[K3PZN-List] Canadian Hams and the Code

Fri Jan 21 09:55:07 EST 2005

Al

thanks for the reply ... 

i agree this is a diverse hobby!  

since i am old enuff to remember, i think of ham radio
as glowing tubes, plugging a xtal in the rig, pounding
on a brass straight key, and getting qsl cards in the
mail ...... all of this now obsolete.  

today i use solid state rigs, no xtals, i use a paddle
or mic or keyboard and rarely send or receive qsls by
mail.  

i still think of ham radio as scrounging parts,
melting solder, and getting on the air with whatever
you got.  i still do this stuff - just finished
another project (a miniature frequency counter with
SMT parts) and several of my rigs are home assembled. 
one current project is being made mostly of junk parts
taken out of broken stuff .... 

i can relate to folk that hate CW, but these folk
sometimes remind me of folk who hate vegetables! 
there is no better mode for DX or contests!  it is not
hard to be a CW op like me, but the experts have
certainly worked at it to be top notch.  when i got
started, i didn't have money to afford a SSB rig ....
at a minimum hams should respect those that let the
dits and dahs fly because this is not an obsolete
mode.  just like i respect the folk who do amateur TV
and other modes i don't currently do!

have fun!  maybe think again about CW - you can do it!

curt

--- Al Bisasky <al.bisasky at verizon.net> wrote:

> Hi Curt,
> 
> How I got through the 13wpm in 1980, I'll never
> know! I haven't done any CW 
> on the air since about 1985.  I don't even own a key
> anymore.  I can't 
> remember half the code.  I never really liked it. 
> So much for my story.
> 
> The changes to Part 97 proposed by the ARRL will
> inevetably be accepted and 
> implemented by the FCC.  It's a "gravity issue" and
> you can't do a darned 
> thing about it.  So whether you are for it or
> against is a moot point. 
> Whether you agree or disagree with the
> "grandfathering" of 
> Technicians-to-General is also moot.   You either
> live with it or get out of 
> Ham Radio.  Things change.  I remember studying my
> heart out to pass the 
> tests for a 2nd then 1st Class Radiotelephone
> Operator's License so that I 
> could work on radio transmitters.  Five years later,
> the FCC changed both 
> classes to General RTO and now you don't even need a
> license.  But I don't 
> whine and moan and write letters to the FCC; I live
> with it.  I cherish my 
> accomplishment as do I cherish my Amateur Extra even
> though I did not have 
> to pass a 20wpm code test to get it.
> 
> I applaud each new person that gets his/her ticket
> and everytime that person 
> upgrades to General or Extra.  If I have personally
> been involved with that 
> person in any way and helped them along, money can't
> buy the good feeling 
> that it gives me.  License Class does not make a
> good Amateur Radio 
> Operator.  Being able to send and receive code at
> 5-, 13- or even 20wpm does 
> not make a good Ham.  Whether you took your test and
> got your license in 
> 1954 or 2004 does not make a good Ham. Only those
> that respect the service 
> and the hobby and are willing to learn the ways and
> keep on learning and 
> improving their skills make good Hams.  I've have
> been at this for almost 25 
> years and I'm still trying to learn.  I like it that
> way too.
> 
> A Ham can never impress me or earn my respect by
> bragging about how much he 
> knows about Amateur Radio or how fast he can copy CW
> or when he got his 
> license.  He can only earn my respect by sharing
> that knowledge to help and 
> benefit his fellow Hams and the Amateur Radio
> Service.  There are many 
> self-appointed Pillars of All Wisdom and Knowledge. 
> There are inflexible 
> stoics that don't want it any other way except their
> way and are unable or 
> unwilling to compromise, accept change and/or even
> respect the abilities, 
> ideas and opinions of other Hams.  A few of them are
> members of the CCARC. 
> While I treat them the same as any other Ham and
> smile at them and listen to 
> them talk, their callsigns are filed away in my
> feeble brain under "L" for 
> LID...
> 
> 73 Al K3ZE
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Curt Milton" <wb8yyy at yahoo.com>
> To: "CCARC" <K3PZN-List at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 3:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [K3PZN-List] Canadian Hams and the Code
> 
> 
> > Al,
> >
> > thanks for the post!
> >
> > while i wish everyone would try CW (there is no
> better
> > mode for contesting and working DX) - its time to
> move
> > on!
> >
> > there is no reason the FCC should not act today on
> > ARRL recommendations!  (two or three ops in my
> family
> > would appreciate it!).  given the plan (CW only
> for
> > extra class) the merging of everyone into 3
> classes
> > makes sense.  (only novices are short-changed but
> with
> > one test they too become general, and there are
> very
> > few of these licenses around!)
> >
> > as long as everyone gets adequate spectrum for the
> > modes they enjoy, we can thrive and no need for
> > further debates!  no flames or bullets from me.
> >
> > 73, curt
> >
> > --- Al Bisasky <al.bisasky at verizon.net> wrote:
> >
> >> >From the ARRL website www.arrrl.net
> >>
> >> PLEASE DON'T SHOOT THE MESSENGER!
> >>
> >> Industry Canada reports "overwhelming agreement"
> to
> >> drop Morse requirement
> >> (Jan 20, 2005) -- Radio Amateurs of Canada (RAC)
> >> reports that an Industry
> >> Canada (IC) analysis has found "overwhelming
> >> agreement" that Canada should
> >> move away from retaining a Morse code requirement
> as
> >> "the sole means of
> >> gaining access" to the HF amateur bands. IC has
> >> posted a summary of comments
> >> from the amateur community to RAC's
> Recommendations
> >> from Radio Amateurs of
> >> Canada to Industry Canada concerning Morse Code
> and
> >> Related Matters. Said
> >> RAC, "Amateurs should note that while the
> responses
> >> heavily favored deletion
> >> of the Morse Qualification as a requirement for
> >> access to the HF bands,
> >> Industry Canada still has to make and announce a
> >> decision on Morse retention
> >> or deletion." IC said there were 123 comments in
> >> favor of relaxed code
> >> requirements and only 19 "clearly opposed."
> Another
> >> six comments were
> >> inconclusive. The regulatory agency also has
> >> attempted to gauge the level of
> >> support for each of RAC's 12 license
> restructuring
> >> recommendations and said
> >> it would formulate a plan to implement changes
> >> emerging from the
> >> consultation process. RAC notes that until IC
> >> announces a decision to delete
> >> Morse, Canadian amateurs not holding the Morse
> >> Qualification may not operate
> >> on the HF bands.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------
> >> BREAK
> >> -----------------------------------------------
> >> Next CCARC meeting Monday February 14, 7:30 PM at
> >> the FTC.
> >> _______
> >> K3PZN-List mailing list supporting the Carroll
> >> County Amateur Radio Club
> >> K3PZN-List at mailman.qth.net
> >>
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/k3pzn-list
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail
> SpamGuard.
> > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> >
>
-----------------------------------------------------
>  
> > BREAK
> -----------------------------------------------
> > Next CCARC meeting Monday February 14, 7:30 PM at
> the FTC.
> > _______
> > K3PZN-List mailing list supporting the Carroll
> County Amateur Radio Club
> > K3PZN-List at mailman.qth.net
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/k3pzn-list
> > 
> 
> 
=== message truncated ===

__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
Yahoo! Mail - Easier than ever with enhanced search. Learn more.
http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250