From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul  3 05:14:51 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 23:14:51 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Kenwood TS-450
Message-ID: <20030702.231517.-760775.1.kc5fm@juno.com>

Posting this for a friend.  Please contact him directly.

FOR SALE:

1- Kenwood TS 450SAT HF XCVR W / TUNER
1- Kenwood PS 53 HD PWR SUPPLY / 450
1- Kenwood MC 80 8 PIN COMM MIC  (Desk mike)

1- TELEX HY-GAIN TRIBANDER - Model TH3JR-S ANTENNA
1- Solid State Automatic Antenna Rotor System MODEL AR-40 with 88' of
wire.
1- 32 foot free standing tower, Antenna can be raised another 10'.

To be sold as a package deal. $600.00 will purchase all units including
coax. Tower must be moved, copperclad wire for 40 and 80 meter inverted
vee antenna's are included and can double as guy wires if antenna is to
be raised beyond the 32 foot tower height.

First come, first served, HF rig has been used very little, an excellent
buy for a starting Ham. Manuals are also included.

Contact Ed Koehn KA5HED 
Phone 476-5851 or E-mail ekoehn@chouteautel.com

ALSO: 3 bedroom, 2 bath, 2 car garage on 2-3/4 acres, large garden, apple
trees, pear trees, and much more.  If a Ham should be interested the
equipment could stay in place with a much more sweetened deal.

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul  4 17:07:11 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Eddie Manley)
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2003 11:07:11 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] BPL Interference to Ham Radio
Message-ID: <3F05A62F.71F50CE9@sbcglobal.net>

From: Eddie Manley - KD5JGB
Asst Section Manager

FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION:
BROADBAND INTERNET ON POWER LINES [BPL]

The FCC has asked for COMMENTS on their proposal to allow extended
access in Part 15 of the rules.  This is to allow power [electric]
companies to broadcast high-speed internet signals over existing power
lines.   This technology is called BPL [Broadband Over Power Lines] and
also called Power Line Carrier [PLC].   The NOTICE of INQUIRY to allow
this new method of transmission, and was issued May 23, 2003 by the FCC
The COMMENT period closes July 7, 2003.  So, as you can see, we do not
have much time to comment.

Reason for our concern – we believe that BPL poses significant
interference potential to HF and low VHF spectrum use between 2 and 80
MHz.   Power lines carrying this signal can, and could, act as an
antenna – broadcasting their high speed internet signal – transmitting
RF where it doesn't belong – into your radio.   Entire communities will
be affected, so every amateur in any affected area could have the
radiating system on their power lines close to home.

Tests of BPL are under way in several states.  The potential for
interference to amateur radio operation's is real, and where BPL has
been deployed in other counties the results of interference complaints
are real.   Please take the time to understand BPL and TAKE ACTION NOW!

Read the ARRL web page on this at <www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/> and
comment to the FCC on ET Docket No 03-104.   The FCC is now accepting
electronically filed comments via its Electronic Comment Filing System
<www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs>    Under their main links, click on "Submit a
Filing"   In the "Proceeding" field, enter "03-104" and compete the
required fields.   Comments may be typed into a form or you may attach a
file containing your comments.  There is also a mailing address for
those wishing to file by postal mail – Federal Communications
Commission, 445 12th Street SW, Washington DC, 20554 – Send a Cover
Page, or Transmittal Letter, along with your original and 4 copies.

There are several good articles explaining BPL further.  On the ARRL
Home Page, mentioned above, and in the July 2003,  CQ Magazine, Fred
Maia – W5YI has written an excellent critique.  You can view this at
<www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>

Act on this quickly, as the cut off is July 7th..   Our THANKS to those
who take the time to protect amateur radio!



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul  4 19:11:18 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Mark D. Conklin N7XYO)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 13:11:18 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] BPL Interference to Ham Radio
References: <3F05A62F.71F50CE9@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <00ab01c34257$aadffda0$60c214d0@olp.net>

Here's what I sent, feel free to add your words to it and use what you
choose in your comments to the FCC

73 Mark Conklin N7XYO
OK SEC-PIC

Power lines alone do affect the Amateur Service Bands.  Adding a signal over
the power lines will add interference with the Amateur Service Bands. BPL
[Broadband Over Power Lines] and also called PLC [Power Line Carrier] must
not be allowed to come into service.  In additions to being a great hobby
(enjoyed by 700,000 in the US) the Amateur Service Bands are also used in
times of emergency and disaster by both national and local agencies to
assist in communication during the emergency.  This service is relied on by
emergency planners and managers as a primary back up means of communication.
BPL & PLC will interfere with the Amateur Service Bands, and limit it's
ability to assist their communities in time of need.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Eddie Manley" <jema1@sbcglobal.net>
To: <arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Friday, July 04, 2003 11:07 AM
Subject: [ARRL-OK] BPL Interference to Ham Radio


> From: Eddie Manley - KD5JGB
> Asst Section Manager
>
> FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE ATTENTION:
> BROADBAND INTERNET ON POWER LINES [BPL]
>
> The FCC has asked for COMMENTS on their proposal to allow extended
> access in Part 15 of the rules.  This is to allow power [electric]
> companies to broadcast high-speed internet signals over existing power
> lines.   This technology is called BPL [Broadband Over Power Lines] and
> also called Power Line Carrier [PLC].   The NOTICE of INQUIRY to allow
> this new method of transmission, and was issued May 23, 2003 by the FCC
> The COMMENT period closes July 7, 2003.  So, as you can see, we do not
> have much time to comment.
>
> Reason for our concern - we believe that BPL poses significant
> interference potential to HF and low VHF spectrum use between 2 and 80
> MHz.   Power lines carrying this signal can, and could, act as an
> antenna - broadcasting their high speed internet signal - transmitting
> RF where it doesn't belong - into your radio.   Entire communities will
> be affected, so every amateur in any affected area could have the
> radiating system on their power lines close to home.
>
> Tests of BPL are under way in several states.  The potential for
> interference to amateur radio operation's is real, and where BPL has
> been deployed in other counties the results of interference complaints
> are real.   Please take the time to understand BPL and TAKE ACTION NOW!
>
> Read the ARRL web page on this at <www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/> and
> comment to the FCC on ET Docket No 03-104.   The FCC is now accepting
> electronically filed comments via its Electronic Comment Filing System
> <www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs>    Under their main links, click on "Submit a
> Filing"   In the "Proceeding" field, enter "03-104" and compete the
> required fields.   Comments may be typed into a form or you may attach a
> file containing your comments.  There is also a mailing address for
> those wishing to file by postal mail - Federal Communications
> Commission, 445 12th Street SW, Washington DC, 20554 - Send a Cover
> Page, or Transmittal Letter, along with your original and 4 copies.
>
> There are several good articles explaining BPL further.  On the ARRL
> Home Page, mentioned above, and in the July 2003,  CQ Magazine, Fred
> Maia - W5YI has written an excellent critique.  You can view this at
> <www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>
>
> Act on this quickly, as the cut off is July 7th..   Our THANKS to those
> who take the time to protect amateur radio!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
> ______________________________________________________
>
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
>
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
>
>
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul  4 21:15:32 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 16:15:32 EDT
Subject: [ARRL-OK] BPL Interference to Ham Radio
Message-ID: <11.14d88e0a.2c373a64@aol.com>

If this is going to be such a detriment to 2-80 MHZ, maybe we should make=20
sure the other services who share the spectrum know about this as well.

Government agencies such as DOD, FAA, and FEMA all carry significant clout=20
with the FCC.  Many of these agencies spend billions on HF/VHF communication=
=20
systems.  It would be beneficial to us for them to join in on this fight.

If you know a military frequency manager, HF system manager, or a civilian=20
project manager or a state or county emergency manager, pass information abo=
ut=20
this to them. However, don't tell them that it is bad for Ham Radio. Tell th=
em=20
what it will do to their system. Lets put some of their calories to work for=
=20
us.

Clay, WA6LBU

In a message dated 7/4/03 9:13:10 AM Pacific Daylight Time,=20
jema1@sbcglobal.net writes:


> Reason for our concern =E2=80=93 we believe that BPL poses significant
> interference potential to HF and low VHF spectrum use between 2 and 80
> MHz.   Power lines carrying this signal can, and could, act as an
> antenna =E2=80=93 broadcasting their high speed Internet signal =E2=80=93=20=
transmitting
>=20



--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul  4 22:06:19 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 17:06:19 EDT
Subject: [ARRL-OK] BPL Interference to Ham Radio
Message-ID: <7d.3a648aea.2c37464b@aol.com>

good job on the letter mark


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Sat Jul  5 03:15:40 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Fri, 4 Jul 2003 21:15:40 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Sixty Meters
Message-ID: <20030704.211540.-829385.1.kc5fm@juno.com>

Worked a station in KS and MO for my first 60 Meter QSO.  Good 56 signals
at just before 1900 local time. 

Anyone else on 60?

I am monitoring 5330.5 for the next 30 minutes or so.

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Sat Jul  5 12:27:09 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 06:27:09 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Re:BPL Interference to Ham Radio
Message-ID: <20030705.073038.-162768401.0.kc5fm@juno.com>

On Sat,  5 Jul 2003 04:02:01 -0400 (EDT) arrl-ok-request@mailman.qth.net
writes:

> Here's what I sent, feel free to add your words to it and use what 
> you
> choose in your comments to the FCC

Thanks, Mark.

What I sent was:

"As a customer of both commercial cable and public utility companies 
using distribution systems, I am very aware of the interference
caused by their failure to maintain the integrity of their lines.
While, for the most part, they are quick to repair problems, problems
still arise.  It takes hours and sometimes days for the issues to
be resolved.

Because of the War on Terror, I don't feel Broadband Over Power Lines
is an option I would enjoy.  The risk to High Frequency radio
operation, an essential infrastructure during times of disaster, is 
great.  I have seen no evidence that would make me feel that 
commercial power operators can achieve 100% assurance that 
interference would NOT occur.

Therefore, I respectfully request the Commission NOT approve BPL.

Lloyd Colston, KC5FM
director, Mayes County (OK) Emergency Management"



Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Sat Jul  5 20:36:28 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 14:36:28 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Re:BPL Interference to Ham Radio
In-Reply-To: <20030705.073038.-162768401.0.kc5fm@juno.com>
References: <20030705.073038.-162768401.0.kc5fm@juno.com>
Message-ID: <1921.208.191.17.169.1057433788.squirrel@webmail.olp.net>

Well Said Lloyd!

73 Mark Conklin N7XYO


> 
> On Sat,  5 Jul 2003 04:02:01 -0400 (EDT)
> arrl-ok-request@mailman.qth.net writes:
> 
>> Here's what I sent, feel free to add your words to it and use what 
>> you
>> choose in your comments to the FCC
> 
> Thanks, Mark.
> 
> What I sent was:
> 
> "As a customer of both commercial cable and public utility companies 
> using distribution systems, I am very aware of the interference
> caused by their failure to maintain the integrity of their lines.
> While, for the most part, they are quick to repair problems, problems
> still arise.  It takes hours and sometimes days for the issues to
> be resolved.
> 
> Because of the War on Terror, I don't feel Broadband Over Power Lines
> is an option I would enjoy.  The risk to High Frequency radio
> operation, an essential infrastructure during times of disaster, is 
> great.  I have seen no evidence that would make me feel that 
> commercial power operators can achieve 100% assurance that 
> interference would NOT occur.
> 
> Therefore, I respectfully request the Commission NOT approve BPL.
> 
> Lloyd Colston, KC5FM
> director, Mayes County (OK) Emergency Management"
> 
> 
> 
> Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
> Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
>        Homeland Security begins at HOME.
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
> ______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul  8 05:50:52 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Mon, 7 Jul 2003 23:50:52 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Fw: Kenwood rig
Message-ID: <20030707.235221.-868143.7.kc5fm@juno.com>

Please note the item from Ed below.

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.


----- Forwarded Message -----
From: "Edward Koehn" <ekoehn@chouteautel.com>


Lloyd thanks for advertising my rig and tower. I've got the rig and tower
package sold, a holding fee is in the mail, and should be here tomorrow
or Wed. The unit is to be picked up in 2 weeks and I will have to try to
get the tower down and disassembled during this time.  I will be working
in the mean time to see if I can get enough help and manpower to bring it
down and hopefully at the best convenient time for all who can help.
Again, I thank you for your help; you may discontinue the add including
the property, I've got some more work to do on the place and need a
little more time before I do any serious showing.

In His service and yours,

Ed

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Sat Jul 12 03:51:19 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2003 21:51:19 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Severe Thunderstorm Watch
Message-ID: <20030711.215120.-561185.0.kc5fm@juno.com>

IN NORTHEAST OKLAHOMA THIS WATCH INCLUDES 8 COUNTIES... 
  ADAIR           CRAIG           DELAWARE        MAYES 
  NOWATA          OTTAWA          ROGERS          WASHINGTON 

until 0300

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Mon Jul 14 23:24:24 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2003 17:24:24 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Texas Communications Emergency
Message-ID: <20030714.172424.-1039719.1.kc5fm@juno.com>

The Federal Communications Commission, in cooperation with ARRL
South Texas Section Manager Ray Taylor, N5NAV, has declared a
general communications emergency for the Texas coastal area due to
Tropical Storm Claudette. The FCC Enforcement Bureau issued the
declaration under the authority of Section 97.401 of the FCC rules.
 
Effective immediately, the FCC said, the frequencies 7285 kHz (days)
and 3873 kHz (nights) require protection. "Amateurs are required to
refrain from using those frequencies, plus or minus 3 kHz, unless
they are taking part in the handling of emergency traffic," said the
declaration from James Daily, Chief of Homeland Security within the
FCC's Enforcement Bureau.
 
The declaration remains in effect until it's rescinded.

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 15 13:11:13 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Gene A. Nailon)
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 07:11:13 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE
Message-ID: <20030715.071119.-167367.4.k5dle@juno.com>

If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf Director
Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
You need to send your own reply.

Gene
=======================================================
FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
Edmond, OK
15 July 2003

Hello Coy;

"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"

With that said, I believe its already a done deal, get
rid of the code.  It is just one more step the league
will take to lower the standards.  Like I have said before
lower standards, more members, more money, and the hell
with Amateur Radio.
How long will it be before the ARRL decides it will be
best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?

Gene Nailon, K5DLE
=======================================================
ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19 July)
Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the details.

ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held Friday August 1 & Saturday
August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event with President Haynie
just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with all the latest
happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web site at
http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all the details.

ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
Once again the question comes up of the elimination of Morse code
testing for an HF license.  With the elimination of A.25 as treaty
requirement, the question comes up of "What will the FCC do now?

They may very well propose the elimination of Morse testing.  If that
were to happen the ARRL would make input upon notice of a proposed rule
making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with this issue in some
fashion this coming weekend at the summer board meeting.

I would like to here from you if you have strong feelings on this
subject one way or the other.  How do you think the ARRL should respond
to such a proposal?

 Please e-mail your comments to me at n5ok@arrl.org.

Thanks.

Coy, N5OK
Director

--------------------------------------------------------------------
ARRL West Gulf Division
Director: Coy Day, N5OK
n5ok@arrl.org
--------------------------------------------------------------------

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 15 23:46:11 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 17:46:11 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] Fw: [EM] amateur radio and emergency management
Message-ID: <20030715.175003.-890111.16.kc5fm@juno.com>

Please contact him directly with your comments regarding his questions. 
As you are tempted to hit reply, remember that he won't see your comments
because he's not on any of our lists.

I'll be sending my "version of the truth" to him as well.               
:)

Let me know how more I can help.

Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Jim Griffin" <griffindc@yahoo.com>


Hey you all. I tried sending this out once upon a time and 
experienced some technical difficulties so apologies for any 
redundancies.  I'm trying to get an idea of how amateur radio is 
incorporated into emergency management (i.e. how would an emergency 
manager unfamiliar with ham radio go about working it in to a local 
emergency management agency).  Here are some questions I have.  If 
you could answer some (or all if you have time) and enlighten us on 
how this is done, I'd appreciate it.

General
1.        Does a best practices compilation exist?
2.        What types of problems have arisen between amateur radio 
operators and the agencies they serve?
3.        How have amateur radio operators allayed any fear or mistrust 
on the part of first responders or emergency managers?  What approach 
has been successful? Which has not?
4.        Do amateur radio operators object to being referred to 
as "hams" by others?
5.        Does the amateur radio operator's affiliation (e.g., RACES, 
ARES) have an impact on the quality of emergency communications? 
Other than RACES and ARES, what other amateur radio organizations, 
does your agency use any other organizations?
6.        Could a ham's status as an "outsider" be regarded as
an 
advantage of amateur radio in emergency management (i.e. hams are 
less likely to be caught up in turf wars or have an
"institutional 
mentality" within a specific agency)?
7.        Besides the EOC, emergency shelters, and hospitals, to where 
do hams deploy when they are activated?  If hams cannot get there on 
their own, do plans call for other agencies to transport them?
8.        In what situations would the presence of a ham obstruct 
emergency efforts or jeopardize responders?

Planning
1.        How are amateur radio operators included in the emergency 
planning process?
2.        What is necessary to sustain amateur radio in an emergency 
management agency?
3.        Is there a formula or a set of guidelines that may suggest 
how many amateur radio operators are necessary for a given 
jurisdiction?  What other factors (e.g., urban vs. suburban, terrain, 
etc.) should be considered?
4.        Would a background check alleviate any fears responders may 
have about amateur radio operators being privy to certain 
information? How often are ham's backgrounds checked?
5.        What type of political challenges might be encountered when 
using amateur radio?

Training
1.        Has there been an effort to cross-train EOC personnel or 
first responders in amateur radio?
2.        With regard to testing and drills, how long do they normally 
take? What is an acceptable timeframe?  How will responses vary? How 
much do they vary by agency?

Equipment
1.        What types of resources do amateur radio operators need?  
2.        Do emergency management agencies allocate funds for ham 
equipment or is it understood that amateur radio operators must bear 
the entire cost?
3.        FEMA had funding programs to assist in the purchase of 
amateur radio equipment in the early 1990s.  Are there such programs 
today?
4.        What is required in a go-kit?

Procedural
1.        Why do SETs only take place between 9/1 and 11/30?  Are they 
coordinated with other emergency exercises or are they usually
"stand 
alone" exercises?
2.        What is a "temporary state of emergency" the FCC may
declare 
and what impact does this have on amateur radio?
3.        After the local amateur radio officer is notified by the 
emergency manager that the EOC has been activated, how are other hams 
notified? By phone? Radio? Emergency Broadcast System? Is there a 
call list?
4.        Which hams go where? How is this determined? By license 
class? By experience?
5.        How are amateur radio operators outside the area contacted 
and deployed?
6.        How are the locations of all ham operators involved in a 
response accounted for?  Map in the EOC?  Have GIS and GPS ever been 
used?  What are the advantages/disadvantages of such an approach?
7.        Upon what criteria is an exercise deemed a success?
8.        What types of implementation challenges may be encountered 
when using amateur radio? How may they be resolved? Any conflicts 
between competing government agencies?
9.        How is amateur radio's involvement codified? MOUs, amendments 
to communications annexes, etc.

Unintended Consequences
1.        Are there Workman's Compensation issues when including hams?
2.        Have there been problems with hams taking their equipment 
home at the end of a shift when it is still needed in the EOC?





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for Your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at Myinks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/sOykFB/k9VGAA/ySSFAA/psSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

-------------------------
880 Members Strong. 
Questions to Emergency-Management-owner@yahoogroups.com - to unsubscribe
from this group, send an email to:
Emergency-Management-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 07:08:48 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Robert Gillespie)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 01:08:48 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE
References: <20030715.071119.-167367.4.k5dle@juno.com>
Message-ID: <3F14EBF0.2020307@netscape.net>

I agree with you 100%.

k5dle@juno.com wrote:

>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf Director
>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
>You need to send your own reply.
>
>Gene
>=======================================================
>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
>Edmond, OK
>15 July 2003
>
>Hello Coy;
>
>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
>
>With that said, I believe its already a done deal, get
>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the league
>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have said before
>lower standards, more members, more money, and the hell
>with Amateur Radio.
>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it will be
>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
>
>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>=======================================================
>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19 July)
>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the details.
>
>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held Friday August 1 & Saturday
>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event with President Haynie
>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with all the latest
>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web site at
>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all the details.
>
>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
>Once again the question comes up of the elimination of Morse code
>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination of A.25 as treaty
>requirement, the question comes up of "What will the FCC do now?
>
>They may very well propose the elimination of Morse testing.  If that
>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon notice of a proposed rule
>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with this issue in some
>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board meeting.
>
>I would like to here from you if you have strong feelings on this
>subject one way or the other.  How do you think the ARRL should respond
>to such a proposal?
>
> Please e-mail your comments to me at n5ok@arrl.org.
>
>Thanks.
>
>Coy, N5OK
>Director
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>ARRL West Gulf Division
>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
>n5ok@arrl.org
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>_______________________________________________
>___________________Information __________________________
>ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
>Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>______________________________________________________
>
>To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
>with the BODY of the message containing:
>
>unsubscribe arrl-ok
>
>
>Arrl-Ok mailing list
>Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
>  
>

-- 
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. 
Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! 
http://shopnow.netscape.com/



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 11:21:36 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Lloyd Colston)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 05:21:36 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE
Message-ID: <20030716.053353.-743211.1.kc5fm@juno.com>

On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:01:55 -0400 (EDT) arrl-ok-request@mailman.qth.net
writes:

> I agree with you 100%.
> 

I don't agree with Gene 100%.

This is NOT the League's fault that code was eliminated by the
International Amateur Radio Union.  The League is but one voice at that
body.

Regardless what the IARU recommends, it will fall to the Federal
Communications Commission to develop any new rules for amateur radio
operations in the United States.  While the League can give some input to
the FCC, you have the same ability.

While I fully support keeping the Code requirement for operations below
30 mHz, I don't support laying blame where there is no evidence of guilt.

Let me know how more I can help.


Lloyd Colston             Mayes County Emergency Management
Pryor, OK USA           http://www.geocities.com/mccem
        Homeland Security begins at HOME.

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 10:05:08 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Ray)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:05:08 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <3F14EBF0.2020307@netscape.net>
References: <20030715.071119.-167367.4.k5dle@juno.com>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030716035904.02c78f08@mail.rayz.com>


I say eliminate the code requirement and make the written more 
robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the old days when code was 
the only mode then followed by AM phone it was necessary.  But more and 
more  different modes are available and code is now less 
important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as testing your typing 
skills for packet.  It's just another mode.

At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
>I agree with you 100%.
>
>k5dle@juno.com wrote:
>
>>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf Director
>>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
>>You need to send your own reply.
>>
>>Gene
>>=======================================================
>>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
>>Edmond, OK
>>15 July 2003
>>
>>Hello Coy;
>>
>>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
>>
>>With that said, I believe its already a done deal, get
>>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the league
>>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have said before
>>lower standards, more members, more money, and the hell
>>with Amateur Radio.
>>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it will be
>>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
>>
>>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>>=======================================================
>>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19 July)
>>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
>>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the details.
>>
>>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
>>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held Friday August 1 & Saturday
>>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event with President Haynie
>>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with all the latest
>>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web site at
>>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all the details.
>>
>>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
>>Once again the question comes up of the elimination of Morse code
>>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination of A.25 as treaty
>>requirement, the question comes up of "What will the FCC do now?
>>
>>They may very well propose the elimination of Morse testing.  If that
>>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon notice of a proposed rule
>>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with this issue in some
>>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board meeting.
>>
>>I would like to here from you if you have strong feelings on this
>>subject one way or the other.  How do you think the ARRL should respond
>>to such a proposal?
>>
>>Please e-mail your comments to me at n5ok@arrl.org.
>>
>>Thanks.
>>
>>Coy, N5OK
>>Director
>>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>>ARRL West Gulf Division
>>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
>>n5ok@arrl.org
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 15:55:02 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Wayne AA5JJ)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 07:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030716035904.02c78f08@mail.rayz.com>
Message-ID: <20030716145502.60548.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>

The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
CODE EXTRAS........................


--- Ray <res@rayz.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I say eliminate the code requirement and make the
> written more 
> robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the
> old days when code was 
> the only mode then followed by AM phone it was
> necessary.  But more and 
> more  different modes are available and code is now
> less 
> important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as
> testing your typing 
> skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
> 
> At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf
> Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
>
>>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal,
> get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the
> league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have
> said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the
> hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it
> will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>
>>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19
> July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the
> details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held
> Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event
> with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with
> all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web
> site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all
> the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the
> elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination
> of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will
> the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of
> Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon
> notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with
> this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board
> meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong
> feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think
> the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at
> n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information
> __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason,
> WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page
> http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>
______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


=====
In His Grip,
Wayne
Setting Captives Free
"...that we might live in His presence!" (Hosea 6.1-3)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 15:56:20 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Craig Roszel)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 09:56:20 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <20030716145502.60548.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <NDBBKBLIKDMKKHHBDOIFEEEBENAA.craig@oknews.cc>

So what is your point? 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net]On Behalf Of Wayne AA5JJ
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:55 AM
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!


The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
CODE EXTRAS........................


--- Ray <res@rayz.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I say eliminate the code requirement and make the
> written more 
> robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the
> old days when code was 
> the only mode then followed by AM phone it was
> necessary.  But more and 
> more  different modes are available and code is now
> less 
> important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as
> testing your typing 
> skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
> 
> At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf
> Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
>
>>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal,
> get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the
> league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have
> said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the
> hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it
> will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>
>>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19
> July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the
> details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held
> Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event
> with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with
> all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web
> site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all
> the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the
> elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination
> of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will
> the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of
> Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon
> notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with
> this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board
> meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong
> feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think
> the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at
> n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information
> __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason,
> WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page
> http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>
______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


=====
In His Grip,
Wayne
Setting Captives Free
"...that we might live in His presence!" (Hosea 6.1-3)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 16:07:16 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Wade Norris)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 10:07:16 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <20030716145502.60548.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAHx34BV2d2Ea26S9gT+7Yp8KAAAAQAAAAR4ekwUeKJEOAUWpa6heBfAEAAAAA@sbcglobal.net>

It is time to get rid of the code as for the test it will open the world
for ham with certain types of tone deafness and it time for the change
for even our on military has change to the new and better modes

WADE NORRIS
AAA6OK/k5wpn
OKLAHOMA STATE ARMY MARS DIRECTOR
 
 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wayne AA5JJ
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:55 AM
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
CODE EXTRAS........................


--- Ray <res@rayz.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I say eliminate the code requirement and make the
> written more 
> robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the
> old days when code was 
> the only mode then followed by AM phone it was
> necessary.  But more and 
> more  different modes are available and code is now
> less 
> important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as
> testing your typing 
> skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
> 
> At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf
> Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
>
>>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal,
> get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the
> league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have
> said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the
> hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it
> will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>
>>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19
> July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the
> details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held
> Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event
> with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with
> all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web
> site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all
> the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the
> elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination
> of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will
> the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of
> Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon
> notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with
> this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board
> meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong
> feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think
> the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at
> n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information
> __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason,
> WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page
> http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>
______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


=====
In His Grip,
Wayne
Setting Captives Free
"...that we might live in His presence!" (Hosea 6.1-3)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 18:46:56 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Donald M. Ross)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 12:46:56 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAHx34BV2d2Ea26S9gT+7Yp8KAAAAQAAAAR4ekwUeKJEOAUWpa6heBfAEAAAAA@sbcglobal.net>
Message-ID: <003101c34bc2$43dde4e0$df5003cf@CPQ47403191915>

Wade,

I assume that you have some basis for claiming that the US Military does
not use the Morse Code?  The last time I checked, code proficiency is
still a requirement in SOCOM (Special Operation Command) communications
specialties.  

When I was at PACOM JSOTF (Joint Special Operations Task Force for the
US Pacific Command) last week, several of us were talking about the
different instruction methods that have been used by SOCOM over the
years to acquire and maintain code proficiency - a critical mission
requirement.  Some of their non-ham comms guys are listening to the CW
portions of 20m to gain / maintain proficiency between missions.

I believe you if you say that MARS no longer requires code knowledge or
proficiency, but I believe that you are, at best, misinformed about the
real military.

Besides, the United States already has "no code HF" privileges; I
believe it is called CB.

Don Ross, NL7CO/EM04

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wade Norris
Sent: 16 July 2003 10:07
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

It is time to get rid of the code as for the test it will open the world
for ham with certain types of tone deafness and it time for the change
for even our on military has change to the new and better modes

WADE NORRIS
AAA6OK/k5wpn
OKLAHOMA STATE ARMY MARS DIRECTOR
 
 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wayne AA5JJ
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:55 AM
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
CODE EXTRAS........................


--- Ray <res@rayz.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I say eliminate the code requirement and make the
> written more 
> robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the
> old days when code was 
> the only mode then followed by AM phone it was
> necessary.  But more and 
> more  different modes are available and code is now
> less 
> important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as
> testing your typing 
> skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
> 
> At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf
> Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
>
>>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal,
> get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the
> league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have
> said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the
> hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it
> will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>
>>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19
> July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the
> details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held
> Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event
> with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with
> all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web
> site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all
> the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the
> elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination
> of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will
> the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of
> Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon
> notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with
> this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board
> meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong
> feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think
> the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at
> n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information
> __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason,
> WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page
> http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>
______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


=====
In His Grip,
Wayne
Setting Captives Free
"...that we might live in His presence!" (Hosea 6.1-3)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 03:50:06 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Nate Bargmann)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 21:50:06 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <20030716145502.60548.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <5.1.0.14.2.20030716035904.02c78f08@mail.rayz.com> <20030716145502.60548.qmail@web10507.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <20030717025006.GA22034@localhost>

* Wayne AA5JJ <aa5jj@yahoo.com> [2003 Jul 16 21:25 -0500]:
> The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
> CODE EXTRAS........................

I don't believe there are enough "NO CODE EXTRAS" left to make a
difference.

If my recollection of history is correct the only time a code exam was
not required for an Amateur Radio Operator's License was was back in the
beginning around 1912 or so.  At that time a license and call were
available for the simple act of filling out the application.  Some time
later the institution of examination for such a license was put in
place.  Not many of those "NO CODE EXTRAS" are left in our ranks, I'm
afraid.

If, instead, you are refering to those who obtained their Amateur Extra
after April 15, 2000 then you, sir, are demonstrating your ignorance 
amongst other attributes.  The fact is that every licensed radio amateur 
since at least the early twenties, and perhaps before, has passed at 
least one code examination.  What has varied is the degree of 
proficiency required to pass a given exam for a given set of priveleges
and has been changed many times over the years. 

Your elitist remark against those that have met the current licensing 
requirements is completely uncalled for in this forum or elsewhere the
general public has access to our dirty laundry.

What happens to the code requirement is irrelevant to the quality of
operators on the bands--past, present, and future.

That said, it is certainly your right as an ARRL member to voice your
opinion to the section and division leadership and, as a U.S. citizen,
the FCC.  Please be more polite, complete, and well reasoned in your 
correspondence with them.

73, de Nate >>

-- 
 Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB          | "We have awakened a
 Internet | n0nb@networksplus.net               | sleeping giant and
 Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov           | have instilled in him
  Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @  | a terrible resolve".
             http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/           | - Admiral Yamamoto

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 16 19:10:22 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Wade Norris)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 13:10:22 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <003101c34bc2$43dde4e0$df5003cf@CPQ47403191915>
Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAHx34BV2d2Ea26S9gT+7Yp8KAAAAQAAAAz6yygFAbd0m7NKT045NQmQEAAAAA@sbcglobal.net>

All navy and Coast Guard beacons and even rescued radio operator do not
use or send code all have gone to other modes. I was a radio tech in the
military back in 1977 and they were starting to discontinue it then I
don't want the code to disappear from use on ham but it should not be a
test item, that way who wants to use it can and those who do not don't
have too

WADE NORRIS
AAA6OK
OKLAHOMA STATE ARMY MARS DIRECTOR
 
 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Donald M. Ross
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 12:47 PM
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

Wade,

I assume that you have some basis for claiming that the US Military does
not use the Morse Code?  The last time I checked, code proficiency is
still a requirement in SOCOM (Special Operation Command) communications
specialties.  

When I was at PACOM JSOTF (Joint Special Operations Task Force for the
US Pacific Command) last week, several of us were talking about the
different instruction methods that have been used by SOCOM over the
years to acquire and maintain code proficiency - a critical mission
requirement.  Some of their non-ham comms guys are listening to the CW
portions of 20m to gain / maintain proficiency between missions.

I believe you if you say that MARS no longer requires code knowledge or
proficiency, but I believe that you are, at best, misinformed about the
real military.

Besides, the United States already has "no code HF" privileges; I
believe it is called CB.

Don Ross, NL7CO/EM04

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wade Norris
Sent: 16 July 2003 10:07
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: RE: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

It is time to get rid of the code as for the test it will open the world
for ham with certain types of tone deafness and it time for the change
for even our on military has change to the new and better modes

WADE NORRIS
AAA6OK/k5wpn
OKLAHOMA STATE ARMY MARS DIRECTOR
 
 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net
[mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Wayne AA5JJ
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 9:55 AM
To: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!

The only ones that want to get ride of the code is NO
CODE EXTRAS........................


--- Ray <res@rayz.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I say eliminate the code requirement and make the
> written more 
> robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the
> old days when code was 
> the only mode then followed by AM phone it was
> necessary.  But more and 
> more  different modes are available and code is now
> less 
> important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as
> testing your typing 
> skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
> 
> At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf
> Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
>
>>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal,
> get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the
> league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have
> said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the
> hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it
> will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
>
>>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19
> July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html  for the
> details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held
> Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event
> with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with
> all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web
> site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all
> the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the
> elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination
> of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will
> the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of
> Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon
> notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with
> this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board
> meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong
> feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think
> the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at
> n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
>
>>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information
> __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason,
> WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page
> http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>
______________________________________________________
> 
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
> 
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
> 
> 
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


=====
In His Grip,
Wayne
Setting Captives Free
"...that we might live in His presence!" (Hosea 6.1-3)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!
http://sbc.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


_______________________________________________
___________________Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
with the BODY of the message containing:

unsubscribe arrl-ok


Arrl-Ok mailing list
Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 05:50:51 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Dean Feken)
Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2003 23:50:51 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
Message-ID: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook>

Ok Guys, here's one amateur radio operators opinion;

  1.. I empathize with the old timers position on the code, as they have
worked hard to achieve proficiency in that mode.
  2.. I also agree with the comments that CW is just another mode that is
now approaching the end of its useful life.
  3.. I STRONGLY agree with the comment that testing should be more
rigorous.
There is and should be a place in Amateur Radio for all of our interests, be
it CW, PSK31, Packet, or whatever. However, Amateur Radio has to grow. This
means that we have to be willing to grow. New modes offer the challenges and
opportunities for that growth. By placing arbitrary CW requirements on
prospective amateurs we limit the technical growth that we could otherwise
achieve.

What is of greater concern, is the Amateur who has managed to pass exams by
rote memorization. I know a number of individuals that have reached Amateur
Extra using this technique. The Amateur Extra was at one time reached by the
amateur who could demonstrate a higher level technical competence. Today
there are individuals who hold the once coveted Amateur Extra who can't tune
a simple antenna or program their handheld. In some cases these people are
training new operators how to pass the exams using the same technique. This
is why I believe testing should be comprehensive and rigorous.

Finally, those who "takes shots" at the ARRL just don't get it. The league
works very hard at protecting our spectrum, our privileges, and our
service - hobby - avocation. Without the efforts of these hardworking
individuals the argument about code vs. no code would be moot. We wouldn't
have bands to operate in.

Respectfully

Dean Feken KL7MA



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 06:36:10 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (M. Schneider)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 00:36:10 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
References: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook>
Message-ID: <002101c34c25$571b1740$24eaa2cd@msokla>

Well said, Dean!  Probably one of the most well-written positions on both CW
and the ARRL that I have read in a long time.   Ditto from me.

Mark Schneider - K5MAR

See ya'll at Ham Holiday this Saturday!

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dean Feken" <dfeken@perryisp.net>
To: <arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net>; " Nate Bargmann" <n0nb@networksplus.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:50 PM
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?


> Ok Guys, here's one amateur radio operators opinion;
>
>   1.. I empathize with the old timers position on the code, as they have
> worked hard to achieve proficiency in that mode.
>   2.. I also agree with the comments that CW is just another mode that is
> now approaching the end of its useful life.
>   3.. I STRONGLY agree with the comment that testing should be more
> rigorous.
> There is and should be a place in Amateur Radio for all of our interests,
be
> it CW, PSK31, Packet, or whatever. However, Amateur Radio has to grow.
This
> means that we have to be willing to grow. New modes offer the challenges
and
> opportunities for that growth. By placing arbitrary CW requirements on
> prospective amateurs we limit the technical growth that we could otherwise
> achieve.
>
> What is of greater concern, is the Amateur who has managed to pass exams
by
> rote memorization. I know a number of individuals that have reached
Amateur
> Extra using this technique. The Amateur Extra was at one time reached by
the
> amateur who could demonstrate a higher level technical competence. Today
> there are individuals who hold the once coveted Amateur Extra who can't
tune
> a simple antenna or program their handheld. In some cases these people are
> training new operators how to pass the exams using the same technique.
This
> is why I believe testing should be comprehensive and rigorous.
>
> Finally, those who "takes shots" at the ARRL just don't get it. The league
> works very hard at protecting our spectrum, our privileges, and our
> service - hobby - avocation. Without the efforts of these hardworking
> individuals the argument about code vs. no code would be moot. We wouldn't
> have bands to operate in.
>
> Respectfully
>
> Dean Feken KL7MA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
> ______________________________________________________
>
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
>
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
>
>
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
>
>


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 12:43:12 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Mark D. Conklin N7XYO)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 06:43:12 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
References: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook>
Message-ID: <000701c34c58$9a7381c0$60c214d0@olp.net>

Well said Dean,

Mark Conklin N7XYO

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dean Feken" <dfeken@perryisp.net>
To: <arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net>; " Nate Bargmann" <n0nb@networksplus.net>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 11:50 PM
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?


> Ok Guys, here's one amateur radio operators opinion;
>
>   1.. I empathize with the old timers position on the code, as they have
> worked hard to achieve proficiency in that mode.
>   2.. I also agree with the comments that CW is just another mode that is
> now approaching the end of its useful life.
>   3.. I STRONGLY agree with the comment that testing should be more
> rigorous.
> There is and should be a place in Amateur Radio for all of our interests,
be
> it CW, PSK31, Packet, or whatever. However, Amateur Radio has to grow.
This
> means that we have to be willing to grow. New modes offer the challenges
and
> opportunities for that growth. By placing arbitrary CW requirements on
> prospective amateurs we limit the technical growth that we could otherwise
> achieve.
>
> What is of greater concern, is the Amateur who has managed to pass exams
by
> rote memorization. I know a number of individuals that have reached
Amateur
> Extra using this technique. The Amateur Extra was at one time reached by
the
> amateur who could demonstrate a higher level technical competence. Today
> there are individuals who hold the once coveted Amateur Extra who can't
tune
> a simple antenna or program their handheld. In some cases these people are
> training new operators how to pass the exams using the same technique.
This
> is why I believe testing should be comprehensive and rigorous.
>
> Finally, those who "takes shots" at the ARRL just don't get it. The league
> works very hard at protecting our spectrum, our privileges, and our
> service - hobby - avocation. Without the efforts of these hardworking
> individuals the argument about code vs. no code would be moot. We wouldn't
> have bands to operate in.
>
> Respectfully
>
> Dean Feken KL7MA
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ___________________Information __________________________
> ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
> Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
> ______________________________________________________
>
> To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
> with the BODY of the message containing:
>
> unsubscribe arrl-ok
>
>
> Arrl-Ok mailing list
> Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 12:44:55 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Nate Bargmann)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 06:44:55 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
In-Reply-To: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook>
References: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook>
Message-ID: <20030717114455.GB22034@localhost>

Well said, Dean.

I agree with your comments 100% and I would like to add a few more.  :-)

1.  I am put off when hams who are supposed to be communicators jump
into this (or any other) discussion and all they do is lob one line
"zingers".  This does nothing to broaden the sense of community we
should share.  In fact this creates festering wounds that prevent us
from being the best team we could be when the chips are down and emergency
communications are needed most.  In those situations I don't care if the
guy that is helping me was licensed pre or post 04/15/2000.  The more
important aspect is getting the traffic relayed correctly.

>From the Amateur's Code:

"The Amateur is Considerate...He never knowingly uses the air in such a
way as to lessen the pleasure of others."

I'd like to think this extends to email lists and it's a personal goal 
of mine to live up to this lofty expectation.

2.  With regard to mandatory Morse Code testing, the world has changed.
Like it or not, the international community has only decided that
national administrations should have the option of requiring a code 
exam or not.  As it should have been for many years!  It is my political 
philosophy that government is best kept to as local of a level as possible
and that is what the WARC decision does.  It does not mandate that the 
FCC or any other administration strike the code requirement.

That said will there be a petition filed to remove the code requirement
in the U.S.A.?  It's inevitable, I believe, that we will see such a
petition within the next few months.  Do I personally support or oppose
such a petition?  At one time I would have opposed it vehemently.  Now I
probably lean more in favor of striking the requirement.  

Personally, I have not found that code proficiency makes anyone a better
person nor does it cause one to reach a special state of knowledge or
oneness with nature.  At best it forces some type of military style
discipline to one's self in order to obtain greater operating
privileges.  At worst it has turned off many hams from ever trying one
of the most storied and interesting ways there exists to communicate.  A
look around the HF bands will reveal far too many 20 WPM Extras behaving
badly.  How did the code filter help here?

>From the Amateur's Code:

"The Amateur is Progressive...He keeps his station abreast of science.
It is well built and efficient. His operating practice is above
reproach."

I firmly believe that had there been some other means of communication
available "in the beginning" then folks would still hold on to that
method with the same tenacity as they do mandatory Morse Code exams.
There is nothing wrong with preserving our history and tradition and I
tip my hat to those who do so.  However, we are to be a forward looking
service employing new technologies and new techniques.  Are you
fulfilling that role?  I know I could do better myself.

>From the Amateur's Code:

"The Amateur is Loyal...He offers his loyalty, encouragement and support
to his fellow radio amateurs, his local club and the American Radio
Relay League, through which Amateur Radio is represented."

Again please keep this in mind during this final debate on mandatory
Morse Code examination.  We need to be loyal and considerate of one
another and it is petty issues such as this that occupy our attention
and prevent us from mounting an effective and united front against those
wishing to take our spectrum allocations either overtly or covertly
(BPL/PWC, anyone?).

And really, folks, keep in mind that this debate is over the mandatory
Morse Code exam.  It has nothing to do with the positive or negative
attributes of the mode.  Simply put, should a mandatory Morse Code exam
exist in the 21st Century and beyond?

Like Dean I would like to see the written examinations bolstered to
reveal a demonstration of real knowledge and experience.

A couple more from the Amateur's Code:

"The Amateur is Friendly...Slow and patient sending when requested,
friendly advice and counsel to the beginner, kindly assistance,
cooperation and consideration for the interests of others; these are the
marks of the amateur spirit."

"The Amateur is Balanced...Radio is his hobby. He never allows it to
interfere with any of the duties he owes to his home, his job, his
school, or his community."

With all the acrimony I have seen tossed by both sides in the mandatory 
Morse Code examination debate over the past 20 years or so I think we
should all step back and ponder the Amateur's Code and not get carried
away with our emotions.

73, de Nate >>

-- 
 Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB          | "We have awakened a
 Internet | n0nb@networksplus.net               | sleeping giant and
 Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov           | have instilled in him
  Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @  | a terrible resolve".
             http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/           | - Admiral Yamamoto

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 12:51:31 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Mark D. Conklin N7XYO)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 06:51:31 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
References: <000901c34c1f$0365db90$07d276cc@DeansNotebook> <000701c34c58$9a7381c0$60c214d0@olp.net>
Message-ID: <001f01c34c59$c43c6ac0$60c214d0@olp.net>

I hope all of you have been coping Coy Day N5OK (e-mail:  n5ok@arrl.org  )
with all your coments.  The ARRL board needs your thoughts.

Here is what I sent:

Hi Coy,

Here is my two cents.  Many of the new and younger folks coming into the
hobby do NOT see any need for morse code.  They are the internet generation
and the future of ham radio.  They have been able to send a message around
the world in an instant all thier lives with out morse code.

Many of them would love to get into HF, but see no need for the code.  I
see a lot of the age gap in the hobby.  Older hams with codes skills and on
HF and younger with no desire to learn code and are expermenting on 6M and
up.

Want to grow the hobby?  Look to the younger hams, and encourage them.

I know there are strong feelings either way. Yet I am looking forward and
the elimination of morse code would spur the growth of our hobby.

Thank you,

Mark Conklin N7XYO
OK-SEC PIC



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Thu Jul 17 22:58:18 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Bill Wyatt)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 16:58:18 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
In-Reply-To: <001f01c34c59$c43c6ac0$60c214d0@olp.net>
Message-ID: <200307172157.h6HLvhJV066688@pimout4-ext.prodigy.net>

Greetings from Northwest Oklahoma,

Subject: just some thoughts from the west

I see Amateur Radio, as a hobby, searching for a new direction in=
 a 
world of "fast food" lives.  Once upon a time, seems I have heard=
 
that line before, ham radio was built on a new concept of=
 talking, 
without wire, over great distances and doing this with equipment=
 
designed and built by those in the hobby.  Much of this original=
 
concept has been promoted by specialized groups which have kept=
 these 
old, foundation parts of the hobby alive.  Morse Code Nets, DXing=
 and 
QRP have done much keep Morse Code active and revive scratch=
 building 
and kit building.  

Morse Code will always be a part of that great concept just as=
 AM, 
slow scan TV,  packet and teletype are all great modes of 
communication even though not as widely used as SSB and FM. =
 Morse 
Code, as a mode, became somewhat distinguished from other modes=
 when 
it became a part of the licensing procedure for Amateur Radio. =
 At 
first it was held as, a right of passage in a world where "hard 
things" were worth working for and technology, of the period,=
 needed 
a  means of sending information, which could be understood during=
 
less than ideal conditions, with less that ideal equipment.  Code=
 was 
and still is the best mode to accomplish this when all factors of=
 
wireless communications are considered.  But, for many, the idea=
 of 
"Morse Code" has become a cumbersome part of attaining an Amateur=
 
Radio License.

Aside from a few that truly enjoy CW, we have allowed it to=
 become a 
tool for the protection and sanctity of Amateur Radio.   Over the=
 
years we have heard every reason for not learning the code from,=
 
"it's, no longer useful" through, "I just can't hear the=
 difference 
between a dit and a dah".  Instead of organizing code classes and=
 
mothering, I think Elmering is the politically correct thing to=
 say, 
young prospective hams through the learning process. Busy lives=
 and 
other interests helped many to say, "they're just CB'ers and=
 wouldn't 
be good for the hobby anyway" or "I learned it on my own so can 
they".  Therefor, Morse Code took it's place as a limiting=
 factor, in 
many cases, to keep "undesirables" from the sacred ranks of=
 Amateur 
Radio.  Oh, I know, there were many code classes given but, we=
 still 
allowed "the code" to become a tool to limit who became a ham. 

The truth of the matter, many things besides Morse Code have=
 effected 
ham radio's over the years.  The technology which was born out of=
 ham 
radio has done much to limit the average person's ability to=
 build 
and maintain his or her equipment.  I many cases, it's just plain=
 
cheaper to buy, than build or send to the repair shop rather than=
 buy 
the test equipment and figure out how to fix it.  Amateur Radio=
 has 
become secondary to other hobbies and parts of our lives.  Now we=
 
become a ham to chase storms, to fly radio controlled airplanes,=
 to 
keep in touch with family, to assist in local and national 
emergencies and other activities which are enhanced by good=
 reliable 
communications.  No longer is Amateur Radio the reason to become=
 a 
Ham for many but, the benefits of Amateur Radio have become an=
 added 
benefit to many other parts of our lives.  In other words, "we=
 have 
become accepted by the world", isn't that all we wanted back in=
 the 
70's and 80's?

>From my point of view we have two forces at work.  First, the=
 hard 
liners which wish to maintain the sanctity of the hobby for the 
betterment of Amateur Radio.  Secondly, the new generation who=
 wish 
to enjoy the hobby of Amateur Radio along with their many other 
interests in life. The hard liners will keep the hobby pure=
 welcoming 
all that can muster the desire to enter the gate.  While, the=
 passive 
group will welcome all and enjoy their visit.  Can the two live 
happily ever after?  

The demands of the groups are much different.  The hard liners=
 have 
hammered into their ever being, anything worth having must be=
 earned, 
there must be a right of passage and there must be a means of 
limiting access.  And, Amateur Radio must be maintained in it's 
purest state.  The desires of the second group are passive.  They=
 
will use the hobby as their interests lead them, they will=
 attempt to 
change the things they don't enjoy or do not agree with and they=
 will 
leave the hobby for other adventures when finished.

I know Hams that feel the FCC should still be administering exams=
 and 
Bash was the downfall of Amateur Radio.  These ideals are just as=
 
misplaced as the ones which suggest, one should simply fill out a=
 
form for an Amateur License and let the cost of equipment limit=
 the 
number of hams.  As older Amateur's we must accept the fact that,=
 the 
reason we came to the hobby is not held by many of this=
 generation of 
younger Hams and younger Amateur's must accept the fact that much=
 
hard work has gone into the preservation of the hobby by a=
 generation 
of older Hams.

Technology has brought many new adventures to the world but few=
 will 
ever hold the ability to bridge nations, people and ideals as has=
 
Amateur Radio.  There should always be some profound statement=
 that 
one could use about now but, none comes to mind.  So, I will=
 close 
with this.  I would like to see Morse Code remain a part of the 
process but if it does not, Amateur Radio is still worth saving. =
 
Never doubt for a minute that other services would love to have=
 our 
frequencies.  The only way we will save our band is though use=
 and 
peace in our united ranks. 

Bill Wyatt  N5WO

QRP has bolstered that phase of the hobby some but, my bet is,=
 this 
to will slowly slip into the background of ham radio.  

 

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 06:51:31 -0500, Mark D. Conklin N7XYO wrote:
>I hope all of you have been coping Coy Day N5OK (e-mail:
>n5ok@arrl.org  )
>with all your coments.  The ARRL board needs your thoughts.
>
>Here is what I sent:
>
>Hi Coy,
>
>Here is my two cents.  Many of the new and younger folks coming=
 into
>the
>hobby do NOT see any need for morse code.  They are the=
 internet
>generation
>and the future of ham radio.  They have been able to send a=
 message
>around
>the world in an instant all thier lives with out morse code.
>
>Many of them would love to get into HF, but see no need for the
>code.  I
>see a lot of the age gap in the hobby.  Older hams with codes=
 skills
>and on
>HF and younger with no desire to learn code and are expermenting=
 on
>6M and
>up.
>
>Want to grow the hobby?  Look to the younger hams, and=
 encourage
>them.
>
>I know there are strong feelings either way. Yet I am looking
>forward and
>the elimination of morse code would spur the growth of our=
 hobby.
>
>Thank you,
>
>Mark Conklin N7XYO
>OK-SEC PIC
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>___________________Information __________________________
>ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT 
wb5syt@arrl.org
>Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>______________________________________________________
>
>To leave ARRL-OK , send mailto:mailman@qth.net
>with the BODY of the message containing:
>
>unsubscribe arrl-ok
>
>
>Arrl-Ok mailing list
>Arrl-Ok@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok




From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul 18 03:02:40 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (John W W Brassfield)
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2003 21:02:40 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] To CW or Not to CW, Is that the question?
Message-ID: <20030717.210543.2960.7.n5sam@juno.com>

Good evening folks - 

I have read many responses supporting both sides and feel I should ad my
2 cents - 

I was first exposed to the hobby thru a friends dad - Jim K5PER, back in
the 60's.  My highschool had an electronics class and a radio club with
plans to build a ham station.  Many of us listened to records trying to
learn the code - to little success.  For the next 20 years, I could pick
a CQ or SOS out of any speed of cw, but the rest of the code was a blur. 
About 13 years ago, my neighbor, Jerry N5MAY, encouraged me to attend
license classes sponsored by the South Canadian ARC in Norman.

Personally, I had to work hard to learn the code.  By learning the code
to obtain my license, I met a world of friends, been active in the
leadership of local & state ham organizations and activities as well as
the emergency service part of the hobby.  

The code is an integral part of the history of the hobby and in serious
situations, may be the only mode to communicate nation or world wide. 
With the 5wpm current requirement, at least everyone has a familiarity
with CW and its use.  Keep the code.

73 all
John N5SAM

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Fri Jul 18 21:41:13 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:41:13 EDT
Subject: [ARRL-OK] a copy of my letter to coy
Message-ID: <14f.218f7d04.2c49b569@aol.com>

As far as the morse code requirement goes, i vote to drop it.  CW is a very 
popular mode, i try to work CW on 6m & 2M when i can get a slow contact 
(6-8wpm), the other digital modes are also very popular, but does the talent of 
knowing CW make a person a better SSB, AM, FM or other DIGITAL mode operator?  I 
have listened to some of the trash (all have passed the CW requirement) on the 
HF amateur bands in the General and Extra class freqs, glad my son and wife are 
not around when the trash gets on the air (also note-there are many 
professional & courteous OPs on the bands that, way far, outnumber the trash).  Also 
does CW automatically make an AMATEUR RADIO OPERATOR more "technically 
proficient"?  Probably not.

I do understand that if the CW requirement is dropped, the HF bands will get 
flodded with new operators (and trash), but the boom of new operators, sales 
of HF gear (i am sure Yaesu, Icom & Kenwood will profit imeasureably). However 
i am sure the older Ops oppose this new proposition, i have even heard them 
call the new EXTRA class OPs "EXTRA LIGHT".

Also note, CW can be encoded and decoded through a computer, a mode i doubt 
will die anytime soon.

so there it is.....you asked for input. In contrast, the HF community have 
asked for support concerning the data transmission over the power lines and have 
also recieved new secondary privleges on the new 60m allocation (only SSB 
with ERP = or < 50w dBd) no CW.  

thank you for  having the time and energy to represent HAMs in OK and TX. 
hope to get to see you friday nite in okc, i couldnt get off saturday..........73

david howard, kd5qwo@arrl.net

In addition to my letter to Coy, I might add another interesting bit of info 
concerning data transmissions over power lines...........seems to be a major 
factor on hf than on vhf or above.  im sure there will be some intermod, 
probably not enough for me to worry about...........so if i have no proveliges on hf 
why should i care?  because other hams want to utilize that part of the 
spectrum and i will help support them.  


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Mon Jul 21 10:14:00 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Ray Shank)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 04:14:00 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030721041343.02c93670@pop.central.cox.net>

Hi Coy,

I just want to say that I am not against the code, I just think of it as 
simply another mode in todays ham radio repertoire of available ways of 
communicating.  I therefore believe that it should no longer be a test one 
should have to take to become a ham.  I feel the written should be expanded 
to include more relevant questions pertaining to the proper operations, 
technical and regulations of ham radio.

What we're interested in is operators that can perform the task of 
communications.  With this said, then we should test people on how well 
they know what they can and should not do.

As I said before, Morse code testing now is as relevant as forcing someone 
to take a typing speed test for packet radio.  It's simply a mode.  So is 
CW.  I don't think it's important if someone knows the code if they have no 
desire to use it.  The most important thing is, can they use the modes they 
want to use in the illegal and best way possible.

Ray Shank, WA5RAY


At 03:49 PM 7/20/2003, you wrote:
>Ray,
>
>Thanks for the input.  I just returned from the board meeting and the issue
>of Morse code was not addressed.  I'm keeping your comments on file for the
>next board meeting.
>
>Coy
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Ray" <res@rayz.com>
>To: <n5ok@arrl.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 4:12 AM
>Subject: Re: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
>
>
>
>
>I say eliminate the code requirement and make the written more
>robust.  Code is only one mode of many. back in the old days when code was
>the only mode then followed by AM phone it was necessary.  But more and
>more  different modes are available and code is now less
>important.  Testing for code is now as relevant as testing your typing
>skills for packet.  It's just another mode.
>
>Ray Shank, WA5RAY
>
>At 01:08 AM 7/16/2003, you wrote:
> >I agree with you 100%.
> >
> >k5dle@juno.com wrote:
> >
> >>If you haven't seen this post from our West Gulf Director
> >>Coy Day  N5OK, here is a copy.
> >>You need to send your own reply.
> >>
> >>Gene
> >>=======================================================
> >>FROM: Gene Nailon  K5DLE
> >>Edmond, OK
> >>15 July 2003
> >>
> >>Hello Coy;
> >>
> >>"KEEP THE CODE TESTING"
> >>
> >>With that said, I believe its already a done deal, get
> >>rid of the code.  It is just one more step the league
> >>will take to lower the standards.  Like I have said before
> >>lower standards, more members, more money, and the hell
> >>with Amateur Radio.
> >>How long will it be before the ARRL decides it will be
> >>best if we don't even call it Amateur Radio?
> >>
> >>Gene Nailon, K5DLE
> >>=======================================================
> >>ARRL OKLAHOMA STATE CONVENTION THIS WEEKEND (18-19 July)
> >>Check out the Ham Holiday 2003 web site at
> >>http://www.qsl.net/coranews/index.html for the details.
> >>
> >>ARRL WEST GULF DIVISION CONVENTION
> >>The West Gulf Divsion Convention will be held Friday August 1 & Saturday
> >>August 2, 2003.  This will be a significant event with President Haynie
> >>just back from the Summer ARRL board meeting with all the latest
> >>happenings.  Check out the Austin Summerfest web site at
> >>http://www.austinsummerfest.org/index.html for all the details.
> >>
> >>ELIMINATION OF MORSE CODE
> >>Once again the question comes up of the elimination of Morse code
> >>testing for an HF license.  With the elimination of A.25 as treaty
> >>requirement, the question comes up of "What will the FCC do now?
> >>
> >>They may very well propose the elimination of Morse testing.  If that
> >>were to happen the ARRL would make input upon notice of a proposed rule
> >>making.  The ARRL is likely going to deal with this issue in some
> >>fashion this coming weekend at the summer board meeting.
> >>
> >>I would like to here from you if you have strong feelings on this
> >>subject one way or the other.  How do you think the ARRL should respond
> >>to such a proposal?
> >>
> >>Please e-mail your comments to me at n5ok@arrl.org.
> >>
> >>Thanks.
> >>
> >>Coy, N5OK
> >>Director
> >>
> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>ARRL West Gulf Division
> >>Director: Coy Day, N5OK
> >>n5ok@arrl.org
> >>--------------------------------------------------------------------


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Mon Jul 21 10:20:13 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Ray Shank)
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 04:20:13 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] KEEP THE CODE? Not!
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20030721041343.02c93670@pop.central.cox.net>
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20030721041813.02c97ff0@pop.central.cox.net>

Darn spell checker - the last line should read legal not illegal

At 04:14 AM 7/21/2003, you wrote:
>Hi Coy,
>
>I just want to say that I am not against the code, I just think of it as 
>simply another mode in todays ham radio repertoire of available ways of 
>communicating.  I therefore believe that it should no longer be a test one 
>should have to take to become a ham.  I feel the written should be 
>expanded to include more relevant questions pertaining to the proper 
>operations, technical and regulations of ham radio.
>
>What we're interested in is operators that can perform the task of 
>communications.  With this said, then we should test people on how well 
>they know what they can and should not do.
>
>As I said before, Morse code testing now is as relevant as forcing someone 
>to take a typing speed test for packet radio.  It's simply a mode.  So is 
>CW.  I don't think it's important if someone knows the code if they have 
>no desire to use it.  The most important thing is, can they use the modes 
>they want to use in the illegal and best way possible.
>
>Ray Shank, WA5RAY


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 22 06:19:55 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 01:19:55 EDT
Subject: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough
Message-ID: <cb.35682205.2c4e237b@aol.com>

Okay I am getting on my soap box for a few minutes.

I have read numerous emails on the subject of keeping the CW testing and what 
I have heard really annoys the hell out of me.

There have been comments about how reducing the requirements for licensing is 
"dumbing down" ham radio. Now, I will agree the tests that I took were 
considerably more difficult than they are now, however that is fixable.  

What wereally need to fix is the way we treat our fellow hams. I do not see 
the benefit from the name calling (extra lite) and insinuating that they are 
less a ham than those of us who took the test a few years ago. This all coming 
form hams that are considered leaders in our community and others that have 
been around amateur radio forever and seem to think that their opinion is the 
only right one(you know who you are)

To apply the rational man concept here, If one would like to be considered a 
leader, one should lead by example. Having said that, I think that the whining 
and moaning needs to stop.  If you want ham radio to survive, we need to 
encourage new hams and those who want to be hams. Not belittle them by cutting 
down their achievement, most of whom do not know what the test looked like 25 
years ago.

Our future is listening!  Believe it or not there are others walking and 
driving around that have radios and scanners. Plus just think about what you are 
saying to the sons, daughters and grandchildren of fellow hams. They are in 
background listening to the what you are saying.  Does this bickering increase 
their desire to be hams, I bet not!

Change is hard ladies and gentlemen.  There is no sure fire way to ensure ham 
radios survival.  I am sure that all you accomplish by all this belittling is 
drive potential quality hams away. 

Clay Mayrose, WA6LBU


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 22 14:17:44 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 09:17:44 EDT
Subject: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough
Message-ID: <115.26966ec8.2c4e9378@aol.com>

To code or not to code??  I think everyone is missing the boat on this.  If 
we don't do something, we will loose our bands!!!!!  If we don't use them, I 
can assure you that there are commercial interests out there that would use 
them, so I think we need to do whatever we can to protect them.  

Chuck, N5FWX


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 22 14:23:08 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Craig Roszel)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 08:23:08 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough
In-Reply-To: <115.26966ec8.2c4e9378@aol.com>
Message-ID: <000c01c35054$65ca2f50$6401a8c0@UncleDan>

I Agree!!!

 -----Original Message-----
From: 	arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net [mailto:arrl-ok-admin@mailman.qth.net]
On Behalf Of GONERIDING@aol.com
Sent:	Tuesday, July 22, 2003 8:18 AM
To:	arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net
Subject:	Re: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough

To code or not to code??  I think everyone is missing the boat on this.  If
we don't do something, we will loose our bands!!!!!  If we don't use them, I
can assure you that there are commercial interests out there that would use
them, so I think we need to do whatever we can to protect them.

Chuck, N5FWX


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---
______________________________________________________
___________________ Information __________________________
ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
______________________________________________________

ARRL-Ok mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
Post: mailto:ARRL-Ok@mailman.qth.net


From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Tue Jul 22 22:49:41 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Nate Bargmann)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 16:49:41 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough
In-Reply-To: <115.26966ec8.2c4e9378@aol.com>
References: <115.26966ec8.2c4e9378@aol.com>
Message-ID: <20030722214941.GE396@localhost>

* GONERIDING@aol.com <GONERIDING@aol.com> [2003 Jul 22 16:20 -0500]:
> To code or not to code??  I think everyone is missing the boat on this.  If 
> we don't do something, we will loose our bands!!!!!  If we don't use them, I 
> can assure you that there are commercial interests out there that would use 
> them, so I think we need to do whatever we can to protect them.  

Occupancy is the key to retaining our spectrum and I am no better than
anyone else when it comes to fulfilling that role.  The highest
frequency band I have equipment for is 440 MHz FM and that's not good
enough.  How many hams have never been on a band higher than 2m?  My
guess is that the percentage is far too high for whatever reason.

I believe that we value most that for which we work hardest.  A simple
statement.  So what is our most valuable spectrum allocation?  By
tradition and by the current licensing system the answer would have to
be the spectrum below 30 MHz.  Am I saying this spectrum is not
important?  Not all.  HF is a vital part of Amateur Radio's identity,
history, and tradition.  Meanwhile the bands above 30 MHz are the
"utility bands".  They are also the most valuable spectrum in terms of
commercial potential the Amateur Radio Service has.

I've entertained a crazy idea for several years that with the potential 
elimination of the Morse Code exam (I refuse to call it CW as even SSB 
is CW--understand what CW really means) the current licensing
arrangement could be turned on its head.  I say invert the whole system.
That's right, new hams get all of HF and to really use and develop new
technologies above 30 MHz requires an upgraded license.  Too radical you
say?  Let's look at the typical new ham these days.  Most Technicians, I
have observed, spend some time on the local repeaters and some will set
up a station to work some DX.  A very few seem to get interested in weak
signal work or non-FM modes.

Most that are willing to advance in the hobby will study for their
license upgrade and access to HF.  Then to finally have all amateur
privileges they study some more and upgrade to Extra.  A lot will be
happy on HF along with local contacts on VHF/UHF.  A few will migrate
back to VHF/UHF and begin exploring the non-utility modes and less
crowded bands.  I find myself doing this.

Thus, I think that by turning the whole system around that after some
time the motivation for upgrading will lead to excitement and curiosity
of our most valuable spectrum--namely, the UHF+ bands. Can we occupy 
those bands fast enough to save them?  I don't know.  I have a real life 
that cuts into time for pursuing interests like this.

I do ask that rather than dismissing my idea out-of-hand you consider it
and give it some thought.

Somehow the Service's perception of the spectrum above 30 MHz need to
change from "that lump of spectrum the newbies get" to "our most
valuable and intriguing spectrum and the key to Amateur Radio's future."

We've got to save it before it's too late.

73, de Nate >>

-- 
 Wireless | Amateur Radio Station N0NB          | "We have awakened a
 Internet | n0nb@networksplus.net               | sleeping giant and
 Location | Bremen, Kansas USA EM19ov           | have instilled in him
  Amateur radio exams; ham radio; Linux info @  | a terrible resolve".
             http://www.qsl.net/n0nb/           | - Admiral Yamamoto

From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 23 05:04:59 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Robert Gillespie)
Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 23:04:59 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] I have heard enough
References: <cb.35682205.2c4e237b@aol.com>
Message-ID: <3F1E096B.1080304@netscape.net>

While your on your soap box,  remember each time the code was lowered 
the promise of tuffer written was proposed. Has it EVER happen yet, NO. 
Also your phrase "dumbing down" ham radio is exactly what we are doing.

Wa6lbu@aol.com wrote:

>Okay I am getting on my soap box for a few minutes.
>
>I have read numerous emails on the subject of keeping the CW testing and what 
>I have heard really annoys the hell out of me.
>
>There have been comments about how reducing the requirements for licensing is 
>"dumbing down" ham radio. Now, I will agree the tests that I took were 
>considerably more difficult than they are now, however that is fixable.  
>
>What wereally need to fix is the way we treat our fellow hams. I do not see 
>the benefit from the name calling (extra lite) and insinuating that they are 
>less a ham than those of us who took the test a few years ago. This all coming 
>form hams that are considered leaders in our community and others that have 
>been around amateur radio forever and seem to think that their opinion is the 
>only right one(you know who you are)
>
>To apply the rational man concept here, If one would like to be considered a 
>leader, one should lead by example. Having said that, I think that the whining 
>and moaning needs to stop.  If you want ham radio to survive, we need to 
>encourage new hams and those who want to be hams. Not belittle them by cutting 
>down their achievement, most of whom do not know what the test looked like 25 
>years ago.
>
>Our future is listening!  Believe it or not there are others walking and 
>driving around that have radios and scanners. Plus just think about what you are 
>saying to the sons, daughters and grandchildren of fellow hams. They are in 
>background listening to the what you are saying.  Does this bickering increase 
>their desire to be hams, I bet not!
>
>Change is hard ladies and gentlemen.  There is no sure fire way to ensure ham 
>radios survival.  I am sure that all you accomplish by all this belittling is 
>drive potential quality hams away. 
>
>Clay Mayrose, WA6LBU
>
>
>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
>multipart/alternative
>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
>  text/html
>The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
>or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
>to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---
>______________________________________________________
>___________________ Information __________________________
>ARRL Oklahoma Section Manager - John Thomason, WB5SYT wb5syt@arrl.org
>Oklahoma Section Web page http://members.cox.net/arrl-ok
>______________________________________________________
>
>ARRL-Ok mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arrl-ok
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/faq.htm
>Post: mailto:ARRL-Ok@mailman.qth.net
>  
>

-- 
Your favorite stores, helpful shopping tools and great gift ideas. 
Experience the convenience of buying online with Shop@Netscape! 
http://shopnow.netscape.com/



From arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net  Wed Jul 23 21:23:35 2003
From: arrl-ok@mailman.qth.net (Mark D. Conklin N7XYO)
Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 15:23:35 -0500
Subject: [ARRL-OK] PR101
Message-ID: <00c401c35158$4b5a8020$60c214d0@olp.net>

PR101

There are many groups and clubs that are out doing fun and exciting things,
as well some great public service events. But the Amateur Radio story is not
being told. Not told to other hams within the groups, and not being told to
the public. So how do you got this word out? One way is with your club's or
group's newsletter of course.

Newsletters are a powerful PR tool and a great way to keep your group
informed of local happenings. Good newsletters include information on the
club's or group's latest news, announcements of upcoming events, public
service events, local VE testing locations, area hamfest dates and info, as
well as the contact information for the club or group. Photos with captions
(including first and last names, and amateur call sign of all in the photos)
are always a nice touch and can do much to interest the non-ham in reading
the newsletter. FYI: make sure to get permission to publish the photos in
the newsletter of anyone photographed. And especially you must have
permission from the parent of any child photographed for the newsletter.

In addition to sending your newsletter to all the members of your group, it'
s a good idea to send a copy to the local media, government officials, and
any agency that your group may service (i.e. The Salvation Army, local
National Weather Service office, local emergency manager, your mayor, etc.).

With the aid of a computer and some software (such as MS-Publisher, retail
less than $150), you can easily create a very sharp looking newsletter. Add
Adobe PDF writer to your software and you will be able to e-mail your
newsletter and save the cost of the stamps and printing.

I'm adding a little teaser here about an upcoming PR seminar for Amateur
Radio. Here in the Oklahoma Section we plan to hold a half-day seminar. We
really would like all ARRL PIOs, any club officers, newsletter editors, PR
chairpersons, and anyone who may like to be involved in Amateur Radio PR to
attend. Keep watching this newsletter for more info or also the ARRL
Oklahoma Section's web page at: http://www.remote.arrl.org/sections/OK.html

Want more information about the ARRL PIO program? Contact me or see
http://www.remote.arrl.org/pio/

73's

Mark Conklin, N7XYO
Public Information Coordinator,
ARRL Oklahoma Section
(918) 366-2007 Eve.
(918) 622-6262 Ext. 25 Day
(918) 232-8346 Mobile
1-888-597-1492 Pager
n7xyo@arrl.net e-mail


