I thought I'd forward the thoughtful comments below from
e-ham.net ... they say a LOT. (name/callsign omitted to
at least partially protect the innocent ...)

Carl - wk3c

*********
For the last 25 years I have been in the US Coast Guard serving as
telecommunication technician. I am now a instructor at the same course.
I started off as a Morse Code operator in New Jersey. I grant you I
graduated at the near bottom of my Morse code class but still passed the 40
wpm requirement easily.
I also was sent to 9 months of antenna and radio theory and fundamental
classes. Upon graduation billions of years ago we all were required (simply
because the instructor was a Ham Extra Class type) to take the Morse code
and written tests. My class had 37 folks in it. On a windy Saturday in New
Jersey in winter 1978 we all went and took the Ham radio test and all by
simple virtue of having studied Morse and electronic theory and fundamentals
for almost a year left with our Extra licenses.
So in 1978 37 of us got "forced" into Ham radio and to this date - 22 still
are active (three of my class passed away, and I think one is in jail) but
the point is that we are still active running MARS stations, teaching in
service schools and running C2 systems for the DoD and doing so as Hams and
Coast Guard Instructors.
A few years ago the Coast Guard decided to do away with the Morse
requirement for us to learn as newbies - and for good reason - No one ever
used it for emergencies. Technology had developed a means to communicate
request for assistance via HF voice, FM, AM, TacSat. And the trusty
cellphone. I mean - in my opinion only a fool would trust sending a morse
code message that his ship was sinking - people wanted to call on a phone -
ask for help - and hear a warm friendly voice on the other side saying help
is on the way.
Two weeks ago 28 Coasties graduated from the DoD Signal center at Ft
Gordon - they had over a year of telecommunication training, satellite
uplink/downlink, antenna theory, computer ops, you name it - but what they
didn't have is any morse code. So how many of the last 3 classes that have
graduated have became Hams - ZERO. The reason is simple - they simply don't
see a need to study something that the US Govt (both the FCC and Coast Guard
and DoD) themselves have stated was not necessary.
One of the seaman that was asking me about how to become a ham told me that
to be forced to study the code to get a license was like a surgeon being
told he had to learn about Ether because that's how they use to do it back
in the civil war or a skipper having to learn how to pilot a steamboat
because for the longest time that was the naval tradition - and he has a
point - morse code was around and was an acceptable form of communication
when Steamers and biplanes were the norm but technology has changed greatly.
But here it is today - the 21st Century and we are judging folk on their
capabilities of being good Hams based on a 19th century art form.
Do I believe in tradition - of course -- but tradition shouldn't be the
basis of restricting new technology or ideals.
Do I still use morse - yep, do I scream and yell at my new students because
even though they can design an antenna system with a coke can and chewing
gum that can talk to someone 1000 miles away but must be inadequate because
they don't know morse code - No.
Bottom line is that there are a ton of great folks out there that would be a
great benefit to Ham radio but just don't want to, or can't learn the code.
And just for the record - for the last two classes I asked "how many of you
guys use CB radios" - to date the number is Zero. I had one girl in the
telecommunication class raise her hand and ask "What's a CB?". so the
argument that if we open the airwaves up to these fine Americans that have
served for over a year learning the best in radio theory and fundamentals
that they are suddenly going to invade your air space and start talking CB
is just ridiculous.
Anyway . my two cents worth.
************
END QUOTE FROM E-HAM.NET

That would be all fine and good. but you know, as well as the rest of us, that
most of the New people will be know where near that level, and probably never
will be.

nice condescending attitute there.

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

I thought I'd forward the thoughtful comments below from
e-ham.net ... they say a LOT. (name/callsign omitted to
at least partially protect the innocent ...)

Why? We can always go searching through eham

Carl - wk3c

*********
For the last 25 years I have been in the US Coast Guard serving as
telecommunication technician. I am now a instructor at the same course.
I started off as a Morse Code operator in New Jersey. I grant you I
graduated at the near bottom of my Morse code class but still passed the 40
wpm requirement easily.
I also was sent to 9 months of antenna and radio theory and fundamental
classes. Upon graduation billions of years ago we all were required (simply
because the instructor was a Ham Extra Class type) to take the Morse code
and written tests.

WHOA! "Required?"

My class had 37 folks in it. On a windy Saturday in New
Jersey in winter 1978 we all went and took the Ham radio test and all by
simple virtue of having studied Morse and electronic theory and fundamentals
for almost a year left with our Extra licenses.

So it was a no-effort thing. These folks had all already learned both theory
and code on the taxpayer's dime, to a level far beyond that required for the
amateur license.

So in 1978 37 of us got "forced" into Ham radio and to this date - 22 still
are active (three of my class passed away, and I think one is in jail) but
the point is that we are still active running MARS stations, teaching in
service schools and running C2 systems for the DoD and doing so as Hams and
Coast Guard Instructors.

All good things.

A few years ago the Coast Guard decided to do away with the Morse
requirement for us to learn as newbies - and for good reason - No one ever
used it for emergencies.

Morse Code was phased out of the maritime services so that the shipping
companies would not have to staff their ships with skilled radio operators
whose sole duties would be radio communications.

The maritime radio services exist only because ships need communications, not
because the shipping companies or crews like to mess around with radios.

Technology had developed a means to communicate
request for assistance via HF voice, FM, AM, TacSat. And the trusty
cellphone.

I'd like to see how far from shore a cellphone works....

I mean - in my opinion only a fool would trust sending a morse
code message that his ship was sinking - people wanted to call on a phone -
ask for help - and hear a warm friendly voice on the other side saying help
is on the way.

Not exactly an unbiased opinion...

IIRC, the last use of Morse for a maritime emergency was on December 31, 1997,
involving MV Oak.

It should be noted that the newer systems have a much higher false alarm rate
than the old manual Morse system.

Two weeks ago 28 Coasties graduated from the DoD Signal center at Ft
Gordon - they had over a year of telecommunication training, satellite
uplink/downlink, antenna theory, computer ops, you name it - but what they
didn't have is any morse code. So how many of the last 3 classes that have
graduated have became Hams - ZERO. The reason is simple - they simply don't
see a need to study something that the US Govt (both the FCC and Coast Guard
and DoD) themselves have stated was not necessary.

Do they have an instructor *requiring* or *forcing* them to take the test?

One of the seaman that was asking me about how to become a ham told me that
to be forced to study the code to get a license was like a surgeon being
told he had to learn about Ether because that's how they use to do it back
in the civil war or a skipper having to learn how to pilot a steamboat
because for the longest time that was the naval tradition - and he has a
point - morse code was around and was an acceptable form of communication
when Steamers and biplanes were the norm but technology has changed greatly.

Sure. But modern MDs don't use ether, steam has been largely replaced by diesel
and gas turbines. Hams, however, still use Morse code extensively.

But here it is today - the 21st Century and we are judging folk on their
capabilities of being good Hams based on a 19th century art form.

Not true at all. Was there no use of Morse code in radio in the 20th century?

Do I believe in tradition - of course -- but tradition shouldn't be the
basis of restricting new technology or ideals.
Do I still use morse - yep, do I scream and yell at my new students because
even though they can design an antenna system with a coke can and chewing
gum that can talk to someone 1000 miles away but must be inadequate because
they don't know morse code - No.
Bottom line is that there are a ton of great folks out there that would be a
great benefit to Ham radio but just don't want to, or can't learn the code.

Maybe. We've had a nocode ham license for 12+ years now - and yet none of the
students wanted that license, huh? The satellite systems used for maritime
distress, GPS, etc., aren't HF systems either.

And just for the record - for the last two classes I asked "how many of you
guys use CB radios" - to date the number is Zero. I had one girl in the
telecommunication class raise her hand and ask "What's a CB?". so the
argument that if we open the airwaves up to these fine Americans that have
served for over a year learning the best in radio theory and fundamentals
that they are suddenly going to invade your air space and start talking CB
is just ridiculous.

Sure - those folks.

Anyway . my two cents worth.
************
END QUOTE FROM E-HAM.NET

The writer ignores the biggest differences of those 25 years:

1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.

2) There was no instructor today FORCING them to take the test. In fact, an
instructor who tried to do that might be in trouble.

An amateur license is not a license to engage in commercial, maritime,
military, broadcast, public safety or other nonamateur radio communications.
It's a license to engage in amateur radio, using the amateur radio frequency
allocations. And radio amateurs do use Morse code extensively.


73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


So you're suggesting that 1978 era hams who didn't study Morse
specifically
to obtain an amateur license (ie., they were "forced" to learn it at
20WPM in a military training program) are less desirable hams than
those today who learn 5WPM (QRS PSE) on "their own time and effort"?

Sunuvagun!

Good luck on this one now!

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


You know Jim, the more I ponder this paragraph, the more I think you
may just have hit on an important way of grading the dedication (and
therefore "value") of any given amateur licensee. Just by examining
their involvement in the military, we can assign them a scientific
"grade of merit" based on whether they got a free pass based on being
forced to learn code or not forced.

Merit Zero (0.0): Draftee who was forced into the military and then was
forced into Morse school.

Merit Zero-point-one (0.1): Draftee who was forced into the military
and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cushy non-infantry job.

Merit One (1.0): Volunteer who joined the military by judicial suggestion
("Boy, come back for sentencing in 10 days, unless you're in the
military by then, in which case the charges will be dropped.") but
was forced into Morse school.

Merit One-point-one (1.1): Volunteer who joined the military by
judicial suggestion ("Boy, come back for sentencing in 10 days,
unless you're in the military by then, in which case the charges
will be dropped.") and then volunteered for Morse school to get a
cushy non-infantry job.

Merit Two (2.0): Volunteer who joined the military to avoid the draft
and was forced into Morse school.

Merit Two-point-one (2.1): Volunteer who joined the military to avoid
the draft and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cushy
non-infantry job.

Merit Three (3.0): Volunteer who freely joined the military and then
was forced into Morse school.

Merit Three-point-one (3.1): Volunteer who freely joined the military
and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cush non-infantry job.

Merit Four (4.0): Person who declined to volunteer for the military
service and learned Morse on his own time and effort. (Hello, Jim)

Merit Four-point-one (4.1): Person who fled the country to avoid
military service and learned Morse on his own time and effort.

..... or maybe I've got that all bass-ackwards.

73, de Hans, K0HB

(Hans K0HB) wrote in message . com...
"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


You know Jim, the more I ponder this paragraph, the more I think you
may just have hit on an important way of grading the dedication (and
therefore "value") of any given amateur licensee.

Well, that wasn't my intent at all. I was merely pointing out that for
some folks, getting a license involves a lot of learning and the
related effort, while others already have the skills and knowledge.

You might want to talk to N0IMD about the concept.

Just by examining
their involvement in the military, we can assign them a scientific
"grade of merit" based on whether they got a free pass based on being
forced to learn code or not forced.

You can do that.

Merit Zero (0.0): Draftee who was forced into the military and then was
forced into Morse school.

Merit Zero-point-one (0.1): Draftee who was forced into the military
and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cushy non-infantry job.

Merit One (1.0): Volunteer who joined the military by judicial suggestion
("Boy, come back for sentencing in 10 days, unless you're in the
military by then, in which case the charges will be dropped.") but
was forced into Morse school.

Merit One-point-one (1.1): Volunteer who joined the military by
judicial suggestion ("Boy, come back for sentencing in 10 days,
unless you're in the military by then, in which case the charges
will be dropped.") and then volunteered for Morse school to get a
cushy non-infantry job.

Merit Two (2.0): Volunteer who joined the military to avoid the draft
and was forced into Morse school.

Merit Two-point-one (2.1): Volunteer who joined the military to avoid
the draft and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cushy
non-infantry job.

Merit Three (3.0): Volunteer who freely joined the military and then
was forced into Morse school.

Merit Three-point-one (3.1): Volunteer who freely joined the military
and then volunteered for Morse school to get a cush non-infantry job.

Merit Four (4.0): Person who declined to volunteer for the military
service and learned Morse on his own time and effort.

(Hello, Jim)

What do you mean by "Hello, Jim?"

Merit Four-point-one (4.1): Person who fled the country to avoid
military service and learned Morse on his own time and effort.

.... or maybe I've got that all bass-ackwards.

You've left out a few categories:

- Person who earned their Extra amateur license years before they were
eligible for military service

- Person whom the military would not accept for legitimate physical
reasons (vision, etc.). Would any branch of the military accept a
recruit with, say, 20/15 vision in one eye and 20/400 plus extreme
myopia in the other?


73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ilgate.org, "Hans
K0HB" writes:

"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG
training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and a
bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


So you're suggesting that 1978 era hams who didn't study Morse
specifically
to obtain an amateur license (ie., they were "forced" to learn it at
20WPM in a military training program) are less desirable hams than
those today who learn 5WPM (QRS PSE) on "their own time and effort"?

No, Hans, I'm not suggesting that at all.

Sunuvagun!

Son of something else.......;-)

Good luck on this one now!

You too.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote:

(Hans K0HB) wrote:
(snip) Just by examining their involvement in the
military, we can assign them a scientific "grade of
merit" based on whether they got a free pass
based on being forced to learn code or not forced.

(snip)

Merit Four-point-one (4.1): Person who fled
the country to avoid military service and learned
Morse on his own time and effort.


You've left out a few categories:

- Person who earned their Extra amateur license
years before they were eligible for military service

- Person whom the military would not accept for
legitimate physical reasons (vision, etc.). Would
any branch of the military accept a recruit with,
say, 20/15 vision in one eye and 20/400 plus
extreme myopia in the other?


And lets not forget those who enlisted in the military and selected a
signal MOS long after code was pretty much dropped by the military. That
would include just about all those who went to the Army's Signal School
somewhere after about 1970 (over thirty years ago).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
(Hans K0HB) wrote in message
. com...
"N2EY" wrote


1) Back in '78, the students learned Morse Code as part of their CG
training,
so there was no other training needed for them to get Extra Class
amateur
licenses. Today, they would need to put in some of their own time, and
a bit of
effort, learning Morse at 5 wpm for that test.


You know Jim, the more I ponder this paragraph, the more I think you
may just have hit on an important way of grading the dedication (and
therefore "value") of any given amateur licensee.

Well, that wasn't my intent at all. I was merely pointing out that for
some folks, getting a license involves a lot of learning and the
related effort, while others already have the skills and knowledge.

The point is that licensing should be based on one's demonstration
of the required qualifications, no more, no less.

If someone already has the knowledge to pass the tests, fine.
There is no "value added" in "making them work for it" ... if
they have the knowledge they are qualified, period. (and likely
they worked for it or they wouldn't have the knowledge anyway,
so the logic of "making them work (more)" fails)

Carl - wk3c