[KYHAM] No code proposition for HF

[Steve Ellington]

Absolutely not! You've passed the test and made the grade. You can use any
mode you wish. Your efforts to learn the code resulted in a higher class
license, increased pride of accomplishment and a permanent enthusasium for
ham radio. Most of us had to work pretty hard to learn code. I stayed up
late every night for weeks cramming for it. The only difference it, I liked
it and so I stayed with it. This does not make me a better ham, just a
different one. What I don't like to hear is guys wanting to eliminate the
fundementals of radio in order to increase our numbers or justifying their
lazyness.

I also run some FM, SSB , PSK and RTTY, all cool modes but technically
complex compared to simple CW. With CW, I can build a rig inside of an
Altoids box, pack a small battery, key,  some wire and head for the woods. 1
watt to a lenght of wire will yield many enjoyable QSOs. I'm referring to
the famous Tuna Tin II rig for example. 73
http://www.imagenisp.ca/jsm/Tuna.html
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/jakeycarter/AltoidTT.html


Steve
N4LQ

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pete & Kim" <pwkw@insightbb.com>
To: <kyham@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 8:11 PM
Subject: [KYHAM] No code proposition for HF


> I learned CW for my general class license. I tried it a few times, and
made
> an idiot of myself with several foreign stations because I couldn't sort
out
> the dits and dahs (I had passed the test, right?). I don't care for it,
and
> it doesn't come as easily to me as it has a friend who could read and send
> at 20 wpm before he ever had a live contact. I have made an SSB QSO with a
> Polish station on 5W. Two days ago, I got a pc up and running PSK31. RTTY
is
> a simple next step. Does this make me a poor operator?
>
>
>
> I can spin the dial from 160 to 20 M and hear cat-calls, unidentified
voice
> transmission, people tuning up on QSOs, transmissions to no one in
> particular, and CQs within 1 MHz of another CQ or QSO. Presumably, these
> people also passed 13 or 20 WPM for their ticket. Does that make them
better
> operators than me?
>
>
>
> I have finished the ARRL's EMComm Level 1 course, and a weather
preparedness
> course from FEMA. I am an active member of Skywarn, with at least 20 hours
> of service at the NWS office in 2003. None of this used CW knowledge. Does
> this make me a poor operator?
>
>
>
> During a December contest, I was blown out of the water by a big gun
station
> just a MHz below me. That operator knew I was there, and was told I was
> there, but did not move. Presumably that station passed the CW
requirement.
> Did that make them a better operator than me?
>
>
>
> A few weeks ago, via Echolink, I talked to three operators from
Manchester,
> England on a local 2M repeater. They did the standard HF QSO spiel, while
I
> was telling them about the repeater, it's coverage, and about Metro
> Louisville, which the repeater covers. They gave me an RST report, while I
> did not. They talked about their rigs, power and antennas, while I did
not.
> None of this occurred using CW, or any active knowledge of CW on my part,
or
> with the usual HF protocols. Does this make me a poor operator?
>
>
>
> I'd like to find some answers to my questions from those on this list with
> more experience (6 years), because apparently I'm missing something. From
> what I've read so far, there are far better operators than I because they
> know and use CW, while I don't.
>
>
>
> Pete Womack
>
> KF4VCC
>
>
>
>
>
> --- 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  ---
> _______________________________________________
> Support Amateur Radio in Kentucky!
> http://www.kyham.net/
>