[Qcwa] CW Requirement

[Stan Vandiver]

> Should CW be retained as a license requirement to operate below 30mhz?
> YES or NO and why

No.  Morse proficiency was required for nearly the last 100 years 
for a REASON: to assist maritime & military, or at the very least to 
recognize their operations and stay clear if that was required. That 
REASON has now vanished, almost overnight.

Personally, I hope that FCC unilaterally dismisses the requirement, 
without any NPRM or other input from the public.  This would take 
the heat off of ARRL and let all the finger-pointing fall on their 
shoulders.  The gov't is big and tough, and they can take it.  They 
were bound by international treaty before, now they are not.

This is also an opportunity to fix one of the biggest snafu's that 
FCC has made (imho)... requiring the Tech w/HF licensee to be 
solely responsible for proving their right to operate CW.  If you work 
a Tech on HF/CW, you don't know if they are authorized or not!

Morse was the only mode in which "proficiency" had to be 
demonstrated.  Not voice, not digital, not satellites.  With the 
REASON for requiring this now gone, the testing requirement 
should follow suit.  That is not to say that we can't still apply Morse-
related questions into the question pools, just as we do with the 
other modes.

Each of our modes only survives by the enthusiasm of its users, 
and by its continued merits.  You don't hear much AM or spark 
these days, nor do you hear much enthusiasm to return to those 
modes (though, as I understand it, there was quite a lot of 
grumbling during the transition to SSB).  CW certainly merits 
continued use, but it will have to be taught to others out of love, 
tradition, and its useful benefits (weak signal, moonbounce, and 
others)... not out of regulatory compliance.

Best regards,

Stan/W4SV
Hanna, Indiana