade even more, and "just-in-
time" Education will supercede the 4-year college model.

The First Class Commercial Radiotelephone license I worked so hard on in
High School is no longer required to fix broadcast transmitters. And the
world has not come to an end. People who can do the job get hired to do
it, and those who can't get fired. Used to be they BOTH had licenses...

--
Regards, Terry King ...In The Woods In Vermont

Capturing Live Music in Sound and Images
http://www.terryking.us

I too got my license in 1957 and hated the code. I am in favor of abolishing
it for HF except in the code only portion of the bands. A code endorsement
could be added for those frequencies. The question/answer pools are a joke,
but I think federal policy regarding them goes beyond the FCC as the FAA has
similar stuff for aviation exams now.
Lets bring back the 2 year as a General Class or better before being
eligible to take the Extra Exam. Experience is needed before getting a 1 X 2
vanity call! I keep running into those guys (especially boaters) who have
less than 6 months as a ham and think they know it all.

Larry, since you brought up the NNNN at the end of a TTY message, I must
point out it served an autostop function on TTY machines such as the Model
28 (I admit to being a model 12, 14, 15, 19, 28 TTYer years ago) that were
equipped with a "stunt box".
Do you recall what ZCZCZRJ did?

Doug, K7ABX
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message
...
73 Larry W4CSC aka KN4IM, WB4THE, WN2IWH when I was 11.
Leaving for sea tonight so won't be replying to this message....
Best of luck to all those coming into ham radio! For me, it's been a
helluva great ride these past 47 years!

NNNN (We always put that at the end of important-looking teletype messages
to impress everyone.)

SK

"Doug" wrote in
hlink.net:



I too got my license in 1957 and hated the code. I am in favor of
abolishing it for HF except in the code only portion of the bands. A
code endorsement could be added for those frequencies. The
question/answer pools are a joke, but I think federal policy regarding
them goes beyond the FCC as the FAA has similar stuff for aviation
exams now. Lets bring back the 2 year as a General Class or better
before being eligible to take the Extra Exam. Experience is needed
before getting a 1 X 2 vanity call! I keep running into those guys
(especially boaters) who have less than 6 months as a ham and think
they know it all.

Isn't it also time we abolished this ARRL nonsense of segregated ham bands,
leaving 50 Khz virtually "US FREE" from 14.100 to 14.150? 160 meters works
just fine without ARRL flexing FCC muscles on subbands no longer of use.
Let the MARKET and the hams set what is acceptable and what is wasted.

If we're going to keep it segregated like this stupidity, let's CONFINE CW
to the bottom 25 or 50 Khz of the bands, to keep old farts from using it as
a JAMMING DEVICE up in the phone bands. I've been hearing the CW jamming
for 40 years. CW has no place in the phone bands....EVER.


Larry, since you brought up the NNNN at the end of a TTY message, I
must point out it served an autostop function on TTY machines such as
the Model 28 (I admit to being a model 12, 14, 15, 19, 28 TTYer years
ago) that were equipped with a "stunt box".
Do you recall what ZCZCZRJ did?


My mom got ****ed and threw me and my Model 15 out into the garage, back in
the early 60's. Something about teletype noise keeping her from sleeping
at 2AM.....??? I never could afford a Model 28 until much later. By then,
I was running a Micrologic into a TV. Remember them?...(c;

I think ZCZCRJ turned the teletype machine motor on in systems with dead
time.

Did you ever see a Burpee reperf machine? Something like 650 wpm in a
parallel interface (not Baudot serial data). The tape just FLEW out of
them and their motors only ran intermittently. I think they were remotely
addressable, somehow.

Ah, it's all gone, now. Only noise in Radio Central on the ships is
cooling fans. Pity.....

I remember those "Secret" messages:

Mrs. Jones, wife of Admiral Jones, requests the presence of Mrs. Johnson,
wife of Admiral Johnson, at a tea given in her honor on Saturday, June 18th
at 4PM. RSVP

NNNN

Wonder how much paper this crap used to waste, NAVYWIDE? Probably lots
more than the paper I printed 24/7 back in the Cal Lab (Shop 67B) on board
USS Everglades (AD-24) on the Reuters Press broadcast on 10 Mhz band...(c;

Larry

"Glenn Ashmore" wrote

Doug Dotson wrote:
..... Personally, I think the code should stay.

I am a bit worried about the bands going the way of CB ... I would like
to see
the writtens get a lot tougher ....

It's inevatable because of technology. One had to know Morse to be a ham
"back when", not because of FCC rules but because it was the only reliable
way to communicate. The rules merely reflected that technical reality. That
is no longer true today so requiring Morse makes about as much sense as
requiring visitors to Yellowstone Park to demo proficiency with flint and
steel before being allowed to see Old Faithful.

The same goes for the electronic part of the written tests. It was essential
for hams to know enough to stay out of trouble when everybody built their
own rigs, but that day is long gone. Everybody is an "appliance ham" because
it is too expensive to home brew. This means that written tests should
emphasize good operating techniques which means a lot of rote memorization.
You don't "understand" band limits in the same way we had to "understand"
how vacuum tubes and transistors worked - you just memorize them. In a way,
that makes the tests harder. I didn't need to study before aceing my
general exam 'cuz I could already draw Hartley and Colpitts oscillators but
I'll have to hit the books to pass my Extra cuz it's all memorization.

73, K3DWW