TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] FCC says CW dead
From: "HUGHESRO" <ROGERH@realtracs.com>
Reply-to: ROGERH@realtracs.com,Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:41:49 -0500
List-post: <mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
I told myself I was not going to get upset over this cw thing as i had a heart 
transplant 9 yrs ago next week. But darn it just leave things alone. As a 99% 
cw person who works at 25-30 wpm with memory loss and nerve damged hands, this 
is crap. I have people in cw training presently. We will have an influx of new 
hams and in a abt a yr they will get board and leave as they did before. They 
will want us to give them a free radio too. I'm cooled off now. I knew it was 
coming. Its about money, members and manufacturers. But I will keep teaching 
and pushing as i always have for 35 yrs. roger,w4iv retired chief warrant 
officer, 82nd airborne.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Tommy <aldermant@alltel.net>
Reply-To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date:  Thu, 21 Jul 2005 19:32:00 -0400

>Rich,
>
>You have a good argument....for a single case only! Age is not an 
>impediment for learning CW. My example is a gentleman, age 84, that I 
>talked to Monday night. This gentleman was running at about 15 wpm, 
>and he has been a ham for four months!
>
>And it's not an argument about keeping CW or deleting it, CW is, in 
>fact, just one of the parts of our hobby that makes it interesting. 
>Right, I don't have to take a test on how to push a microphone button 
>to become an Extra, so the idea of eliminating CW from the testing 
>requirement is not a far fetched idea. I am, right now, a strictly CW 
>operator, and by my own choice. But only because it is the only part 
>of this hobby that I really enjoy right now.
>
>The dropping of the CW requirement for testing does not bother me. 
>What DOES bother me a great deal is in this same FCC NPRN, the 
>definition of the amateur service has 'casually' been redefined. The 
>amateur service in this NPRN definition, no longer has any ties with 
>'emergency' or 'public' service, it is defined as a "hobby". How long 
>do you think it's going to take commercial interest to convince the 
>FCC to give them the "hobbist" frequencies? To be, that is what WE 
>should be concerned about in this NPRN.
>
>Tommy - W4BQF
>
>At Thursday 06:59 PM 7/21/2005, you wrote:
>> >
>> >Agree.
>>
>> >Gosh, any moron can pick up a mike.  Now sending and receiving cw at  30
>> >wpm
>> >is an art.  CW is ham radio
>>
>>agree,  but...   I know of an old man who thought it would be nice to chat
>>with people over the radio to occupy his time,  CB seemed a bit rough to
>>him, so he thought maybe the ham operators would be good to talk with,  Very
>>good ham now but stuck as a no-code tech.  he would like to be on HF to work
>>some of the side band and/or RTTY.
>>
>>Even though I can send/receive better than 30 and wish all could enjoy it,
>>yet, do I want to block this person?
>>
>>tough call don't you think?,
>>
>>Perhaps the art is as much in getting a good station together for
>>communication as much as the method.
>>
>>Best wishes,
>>Rich
>>K5SF
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>TenTec mailing list
>>TenTec@contesting.com
>>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
>_______________________________________________
>TenTec mailing list
>TenTec@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>