(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , JJ
writes:

N2EY wrote:

Do you have something against someone who has no desire to operate CW?
There are many different modes of operation in ham radio, do you
operate them all?

No - do you?

No, I certainly do not. If someone wants to only operate cw, only
ssb, only 2 meter FM, then fine, and they are just as much a ham
as someone who operates multiple modes.

I agree!

And I certainly do not
look down my nose and take a superior attitude toward those who
might choose to limit their operating to one mode like others here
on the group.

You mean like the folks who look down their noses at me because I operate
mostly CW?

Who does that?

What most find irritable about you is that you insist that they learn
your favorite mode, not that you use it.

On 12 Jul 2003 02:05:48 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

At the risk of sounding Kim-like, ROTFLMAO!!!

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Larry. I think you're in
love with her!

Were it not for the occasional usefulness of the 2-meter band to
"real" ham radio operators like you and me, I'd suggest that it be
separated from the licensing structure and just be given away to
anyone who can afford a transceiver. Of course, we've already gone
most of the way to doing just that, and we still don't see any real
growth in the numbers of licensed amateurs.

Heckuva lot of growth in the number of no-code Techs, though. So if
the total number of hams hasn't increased, the number of hams with the
other classes of license must have decreased accordingly in order to
keep up. Or are guys reverse-upgrading to Technician nowadays?

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

On 12 Jul 2003 03:39:36 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

I agree that Morse code proficiency has nothing to do with speaking or
typing -- but the ability to effectively employ the Morse/CW mode -- at
speeds greater than 5 WPM -- will keep you communicating when conditions
prevent you from communicating by voice or digital modes.

I thought CW *is* a digital mode.

You have done
nothing but provide personal, anecdotal proof that reducing code testing
requirements down to a mere 5 WPM maximum was NOT a good thing!

Don't look now, but it's about to get reduced even further, to a zero
WPM maximum. The result will be that there will be fewer and fewer
people on the bands that know any code at all...which means that there
will be fewer and fewer people for you to contact on CW. Unless, of
course, you manage to start convinging some of them that CW is
actually fun to use - and if you keep on going with the same
derogatory comments about no-code hams that you've been treating
people to for at least four years now, you'll have a tough time
getting anyone's attention even if you do decide to try.

These days, the vast majority of emergency communications is done on a
local basis, primarily on 2m using FM repeaters and simplex. 70cm is
probably the next most widely used band for this purpose. Neither is
subject to the propagation difficulties often encountered on HF.

True -- when the "emergency" is confined to a small locality and the VHF/
UHF repeater infrastructure remains intact. However, what if there is a
widespread disaster -- such as the "Big One" striking the San Andreas fault
line in California? That will not be a "local" disaster -- it will affect the
entire country. Vast regions hundreds of miles in radius will be affected,
and the commercial communications and existing Amateur Radio
infrastructures and the power grids they depend on will be disrupted for
God only knows how long. At that point, we could be talking about areas
with populations of hundreds of thousands of people being out of
communication with the area "outside" the disaster zone. Communications
nets spanning many times the normal operational range of terresterial
VHF/UHF systems will be necessary -- and don't look now, but we're
coming to the downside of the solar cycle -- meaning poor propagation.
I guarantee you that there will be lots of opportunities for No-Code HF
Ham Heroes to help out, but when conditions dictate the use of CW, in
order to be able to communicate when voice and data modes fail due to
lack of available electrical power or poor atmospherics, that capability
will not be available because it will not have been learned. That's when
some guy like me will enter the picture, and say, "Step aside, Sonny,
and take your toy microphone with you."

No, that's when FEMA and the U.S. military will start shipping in
trailerloads of frequency-agile communications equipment - yes, VOICE
communications equipment including portable repeater systems, mobile
and handheld radios, and...aw, what the heck, you have Internet access
same as I do. Check out what the SHARES program is all about.

Then he'll plug in his key and
re-establish contact with the outside world.

With no electrical power? I think he'll need to plug in a lot more
than a key.

Of course, you will never
be convinced that that could happen -- so you'll just have to hope it doesn't.

Oh, I'm sure "the big one" could happen. I just don't think we agree
on what the needed response from the amateur community will be.
Furthermore, since I live in New York and you live in Delaware, it
doesn't matter what either of us expects. What matters is what the
ARES/RACES ops in the affected area will be expecting, based on what
the officials from their served agencies tell them they'll be asked to
do...unless you plan to hop on your horse and ride to California when
it happens - packing a QRP CW rig, a battery, and a few hundred feet
of wire, of course - in which case they may just stop you at the state
line and tell you to get lost.

In the meantime, I'll be ready!

Is there a fault line in Delaware that I don't know about? :-)

Well, unfortunately, there are lots of new Ham Heroes who believe
precisely that, and they belive that their possession of the HT and
650 mAh battery pack makes them a "real" ham radio operator!

The fact that their licenses say "Amateur Radio License" on them, same
as yours and mine, makes them "real" ham radio operators (assuming
they spelled their names right on their applications and thus don't
have an invalid license). How prepared they are for emergency
operation is another matter entirely.

I don't think anyone's going to confuse emergency communications with
anything enjoyable. However, in order to have total communications
capability, leaving out Morse/CW capability just doesn't make sense to me.

Hmmmm...it made sense to the Coast Guard when it became clear that
they were better off using NAVTEX. USCG doesn't use CW anymore.
Somehow, I doubt that the rest of Homeland Security considers them any
less of a "real" organization because of that.

We're going the wrong way on that, and the only reason for it is because
people these days are just too damn LAZY to learn a useful communications
skill.

Lots of people these days are learning lots of useful communications
skills, Larry. Some even invent brand new ones once in awhile. The
bottom line is, there is more than one way to skin a cat (so to
speak), and as long as the message gets through, it really doesn't
matter whether it went by CW, SSB, packet, PSK31, SSTV, or for that
matter, by carrier pigeon.

Hmmm...my late paternal grandfather raised pigeons as a hobby. Makes
me wonder if he thought the mailman was lazy.

End of story.

But Larry, the story hasn't even *started* yet!

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 10:48:21 -0600, JJ
wrote:

John, you have to realize that Larry and his huge ego are just
waiting for the above scenario to happen so he can "save the
world" with his CW skills. He is in complete denial that when this
big disaster happens, he and his CW skills will mean nothing.

Actually, Larry could be quite correct. Nonetheless, code testing as a
licensing requirement appears on the verge of going the way of the
auk, the Edsel, and point-to-point wiring in commercial radio gear.
One of the other regulars in this NG likes to comment that the plug is
about to be pulled on the government life support system, or words to
that effect, which is that person's way of saying that those who have
a genuine interest in the use of the mode had better start thinking
about finding another way to get people interested in learning the
code if they want the use of Morse to continue to be a part of the
hobby. Telling people they are lazy if they've chosen not to learn it
is not going to do the trick.

I can just see him waving his code key shouting "I can save the day
with my CW" at the officials who will laugh their ass off at him.

One could be waving state-of-the-art voice communications gear and get
the same reaction. That's why it's important for ham radio emergency
communications groups to establish a good relationship with the
emergency management officials in the areas they serve *before*
disaster strikes. Once the proverbial merde hits the proverbial
ventillateur, the folks running the served agencies will be too busy
to listen to explanations. I'm sure most of us know how it goes, or
can at least imagine - when you are up to your keister in alligators,
it's easy to forget that the initial objective was to drain the swamp.

I have been a ham for over forty years, have participated in many
disaster situations, and I have never seen conditions where CW
was the only means of communication that would get through, even
at the bottom of the solar cycles. Guys like Larry live in a "I am
superior to you because of my CW skills" dream world.

Despite that, I've no doubt that it's possible for such conditions to
exist. The point that I think Larry and numerous others in the hobby
seem to be missing is that this is a diversified hobby with a lot of
different and equally interesting facets, of which CW is just one. I'm
not about to ridicule anyone because they enjoy communicating with CW.
However, I also don't think it's right to ridicule people who do not.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 01:20:17 GMT, Dick Carroll
wrote:

No, I certainly do not. If someone wants to only operate cw, only
ssb, only 2 meter FM, then fine, and they are just as much a ham
as someone who operates multiple modes.

So a ham who operates all modes except that he cannot operate radiotlegraphy
because he doewn't know Morse code, is just as well qualified as a ham who
operates all those and also can operate radiotelegraphy.

Surely you can understand the fallacy of your own argument,
all other considerations aside.


The question becomes, qualified to do what?

Do you really need to ask? *To Communicate by Amateur Radio*, of course.
CW ops have a mode available that no coders don't, and seems most never will.

"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003 23:19:38 -0400, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:

In a way, I do -- because their lack of desire to operate CW is usually
based on a lack of willingness to break their inertia and get down to
learning it. It's called laziness. Yup, that's right -- the "L" word.
L-A-Z-I-N-E-S-S.
Hams who don't care or "don't want" to learn Morse code
are just plain old LAZY. Period. End of Story. Consider yourself to
have been grabbed by the collar and beaten with a club called The
Truth!!!

Yes sir, guess my lack of desire to play golf can best be attributed
to a lack of willingness to break my inertia and get down
to learing it. Just my basic laziness I guess...nothing at all
involving there's any personal choice, like or dislike involved.

Same ole Larry :-)

No, Bill - it's the fact that you couldn't find that club called The
Truth in your golf bag...even though you left it right there between
the three wood and the sand wedge. ;-)

John, are you saying I am lying? If so, based on what?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

In article , Dick Carroll writes:

No, I certainly do not. If someone wants to only operate cw, only
ssb, only 2 meter FM, then fine, and they are just as much a ham
as someone who operates multiple modes.

So a ham who operates all modes except that he cannot operate radiotlegraphy
because he doewn't know Morse code, is just as well qualified as a ham who
operates all those and also can operate radiotelegraphy.

Surely you can understand the fallacy of your own argument,
all other considerations aside.

Dick:

An even greater fallacy is the notion that "hams" who operate only
2-meters FM (which probably defines at least 80 percent of "hams"
licensed since 1991) is "qualified" as an amateur radio operator!
At the risk of sounding Kim-like, ROTFLMAO!!!

Were it not for the occasional usefulness of the 2-meter band to
"real" ham radio operators like you and me, I'd suggest that it be
separated from the licensing structure and just be given away to
anyone who can afford a transceiver. Of course, we've already gone
most of the way to doing just that, and we still don't see any real
growth in the numbers of licensed amateurs.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Arnie Macy wrote:


This EMA Director won't. I have already incorporated CW in my Emergency
Management Plans. It's a great tool to have (in conjunction with the other
available communications modes). I actually feel sorry for those in EMA,
and Amateur Radio, that discount it. We put it to great use during
Hurricane Floyd in 1999, and I'm sure we'll use it again in the future.

And your response comes because you are a ham and support CW and
you just can't stand the thought that CW may not save the world
someday. Go talk to your local emergency officials about how you
can save the world because you can use CW and see how much
importance they put on you views. So you put it to use in 1999
during Hurricane Floyd. Why? Was it the only means of
communications that could get through? I seriously doubt it. I am
not arguing the fact you used CW, just don't tout it as the end
all to communications during the Hurricane.

Your 40 years as a Ham apparently haven't taught you very much. It's always
better to leave Emergency Management Planning to the professionals. You
just proved it.

It has taught me that I have never had to use CW as the only means
of communication during any emergency, and that includes
disastrous tornados, hurricanes, floods, and earthquakes. It has
taught me that CW is an antiquated mode and I am not silly enough
to think it will be some ham nut like Dick, Larry or you that will
save the world from disaster with your little code key. I am not
anti CW, just anti those who claim that it will be the savior of
the world and anyone who doesn't use code isn't as good a ham as
Larry, Dick, and others (you too I guess). I have known many hams
that never operated CW after upgrading from Novice, and they would
put Larry and Dick to shame as far as being "real" hams.
Look into the future and you see Larry's skeleton sitting at his
rig, hand on the code key still waiting to say the world with is
CW skills. It isn't going to happen.

Dick Carroll wrote:


you just like to slam CW.

And you just like to slam anyone who dosen't feel about the use of
CW as you do.

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote in
:

On 10 Jul 2003 02:34:45 GMT, ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)
wrote:

In article , JJ
writes:

Do you have something against someone who has no desire to operate
CW?

In a way, I do -- because their lack of desire to operate CW is usually
based on a lack of willingness to break their inertia and get down to
learning it. It's called laziness. Yup, that's right -- the "L" word.
L-A-Z-I-N-E-S-S. Hams who don't care or "don't want" to learn Morse
code are just plain old LAZY. Period. End of Story. Consider
yourself to have been grabbed by the collar and beaten with a club
called The Truth!!!

Still on that kick, eh?

How about a ham who learned it (at least well enough to pass a 5WPM
code test) and now chooses not to operate in that mode anyway? Is that
laziness too, or is it a ham exercising his/her right to operate in
whatever mode he/she chooses from among those permitted to him/her
under the privileges granted by his/her license? (and it is not my
intention to trip you on the point that no-code techs are permitted to
operate in CW anywhere that they have privileges)


There are many different modes of operation in ham radio, do you
operate them all?

Nope, not all -- but certainly a whole lot more than most hams do. And
you know something totally strange? My Morse/CW proficiency doesn't
interfere one little bit in my enjoyment of other modes!

Even though I learned the code well enough to pass a test, I don't
consider myself proficient at it. My lack of proficiency doesn't
interfere one little bit in my enjoyment of other modes.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ



What about me? I passed 20wpm and choose not to use it atall? No doubt I
will be told I'm missing out, but I'm doing exactly what I want to.