[Kenwood] CW Outdated Mode?

[Alan Zack]

Along the same note, I am amazed on how many people under 30 or so, 
can't drive a car with a clutch, or in my teen age days, a stick 
shift.  I can remember my father not wanting to buy a car with an 
automatic transmission back in the 1950's and 1960's because he 
believed they used more gas than a stick shift, even if gas was only 
around 30 cents a gallon then.
Of course I am a member of ZUT (CW Forever) the USCG CW Operators 
Assoc.  Nothing like working CW on the 500 kc band from an old HU16E 
bucking through the winds in storm using a 150 ft trailing wire 
antenna on a search mission while making LORAN A fixes manually.  Back 
then that was the only way to communicate with some freighters and 
fishing factory ships.  Now the USCG no longer teaches CW, and have 
phased out the RM (Radioman or Sparks) rating.  At least the USCG were 
the last branch of the service to phase out CW with a great ceremony. 
  How I remember the old OS (Ocean Stations), CG Cutters stationed 
half way between San Francisco and Hawaii, NYC and London, etc.  At 
least we would fly over them, they were stuck out in the ocean for a 
month or so bobbing around in one place.  The airline stews would talk 
to them on VHF for the short time they were in VHF range to cheer them up.
73 & ZUT

Leigh S. Jones wrote:
> This debate has howled on so long that I guess I'd be doing
> amateur radio a disservice if I didn't add my comments.
> 
> First, I need to make it very clear that I hold in low regard
> anyone who uses language such as "outdated" to describe
> Morse code.  The truth is very simple.  If everyone had the
> skill needed to communicate in Morse code, then no one
> would ever describe the code as "outdated".  The code
> may, some day, perhaps within this century, become
> outdated.  "Outdated" is an excuse -- a slander.  When 
> someone calls the code outdated, he means that he, 
> personally, does not possess the skill needed to 
> communicate in the code.  He issues the false claim that
> he is more modern than the code, thus he is above it.
> The code can only be outdated when there is nothing to
> be gained by its use by anyone.
> 
> I see the relationship between amateur radio and the 
> code in a different light.  To me, the code is like 
> instrumental music.  One can learn to sing and to make 
> music without instruments.  Song in its purest form is a
> thing of beauty, but the world doesn't need to be limited
> to acappella song.  There can also be instrumental music.
> Amateur Radio is the grandeur of such music.  Some
> will only sing, while others will gain the skills needed to
> make music with an instrument.
> 
> I also believe in separate subbands for the modes, really 
> as a convenience but also for more practical reasons.
> The modes are best kept apart.  It would take a very 
> long time to explain why, and one major idea per post
> is a sensible plan.
> 
> KR6X
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "John Geiger" <johngeig at yahoo.com>
> To: <k4pdm at yahoo.com>; <kenwood at mailman.qth.net>
> Sent: Monday, January 10, 2005 11:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [Kenwood] CW Outdated Mode?
> 
> 
> 
>>--- Paul Manuel <k4pdm at yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>To my ear, the novice CW bands are little-used (and
>>>should be refarmed
>>
>>No, the technician license should be eliminated, and
>>the novice license brought back as the point of entry
>>into amateur radio.
>>
>>73s John NE0P


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________ 

Alan Zack
Amateur Radio Station K7ACZ
Las Vegas, Nevada, USA
Quality Engineer, The Boeing Company, Retired
Aviation Chief Warrant Officer, U.S. Coast Guard, Retired
U.S. Coast Guard, Always Ready, Always There
Every hour, Every day, Around the Clock and Around the World
SEMPER PARATUS
http://www.gocoastguard.com
http://www.uscg.mil/d14/units/asbp/uscgasbp/
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY