OT: CW, licensing, etc.
Locked
 
|
After reading all the comments on the subject, I'd like to
offer the following ... I was one of the six people responsible for the "No Code License". I consider it an honor to have been chosen as a member of the study committee by the ARRL. FWIW, each member of the committee was a dedicated CW operator. It had nothing to do with "incentive licensing". We were told by the both the FCC and the ARRL that some form of a code free license -was- coming and they wanted to give the amateur radio community a "say" in the matter. Our committee was widely publicized in the hobby's media and we all received -lots- of correspondence, both pro and con. I still have two cartons of letters in my attic. FWIW, the letters are about 50/50 in favor and against. What eventually became the "no code license" differs a bit from what was we proposed ... think 160M and 6M for example. It was thought that because of TVI that 6M would not be a good place to put inexperienced new hams and the lack of activity and LORAN A on 160M was a detriment. The jury will always be out on whether "no code" has been good for the hobby or not, but it was felt that the resulting increase in the number of licenses may have "saved" the hobby from the spectrum wolves on the prowl at the time. Trivia: We determined that if a person said they couldn't learn the code there was no way to disprove that. One can -always- find a CW QSO to enjoy. I've been essentially CW only since my Novice license in 1951 (WN5TKI) ... one of the first issued ... and the FCC only came to Oklahoma City once a year in those days. My SK Elmer (W5ADC) drove this 13 year old kid the 90 miles to take the exam. 66 years have passed ... such changes I've seen. 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP (Not a vanity call ... a story unto itself.) ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
|
|
Two things about learning code:
1) It gets much harder after age 16, but 2) the development of Morse training software has made it MUCH easier than it was in the pre-computer age. I just wish they could stop publishing those stupid charts that show the characters as dots and dashes. IMHO memorizing the code that way does a lot of damage. Vic 4X6GP (CWops CWA advisor) > On 15 Nov 2017, at 6:36, Walter Underwood <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Thank you for all the work you put into that. > > My story is a lot like some others, but I got my Novice license during the “two years and out” era (fall 1970). I didn’t make 13 wpm and I couldn’t renew the license, so I was out of the hobby until 2009. Meanwhile, I got an electrical engineering degree in signals and systems, with classes from some of the pioneers in DSP. I worked in that field for a few years, then moved to networking. > > Without code, I came back to amateur radio, first with General and then with Amateur Extra. I’m part of our local em-comm group and head up the Radio Scouting activities for the Boy Scouts in our area. When I can get on a summit, I do SOTA. A couple of times, I’ve made a stab at re-learning Morse, but it is really, really hard. For me, it is like doing taxes while drunk. Not pleasant. And don’t talk to me about “music and Morse”, because I’ve sung in church choirs for over twenty years. I’ll try again. > > wunder > K6WRU > Walter Underwood > CM87wj > http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my blog) > >> On Nov 14, 2017, at 3:52 PM, Ken G Kopp <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> After reading all the comments on the subject, I'd like to >> offer the following ... >> >> I was one of the six people responsible for the "No Code >> License". I consider it an honor to have been chosen as >> a member of the study committee by the ARRL. FWIW, >> each member of the committee was a dedicated CW >> operator. >> >> It had nothing to do with "incentive licensing". We were told >> by the both the FCC and the ARRL that some form of a code >> free license -was- coming and they wanted to give the amateur >> radio community a "say" in the matter. >> >> Our committee was widely publicized in the hobby's media >> and we all received -lots- of correspondence, both pro and >> con. I still have two cartons of letters in my attic. FWIW, the >> letters are about 50/50 in favor and against. >> >> What eventually became the "no code license" differs a bit >> from what was we proposed ... think 160M and 6M for example. >> It was thought that because of TVI that 6M would not be a >> good place to put inexperienced new hams and the lack of >> activity and LORAN A on 160M was a detriment. >> >> The jury will always be out on whether "no code" has been >> good for the hobby or not, but it was felt that the resulting >> increase in the number of licenses may have "saved" the >> hobby from the spectrum wolves on the prowl at the time. >> >> Trivia: We determined that if a person said they couldn't >> learn the code there was no way to disprove that. >> >> One can -always- find a CW QSO to enjoy. I've been essentially >> CW only since my Novice license in 1951 (WN5TKI) ... one of the >> first issued ... and the FCC only came to Oklahoma City once a >> year in those days. My SK Elmer (W5ADC) drove this 13 year >> old kid the 90 miles to take the exam. >> >> 66 years have passed ... such changes I've seen. >> >> 73! >> >> Ken Kopp - K0PP >> (Not a vanity call ... a story unto itself.) >> Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[hidden email] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to [hidden email] |
«
Return to Elecraft
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |