[CQ-Contest] CW is not obsolete (fwd)

[Rich L. Boyd]

73 - Rich Boyd, KE3Q

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 11:54:01 -0600
From: Kris Mraz, N5KM <mraz at rockdal.aud.alcatel.com>
To: "Rich L. Boyd" <rlboyd at CapAccess.org>
Cc: Contest Reflector <cq-contest at Contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CW is not obsolete

Hi Rich,

Thought I'd get in my comments before there are complaints that this
thread isn't contest related (which it is).

Another reason CW is important to the ham community:

7. If you need to talk to a DX station who is on phone below 14150,
for example, the only legal way is to use CW. "PSE QSY 14200 FOR QSO".
I don't think sending AMTOR or PACTOR or CLOVER to him would work.
He would simply start complaining about some QRM that came up on the 
frequency.

Re: your point 3: 
> The only digital mode readily copyable from the radio with the human 
> ear and brain, no modem/TNC or computer needed.

Some of the anti-coders have taken up the "wetware modem" denegration
of CW. That is, "why do I have to use my brain to act as a modem when 
an electronic box will do the same thing"? My take is what can be 
cooler than having a modem with you all the time that doesn't need any 
power source and works all the time? 

Re: your point 5.  
>At another end of things, which is a new ham in a developing country 
>more able to afford (build and maintain), a simple CW rig...

If I'm not mistaken I believe CW is still used commercially in some
countries to pass traffic between regions.

Aside: I know there are digital contests that include all digital
modes. I've never participated in any of these but can someone
describe how a digital pileup works? Can one AMTOR signal be picked
out, electronically, from a pile of 10-15 callers on the same freq?
Same for PACTOR, ASCII, CLOVER, etc.

73
Kris N5KM 
mraz at aud.alcatel.com


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com