(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...

A half century ago...(SNIP)

You were unlicensed in the Amateur Radio Service, a "tradition"
you continue to this date...

Sorry to hijack the thread, Jim!

Back under the bridge, troll...

Takes one to know one, eh, Lennie...?!?!

Steve, K4YZ

On 8 Aug 2003 10:12:11 -0700, N2EY wrote:

AMTOR is pretty much dead, I am told.

Certainly not as popular as it once was, but I don't think it's entirely
"dead."

How many HF amateur AMTOR contacts have you or anyone you know made in
the past year?

Yet SITOR - the commercial version of AMTOR - is the standard HF
mode of data communication in the maritime service. That, and not
obscenenly-expensive satellite comms, is what killed maritime CW.
The ship's purser or deck officers can pull up the preset HF
transceiver channel and pound away, and even personal e-mail is now
sent and received by a SITOR connection to AOL via Globe Wireless,
the successor to RCA and ITT, via an AOL "kiosk" in the recreation
areas. No Radio Officer needed.

One of the San Francisco area marine radio techs, a ham, applied to
the FCC to be able to offer PACTOR service in the marine bands, and
after consulation with the ITU, his request was turned down because
it was not an international standard and would not give that much
improvement over SITOR considering the changes necessary.

And the US Coast Guard and other similar agencies world-wide
continue to transmit NAVTEX bulletins (marine broadcasts) on 518 kHz
worldwide using SITOR.

Of course what really drove all that was PC/soundcard setups becoming
affordable.

Agreed ... multimode with a std SSB radio and PC ... cool stuff.

Yeah - I can tune SITOR by setting the (suppressed) carrier 2.2 kHz
higher than the channel center and using LSB. Cheapie "FSK".

Going to be "more easier" later on this week when my new Ten-Tec
computer-tuned DSP HF receiver arrives, and I can set the filtering
to just where I want it.

I'm not throwing my AMTOR/SITOR TNCs away just yet.

Sort of. But it's actually a patch job.

One reason packet is stuck at 1200 baud all these years is because
going faster would require a purpose-built data radio. Ikensu isn't
going to do it unless there's a proven market, and the failure of 9600
to get much attention means they will wait some more.

Hey, we know that we can get at least 28K or more in a standard
audio channel. But hams are cheap - nobody (including me) wants
to throw away existing 1200 baud radios and TNCs that work really
well for the type of canned messages that we get on packet, unless
they are super-whizzes at Qualcom, with due appolgies to Phil Karn
who fits that description and has done a LOT for digital ham radio
specifically and whom I admire greatly.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 8 Aug 2003 10:12:11 -0700, N2EY wrote:

AMTOR is pretty much dead, I am told.

Certainly not as popular as it once was, but I don't think it's entirely
"dead."

How many HF amateur AMTOR contacts have you or anyone you know made in
the past year?

Yet SITOR - the commercial version of AMTOR - is the standard HF
mode of data communication in the maritime service. That, and not
obscenenly-expensive satellite comms, is what killed maritime CW.

Wasn't maritime MF Morse capability mandatory until the satellite based
distress system came online?

The ship's purser or deck officers can pull up the preset HF
transceiver channel and pound away, and even personal e-mail is now
sent and received by a SITOR connection to AOL via Globe Wireless,
the successor to RCA and ITT, via an AOL "kiosk" in the recreation
areas. No Radio Officer needed.

Sure. And the reason all that happened was that the shipping companies decided
to make the inital investment in SITOR equipment, and pay for it with the
salaries of the laid-off radio officers. And as long as the SITOR equipment
does the job and costs less per year, there will be no reason to replace it
with something better.

One of the San Francisco area marine radio techs, a ham, applied to
the FCC to be able to offer PACTOR service in the marine bands, and
after consulation with the ITU, his request was turned down because
it was not an international standard and would not give that much
improvement over SITOR considering the changes necessary.

Exactly - the improvement was judged to be not worth the investment. Since
decisions like this are made at the top and conformity is deemed more important
than what people *want* to do, the existing system is kept.

Which is why you can watch a 2003 TV show on a 50+ year old TV receiver. NTSC,
anyway.

And the US Coast Guard and other similar agencies world-wide
continue to transmit NAVTEX bulletins (marine broadcasts) on 518 kHz
worldwide using SITOR.

Using a system that is almost completely automated.

Of course what really drove all that was PC/soundcard setups becoming
affordable.

Agreed ... multimode with a std SSB radio and PC ... cool stuff.

Yeah - I can tune SITOR by setting the (suppressed) carrier 2.2 kHz
higher than the channel center and using LSB. Cheapie "FSK".

Going to be "more easier" later on this week when my new Ten-Tec
computer-tuned DSP HF receiver arrives, and I can set the filtering
to just where I want it.

bwaahaahaa

I'm not throwing my AMTOR/SITOR TNCs away just yet.

But how much AMTOR will be found in the HF ham bands today? I daresay not much.
In fact you'll probably find more 60 wpm Baudot RTTY on the ham bands in the
course of a year than you will find AMTOR. (if you count contests).

Sort of. But it's actually a patch job.

One reason packet is stuck at 1200 baud all these years is because
going faster would require a purpose-built data radio. Ikensu isn't
going to do it unless there's a proven market, and the failure of 9600
to get much attention means they will wait some more.

Hey, we know that we can get at least 28K or more in a standard
audio channel.

Sure - if the channel's characteristics are good enough.

There's also the question of what FCC will allow in symbol rate and such.

But hams are cheap - nobody (including me) wants
to throw away existing 1200 baud radios and TNCs that work really
well for the type of canned messages that we get on packet, unless
they are super-whizzes at Qualcom, with due appolgies to Phil Karn
who fits that description and has done a LOT for digital ham radio
specifically and whom I admire greatly.

I disagree with hams being "cheap". It's more a matter of not being able to
write off expenditures. Businesses can depreciate equipment - hams can't. They
can also pay for equipment out of reduced labor and repair cost - hams can't.
Engineering economics 101.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
. com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...

Now you're trying to tell us that incentive licensing PROMOTED
growth in ham radio??? I don't think so ...

More likely the boom after WWII (and Korea) was due to military
radio folks becoming hams when they got out ...

Now, now. Rev. Jimmie LIVED THOSE TIMES. He KNOWS.

:-)

You've told us about morse landline telegraphy. Did you LIVE THOSE
TIMES? Do you KNOW? Maybe you read it in a BOOK or saw an article on
the WEB. :-)


The boom in the 60's was probably due to the emergence of economical
JA radios, a general increase in the interest in electronics, and later, the
emergence of VHF/UHF FM and repeaters ...

Incorrect. There was no boom of JA radios in the 1960's.

It's difficult for even old-timers to understand a postwar boom period and
the Cold War getting hotter when they've just reached First Grade. :-)

I don't know about when you were in school, Len. They provided us
history books. Most of us figured out that there was additional
historical material available. :-) :-)

The holier-than-thou old-timers insist on the "no-coders" to do all
the technical advancements in amateur radio. Never mind that they
weren't able to do much in a half century. :-)

What's it to you? You aren't involved. If you're to make any technical
advancements in amateur radio, you'd better get cracking. You've wasted
decades talking about "getting into" amateur radio. :-)


The holier-than-thou old-timers won't hear of "being nice" to newcomers.

They have achieved TITLE, STATUS, Rank and Privelege and can sign
their callsign behind their names (just like nobility). They are Very
Important exhalted People who are "superior!"

Love your "fox and the grapes" routine. You got the callsign and
privilege portion partially correct.

Nobility suffers the peasantry, poor things.

In this game, you aren't nobility and you aren't a peasant. You're an
onlooker.

Dave K8MN

In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes:

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
om...

More likely the boom after WWII (and Korea) was due to military
radio folks becoming hams when they got out ...

There has never been a correlation made between the growth of ham
radio and new batches of war vets.

It should be noted that the number of US hams grew from about 60,000 on VJ Day
to almost 100,000 in 1951, when the restructuring that gave us the "name"
classes (including Novice) took place. Some of that was obviously returning
vets, some was "pent up demand", etc.

btw, FCC continued to conduct ham exams and issue amateur operator licenses
during WW2. They simply suspended all station licenses. So there were plenty of
hams but no ham stations for them to operate legally. This was a big
improvement over WW1, when all licenses were revoked, equipment had to be
dismantled and sealed, and even antennas had to be lowered to the ground and
removed.

The far more likely reasons were
the overall increase in the standard of living and more personal
leisure time aided and abetted by a heightened awareness of radio
comms and technology in general after those wars.

All big factors. Something as simple as a VA or FHA mortgage and a bunch of
Liberty bonds made a big difference.

And to a lesser
extent the availability of surplus mil-spec hardware for cents per
pound was a boon to growth.

Sure. Plus wartime manufacturing advances meant that prices on both parts and
manufactured gear went down compared to inflation.

More younger people joined the hobby for
all these reasons plus the availability of the then-new Novice license
was a big shot in the arm for growth. "I wuz one" . . .

The Novice had the effect of drastically reducing the age of the average
newcomer. Some folks back then were not happy about that.

The boom in the 60's was probably due to the emergence of economical
JA radios,

There was no boom in the '60s. JA radios did not really appear until the mid
'70s.

That growth occurred when brands like (bloody expensive!) Drake,
Collins, Hammarlund, Heath, B&W and the rest were the only games in
town.

Yep - the '40s, 50s and very early '60s.

a general increase in the interest in electronics, and later, the
emergence of VHF/UHF FM and repeaters ...

'70s, not '60s. Driven by cheap surplus land-mobile stuff.

HF equipment suppliers were and still are almost entirely driven by
market needs and expectations and the competition to meet those needs
and expectations per buck per performace capability. The availability
of the HF riceboxes in the '70s did just that for the existing
population of hams. I've never known of an example of anybody getting
into ham radio simply because the newer HF equipment provided more
bang for the buck.

Actually, what really has a big effect is the perceived cost to get started. In
the bad old days most hams started out with a receiver and simple wire antenna,
costing whatever they could afford. For many it was a $10 Command set or $25
used SWL rx or homebrew. Once the license was earned, a simple tx and TR system
was added. Not state of the art even for the times but a lot of fun was had and
the expenditures were modest and spread out in time. Most of all, beginners had
lots of examples of simple inexpensive first stations. And there was a long
road of improvements possible, all spread out in time.

Today the "paradigm" seems to be a new transceiver, manufactured antenna, etc.,
all at considerable cost up-front before even any listening is done.

Equipment availability for the bands above HF was never been much of a
driver in growth until the Tech license was converted from being an
experimenters ticket to a communicators ticket and even then there
wasn't all that much growth. It wasn't until the 1980s that Techs got
into packet in a big way and into the FM voice infrastructures because
of the increasingly inexpensive VHF/UHF riceboxes that the they became
major players in the growth equation. It was the Disincentive
Licensing maneuver of '91 and the availabilty of $150 2M FM xcvrs
which really done the deed. So now we have numbers. What else did we
get out of that one?

I dunno that we even got that much in the way of numbers. Sure, a lot of hams
started out as post-1991 Techs, and we've grown considerably since then. But
look at the '80s growth, and the '70s growth....

Actually, it's not a bad idea to use existing PC capabilities to do the
signal processing for multiple modes ... it's all software ... and within
the limits of a typical SSB radio, you can do some interesting, albeit
rather slow, stuff on HF.

There ya go again dammit. It's gonna STAY that way too until YOU
figger out how to pull it off without screwing up the bands by being a
spectrum hog for your own jollies.

9600 is a kludge in virtually all of the rice-boxes ... and it's not fast
enough to really be interesting or all that useful ...

9600 would have helped ten years ago but it never happened. In the
meanwhile packet and the Internet have been interlaced and the need
for 9600 has all but disappeared.

I would respectfully disagree ... the idea that "hams can't work
with SMT" is bogus ...

I agree!

Then YOU snip the frigging resistors and jumpers in this frigging SMT
radio so that I can get on 60M. Ya need a 10X magnifier just the SEE
the things on the frigging PCB!

All part of the tool kit.

Building a radio will involve components ... some may be "store-bought"
ICs, others will be R/L/C, perhaps some discrete transistors, etc. ... BUT
there is no reason that reasonably technically-inclined, intelligent hams
cannot
"build" their own custom ICs at home these days ... there are all sorts of
programmable logic devices, ranging from a few thousand or less gates to
several millions of gates ... and the software to do design, simulation,
verification,
and programming is either affordable, or in some cases free.

You do your conceptual design, code it in VHDL, simulate it, synthesize it
into a file that is used to program the IC and voila, something that had NO
"personalilty" ... no "idea of how to do anything" ... is now a functional
"custom IC." This is REALLY cool stuff ... and there are lots and lots of
free "cores"out there for all sorts of things ... SPI interfaces,
microcontrollers,
FEC, and on and on and on ... all things that can be "hooked up" together
and/or with your own code and synthesized into your own IC ...

Let's see,

What I'm hearing is that it's "reasonable" to expect hams who are not
electrical engineering professionals to
do a "conceptual design, code it in VHDL, simulate it, synthesize it into a
file that is used to
program the IC" and then integrate it. We can also expect them to use "lots and
lots of
free "cores"out there for all sorts of things ... SPI interfaces,
microcontrollers,
FEC, and on and on and on ... all things that can be "hooked up" together
and/or with your own code and synthesized into your own IC"s. And then put it
all together into
a functioning, useful RADIO - on their own time and with their own money and
tools.

But it is not "reasonable" to expect them to learn enough Morse code to pass
Element 1. OK, fine.

And when it's all said and done the average ham won't learn or know
any more than he/she needs to pass the tests and/or to get on the air
and meet their specific operating objectives. Whatever takes the least
effort and brain pain prevails.

btw, I don't see anyhting on Shannon's work in the question pools.

Fred is working on it . . .

Actually I think a "21st century Novice" license isn't such a bad idea. The
problem is on the other end of the scale.

Folks just need to think in new paradigms ... unfortunately, that does not
seem to be the strong suit of many present hams.

Another "bell the cat" problem. Which new paradigms? The real problems most
hams, particularly new ones, face are
things like CC&Rs, and RFI.

I heard exactly that same lament in the 1950s and it was just as true
then as it now. What conclusions do you draw from that as it relates
to the health, welfare and growth of ham radio?

What matters is not how many hams there are but how many active hams there are.
The FCC database sez 687,000 or so in the USA alone. What do you think the
bands would sound like if even 10% of them were on the air at once?

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
. com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...

Now you're trying to tell us that incentive licensing PROMOTED
growth in ham radio??? I don't think so ...

More likely the boom after WWII (and Korea) was due to military
radio folks becoming hams when they got out ...

Now, now. Rev. Jimmie LIVED THOSE TIMES. He KNOWS.

:-)

You've told us about morse landline telegraphy. Did you LIVE THOSE
TIMES? Do you KNOW? Maybe you read it in a BOOK or saw an article on
the WEB. :-)

Irrelevant. No one in here lived in 1844 when morse code was first used
in commercial landline communications.

No one in here lived when Marconi did his first radio communications in
Switzerland in 1895, or proved in Italy in 1896...using morse code for
on-off keying of a spark transmitter.

No one in here lived when the Titanic went down and mighty morse code
managed to get through for rescuing some...morse code could get
through because there was NOTHING ELSE to compare it with.

Try reading a BOOK on the REST of the world of radio instead of what
if spoon-fed you by the little publisher in Newington. You might find out
that the REST OF THE RADIO WORLD has gone beyond amateurism.

There is NO need in the rest of the radio world for DX contesting or
morsemanship skills or collecting QSL cards.

The boom in the 60's was probably due to the emergence of economical
JA radios, a general increase in the interest in electronics, and later,
the
emergence of VHF/UHF FM and repeaters ...

Incorrect. There was no boom of JA radios in the 1960's.

Of course not. Hallicrafters, National Radio, RME, Collins were all
having terrific sales, snowing the amateur market with ham gear.

Right. Sure. Where are they now?

Collins quit the ham market long ago. Hallicrafters folded or something
even longer ago. National Radio went for the military electronics stuff
quitting ham radio sales. Even Heathkit went belly-up.

Are you in some kind of dream world where you think Yaesu, Icom,
Kenwood, and JRC are "American" companies?!?!?


It's difficult for even old-timers to understand a postwar boom period
and
the Cold War getting hotter when they've just reached First Grade. :-)

I don't know about when you were in school, Len. They provided us
history books. Most of us figured out that there was additional
historical material available. :-) :-)

Paper, moveable type, and the printing press were all invented LONG
before 1844 and the first use of commercial morse code
communications.

I was a working radio professional in 1952 when the Cold War was
already started. Are you saying your holiness as a school boy has
MORE experience in Cold War life?!?!?

The holier-than-thou old-timers insist on the "no-coders" to do all
the technical advancements in amateur radio. Never mind that they
weren't able to do much in a half century. :-)

What's it to you?

Stuff it, Colonel Klunk.

You aren't involved. If you're to make any technical
advancements in amateur radio, you'd better get cracking.

Stuff it twice. YOU are NOT a judge. You are NOT an official who can
"run" the US amateur radio community. You are NOT in government
anymore and were NEVER a radio regulator at the FCC.

I've had a successful career in PROFESSIONAL radio-electronics and
still enjoy that in retirement. Radio-electronics has been a fun hobby
for me for a longer time.

Now tell us, great big four-decade experienced AMATEUR radio god,
what have YOU ever done to "advance amateur radio?!?"

Show us your patents, your marvelous discoveries, all your important
technical contributions. You've had FORTY YEARS of amateurism
and all you can come up with is trying to put down folks in an amateur
newsgroup?!?


In this game, you aren't nobility and you aren't a peasant. You're an
onlooker.

That's all you are, big radio god of the AMATEUR bands.

A hot-air balloon who plays with ready-built radios and talks tuff as a
newsgroupie.

Get a better life.

LHA

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(pSycho pSteve) writes:

(Len Over 21) wrote in message
...

A half century ago...(SNIP)

You were unlicensed in the Amateur Radio Service, a "tradition"
you continue to this date...

You still off your medications, pSycho pSteve?

Hmmmm...I think YOU would call that a "misdirection".

I call it a childish dodge.

You're STILL not licensed in the Amateur Radio service.

Steve, K4YZ

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
. com...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...

Now you're trying to tell us that incentive licensing PROMOTED
growth in ham radio??? I don't think so ...

More likely the boom after WWII (and Korea) was due to military
radio folks becoming hams when they got out ...

Now, now. Rev. Jimmie LIVED THOSE TIMES. He KNOWS.

:-)

You've told us about morse landline telegraphy. Did you LIVE THOSE
TIMES? Do you KNOW? Maybe you read it in a BOOK or saw an article on
the WEB. :-)

Irrelevant. No one in here lived in 1844 when morse code was first used
in commercial landline communications.

No one in here lived when Marconi did his first radio communications in
Switzerland in 1895, or proved in Italy in 1896...using morse code for
on-off keying of a spark transmitter.

No one in here lived when the Titanic went down and mighty morse code
managed to get through for rescuing some...morse code could get
through because there was NOTHING ELSE to compare it with.

What I wrote was precisely relevant. You wrote of someone's having not
been alive when something took place. I pointed out that you weren't
alive during some of the things which you've pontificated on in this
venue.

Try reading a BOOK on the REST of the world of radio instead of what
if spoon-fed you by the little publisher in Newington.

"YOU have NO authority to call anyone anything, demean them,
make fun of them, or anything else...yet YOU continue to do so.
That indicates the perversity of your control-freak psychosis."

--Leonard H. Anderson

You might find out
that the REST OF THE RADIO WORLD has gone beyond amateurism.

What the hell are you prattling about?

There is NO need in the rest of the radio world for DX contesting or
morsemanship skills or collecting QSL cards.

Did you have a point?

The boom in the 60's was probably due to the emergence of economical
JA radios, a general increase in the interest in electronics, and later,
the
emergence of VHF/UHF FM and repeaters ...

Incorrect. There was no boom of JA radios in the 1960's.

Of course not. Hallicrafters, National Radio, RME, Collins were all
having terrific sales, snowing the amateur market with ham gear.

Right. Sure. Where are they now?

Collins quit the ham market long ago. Hallicrafters folded or something
even longer ago. National Radio went for the military electronics stuff
quitting ham radio sales. Even Heathkit went belly-up.

Are you in some kind of dream world where you think Yaesu, Icom,
Kenwood, and JRC are "American" companies?!?!?

You certainly wrote a large number of diversionary words to cover your
gaffe. There was no boom of Japanese ham gear in the 1960's. Is it
clear now?

It's difficult for even old-timers to understand a postwar boom period
and
the Cold War getting hotter when they've just reached First Grade. :-)

I don't know about when you were in school, Len. They provided us
history books. Most of us figured out that there was additional
historical material available. :-) :-)

Paper, moveable type, and the printing press were all invented LONG
before 1844 and the first use of commercial morse code
communications.

I was a working radio professional in 1952 when the Cold War was
already started. Are you saying your holiness as a school boy has
MORE experience in Cold War life?!?!?

Why no, Len, not as a school boy. I certainly have more governmental
communications experience during the cold war.

The holier-than-thou old-timers insist on the "no-coders" to do all
the technical advancements in amateur radio. Never mind that they
weren't able to do much in a half century. :-)

What's it to you?

Stuff it, Colonel Klunk.

You aren't involved. If you're to make any technical
advancements in amateur radio, you'd better get cracking.

Stuff it twice. YOU are NOT a judge. You are NOT an official who can
"run" the US amateur radio community. You are NOT in government
anymore and were NEVER a radio regulator at the FCC.

It doesn't take a regulator to truthfully state that you weren't
involved and are not involved in amateur radio. Don't tell me what I am
to amateur radio. I'm a licensed ham and have been for decades. You,
quite truthfully are not involved at all in amateur radio. You aren't a
judge of what hams do or have done. You are not a regulator.

I've had a successful career in PROFESSIONAL radio-electronics and
still enjoy that in retirement. Radio-electronics has been a fun hobby
for me for a longer time.

Trust me. Things have a way of evening out.

Now tell us, great big four-decade experienced AMATEUR radio god,
what have YOU ever done to "advance amateur radio?!?"

No, I don't believe I will, Len.

Show us your patents, your marvelous discoveries, all your important technical contributions.

Still have your patent fetish?

You've had FORTY YEARS of amateurism
and all you can come up with is trying to put down folks in an amateur
newsgroup?!?

Folks? Well, there's you. Then again, you aren't a ham. You're just a
groupie.

In this game, you aren't nobility and you aren't a peasant. You're an
onlooker.

That's all you are, big radio god of the AMATEUR bands.

You've got it wrong, Len. I have a license and have had it for decades.
I make contacts via amateur radio daily. I'm a participant in amateur
radio. I don't issue catcalls from the sidelines. The guy who does
that is you.

A hot-air balloon who plays with ready-built radios and talks tuff as a
newsgroupie.

Why, Len, you're the wanna-be.

Get a better life.

I'm quite happy with this one, Len. Yours seems to be a little lacking
in light of your ham radio envy.

Dave K8MN

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

What WILL be the end of ham radio is a lack of significant
growth ...

Let's get it straight - is dropping Element 1 going to give us lots more
growth or not?

I don't understand a few of the things Carl says here. That we will
dissapear unless we get "significant growth".

There are more US hams today than at any time in the past.

What exactly is that? a 100 percent increase in a day? increase at 1
percent over population increase?

That's what I've been asking.

I'd like to know the advances they will bring.

Similar to what newcomers have always brought.

I want to hear how those who oppose the ending of the Morse code
requirement are keeping ham radio from marching forward.

Time for the roadmap to the future to be laid out.

Don't hold yer breath waiting;-)

Or is this like the last scene in "The Candidate"?

Refresh my memory on that one, Mike.

I find it amusing that even though the PCTA's have lost the war, that
those who brought this to bear cannot avoid smacking us around a little
bit yet. It might be fun, but isn't doing anyone a bit of good.

What "war"?

FCC has been pushing for nocodetest since 1975. They've been nibbling away at
both the code and written tests since then.

Gloat time is over. Your time has come. You now have the chance to
prove that you were right. And browbeating the losers isn't a very good
start.

Maybe we'll see a lot of newcomers and technoadvances after the code test goes.
And maybe we won't. Personally, I don't think we'll see either.

If that happens, what will be blamed for the ARS' perceived problems??

A few other countries have dumped code testing. More are on the way to it. It
will be interesting to see what happens in those countries.

Sorry to hijack the thread, Jim!

You didn't hijack anything.

73 de Jim, N2EY

(Len Over 21)
writes:

Irrelevant.

Yes, you certainly are,
Len Anderson ;-) ;-)

No one in here lived in 1844 when morse code was first used
in commercial landline communications.

No one "in here" lived when
the telephone was first used
in commercial landline
communications.

No one in here lived when Marconi did his first radio communications in
Switzerland in 1895, or proved in Italy in 1896...using morse code for
on-off keying of a spark transmitter.

No one "in here" lived when
Fessenden did his first voice
radio communications in
1900 (or was it 1906?)

No one in here lived when the Titanic went down and mighty morse code
managed to get through for rescuing some...morse code could get
through because there was NOTHING ELSE to compare it with.

The Titanic sank at
least six years after
Fessenden demonstrated
voice radio communications.

Try reading a BOOK on the REST of the world of radio instead of what
if spoon-fed you by the little publisher in Newington.

Why?

You might find out
that the REST OF THE RADIO WORLD has gone beyond amateurism.

If that is true, Len Anderson
why do you post here?

And why are you so nasty
in your postings?

Do you have some sort of
unresolved anger towards
others?

"I'm not interested in either getting or dreaming about any AMATEUR license."
- Leonard Anderson

There is NO need in the rest of the radio world for DX contesting or
morsemanship skills or collecting QSL cards.

There is NO need in the amateur
radio world for your posts, Leonard
Anderson.

"The things that upset us most are often things we see as
qualities in our ownselves." - Kim W5TIT

Paper, moveable type, and the printing press were all invented LONG
before 1844 and the first use of commercial morse code
communications.

I was a working radio professional in 1952 when the Cold War was
already started. Are you saying your holiness as a school boy has
MORE experience in Cold War life?!?!?

Perhaps Dave Heil has more
experience in hot wars than you,
Len Anderson. He was in
Vietnam when there was a
war going on there.

Were you ever in a country
where a war was going on?

Stuff it, Colonel Klunk.

"YOU have NO authority to call anyone anything, demean them,
make fun of them, or anything else...yet YOU continue to do so.
That indicates the perversity of your control-freak psychosis."

Guess who said that?

Perhaps you should
take your own advice, Len.