Home Menu

Menu


RadioBanter » rec.radio.amateur » Policy > It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
Reply
Page 3 of 6 12 3 456
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #22   Report Post  
Old October 16th 06, 01:24 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.

wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm


Slow Code wrote:
If an amateur had to relay a through a country and the amateurs didn't
know each other language they still could have passed it by CW and the
message could have been delivered to someone that could read it. Not no
more.

What can be passed by CW that cannot be passed by voice???

Adhere to the ICAO's phonetic alphabet, and there need be no
bi-lingualism nor a CW requirement.

Since 1955 for international civil aviation. It's taken
from the NATO approved phonetic alphabet which came out
earlier the same year. I remember it well since I had to
learn the "new" phonetic alphabet in a hurry while in the
Army then. :-)

It took me about 20 minutes during a mid-shift to learn it.

When things start failing communication wise worldwide, amateur radio
might be all there is to relay messages, and the ITU just removed one of
the legs of a three leg stool.

Dear Slow, air traffic controllers don't use Morris Code, and they
communicate with foreign speakers JUST FINE!

Ever since 1955 the worldwide common language for civil
aviation communications on airways has been English
spoken as well as (now) data. That includes pilots as
well as controllers, even in and over their native
country; a non-English speaking country MAY use their
native language but the civil airways can have many
nations' aircraft in it.

Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own excrement
off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us hit ake on
that.

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
  #23   Report Post  
Old October 16th 06, 02:09 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.

wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 16:24:35 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:

If an amateur had to relay a through a country and the amateurs didn't
know each other language they still could have passed it by CW and the
message could have been delivered to someone that could read it. Not no
more.

What can be passed by CW that cannot be passed by voice???

Adhere to the ICAO's phonetic alphabet, and there need be no
bi-lingualism nor a CW requirement.

Since 1955 for international civil aviation. It's taken
from the NATO approved phonetic alphabet which came out
earlier the same year. I remember it well since I had to
learn the "new" phonetic alphabet in a hurry while in the
Army then. :-)

It took me about 20 minutes during a mid-shift to learn it.

not it took that long or maybe a bit longer but nothing like the time
I have wasted on Morse

It took me about 7 weeks and lots of hours to get to about 10 words per
minute. I couldn't get past that, so I got the consolation prize...
Technician.

When things start failing communication wise worldwide, amateur radio
might be all there is to relay messages, and the ITU just removed one of
the legs of a three leg stool.

Dear Slow, air traffic controllers don't use Morris Code, and they
communicate with foreign speakers JUST FINE!

Ever since 1955 the worldwide common language for civil
aviation communications on airways has been English
spoken as well as (now) data. That includes pilots as
well as controllers, even in and over their native
country; a non-English speaking country MAY use their
native language but the civil airways can have many
nations' aircraft in it.

Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own excrement
off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us hit ake on
that.

well BB it must a tight fit so I suspect he wait to he puls out for
air

We should hear a loud "pop."

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

realy slwo but according to one of post another of Sock puppets "hey
Stupid" so he is more honest the Robeson (which is truly damning with
faint praise.

He might be a former RRAPper. Can you guess which one?

Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
  #25   Report Post  
Old October 17th 06, 02:27 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 96
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
On 16 Oct 2006 16:12:35 -0700, "
wrote:


wrote:
wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 16:24:35 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:


Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own excrement
off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us hit ake on
that.

well BB it must a tight fit so I suspect he wait to he puls out for
air

We should hear a loud "pop."

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

realy slwo but according to one of post another of Sock puppets "hey
Stupid" so he is more honest the Robeson (which is truly damning with
faint praise.

He might be a former RRAPper. Can you guess which one?

I'll go with Mark and say it is a current RRAPer...a pro-coder who
is wrapped too tight...either Jimmie Noserve or that Waffen SS guy.


Does anybody know Slow Codes call? Thanks

Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
  #27   Report Post  
Old October 17th 06, 02:40 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 4,113
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.
" wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
 wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 16:24:35 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:


Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own
excrement off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us
hit ake on that.

well BB it must a tight fit so I suspect he wait to he puls out for
air

We should hear a loud "pop."

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

realy slwo but according to one of post another of Sock puppets "hey
Stupid" so he is more honest the Robeson (which is truly damning with
faint praise.

He might be a former RRAPper. Can you guess which one?

I'll go with Mark and say it is a current RRAPer...a pro-coder who
is wrapped too tight...either Jimmie Noserve or that Waffen SS guy.



And you haven't changed a bit either Len. You should be taking part in
the more technical groups and not arguing policy with pro-coders, or are
you hoping to be the second No-Code Extra after Markie?

SC
Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
  #29   Report Post  
Old October 18th 06, 02:51 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.

wrote:
 wrote:
 wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 16:24:35 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:


Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own excrement
off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us hit ake on
that.

well BB it must a tight fit so I suspect he wait to he puls out for
air

We should hear a loud "pop."

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

realy slwo but according to one of post another of Sock puppets "hey
Stupid" so he is more honest the Robeson (which is truly damning with
faint praise.

He might be a former RRAPper. Can you guess which one?

I'll go with Mark and say it is a current RRAPer...a pro-coder who
is wrapped too tight...either Jimmie Noserve or that Waffen SS guy.

Robesin is absent. Lots of uniques showing up. Maybe we need to run
RRAP through a contest logging program.

Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
  #30   Report Post  
Old October 18th 06, 02:56 AM posted to rec.radio.amateur.antenna,rec.radio.amateur.policy,rec.radio.scanner,rec.radio.swap
external usenet poster
  
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,554
Default It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement.

Slow Code wrote:
" wrote in
oups.com:


wrote:
 wrote:
On 15 Oct 2006 16:24:35 -0700, wrote:
wrote:
From: on Sat, Oct 14 2006 4:01 pm
Slow Code wrote:


Blowcode is just another troll who has his head up his
ass in regards to radio communications. That head just
hasn't been aware of what happened in radio for a half
century.

With his head up his own ass, he wouldn't need to eat his own
excrement off of another man's genitals. Maybe Robesin can give us
hit ake on that.

well BB it must a tight fit so I suspect he wait to he puls out for
air

We should hear a loud "pop."

The ITU didn't "just remove" anything. The ITU-R made
the code test for an amateur license with below-30-MHz
privileges OPTIONAL to each administration. In 2003.
THREE years ago, not "just now." :-)

Slow is, well, slow.

realy slwo but according to one of post another of Sock puppets "hey
Stupid" so he is more honest the Robeson (which is truly damning with
faint praise.

He might be a former RRAPper. Can you guess which one?

I'll go with Mark and say it is a current RRAPer...a pro-coder who
is wrapped too tight...either Jimmie Noserve or that Waffen SS guy.

And you haven't changed a bit either Len. You should be taking part in
the more technical groups and not arguing policy with pro-coders, or are
you hoping to be the second No-Code Extra after Markie?

SC

Mad Dog Deignan of the infamous RF Commandos?

Reply With QuoteReply With Quote
Reply
Page 3 of 6 12 3 456
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode

Posting Rules
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
It was a mistake for the ITU to eliminate the CW requirement. Slow Code Antenna 37 October 29th 06 12:07 AM
ARRL 20 july, FCC Proposes to Drop Morse Code Requirement for All License Classes Thierry Antenna 0 July 28th 05 09:37 AM
FCC: Broadband Power Line Systems Paul Policy 0 January 10th 05 06:41 PM
Eliminate the CW requirement for General & Extra, BUT THEN... Bill Wright Policy 12 December 9th 03 04:20 AM
NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. Keith Policy 1 July 31st 03 04:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Contact Us RadioBanter forum home Privacy Statement
Copyright © 2017