Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

"julian814" ) writes:
Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

This is not a question related to building amateur radio equipment.

It belongs elsewhere, such as rec.radio.amateur.misc or
rec.radio.amateur.policy

Michael VE2BVW

"julian814" wrote in message
ups.com...
Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

The use of CW on the bands has nothing to do with testing requirements.

CW will live undoubtedly under the category of CW, RTTY/Data

And did you know that CW can be legally used on the "Phone Bands" ?

Example from ARRL URL:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg.../allocate.html

General class:
14.025-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.225-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image
Advanced class:
14.025-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.175-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image
Amateur Extra class:
14.000-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.150-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image

And also two meters.......

--
Regards,
Gary...
"Caveat Lector" wrote in message
...

"julian814" wrote in message
ups.com...
Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

The use of CW on the bands has nothing to do with testing requirements.

CW will live undoubtedly under the category of CW, RTTY/Data

And did you know that CW can be legally used on the "Phone Bands" ?

Example from ARRL URL:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/reg.../allocate.html

General class:
14.025-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.225-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image
Advanced class:
14.025-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.175-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image
Amateur Extra class:
14.000-14.150 MHz: CW, RTTY/Data
14.150-14.350 MHz: CW, Phone, Image

I would have to say yes, since CW has always been allowed on ALL amateur
bands, from the bottom end to the top end of each.

Scott
N0EDV

julian814 wrote:
Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

Scott wrote:
I would have to say yes, since CW has always been allowed on ALL amateur
bands, from the bottom end to the top end of each.

Scott
N0EDV

julian814 wrote:

Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

FYI - THat is no longer 100% true since the spot frequencies on 60M are
USB only.
And 6 and 2 are the only places with CW only bands.

Oops, forgot about 60M. Not sure about 6 and 2 being the only bands
with a CW only portion. Maybe a better choice of words would be
"non-voice portions" since it appears that the HF bands still have
segments designated for rtty and data. ???

Scott


John Siegel wrote:


Scott wrote:

I would have to say yes, since CW has always been allowed on ALL
amateur bands, from the bottom end to the top end of each.

Scott
N0EDV

julian814 wrote:

Now that code has been dropped from the license requirement, what will
happen to the CW frequencies? Will people still be able to use Morse
Code on them?


Ralph Glatt

FYI - THat is no longer 100% true since the spot frequencies on 60M are
USB only.
And 6 and 2 are the only places with CW only bands.

Scott wrote:
Oops, forgot about 60M. Not sure about 6 and 2 being the only bands
with a CW only portion. Maybe a better choice of words would be
"non-voice portions" since it appears that the HF bands still have
segments designated for rtty and data. ???

IMHO that was a mistake. It was because the U.S. voice portions of 80m and 40m
where inacessable to ITU zone 1 hams. So putting the data and rtty in them
would have slowed down their growth.

Tune across the high end of the old 80m and 40m CW bands, and you can
see what I mean. from 7100 down, it's almost unusable due to digital
signals, some nights as low as 7050. The same thing with 3850 which is
the top end of my 80m band.

Yes, we now have 7100-7200, but it's not much good for DX yet. It's still
filled with high power SWBC stations who have no intention of moving.
When they are off the air, there is no propigation. :-(

To veer this discussion anywhere near the topic. If you asked because
you are thinking of building a CW only rig, don't worry, it will be
usefull for a long time to come.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 Fax ONLY: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

On Feb 14, 4:21 am, (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:
Scott wrote:
Oops, forgot about 60M. Not sure about 6 and 2 being the only bands
with a CW only portion. Maybe a better choice of words would be
"non-voice portions" since it appears that the HF bands still have
segments designated for rtty and data. ???

IMHO that was a mistake. It was because the U.S. voice portions of 80m and 40m
where inacessable to ITU zone 1 hams. So putting the data and rtty in them
would have slowed down their growth.

Tune across the high end of the old 80m and 40m CW bands, and you can
see what I mean. from 7100 down, it's almost unusable due to digital
signals, some nights as low as 7050. The same thing with 3850 which is
the top end of my 80m band.

Yes, we now have 7100-7200, but it's not much good for DX yet. It's still
filled with high power SWBC stations who have no intention of moving.
When they are off the air, there is no propigation. :-(

To veer this discussion anywhere near the topic. If you asked because
you are thinking of building a CW only rig, don't worry, it will be
usefull for a long time to come.

Well, some of the schematics I've been looking at are for CW rigs.
(Glowbug rigs, in particular.) You have me wondering, though - I
thought digital radio used the same bands as commercial radio?

Ralph Glatt

"julian814" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Feb 14, 4:21 am, (Geoffrey S. Mendelson) wrote:
Scott wrote:
Oops, forgot about 60M. Not sure about 6 and 2 being the only bands
with a CW only portion. Maybe a better choice of words would be
"non-voice portions" since it appears that the HF bands still have
segments designated for rtty and data. ???

IMHO that was a mistake. It was because the U.S. voice portions of 80m
and 40m
where inacessable to ITU zone 1 hams. So putting the data and rtty in
them
would have slowed down their growth.

Tune across the high end of the old 80m and 40m CW bands, and you can
see what I mean. from 7100 down, it's almost unusable due to digital
signals, some nights as low as 7050. The same thing with 3850 which is
the top end of my 80m band.

Yes, we now have 7100-7200, but it's not much good for DX yet. It's still
filled with high power SWBC stations who have no intention of moving.
When they are off the air, there is no propigation. :-(

To veer this discussion anywhere near the topic. If you asked because
you are thinking of building a CW only rig, don't worry, it will be
usefull for a long time to come.

Well, some of the schematics I've been looking at are for CW rigs.
(Glowbug rigs, in particular.) You have me wondering, though - I
thought digital radio used the same bands as commercial radio?

Ralph Glatt


Nope, amateur radio digital transmissions use amateur radio bands.

Dee, N8UZE