[CW] CW Poll in Germany; Russian WRC Position

Bill Tippett [email protected]
Tue, 16 Jul 2002 21:58:13 +0100


        FYI.  73,  Bill  W4ZV

http://www.muenster.org/dtc/eindex.html (click English and
News under Contents at the left side of the page)

     German Radio Amateurs voting for a retainment of the
     Morse Code requirement for HF licensees !
     (DTC 18/03/2002)=20

     CW exams should continue to be a requirement for those
     who want an Amateur Radio license with permission to
     access the HF bands. This is what the majority of German
     hams have voted for, being the result of a polling carried
     out by the national IARU representative Deutsche Amateur
     Radio Club (DARC). The results of this event has just been
     made public.

     Subject of the voting was whether the Morse code
     requirement should continue to be a requirement for future
     HF licensees or not. One should add that the voting did in
     fact include votes by licensees of all German license
     classes e.g. both those with and without HF access
     permissions.=20

     The final voting results were:=20

          total number of votes: 17455
          pro CW exam votes: 8530
          no CW exam votes: 7781
          invalid votes: 1144

     This clear result now is the very basis of DARC in
     representing the interests of German radio amateurs both
     within IARU and in discussions with the German
     administration.=20

     DTC had recommended that its members should
     participate in the DARC voting if a member there (most
     DTC members are members of DARC as well) to promote
     the pro CW attitude and aims of our club. Considering the
     result of the voting DTC feels its attitude well supported
     that the radio amateurs continue to regard the requirement
     of Morse code exams for any HF band access a necessity -
     quite different from what appears to be the attitude of
     some national IARU representatives and clubs.=20

     Apparingly the results of the voting in Germany also show
     that some of the positions being expressed by IARU
     representatives - be it on a worldwide or regional basis -
     did in fact not consider the general attitude of the radio
     amateurs being their members. It is all too obvious that
     quite a few club representatives may not have considered
     the democratic view of their members as well. The reasons
     for this kind of behaviour should be made a subject of
     discussions right now!=20

     Votings like the one just taken in Germany have not been
     too many around so far. Known instances like that were
     conducted in Russia, Australia, France and now Germany.
     Quite interesting: Many club officials of those countries
     that normally feel proud pointing at their democratic
     society failed to consider to find out what the radio
     amateurs and members do think about the matter of the
     Morse code requirement for HF licensees. Perhaps it was
     not wished or considered to do so to avoid the binding
     facts. However, these officals should be asked why they
     are so "lifted off" from their members and why they
     apparingly do not worry too much about loosing contact
     with the general membership they have to represent.
     Martin Hengemuehle
     DL5QE
     Chaiman, DTC

DTC - Statement Regarding "CW and WRC 2003"
     (DTC 03/02/2002)=20

     The World Radio Conference WRC 2003 is appearing at
     the horizon already. The WRC agenda will deal with a
     proposed change of article S.25.5 which pinpoints the
     necessities regarding the licensing of radio amateurs and
     currently requires given proof of any individual's capability
     to send Morse telegraphy by hand and receive it by ear if
     access to the bands below 30 MHz is to be granted by that
     license. The proposed change on the WRC 2003 agenda
     regarding the item just mentioned has already brought
     new life to the old and ever continuing discussions pro or
     contra the need to pass a CW exam for HF access
     licensees.

     Some national radio amateur organizations in a couple of
     countries being IARU members as well favour the
     abolishment of any enforced CW exams. Other do favour a
     retainment of this requirement. Not too very long ago IARU
     (and within IARU its Region 1 suborganization) put
     forward a strong vote to retain the Morse code requirement
     internationally. However, suddenly its view has changed
     and IARU is now following the ideas of those who just
     want the contrary, e.g. the abolishment of the very
     requirement.

     The Deutsche Telegrafie Club (DTC) of cause pleas for the
     retainment of the Morse code exam and emphasizes that
     any CW organization worth its name has no choice other
     than this!

     Besides principle arguments DTC sees some fundamental
     arguments that prove its position right and a necessity
     favouring a sound future of the Amateur Radio Service in
     general::

     1.) re: No CW exam means an increase in membership
     numbers

     Membership numbers of most national amateur radio
     organizations seem to show no growth or even a decline
     meaning a stagnation or decline in income from
     membership fees. The tendency is - a decline! The waiving
     of 12 wpm exams and the very replacement by an "much
     easier" 5 wpm one did not show the intended increase in
     membership numbers of the big national radio clubs
     despite that it was just this anticipated increase that was
     the main among the reasons given to implement that
     "speed". The only thing that happened was a reshuffling
     within the membership already there regarding the
     individual license classes. An increase in membership
     numbers just didn't take place! The proposed abolishment
     of the Morse code exam requirement will but continue the
     aforementioned reshuffling within (!) the already existing
     membership and not gain a bulk of new members!
     Statistics in the most industrialized countries show the
     population to decrease and the average individual's age to
     inrease. This tendency is not "out of bounds" regarding
     radio amateurs and therefore membership numbers will
     not be altered by any movement or step to get rid of the
     Morse code requirement as such. The trend will be ever
     decreasing numbers for some time to come. It appear that
     some efficient public relations is also missing to give
     amateur radio its fair share among the ever increasing
     number of leisure activity offers and hobbies. Obviously
     there is an urgent need to think things over! Getting rid of
     "unnecessary burdens" will not necessarily make our
     hobby more attractive, quite the contrary appears to be the
     case! Those who favour the "Take it easy - no CW!"-view
     probably should look at the CW clubs membership
     numbers around: they increase and the CW clubs prosper
     well! People seem to be attracted much more by
     "difficulties" than general Morse code waivers...

     2.) re: CW exams may easily be replaced by an increase
     level elsewhere

     Quality retainment following that way instead of retaining
     the Morse code requirement will turn out to be but poor
     choice as amateur radio will become a kind of
     "hi-technician's hobby" then. Is that what we want it to
     become? Also, levels in exams are up quite high already.
     Amateur radio besides being a technical hobby is also a
     hobby of communication among radio amateurs and thus
     a big question arises: if our hobby becomes a much more
     technical one by increasing that level in future exams, will
     the future licensees be active radio amateurs e.g. make
     their QSOs in somewhat the same manner as we are used
     to now? Or will they just try out what they will have had
     constructed and then discontinue QSOing afterwards? Will
     there be rag chews anymore then?=20

     3.) re: Abolishment of the Morse code requirement will not
     impair the future of telegraphy in the Amateur Radio
     Service

     This claim is very much to be doubted! Who is going to
     teach and learn Morse if that is no longer required? The
     argument is often supplied with an additional remark that
     these people have no doubts that CW is an efficient means
     of communication and thus will continue to prosper within
     the Amateur Radio Service. It will not! Most CW operators
     did learn the code due to the imposed requirement to do
     so. And most did gain their proficiency and capability to
     QSO in CW lateron. Would it not have been for the imposed
     requirement the "lateron" development would almost
     never have taken place. Those who favour the
     no-code-view and also think that Morse will prosper in
     future are either a bit "off the road" or do want to tell lies.
     Look at them and you will notice that almost noone of
     these people has put up anything that will be likely to make
     Morse prosper within the Amateur Radio Service in the
     proposed no-code-future. Split- minded?
     Double-tongued? Exam-proven CW radio amateurs are no
     "better" hams, but they are indeed better capable ones,
     having shown discipline! This has been of no damage for
     amateur radio so far. Rather the contrary, as quality has
     been a characteristic of our hobby up to now - and
     apparingly also due to the discipline that is required to sit
     down and learn the Morse code. This gained quality is one
     of the aspects that are suitable to convince other people to
     pay our hobby the necessary owe and attention. Why
     throwing that away? People who separate from their own
     roots are most likely to become homeless!

     4.) re: "Individual national rules" requiring CW exams are
     possible even if WRC 2003 cancels the Morse code
     requirement

     Some national IARU representatives - among them being
     ARRL - indeed argue that way. Rather there are doubts
     they really mean it. Why should the national
     telecommunications authorities do so if the international
     requirement is no longer there? And why do those who
     argue that way fail to notice that they put one of the main
     achievements of the last decades at risk, e.g. the
     international agreements that set a common minimum level
     and allow a much easier reciprocal licensing? Are we
     going to go national only again? It sounds but a bit idoitic
     to a) tell we all need to waive the Morse code requirement
     and then b) we might enforce it again on a national level.
     What is really meant? a) or b)? And does that idea not only
     try to please those who are against the abolishment of the
     Morse code requirement and intents to calm those people
     down to not interfere with the very "new" approach? The
     argument is not logical as such and therefore fails to work
     as intended!

     Considering the above DTC is sure to be on the right track
     pleading for the retainment of the Morse code requirement
     as being set by the currently existing article S25.5 .=20

     Also DTC very much welcomes the Russian Federation's
     approach of putting its demand to retain the Morse code
     requirement onto the agenda of the forthcoming WRC
     2003. The Russian Federation thus follows the democratic
     view of its radio amateurs and is convinced that quality
     standards of the Amateur Radio Service are linked with the
     Morse code exam requirement. The Russian radio
     amateurs deserve our thanks in having achieved that!

     The Russian WRC 2003 agenda item is well reasoned. This
     has already triggered a similar move by the French Union
     Fran=E7aise des T=E9l=E9graphistes (UFT) to consider
     approaching their national IARU organization (REF) which
     they are affiliated with. Even within IARU there appears to
     be no common view on the matter of code vs. no-code
     requirement and our national IARU representative DARC
     apparingly still is trying to make up its mind somehow on
     the matter... The French UFT however has come forward
     with the proposal to focus the interests of all those who
     are in favour of retaining the Morse code requirement. DTC
     explicitly welcomes UFT's proposal and we will try to
     contribute and cooperate on that behalf in a suitable way.

     DTC believes that trying to convince the very national
     telecommunications authorities to vote for a retainment of
     the Morse code requirement at the WRC 2003 is the best
     and most effective way to get our views through. While of
     cause the organizations of the amateurs are well suited to
     focus the different ideas on national and international
     levels DTC is sure that the best way to forward the
     common ideas is to stick with and approach those who
     have a) the right to put an item onto the WRC 2003 agenda
     as well as b) have the right to vote there - which makes it to
     be the respective national telecommuncations authorities.
     Our fellow Russian radio amateurs deserve the honour of
     being the first ones to have already finished on that path.
     Congrats!=20

     We do, however, also notice that quite a couple of nations
     still are trying to find out what their view regarding a
     retainment or abolishment of the Morse code requirement
     actually is, while others are already in a much more
     developed stage of decision making or even already at the
     acting level. "Those who come late will be punished by
     life" is what Gorbachov said. Exactly.=20

     One of DTC's mottos is "Telegraphy is one of the
     fundamentals of amateur radio!". Thus DTC is firm in its
     position to retain the Morse code requirement at WRC
     2003, e.g. to have put into plain words into article S25.5 the
     explicit requirement to show given proof of sending by
     hand and hearing by ear of the Morse code for all
     individuals who wish to be issued an amateur radio
     license to get access to the HF bands. No less, no more!.

     January 2002

     Deutscher Telegrafie Club e.V. (DTC)

     Martin Hengem=FChle
     DL5QE
     Chairman

     For the benefit of all interested the Russian WRC 2003
     agenda item in its original text version:

     Agenda Item 1.7.1- Possible revision of Article S25

     The Administration of the Russian Federation agrees that
     there is a need to modify Article S25, and fully supports the
     proposals by the International Amateur Radio Union
     (IARU). In this regard , it would like to express its concern
     regarding the deletion of certain provisions:=20

     S25.5=20

     We consider it advisable to RETAIN the provisions in the
     Radio Regulations which stipulate the need for a command
     of Morse Code in order to be issued a radio amateur
     licence.=20

     REASONS:=20

     (A) A knowledge of Morse Code determines the boundary
     separating users of the radio- amateur service from citizen
     band (CB) users.=20

     (B) An analysis of the current situation carried out by
     Russian radio amateurs shows that the lowering of
     requirements regarding knowledge of Morse Code in
     different countries did NOT lead to a significant increase in
     the number of radio amateurs. On the contrary, to abolish
     the requirement regarding knowledge of Morse Code in the
     short-wave bands may produce a significant increase in the
     number of untrained radio amateurs.=20

     (C) The working statistics of major radio contests indicate
     that roughly the same number of communications are
     effected using telegraph (Morse Code) as single sideband
     modulation, and a very low percentage of
     radiocommunications are effected using modern digital
     transmission facilities.=20

     (D) A survey of Russian radio amateurs has shown that an
     overwhelming number of those having submitted
     comments are in favor of requiring a knowledge of Morse
     Code for the issue of a licence to operate at frequencies
     below 30 MHz.=20

     (E) Russian radio amateurs consider that revoking the
     requirement for a knowledge of Morse Code would lower
     the level of proficiency and lead to numerous infringements
     in parts of the amateur ranges.=20

     In addition it is well known that:=20

     (F) Radiotelegraphy signals constitute the most
     interference-suppressing means of effecting amateur radio
     communications, this being of no small importance to radio
     amateurs.=20

     (G) Radio telegraphy constitutes one of the most effective
     means of communications in Emergency situations.=20

     CONCLUSION:=20

     The practical ability to work in telegraph mode when
     operating in frequencies below 30 MHz, i.e. using Morse
     Code, is a mandatory condition, when it comes to
     examining the proficiency of individuals wishing to be
     issued a radio amateur licence.=20