[CW] Our Position on Morse Requirement
Gregory W. Moore
[email protected]
Sun, 27 Jul 2003 20:07:17 -0400
Ken, I agree with your realistic appraisal of what is actually going to
be down the road. That being said, however, There is a viable workaround
proposal. Why not have "ratings" similar to a Pilot's Certificate
(License), but that's what the FAA calls it.
In order to fly a multi engine aircraft, one has to have a multi engine
rating, to fly instrument, one has to have an instrument rating, to fly
as a commercial pilot, one has to have a commercial rating, and so
forth. Each one of these ratings involves time, instruction, a written
exam, and the flight test (check ride). As a pilot, one also has to have
a biennial flight review, and medical exams, the time between them
dependent on the licence class held. I see no reason, if the FAA can do
this, why the FCC can't.
Since I have been thru the FAA hoops, without too much difficulty, I see
no reason why the FCC can't structure their licencing process somewhat
similarly. If you want to work CW, OK, but you have to have an exam.
(This would neatly sidestep the no code BS, as it simply would be
another rating to work toward for those entering our avocation). Those
already holding licences granted prior to the imposition of this would
simply be grandfathered, and be granted the CW rating automatically.
OK, flame away, but this seems to be the way to do it.
Incidentally, since the FCC got rid of everything, that is why I will
never lose, or upgrade my "Advanced" class licence. Since it's unique
now, I plan to stay exactly where I am. I have no particular worries
about my CW skills, and use it whenever possible.
73 de Greg Moore WA3IVX / NNN0BVN
Mike Manship wrote:
>At 12:33 PM 7/27/03 -1000, Ken Brown wrote:
>
>
>>Therefore we propose:
>>
>>1) At least one amateur license class (probably Extra Class) maintains a
>>morse test element.
>>
>>
>
>It will probably be eliminated for all classes.
>
>
>
>>2) Every HF and MF amateur band shall have a CW ONLY sub band, at least
>>as large as the present Extra Class digital subbands and preferably
>>larger. The bands which do not presently have an Extra Class digital sub
>>band shall have CW only subbands also. CW will continue to be allowed
>>anywhere in the amateur bands, not including the 60 meter channels.
>>
>>
>>
>
>This might happen.
>
>
>
>>3) The morse test should be performed at a speed at which morse is
>>actually useable, perhaps 10 wpm.
>>
>>
>
>
>Since they already reduced it I doubt they will increase it.
>
>
>
>>4) The morse test element should include both receiving and sending.
>>
>>
>
>Since they already eliminated a sending test (and probably will eliminate
>receiving)
>I doubt they will reinstate it. It's easy to grade a receiveing test with
>multiple-choice
>answers. It would take someone who can actually copy Morse to grade a
>sending test.
>
>
>
>>What do you all think of the above?
>>
>>Ken N6KB
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>CW mailing list
>>[email protected]
>>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>CW mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>
>
>
--
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
--Edmund Burke
Greg Moore NNN0BVN PA
U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Military Affiliate Radio System (MARS)
Official Pennsylvania Area Website:
http://pages.prodigy.net/nnn0fbk/mars.htm
Official Northeast Area Website:
http://www.navymars.org/northeast/index.htm
Navy-Marine Corps MARS: Proudly Serving Those Who Serve."
E-Mail (MARS) [email protected]
********************************************************************************************************
--- 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 ---