I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.


My statement is that there is no direct relationship.


Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike,

An excellent idea. I for one would be very interested in seeing the
logic and rationale that folks have for keeping or retiring the code
test. By removing the emotion, personal opinion and bias from the
discussion, some quite interesting points may well be raised.

73, Leo

On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:34:37 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.


My statement is that there is no direct relationship.


Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences. Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ... we'll see how the other side deals
with it ...

73,
Carl - wk3c

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.


In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)


I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.


Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

I agree that the Tech's on average have been more likely to do public
support in my area. i'm also in a University town, so that can skew the
results.

But that's okay as far as my argument goes. As long as things average
out, its consistent with my statement.

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...


I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.


I think I've met the challenge ...


Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.


Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences. Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.


We shall see ...


My statement is that there is no direct relationship.


The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

True enough. My main purpose here is to see if any of those who declare
that PCTA's are behind the times can come up with anything substantial.


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

My experience has been different. But let's talk about yours.

First off, with all due respect, I would submit that Carl is perhaps
not the optimum salesperson for convincing people to take code tests
in order to get a license.

Carl's claim, as I read it, is that he knows RF engineers who would
have become hams but for the code test. Some of them have become hams
in spite of that test, or since it was lowered to 5 wpm for all
classes.

The question I ask is this: What does it matter to amateur radio what
a person's job is, unless that person actually uses their job-related
skills for amateur radio? And how many RF engineers will put that
experience to work in amateur radio if the code test is removed that
are allegedly being stopped today?

I remember back in 1990 that this same argument was being used against
the Technician code test. We were told that ham radio would get lots
of new technical folks to push development of the VHF/UHF spectrum,
and that such folks weren't interested in taking code tests. Yet here
it is a dozen years later and there hasn't been any techno-revolution
in amateur VHF/UHF. That doesn't mean there hasn't been progress, just
that there hasn't been massive changes.

Indeed, consider the recent developments in 24 GHz EME. Several
enterprising hams have built stations for that band capable of EME
QSOs (USA to Czech Republic is the current record, IIRC) using only
small (~ 2 meter diameter) dishes and less than 100 watts output from
the TWTs.

And the mode used?

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

I've found more homebrewers among CW ops than any other part of ham
radio.

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ from
yours, YMMV ...

Of course.

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Almost.

You wrote:

"were unwilling to waste their valuable time lear[n]ing Morse"

and

"jumped through the 5 wpm hoop"

which some folks would take as abrasive and/or insulting.

Why not just say:

"were unwilling to spend the time and effort"

and

"passed the 5 wpm test simply to meet the requirement"

?

Is an RF engineer's time more valuable than, say, a doctor's or
lawyer's?

Suppose a doctor or lawyer wants to be a ham, but doesn't want to
spend the time learning all the material in the written tests just to
use a manufactured rig to chase DX. Would you say such a person did
not want to waste their valuable time learning the theory needed for
the Extra test? Or, perhaps, did not want to jump through the written
test hoop?

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of their
own
personal experiences.

Agreed.

Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm "in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...

Of course.


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

I think I've done that.

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

One can find anecdotes for almost any position.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ...

Except for the "waste their valuable time" and "hoop" stuff, I'd
agree.

73 de Jim, N2EY

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

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.
The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical
backwater.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham) have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in
public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being "users"
rather than tinkerers ...

Remember, this is my personal experience, and since it seems to differ
from
yours, YMMV ...

I would also challenge them to do it without being abrasive or
insulting.

I think I've met the challenge ...

Just facts or intelligent informed opinions.

Since there are no authortative, scientific statistics (and probably never
will
be), I think that all you can expect to get are peoples accounting of
their
own
personal experiences. Mine are admitedly coming from the fact that I'm
"in
the business" of RF engineering ... but through local clubs and ARES/RACES
participation over the past 25+ years, my observations seem to hold, even
amongst contacts/acquaintences/friends who are not "in the profession."
Remember, YMMV ...


Pro coders can help by refraining from name calling too.

We shall see ...

My statement is that there is no direct relationship.

The evidence is anecdotal will, as I point out, vary from person
to person, depending on their location, profession, the "slant"
of the local club(s) they belong to, etc.

Anyone ready for a real discussion without the barbs? Can we do it?
First person to start throwing insults only makes it look bad for
his/her side.

I think I've taken the high ground ... we'll see how the other side deals
with it ...

73,
Carl - wk3c


Well Carl in my personal experience (my own) I am quite good at CW, and
spent most of my life in the Electronics field. All self taught (Morse and
theory). Never been to a electronics tech school, but managed to make a
living in the field for years.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...
[snip]

That *might* be a bit difficult given that even Carl, their vaunted
leader, is a SSB ratchjaw, not given to even putting a digital HF
station on the air, much less doing any "amsteur digital design".

Gee, Dick your hatred of SSB is showing again ... and you failed
Mike's "test" because you resorted to insults.

Besides, I'm active on digital ... how the hell do you profess to
know what modes I'm capable of/equipped for/using?????

At least I can get PSK31 to work ...

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham)

Ah, it MUST be pointed out here that your tenure as a longtime ham did
not include close connection to *anyone* who was seriously involved in
radiotelegraphy in any way. And I know that how? By your actions here!
It's completely safe to say that no one would tolarate your attitude as
a friend, not likely as even a casual acquaintance, given the lever of
vituperation you have always shown toward CW. So what would anyone
expect your experience to be??

One of my best friends, now SK unfortuantely, was a CW op ... worked
as radio officer on ships, was a LL telegrapher when he was a kid. 60 wpm
in his head, while drunk, smoking, and playing poker was no problem for
him. HE understood that CW "wasn't my thing" and we still were friends,
enjoyed other aspects of ham radio together, and had a good time.

Now, I wouldn't expect to be able to have that sort of a relationship
with you, Dick ... you're not open-minded enough to accept that others
see things different than you. (You see, I accept that you like and use
CW ... I disagree only with your propatation of the "Morse myths" and
your insistence that everyone should have Morse forced on them in
exchange for HF privs ... fortunately, most of the rest of the world
doesn't agree with you.)

Carl - wk3c

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

I think I've taken the high ground

Carl, with all due respect, using abrasive and derisive terms like
"jumping through hoops" is not "the high ground". It is your same old
baiting and condescending rhetoric, seemingly calculated to be
inflamatory and divisive.

I don't mourn the end of Morse testing, but I recognize the fact that
many honorable folks disagree with me, and I try to treat their
opinions with respect.

With all kind wishes,

de Hans, K0HB

"Leo" wrote in message
...
Mike,

An excellent idea. I for one would be very interested in seeing the
logic and rationale that folks have for keeping or retiring the code
test. By removing the emotion, personal opinion and bias from the
discussion, some quite interesting points may well be raised.

73, Leo

Leo,

The whole discussion and every possible argument pro/con on code testing
has been reviewed in the comments filled under NPRM98-143 as well as
several other past FCC reviews.
In the 98-143 R&O which came from all those comments,
the FCC found not one reason of
sufficient cause to retain any code testing...EXCEPT, at that time, the
ITU treaty still required code testing for hams permitted under 30MHz
operation.

As of July 5, 2003 the ITU treaty changed and ended mandatory
morse testing completely...leaving any decision to have any morse testing
that of each individual country.

Given the end to the ITU treaty requirement and coupling that with the
prior findings of the FCC R&O for 98-143, the only conclusion one
can have is that...absent anything NEW in the arguments, the FCC
should now remove all morse testing.

People can argue with the past FCC findings, but nothing being
offered now is anything that the FCC hasn't heard before. Add to that
the fact that other administrations have already ended code testing
since July 5, 2003 one can also conclude that it isn't likly that the
USA will retain code anymore. In the end, it is not a matter of IF, but
more
simply WHEN.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

I just saw another accusation of Pro-Coders as technically backwards.

Yet some of the most progressive RF Engineers and Technicians I know
(who are Hams) are really enamored of Morse CW.

That would be those engineers who understood the real value of simple,
effective, easily implemented baseline communications which can be used
from almost anywhere with the least amount of simple equipment imaginable.
Carl never did understand any of this, and of course it doesn't match
his agenda, so it has no validity to him.

Then I guess the many other services which, at one time, did use morse
(i.e. military, marine, etc); but ended its use some time ago didn't
have the engineering folks that "understood the real value...."

The issue is one of personal choice, not need, as to ever using morse
anymore. At best, there is but a handful of anecdotal references to
morse being claimed as being "the only mode usable" under some
actual emergencies. Those that claim morse is needed for emergencies
fail to show any reliance on the mode in the vast (probably 90+ percent)
domain of those organizations (RACES, ARES, etc) that actually
put in place teams of operators, stations and portable equipment.

In over 32 years as an RF engineer, I have not had the same experience.

This would be no surprise, given your OBVIOUS hatred of radiotelegraphy.

Dick would have us believe he can read people's minds as
to their likes/dislikes.

The most technical folks have seemed more interested in the technical
side of ham radio and there have been MANY who I could not recruit
into ham radio because they had no interest in and were unwilling to
waste
their valuable time learing Morse to a level that would get them decent
HF privs. (some have capitulated and jumped through the 5 wpm hoop
since "restructuring" and are now extras, but many have refused, on
principal, to jump through the hoop, saying they'll wait until they
don't
have to waste their time on Morse)

Mygawd man, no one in his right mind, having once endured that diatribe,
would be eager to have to go through it all over again. You have it
programmed into your psyche, if not in a keyboard macro. Naturally they
avoided any act or word which would have keyed your internal macro. Who
wouldn't?

I would challenge the NCTA's to show some proof that those who believe
that the morse code test should be retained are in a technical
backwater.

That *might* be a bit difficult given that even Carl, their vaunted
leader, is a SSB ratchjaw, not given to even putting a digital HF
station on the air, much less doing any "amsteur digital design".

Dick appears to question the technical competency and contribution(s)
Carl has made.

Most of the avid CW ragchewers/contesters I've known over the years
(remember, I'm a long-time ham)

Ah, it MUST be pointed out here that your tenure as a longtime ham did
not include close connection to *anyone* who was seriously involved in
radiotelegraphy in any way. And I know that how? By your actions here!
It's completely safe to say that no one would tolarate your attitude as
a friend, not likely as even a casual acquaintance, given the lever of
vituperation you have always shown toward CW. So what would anyone
expect your experience to be??

So how do you explain my comradeship with hams that are avid
CW users yet are fuly aware of my role in NCI to end code tetsing?

have been more interested in the operating
activity (ragchewing, contesting, paper-chasing) than the technical
side.
My experience has been that they have been less technically inclined
than
a lot of the no-code techs I've met, less inclined to participate in
public
service/emergency communications, and more inclined to just being
"users"
rather than tinkerers ...

Same old, same old... Make the CW supporters appear to be Luddites-an
accusation you have repeated many times here on rrap=-Go googling for
the facts if anyone doubts it.

The FACTS are that the CW suppoorters are far most often the users of
advanced digital modes. I'd wager that Carl has never been on the air
using CLOVER II. I have.

So are you saying only "CW suppoorters" (sic) or a majority of same
are likly to be users of advanced digital modes?

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK