[CW] QRM and Technician License Expansion

n7dc at comcast.net n7dc at comcast.net
Tue Mar 19 19:22:48 EDT 2019 

No, you can use LOTW, without being a member, stateside.  But, in order to actually use the match ups, you have to pay for each contact, just like we have to pay for each QSO card check, for that card, or that LOTW match to be accepted for DXCC, WAS. etc.  Foreign operators do NOT have to be ARRL members, but they still have to pay for the LOTW matches, to earn a DXCC, etc.  You can match their free uplink lotw logs, and they do not have to pay for what they use, but you do.  
It really is cheaper to use LOTW contacts, than it is for using cards, but we pay for them all.  Personally, I think have LOTW is cheaper, and is certainly faster than waiting around for a real card, by bureau, or even by mail.  I dont have enough years left to wait 5-10 years for someone to finally send a buro card.  
N7DC at ARRL.NET
Ex WN5QMX,WA5UKR,ET2US,ET3USA,SV0WPP,VS6DD,N7DC/YV5/G5CTB
QSL Bureau, DIRECT, LOTW Preferred, eQSL used but upload at a courtesy only, as do not use the system for awards.


> On March 19, 2019 at 6:32 PM john <johnmb at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> I agree...dropped 'em like a stone too
> 
> I don't think you have to be a member to get DXCC (you just have to pay 
> more). You don't have to be a member to use LOTW I'm sure.
> 
> I don't support the new initiative .
> 
> John K5MO
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/19/2019 4:56 PM, n7dc at comcast.net wrote:
> > 
> > Yes, the ARRL supported the series of dumbdowns and the results can be 
> > heard on air.  But I vote with my wallet...I dropped them after 30 
> > years.  Jim
> > 
> > A wink is as good as a nod to a blind mule.
> > 
> > 
> > That was my intent too. but along came LOTW.  Today, it is essentially 
> > the only way to get card for DXCC, etc.  In fact, stateside, we have to 
> > be members to get the awards, and that was a main reason to join them 55 
> > years ago, anyway.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > On Tuesday, March 19, 2019 Richard Knoppow <cw at mailman.qth.net> wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > N7DC at ARRL.NET
> > Ex WN5QMX,WA5UKR,ET2US,ET3USA,SV0WPP,VS6DD,N7DC/YV5/G5CTB
> > QSL Bureau, DIRECT, LOTW Preferred, eQSL used but upload at a courtesy 
> > only, as do not use the system for awards.
> > 
> >> On March 19, 2019 at 3:58 PM abqcooks--- via CW <cw at mailman.qth.net> 
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>     I think perhaps what these people want is CB. No technical
> >> knowledge or code needed. Keep in mind the original excuse (or
> >> justification if you prefer) for amateur radio was to provide a
> >> group of knowedgable people with adequate equipment to cope with
> >> emergencies where the regular commercial communications had
> >> broken down. It is perhaps harder to maintain this justification
> >> now than it was a century ago but I think recent experiences with
> >> severe storms and floods are sufficient to do so.
> >>     When I started out the novice license was available but I
> >> decided to go for the general, which at that time had all
> >> privileges. Electronics was my hobby plus I had some formal
> >> schooling in it, so I had no doubts about the written license. I
> >> then worked on getting my code speed up. You can read 5 WPM once
> >> you memorize the code but reading at 13 WPM takes some work. I
> >> got my speed up to around 15 WPM, maybe a little more, and went
> >> down to the Federal Building and took the test. Had no trouble
> >> with the code (which surprised me) or the written exam and after
> >> what seemed like eons got my license in the mail. I think the
> >> technician license was intended for those who could pass a
> >> tougher theory test than the novice but not code. I am not sure
> >> if that was a good idea or not, can make an argument on both
> >> sides of it. Anyway, I kept active until life got in the way and
> >> then picked it up again a dozen years ago. No code test any more
> >> although I could have passed the 20 WPM without trouble. Theory
> >> exam was not too difficult, mainly I had to study the newer
> >> regulations. So, now I have an extra class but am not much on the
> >> air because I need a real antenna and have reached the age where
> >> crawling around on roofs is not so easy. In any  case, I am
> >> rather opinionated about all sorts of stuff but one of them is
> >> not making something so easy it no longer has any value.
> >>     I think CB was a blunder but was great for equipment
> >> manufacturers and that was the main reason it was created. Too
> >> stupid or lazy to get a ham license, then CB is for you, kids.
> >> Who cares about rules and the law, its uninforceable anyway. Add
> >> a code test and you toss all those folks overboard.
> >>     I may be a curmudgeon but I am a cheerful curmudgeon.
> >>
> >> On 3/19/2019 11:43 AM, n7dc at comcast.net <mailto:n7dc at comcast.net> wrote:
> >> > We were asked to vote on the issue, and the ARRL then supported
> >> > the non code licenses.  Funny thing though, later on I saw that
> >> > the vote was very "NO!"   But it was done anyway.
> >> >
> >> > They keep talking about a new license to make it even easier.  My
> >> > vote too, is to return the Novice exams, including CW.
> >> > Thousands of us came on that way.  I've been involved with kids,
> >> > and adults, earning their entire license, including learning the
> >> > code at 5 plus wpm, within ONE week.  Another time, One boy, on a
> >> > one-on-one basis, learned and PASSED the 5 wpm code in 30
> >> > minutes.  Take at look online,  search for Ham radio at the BSA
> >> > National Jamboree 1985.   I think the article said something like
> >> > 5 Scouts, but it was 12.
> >> >
> >> > Danny Douglas
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Richard Knoppow
> >> 1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com <mailto:1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>
> >> WB6KBL
> >> ______________________________________________________________
> >> CW mailing list
> >> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> >> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >> Post: mailto: CW at mailman.qth.net <mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net>
> >> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
> >> Unsubcribe send email to
> >> cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net <mailto:cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net>
> >> Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net 
> >> <mailto:cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net>
> >> Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >>
> >>
> >> =30=
> > 
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > CW mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> > CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
> > Unsubcribe send email to
> > cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
> > Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
> > Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > 
> > =30=
> > 
> > 
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > CW mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> > CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
> > Unsubcribe send email to
> > cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
> > Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
> > Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > 
> > =30=
> > 
> 
> -- 
> III
> ______________________________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
> Unsubcribe send email to
> cw-unsubscribe at mailman.qth.net
> Subscribe send email to cw-subscribe at mailman.qth.net
> Support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 
> =30=

More information about the CW mailing list