Slashdot Mirror
FCC Proposes Abolishing Morse Code Requirement
TaxSlave writes "According to this ARRL article, the Federal Communications Commission has finally decided which path it wants to take with the Morse Code requirement for an amateur radio license. International requirements for Morse Code were done away with some time back, and several countries quickly abolished the requirement. Now, the FCC has proposed doing the same thing. Next step, months of comments, discussion, and navel-gazing."
But if nobody learns morse code, how are the people trapped underground going to tap out a morse code message to ask for help? What about those people in deep space who cannot communicate due to interference and need to revert to morse code? Won't somebody please think of Hollywood!
Morse code can be transmitted even in high-noise situations - as you're not trying to hear someone yelling CQ! THIS IS QC! OVER!!
Clicks, beeps, bloops, etc -- easy to hear over static.
= Grow a brain...
Morse code will go the way of the dinosaur perhaps as it should have long ago, yet not without many noting its departure with a particular reverence for the past. Morse, however, is still a viable means of communication. For example, it is certainly faster than SMS. At any rate, perhaps the FCC should instead focus upon more pressing matters: cleaning out the clutter in the increasingly crowded radio spectrum and speeding along the many pending standards that would make communication on the whole an easier matter.
I guess you must be much smarter than I am, and most of the hams I've been talking to. I'm having a terrible time learning morse. I set a goal of having it down by a hamfest in Sepember, and I hope I can make it. I think it stinks that I can get all the theory, build circuits, program PCs, and fix just about anything, but I can't transmit below 50MHz because I can't seem to learn a 150 year old communications method.
Most hams seem to take the attitude of "I had to learn it, I'm glad I did, but I don't use it" when it comes to code. If my current difficulty learning code continues, I really doubt I'll use it, unless my life depends on it (which, since no one else will be able to understand, will be a useless excercise). Too many bad memories.
Of course, the pro-code group will start slamming the FCC with form letters DEMANDING they keep the morse code requirement (and getting rid of all the fornecation and cussin' on the broadcast stations while they're at it). Since most of the people who don't want the code requirement aren't all that militant, the FCC will cave. As usual the ARRL will editorialize in QST about how great it was to learn morse as a boy at the feet of Edwin Armstrong, and how all those POWs were able to keep their spirits up by banging code out on the pipes, etc. This will generate a new round of debade in usenet and eham.net.
Meanwhile, more kids will miss out on learning about electronics, thinking a radical case mod makes them an engineer. More spectrum will be sold off to private parties, or rendered useless due to broken technology that has no practical use.
"Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
"What is the point of amateur radio when the Internet has connected most of the globe?"
Indeed. But there are many remote places that the Internet has not reached and may never reach. Also, amateur radio has far better mobile operating abilities (i.e., when your cell phone is not in range of a tower, you can still use ham radio to make contact). The Internet (and, incidentally, cell phones) also tends to become unavailable when natural disaster (such as hurricanes or tsunamis) strike.
Ham radio is becoming overshadowed by the Internet, but Ham still has a few tricks up it's sleeve. It will still be relevant -- if not as popular -- for decades to come.
DRM 'manages access' in the same way that a prison 'manages freedom'
A more profound question is the following. What is the point of amateur radio when the Internet has connected most of the globe?
Can you do it without infrastructure? Didn't think so.
For me the point is the electronics. I really enjoy building something from scratch than can communicate around the globe and only spending a couple of dollars to do it. Radio propagation is also quite amazing.
You are right though, the draw is not to be able to talk to people around the globe, the internet serves that purpose just fine. It is the hobby aspect that I enjoy.
Well, and the civic service part too. Providing communications in cases of emergency is a noble goal. As a past commander of a search and rescue team I have seen amateur radio used in this capacity as well.
What I don't understand is how some computer geeks seem to have this major hatred toward amateur radio (and vice versa, but not as much). If you don't like it, don't do it.
Finkployd
"Indeed. But there are many remote places that the Internet has not reached and may never reach."
No, there aren't. If you can see the sky, you can get the internet. Services like Iridium and Globalstar have made that possible.
Now, Iridum and Globalstar are low-bitrate (2400/9600 baud, respectively), but that's fine for email and IM. Even that limitation will some day be a thing of the past.
I get this question from non-ham friends a lot. They also like to answer a similar question, which is, "Why don't you just use a cell phone to talk to people?" My response is usually something like, why do people go fishing when you can buy fish at the grocery store?
Ham radio is a hobby. People don't do it entirely because it's a practical means of communicating (although it can be that in many situations), they do it because it's enjoyable. It presents challenges which take thought and skill to overcome. There's something about talking to someone on the other side of the world with a few watts into a homemade antenna when the band is noisy. Many people (myself included) love the technical aspects of the hobby. It can be a lot of fun to build a radio from parts, or experiment with different antenna designs. There's a lot more to ham radio than simply utilitarian communication between two people.
I am a pilot, and my hobby has been ruined by "modern" thinking - We can't do anything anymore without being considered terrorists, the public thinks we're an irrelevant waste of time, and lately everyone wants to run our hobby into the ground or shut it down.
I see no reason why ham radio should be any different. You can suffer just like the model rocketry fans, aviation photographers, and computer hackers. The government doesn't like your hobby and wants to destroy it for it's own percieved benefit. Deal with it.
I'm a "lowly" no-code tech ticket holder. As my more 'estemed' HF brothern might call me, a 'tech-lite' operator.
Still, who is it these 'extra class' operators go to when their windows 98 PCs can no longer retrieve their email over their dial up AOL connections due to SAM ware infestation.
Who do they call when they decide to try DSL but can't figure out where on their PC to connect the ethernet cable.
Who do they go to when they receive some e-mail attachement and can't open it (often because their pirated copy of MS Office gorked) - or do manage to get it opened and gomer their system with the worm de jour.
Who is it they go to when they *finaly* decide to try and do something other than whine about hemeroids and the good old days on 20m SSB and connect something like a TNC to their radios, but just can't seem to figure out the lines of an RS-232 link - let alone the pins of a DB-9 (don't ever show 'em a DB-25, they'll stroke out!).
Who is it they call up when they need someone to climb their tower, install a new rotor, replace cable or other maintenance.
(I've got dozens more, but I'm trying to be reasonable here)
And yet - who is it that's not allowed to use HF simply because I refuse to learn an out-dated mode championed by these same 'Technical Leaders'.
I've passed the General written 3 times waiting for this stupid rule to be changed. FINALLY some sense!!
If you love CW, cool - keep on using it. There's NOTHING that says or will say it can't be used. And there'll be many that choose to learn it and continue to operate CW, if for nothing else, the novilty. Enjoy it. But for crying out loud - increase the difficulty of the question pool, tighten the passing score, up the number of questions, make the questions more technical, don't make the question pool public - something applicable to today. Don't rely on a CW test to be your LID filter! Checked 20m lately? It didn't work.
Using CW as a 'barrier' to HF access is about like saying you can't use email unless you can hand code a TCP/IP frame. Or you can't drive a car unless you can cast and machine your own piston rings.
Some of these guys were the gurus of the hollow state erra. But dammit - if you're going to be in a technical hobby, at least TRY and stay current to the last decade's tech! It's about time the license exams became pertinant.
You know - what's worse is what I anticipate happening when the first batch of codeless Generals hit the air. These old hams will use the same tricks of the CBers to try and discourage their new neighbors from using *their* spectrum. Insults, language, over driven amplifiers, intentional interfearance, dare I say - echo mikes...
Instead of a CW exam, every hf operator should be forced to pass an operational review - every freak'n year! Where're the OOs? Where's the log review? Where's the 'self policing' of the hobby? Oh - that's right - you've had a CW exam to take care of that.....
Yea, I posted Anonymously - if some of these HF rag-chewers ever found out who I was, they'd never call for help next time they get phished, gorked a drive, accidentaly deleted their system directory, tried to make a wireless keyboard work, had to install a VOX chip into their new rig, couldn't remember how to program their HT, wanted to update the club's web site.....
I believe that the Morse Code should not be a requirement just to to operate on the HF bands. At one time it made sense, but with today's digital encoding methods, you can have reliable low bandwidth communication on the HF band. Even the ARRL plans to file a petition with the FCC seeking the regulation of amateur subbands by bandwidth rather than by mode of emission. http://www.arrl.org/announce/bandwidth.html
And for all you old timer hams, eliminating element 1 as a requirement for General and Extra Classes does not mean that they are abolishing Morse code. It will still probably be used for decades to come, it just will not be a requirement for those who just want to do SSB or digital contacts.
76 KH2YF
Jeeze, you're lucky this isn't the Ham group I used to meet up with twice a month back home. I once got pissed off about this requirement and it was like a wolf pack frenzy on my arse for daring to question something so enobling as learning code.
Your sentiment is dead on. Ditch the code, let todays tinkerers futz with the spectrum without the code, otherwise the big corporations are going to have it. Nostalgia is great and all that, but when it is shooting your cause in the foot, it's time to ditch it.
The only difference between 1995 and 2005 is that access is more pervasive. In '95 you could get internet from the same places as today. It's just faster today, nothing more. Those redundant backbone networks are nice, but they don't exist in the last mile. That's where damage is most likely to occur.
Were you anywhere near there? The telephone networks were completely unusable. Cellular was gone. As far out as 75 miles, telephone communications weren't working properly. This covered the entire tri-state area. Now they've improved things since then, but the point is that this sort of thing happens, and that telephone and cellular were found to be unreliable in an emergency. For what it's worth, 911 *did* go down in some areas. This was a result of a total collapse of the telephone system in parts of lower Manhattan, and the eventual draining of backup power. 911 has reserve capacity in the telephone system, and dedicated circuits. It does not have infinity circuits.
Internet service was just out in many areas, as in completely non-functional. When you have no telephone line and no power, you have no internet. Those on dial-up were SOL, since you couldn't make any calls across the whole region. DSL had issues because of the huge amount of interference. In areas that still had power, cable internet was generally working.
Large chunks of rescue and relief coordination was done by hams. That information is available with hardly five seconds of research. The rest was done by government workers with radios, and quite a bit of assistance by UPS (as in the shipping company).
IOW, ham radio was found to be absolutely essential during 9/11. Radio was a total and absolute necessity, as there was *no* other way to communicate.
The nice thing about ham is it's long range with little power and equipment requirements. In the event of a real emergency, it's nice to know that there are some extraordinary geeks with the ability to communicate quickly and clearly. In an emergency, things don't always work correctly. Microphones get lost or broken. Injuries result in a loss of the ability to speak. Who knows what might go wrong? Particularly due to the fact that Morse Code operators beat out the most popular method of handheld text-based communcation (short of e-mail or IM, anyway), I think this skill is highly undervalued. Personally, I like the idea of a bunch of knowledgable nerds out there, who can communicate almost as fast (or faster) with only pulses of noise than most of us could communicate with a microphone.
>I think it stinks that I can get all the theory,
>build circuits, program PCs, and fix just about
>anything, but I can't transmit below 50MHz because
>I can't seem to learn a 150 year old communications
>method.
As someone who passed the 20 wpm a decade ago and who actually does use cw more than any other mode when on the radio, I couldn't agree with you more.
Sure, there are instances where cw is really important - say, passing emergency traffic when conditions are poor - but it's absurd to suggest that such a thing happens often enough in the average ham's experience to justify hundreds of hours of study.
For half a century the code test has served primarily as an artificial barrier to licenses.
One could argue that's a worthwhile purpose in itself; adding a challenge to entering any field, however meaningless, can serve to weed out a lot of people who aren't serious about the hobby. An ear full of most CB conversation is enough to convince me that some barrier to entry is probably a good thing. (Although I'm all in favor of having more free-for-all unregulated spectrum out there which anyone can play with than we currently allow.) Our world is full of hurdles put in place solely for the purpose of turning away those who aren't serious about pursuing something. The subject specific GREs are an obvious example from academia. It's never ideal, but it sometimes can serve a worthwhile purpose.
None the less, there are some very good reasons that a code requirement is a bad idea.
First of all, it places an unequal burden on people. I had a pretty easy time with the code - a few tens of hours to get to 5wpm, and an easy couple hours a week after that on the air to get up past 20. But a lot of people have much more difficulty with it. The guy who taught me everything I know about electronics was unable to get a license until the no-code techs came out because dyslexia made learning the code impossible. He's not only an awesome person to chat with and a friend and advisor to many, but has spent countless hours volunteering for emergency communications groups. By any standard, Amateur Radio lost out by keeping him away for so long.
Even among those without learning disabilities, there are many for whom code is really hard. It's unfair to force them to jump what turns out to be an outrageously large hurdle in order to attain something for which actually knowing code isn't necessary.
Second, if we're going to force people to spend hours studying something in order to get a license, there are a lot of more useful things they could study. At least 90% of the hams I meet on phone study code, pass their tests, and then never use it again. What a waste of effort! Instead, why not beef up the technical tests (or get rid of the pre-printed "suggested" multiple choice answers that every VE uses).
Or - if you really want to do something useful - how about requiring something like first aid certification instead? If every ham who spent a hundred hours learning code and then never used it again spent their time learning CPR, just think about how many extra first responders we'd have walking around our streets!
The only remaining question is, what will become of CW when no one is forced to learn it? It's true that I might not have ever learned code if it weren't required, and it's true that I'm glad I did learn it. But there's got to be some other way to provide an incentive to keep at least a few people out there on the bands.
Perhaps you reserve some choice CW-only spectrum for those who've passed code tests. And, so long as there's a strong and active community of code lovers, we can always work to create other incentives with cw-only special event DX stations, extra cw points and freeby stations in contests, and so on. Is that enough to keep the hobby alive? I'm not sure. But if it isn't, then perhaps keeping cw alive isn't worth the cost.
If you pay, as another posternoted.
The important thing about ametueur radio jockies is that is that the network is extremely robust, free, and everywhere. It works for long distance communciation, especially when overoptimized pay services fail. Iridium -- sorry, I have to giggle just a bit there. Ham is a (very modest) reserved spectrum for a network of people that communicate when everything else fails. There's already talk about how to handle jamming; not a solved problem, but in general, it is distributed enough to pose attackers serious issues.
The great power of terrorist attack is uncertainty, followed closely by communication. I find it heartening that as much as the US government might fuck up, at least we are left with a good emergency response channel, made of people who don't attach to the government. That's a really positive feature.
Way back on topic, but I have mixed feelings about dropping the Morse requirements. They've been loosening the rules for a while, but at some point, we're loosing the idea that one can actually assemble kit. We probably already have lost that. Morse is rather important - listening to a fuzzy transmission bounced off clouds from somewhere else in a language you don'nt know is great for learning. And learning is vital for ami radio folks.
OK, I've probably placed, and dated myself. Time to shut up.
I forget what 8 was for.
Grumble. I passed my 5 and got my Extra two months ago, after studying the code 2 nights a week for 6 weeks.
I had a feeling the FCC would be getting rid of the requirement as soon as I had passed it.
However, I still plan on practicing when I get my HF antenna set up, and when I can afford to get an HF rig I may very well do some CW just for grins.
Within the amateur community, there is a school of thought that having a barrier to entry will keep the cildrens' banders and other scum out. To them, I have a three word response:
seventy-five meters
Which, for those of you who are not hams, is roughly the equivalent of reading at -1 - there have been a lot of right assholes on that band who have done just about every "don't" in the book - transmitted music, cursed, jammed other stations, etc. And that band is only open to Morse qualified operators, and when the troublemakers have been tracked down, they were indeed Morse rated.
(and I *was* going to sign this with my call in Morse, but the stupid lameness filter won't let me.)
www.eFax.com are spammers
On the negative side, there is: "I had to. Why shouldn't everyone else?" With some dyslexia, writing down 65 characters/minute was one of the hardest tests I've passed.
But, practically, it would be a shame not to promote a universal basic level of morse because:
1. You can build a transmitter with a handful of primitive components. It's cheap. It's good for the third world.
2. It's simple. Building a transmitter is a good way for kids to play with electronics.
3. It's efficient as all heck. I believe they figure it broadcasts 10 times as well as voice. A hundred watt transmitter can get you around the world comfortably where a 1000 watts might be desirable for voice. Good on several fronts.
4. It's efficiency is multipled because it's small bandwidth means many people can use the spectrum that one voice amateur takes up.
5. Simplicity is good for emergencies. If the tidal wave has arrived, that is a bad time to discover that the morse keyboard has a short. "Let's see now. H --- E --- L ---- P ---- !"
6. A good part of the reason for an amateur service is for emergencies. Isn't it the zen of every superhero to be able to whip up a temporal viewer out of "stone knives and bearskins" like Spock when the need arises?
So, I have no personal stake in the requirements other than I'd like these people to be good enough to justify their access to the rather valuable section of the RF spectrum we've set aside for them. I'd like to think they might be able to put together a radio from components if needed.
Even more important, I like knowing that there is a group of people out their who can communicate over pretty much any channel, radio or not, using the simpliest possible code. There are times (albeit rare) when the only communication you have is banging on a pipe with a large wrench, or flashing a light. I highly doubt that "Radio Shack" has the components to build a decent long-range HAM setup these days, but pretty much anyone can figure out a way to transmit long and short pulses using stuff found anywhere.
It's about time the morse code was dropped. A lot of old farts are convinced the world is ending, because they had to take a test in 1960 in front of the FCC, and want the rest of us to go through the same thing. These are the same folk who dislike www.hamsexy.com, proving hams can laugh at themselves, and that there is a young side to the hobby too. There are still the written tests, which will keep the CB'er out. Most hams on voice admit they can't remember enough morse to operate...so whats the point ? Way back when CB was cool, I went to a ham club. They were all very nice, and explained that if I learned code, I could communicate worldwide. Since it was the peak of the sunspots, I already had most of the lower 48 states without trying too hard (50 watts) on the CB. It didn't make sense to have to learn 13 words per minute (real literacy of code) to be able to use voice again, to talk mostly the same distances. Now, a technically minded person can see the wonder of radio communications, and get involved in worldwide contacts with only a battery radio and wire. No dial tones or cable hookup needed ! And, if they get really interested, are NOT told, you have to learn Mandarin (er, morse code) to get a licence. Google "Yaesu VX-2R" if you want to see what ham radio is up to. Any computer geek reading this can pass ham exams with a little study-and it makes a lot more sense than computer language.
I also have mixed feeling about this. I currently only hold a Technical License and is not actively on radio (no budget to purchase one...). While eliminiating morse code MIGHT help increase amaterus radio participation (many people I talked to said they thought even the most basic amateur license requires morse code, which is not true at all). But I can't fathom, why on earth do they want to remove the morse code requirement? Then again, I may have a few explanations....
All these are speculations...
1. Bands dedicated to morse code isn't used that much.
2. Higher level band aren't utilized to an acceptable level (remove morse code, more people become higher level, using higher level bands).
3. Existence of morse code decoding devices. Reason: Why learn morse code when a small box can just read and send in morse code?
That may be their reason.
In US, you can easily buy enough major firearms to wipe out your neighbourhood but a few little fireworks are banned.
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned in the comments so far is that it is possible for a beginner with limited funds to build transmitters and receivers that are useful for c.w. operation from scratch. This is not the case with equipment for f.m. or single sideband voice operation. Thus, although learning Morse code is a hurdle that is formidable to some, once mastered it opens up many possibilities for technical experimentation.
I've now been a ham for over forty years. In my youth ham radio was for young geeks what computers have become now. My friends and I built our transmitters from parts scavenged from old radios and televisions, and in the process learned skills that later helped us when we built our own computers.
Some say learning Morse code is easy. For them that may have been true, but not all people learn things in the same way. As a teen-ager it took me two years from the time I decided I wanted to be a ham to the time I could pass a 5 word-per-minute Novice code test. It took me a full year to pass the next hurdle, the 13 word per minute test for a General license. It was almost 15 years more before I could pass the Extra Class 20 word per minute test. So I am completely sympathetic with those who say learning Morse code is a barrier. For some that is certainly true. I say let them into ham, radio, let them see how hard it can be to make yourself heard with a 100 watt transmitter competing on crowded voice bands, and then let them meet some of the operators who regularly succeed with 5 or 10 watt homebuilt rigs using Morse. Some may then decide it's worth the effort.
As a new ham myself...maybe a year and a half on the air now...I think it's fair to say that the morse REQUIREMENT should die.
The reason is simple. The morse technique can still be used to send packetized data, ala 300 baud modems and the like. Simple enough to keep a psk31 setup and use that instead of code. What I'm saying is that automatic code sending and recieiving is so inexpensive these days so as to make the real use of code by humans...less relevant.
Dont get me wrong, I admire those who can send and recieve code. The purpose of the amateur service is, however, to advance the hobby and science of radio telecommunications. Morse is well established and it WILL be a matter of pride among hams to learn, build, use, and compete with code. It does not serve to advance the hobby, the art and science, or the emergency services nature of ham radio to limit it to those who can master the morse code when we have such advanced radio technology.
In short, I dont need code because more advanced technology is affordable. We dont need people to experiment with code keys anymore, we need people to experiment with last mile solutions. The only way to encourage that is to change the focus of the license.
73's
I'm having a terrible time learning morse.
And I learned morse code three times. First time was when I got a pair of Radio Shack walkie-talkies when I was six. They had the code right on the radio and had a beeper. My friends and I got fairly proficient. Then, twice agian, a few years apart in Boy Scouts. At that time, I never used it beyond the specific functions I learned it for, so I forgot it after the first function and have since forgotten it again.
Some things stick really well in my long-term memory but Morse code isn't one of them. I'm the same with Palm Graffiti.
I have no doubt I could learn it again in a couple days to take a Ham test, and probably do darn well on it, but then I'd just never use it and forget it again. So I'm a different kind of example of why the test isn't such a wonderful idea.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)