Keith ) writes:
On 25 Jul 2003 16:37:40 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

s97.301(e) reads:

For a station having a control operator who has been
granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician
Class and who has received credit for proficiency in
telegraphy in accordance with the international
requirements.

(followed by frequency table)

The 'international requirements' (ITU-R s25.5) now read:

Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence
to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and
receive texts in Morse code signals.

There is no international requirement for proficiency in telegraphy, so
arguably any Tech could operate on all the frequencies listed in the
table. Be prepared to argue it in court, though!

That is what I'm talking about. There is no longer a international requirement
for morse code so tech's can pick up the microphone and talk on 10 meters.
Here in America the FCC has to issue a warning notice, then a violation notice
and the person cited can then simply demand a hearing before a administrative
law judge. The ALJ is a pretty informal process and you just need to cite the
rules and they are not very strict when it comes to matters like these.
If you have a tech license and you operate outside your allowed bands like pop
up in the twenty meter band and keep it up they might come after you. But if
you meet the international requirements and stay in the HF TECH bands it is not
a violation of the rules and no one can verify if you have passed a horse and
buggy CW test any god damn way.


This is silly. Each country has it's own laws, and you are obliged
to follow them.

What has changed is that the treaty agreement whereby all countries
issuing amateur radio licenses are obliged to have a code test of some
sort for operating below 30MHz (or, was it a higher frequency?) is now
gone.

That means that each country no longer has to conform to that treaty
agreement.

They can, if they so choose, to eliminate their law that requires
code proficiency for amateurs operating in the HF bands.

But they are not obligated to do so.

Until a country changes it's law about this, everyone is obligated
to follow those laws.

Just because the treaty agreement is gone does not mean that there
is any more legality for someone who hasn't taken a code test to operate
at HF. Two months ago, someone could have done it, and if caught they
would face a certain process. If they do it today, and are caught,
they face the same certain process. Nothing has changed on that
account.

Michael VE2BVW

On 25 Jul 2003 20:01:38 GMT, (Michael Black) wrote:

What has changed is that the treaty agreement whereby all countries
issuing amateur radio licenses are obliged to have a code test of some
sort for operating below 30MHz (or, was it a higher frequency?) is now
gone.

Read the regulation. The regulation indicates that according to international
morse code requirements the CW requirement is required. Well the international
regulations do not require a morse code proficiency for HF access.
97.301(e)
I guess it all boils down to what "IS IS".

BTW, what do you care about US regs if you live in Canada?


--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

Keith ) writes:
On 25 Jul 2003 20:01:38 GMT, (Michael Black) wrote:

What has changed is that the treaty agreement whereby all countries
issuing amateur radio licenses are obliged to have a code test of some
sort for operating below 30MHz (or, was it a higher frequency?) is now
gone.

Read the regulation. The regulation indicates that according to international
morse code requirements the CW requirement is required. Well the international
regulations do not require a morse code proficiency for HF access.
97.301(e)
I guess it all boils down to what "IS IS".

BTW, what do you care about US regs if you live in Canada?


By your interpretation, every ham in the world can start operating
on HF, no matter what their license restricts them to, merely because
the international agreement on this matter has been rescinded. Your false
interpretation would therefore apply to all countries. Besides, you
posted in newsgroups that are read by people in many countries, so
why shouldn't I comment.

The international agreement does not set the rules. While except for
Japan with their low power license I can't think of any country that
did not respect the treaty agreement, there wasn't much to keep countries
from not honoring the treaty, other than on a diplomatic level. If
someone operated on HF without passing a code test, they weren't
prosecuted by an international body, they were pursued by their
own country's enforcement body, which also set the rules that
the person was violating. Each country had to put in place rules that
reflect the agreement.

Those rules are still in effect, until they are changed.

"We had to put these rules in place because we honor the international
treaty."

That's a big difference from "You have to know morse code or else the
international boogy man will come down and toss you in jail".

The first is about implementing rules that honor an international agreement.
The second is some international law that you must respect directly.

Find some other section of your rules, and you're bound to find something
that tells you you can't operate HF with certain classes of licenses.
That's the rule that is in control. It's absolute, and not dependent
on some international treaty.

When I was a kid, there was no license here in Canada that let someone
operate without taking a code test. Some likely argued that the code
test was there because of the international agreement, but the rules
were quite clear, you couldn't operate unless you took a test, and part
of that test was a code test. Back in 1978, there was a code-free
license here, but only useable at 220MHz and up, and had a lot of
digital questions. The rules were clear; if you got that license
you could only operate on those VHF frequencies. Back in 1990, there was
restructuring, and there was a license which did not require a code test;
but it was also clear in setting out where you could operate.

For that matter, the US Technician license originally was VHF and UHF
only, yet there was a code test. Your FCC decided it was a necessary
requirement, even if the treaty did not require it in that case. It
was only in more recent decades, when 10meters was added, that the treaty
required a code test. Take away the code test, and the FCC limited
such licenses to VHF and above.

No, the rules are what counts, not some preamble.

Michael VE2BVW

On 25 Jul 2003 22:56:38 GMT, (Michael Black) wrote:

No, the rules are what counts, not some preamble.

The FCC rules are based on that international requirement.
Now the FCC could have said you must pass the 5 wpm test to operate on HF
frequencies. But they said based on the international proficiency requirements
a tech can operate on HF.

Today there are no international proficiency requirements for morse code.



--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jul 2003 22:56:38 GMT, (Michael Black)
wrote:

No, the rules are what counts, not some preamble.

The FCC rules are based on that international requirement.
Now the FCC could have said you must pass the 5 wpm test to operate on HF
frequencies. But they said based on the international proficiency
requirements
a tech can operate on HF.

Today there are no international proficiency requirements for morse code.

And before July, there was no specific "code speed"
international requirement...yet that didn't allow techs who
could do 2 wpm morse on HF...the FCC mandated 5 wpm
even though the ITU had no speed minimum.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 21:13:14 -0400, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:

And before July, there was no specific "code speed"
international requirement...yet that didn't allow techs who
could do 2 wpm morse on HF...the FCC mandated 5 wpm
even though the ITU had no speed minimum.

That was only for the test, it has nothing to do with 97.301(e)

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/

"Keith" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jul 2003 22:56:38 GMT, (Michael Black)
wrote:

No, the rules are what counts, not some preamble.

The FCC rules are based on that international requirement.
Now the FCC could have said you must pass the 5 wpm test to operate on HF
frequencies. But they said based on the international proficiency
requirements
a tech can operate on HF.

Today there are no international proficiency requirements for morse code.

Actually, the new treaty sez each country can decide for itself.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003, Bill Sohl wrote:
"Keith" wrote in message
...
On 25 Jul 2003 22:56:38 GMT, (Michael Black)
wrote:

No, the rules are what counts, not some preamble.

The FCC rules are based on that international requirement.
Now the FCC could have said you must pass the 5 wpm test to operate on HF
frequencies. But they said based on the international proficiency
requirements
a tech can operate on HF.

Today there are no international proficiency requirements for morse code.

Actually, the new treaty sez each country can decide for itself.

....And that means that it is an OPTION, not a requirement.

A requirement cannot be bypassed like an option can.

Keith,
Nope. No matter how much you want it to be as you
say, it isn't. What ain't, ain't...
'Doc

On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:30:08 -0700, Keith
wrote:

Read the regulation.

I have. Did you?

The regulation indicates that according to international
morse code requirements the CW requirement is required.

Absolute nonsense. You don't know *anything* about the regulations
that govern the amateur radio service in the U.S., do you?

Here, in its entirity, is the portion of Part 97 that specifies
qualifications for an FCC-issued ham radio license:

SUBPART F-QUALIFYING EXAMINATION SYSTEMS
§97.501 Qualifying for an amateur operator license.
Each applicant must pass an examination for a new amateur
operator license grant and for each change in operator
class. Each applicant for the class of operator license
grant specified below must pass, or otherwise receive
examination credit for, the following examination elements:
(a) Amateur Extra Class operator: Elements 1, 2, 3, and 4;
(b) General Class operator: Elements 1, 2, and 3;
(c) Technician Class operator: Element 2.

Here, in its entirity, is the portion of Part 97 that sets the
standards for the various elements mentioned in the above subpart:

§97.503 Element standards.
(a) A telegraphy examination must be sufficient to prove
that the examinee has the ability to send correctly by hand
and to receive correctly by ear texts in the international
Morse code at not less than the prescribed speed, using all
the letters of the alphabet, numerals 0-9, period, comma,
question mark, slant mark and prosigns AR, BT and SK.
Element 1: 5 words per minute.
(b) A written examination must be such as to prove that the
examinee possesses the operational and technical
qualifications required to perform properly the duties of an
amateur service licensee. Each written examination must be
comprised of a question set as follows:
(1) Element 2: 35 questions concerning the privileges of a
Technician Class operator license. The minimum passing score
is 26 questions answered correctly.
(2) Element 3: 35 questions concerning the privileges of a
General Class operator license. The minimum passing score is
26 questions answered correctly.
(3) Element 4: 50 questions concerning the privileges of an
Amateur Extra Class operator license. The minimum passing
score is 37 questions answered correctly.
§97.505 Element credit.
(a) The administering VEs must give credit as specified
below to an examinee holding any of the following license
grants or license documents:
(1) An unexpired (or expired but within the grace period for
renewal) FCC-granted Advanced Class operator license grant:
Elements 1, 2, and 3.
(2) An unexpired (or expired but within the grace period for
renewal) FCC-granted General Class operator license grant:
Elements 1, 2, and 3.
(3) An unexpired (or expired but within the grace period for
renewal) FCC-granted Technician Plus Class operator
(including a Technician Class operator license granted
before February 14, 1991) license grant: Elements 1 and 2.
(4) An unexpired (or expired but within the grace period for
renewal) FCC-granted Technician Class operator license
grant: Element 2.
(5) An unexpired (or expired) FCC-granted Novice Class
operator license grant: Element 1.
(6) A CSCE: Each element the CSCE indicates the examinee
passed within the previous 365 days.
(7) An unexpired (or expired less than 5 years) FCC-issued
commercial radiotelegraph operator license or permit:
Element 1.
(8) An expired FCC-issued Technician Class operator license
document granted before March 21, 1987: Element 3.
(9) An expired or unexpired FCC-issued Technician Class
operator license document granted before February 14, 1991:
Element 1.
(b) No examination credit, except as herein provided, shall
be allowed on the basis of holding or having held any other
license grant or document.
§97.507 Preparing an examination.
(a) Each telegraphy message and each written question set
administered to an examinee must be prepared by a VE holding
an Amateur Extra Class operator license. A telegraphy
message or written question set may also be prepared for the
following elements by a VE holding an operator license of
the class indicated:
(1) Element 3: Advanced Class operator.
(2) Elements 1 and 2: Advanced, General, or Technician
(including Technician Plus) Class operators.
(b) Each question set administered to an examinee must
utilize questions taken from the applicable question pool.
(c) Each telegraphy message and each written question set
administered to an examinee for an amateur operator license
must be prepared, or obtained from a supplier, by the
administering VEs according to instructions from the
coordinating VEC.
(d) A telegraphy examination must consist of a message sent
in the international Morse code at no less than the
prescribed speed for a minimum of 5 minutes. The message
must contain each required telegraphy character at least
once. No message known to the examinee may be administered
in a telegraphy examination. Each 5 letters of the alphabet
must be counted as 1 word. Each numeral, punctuation mark
and prosign must be counted as 2 letters of the alphabet.
§97.509 Administering VE requirements.
(a) Each examination for an amateur operator license must be
administered by a team of at least 3 VEs at an examination
session coordinated by a VEC. Before the session, the
administering VEs or the VE session manager must ensure that
a public announcement is made giving the location and time
of the session. The number of examinees at the session may
be limited.
(b) Each administering VE must:
(1) Be accredited by the coordinating VEC;
(2) Be at least 18 years of age;
(3) Be a person who holds an amateur operator license of the
class specified below:
(i) Amateur Extra, Advanced or General Class in order to
administer a Technician Class operator license examination;
(ii) Amateur Extra or Advanced Class in order to administer
a General Class operator license examination;
(iii) Amateur Extra Class in order to administer an Amateur
Extra Class operator license examination.
(4) Not be a person whose grant of an amateur station
license or amateur operator license has ever been revoked or
suspended.
(c) Each administering VE must be present and observing the
examinee throughout the entire examination. The
administering VEs are responsible for the proper conduct and
necessary supervision of each examination. The administering
VEs must immediately terminate the examination upon failure
of the examinee to comply with their instructions.
(d) No VE may administer an examination to his or her
spouse, children, grandchildren, stepchildren, parents,
grandparents, stepparents, brothers, sisters, stepbrothers,
stepsisters, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews, and in-laws.
(e) No VE may administer or certify any examination by
fraudulent means or for monetary or other consideration
including reimbursement in any amount in excess of that
permitted. Violation of this provision may result in the
revocation of the grant of the VE's amateur station license
and the suspension of the grant of the VE's amateur operator
license.
(f) No examination that has been compromised shall be
administered to any examinee. Neither the same telegraphy
message nor the same question set may be re-administered to
the same examinee.
(g) Passing a telegraphy receiving examination is adequate
proof of an examinee's ability to both send and receive
telegraphy. The administering VEs, however, may also include
a sending segment in a telegraphy examination.
(h) Upon completion of each examination element, the
administering VEs must immediately grade the examinee's
answers. The administering VEs are responsible for
determining the correctness of the examinee's answers.
(i) When the examinee is credited for all examination
elements required for the operator license sought, 3 VEs
must certify that the examinee is qualified for the license
grant and that the VEs have complied with these
administering VE requirements. The certifying VEs are
jointly and individually accountable for the proper
administration of each examination element reported. The
certifying VEs may delegate to other qualified VEs their
authority, but not their accountability, to administer
individual elements of an examination.
(j) When the examinee does not score a passing grade on an
examination element, the administering VEs must return the
application document to the examinee and inform the examinee
of the grade.
(k) The administering VEs must accommodate an examinee whose
physical disabilities require a special examination
procedure. The administering VEs may require a physician's
certification indicating the nature of the disability before
determining which, if any, special procedures must be used.
(l) The administering VEs must issue a CSCE to an examinee
who scores a passing grade on an examination element.
(m) Within 10 days of the administration of a successful
examination for an amateur operator license, the
administering VEs must submit the application document to
the coordinating VEC.

Nowhere in there does it say anything about the international
requirements.

Well the international
regulations do not require a morse code proficiency for HF access.
97.301(e)

97.301(e) For a station having a control operator who has been
granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician
Class and who has received credit for proficiency in
telegraphy in accordance with the international
requirements.
snip (Snipped material lists authorized frequencies for operators
with these license classes)

Once again, current international requirements leave it up to each
country's government to determine the requirements for that country's
ham licenses. Which brings us back to:


§97.503 Element standards.
(a) A telegraphy examination must be sufficient to prove
that the examinee has the ability to send correctly by hand
and to receive correctly by ear texts in the international
Morse code at not less than the prescribed speed, using all
the letters of the alphabet, numerals 0-9, period, comma,
question mark, slant mark and prosigns AR, BT and SK.
Element 1: 5 words per minute.

I guess it all boils down to what "IS IS".

Yes, it does. And the above "is" what the current regulations "is"
whether you like it or not. Deal with it - or be prepared to explain
your illegal operation to Riley Hollingsworth.

BTW, what do you care about US regs if you live in Canada?

The HF bands propagate worldwide - which means if clueless trolls like
you get on HF, he would have to listen to your pitiful attempts to act
like someone who knows what they're talking about.

I've been in favor of dropping the code test since the mid-1970's. You
are beginning to make me change my mind.

DE John, KC2HMZ