[Qcwa] CW Requirement

[Jeffrey D Angus]

W1EOF wrote:

>>Now explain why.
>>Note: "Because I said so." and "I feel...." are not valid justifications.
>>    
>>
>Jeff,
>
>I've gone through all of your messages that I have from the past few days
>and ironically I can only find your criticism of other peoples postings here
>on the QCWA reflector. I'm curious what YOUR answer is to the survey.
>
I think the code requirement should be done away with.

It has no currently relevant purpose as far as testing requirements for an
amateur license.

 From the beginning, since everyone else was using more code, it made
sense for amateurs to show a certain proficiency at it for two purposes.
(1) To provide a skilled base in time of need and (2) to avoid interference
with other services.

That is no longer the case. About the ONLY people still using morse code,
are the air traffic beacons. And, not surprisingly, the flight chart 
maps have
the code listed under the alpha "call sign" of the beacon. For example, LAX
.-..  .-  -..-

Gone are the days of a lone amateur copying a distress call from a sinking
ship. Gone are the days of handling message traffic (exclusively) by code.

As mentioned by others, morse code has never acted like a filter to keep
"undesirables" out of the amateur services. All it really has done, is 
to act
as an artificial barrier to keep some rather talented people off of the HF
bands.

The thing that amazes me, is that every time this "eliminate the morse code
testing provisions for HF" discussion comes up, those that are rabidly for
continuation carry on like the FCC is going to come out to their shack and
confiscate their keys. So far, in the almost a century of amateur radio, the
only mode the FCC has outlawed, is the use of spark transmitters.

Personally, I don't have anything against morse code as a mode. I operate
it myself occasionally. (And poorly I might add, I'm out of practice.) My
preference has always been RTTY. And you know what? Despite the
advances made with other digital modes, PSK31, Amtor, Packet, Clover
etc., RTTY continues to be used, so does morse code. Why? Why not?

People do what they tend to enjoy doing. I doubt there are many hams
on the air because somebody is standing behind them with a gun.

Admittedly, using morse code allows the simplest equipment on the air,
but should the licensing requirement be based on what could be called
the lowest common denominator?

As far as the technical requirements for licensing are concerned, I think
those should be "tightened up" a bit, But the very reason they were
"dumbed down" in the first place was to allow people some slack
after passing the other artificial barrier. (Morse Code)

How about requiring people show proficiency at hand cranking a
Model T, then playing with the spark advance to make it run right
before you allow them to drive an automobile? Of course, with
some of the idiots I share the highways out here in Los Angeles
with, that might NOT be such a bad idea.....

Face it people, if you go out of your way to discourage people from
getting licensed with artificial barriers, you won't have an amateur
radio service left to exclude them from.

Jeff
wa6fwi

-- 
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
 safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."
Tara Morice as Fran, from the movie "Strictly Ballroom"