From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!floyd!peri!sbcs!rick
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
Title: No code license
Article-I.D.: sbcs.134
Posted: Thu Nov 18 14:50:56 1982
Received: Sat Nov 20 09:14:32 1982

No doubt that this article should be addressed to net.flame,
however, I think most of the non-ham net subscribers are not
interested in dits, dahs, and morse code blahs.

(flame on)

The ARRL ruling class (QST, Nov 1982, pg 9) claims the no code license
is "an idea whose time has not come."  They base this assertion on the
following arguments:

	1. The code requirement is the only proven
	   screening device for obtaining competent amateur
	   radio operators.  Apparently, they believe only
	   individuals of the HIGHEST technical and moral
	   fiber are able to pass the code exam. Rubbish!!
	   We have more appliance operators, lids, and people who
	   could not cut a dipole antenna today than ever before.
	   I have many technically competent friends (CS types,
	   EE's, etc) that are capable of passing a code exam, but 
	   they would rather spend their time updating their state
	   of the art skills.  These same people would be very
	   interested in experimenting with spread spectrum,
	   packet radio, repeaters, etc, and have great potential
	   to help advance the amateur state of the art.


	2. Amateurs have lost confidence in written exams.  We 
	   can restore their confidence by making the exams more
	   difficult.  The content of the exams is very easy
	   to protect: merely compose each individual exam from
	   a data base of several thousand questions, and change
	   values in questions which require a numerical answer.
	   Say goodbye to Dick Bash and his short cut books.
	   I understand that the FCC has taken some steps in this
	   direction.

	3. Difficulty in self-policing the bands filled with new, and
           presumably inexperienced or incompetent amateurs.  There 
           is no easy solution to this problem; it always has, and 
           always will exist.  This attitude akin to arguing against 
           having children because they are too difficult to raise.
	   Also, while more amateurs may mean more potential problems,
	   it also means more amateurs to help in policing the bands.

	4. (Non ARRL attitude) Alan M(orse). Amateur: "I passed my 13 
           wpm code test, so everyone else must."  My only comment is
	   that hazing belongs in high school or college.

Some questions I have for the ARRL are what makes a good ham (honey
sauce and a little pineapple on top?), and exactly what type of people do 
they feel we need to attract?  Should amateur radio be more than a
alternate medium to the telephone for the masses to communicate over?  
What makes radio amateurs more equal than their fellow citizens when it 
comes to using the "public airwaves"?  Why not use morse code only as a 
computer communications protocol?  In what direction does the ARRL 
perceive amateur radio should head?  Should the ARRL make decisions which
contradict popular opinion, for the greater good of Amateur Radio?
(Depending on who you listen to, hams are for/against the no code
requirement.  The ARRL believes it is espousing a majority opinion
in coming down against the no code license).

The focus of this entire article is that if we can attract some
new technical blood into the amateur service, there are many
contributions that can be made to the state of the art. 
Packet Radio, for example, has not been thoroughly explored by industry;
can amateurs invent new routing strategies to deal with
selective fading, mobile stations, or networks which can dynamically
rearrange themselves to bypass failed nodes, etc.. (Sure, I know a lot 
has been written, but how many of these schemes are more than ink on 
a piece paper?) What about using more efficient modulation schemes for
packet than NRZ, or FM -- anyone for delay modulation, m-ary PSK, etc?  
Given the right people, there is much trail blazing to do.. I feel that
dropping the code exam in favor of a tough written exam will bring more
technical types into amateur radio, and, as a result, the entire amateur
service will benefit.

A little note on my background (ammunition for those who will argue
for the code requirement): I was able to learn code well enough to
receive 18 wpm in about 1.5 months, all while working full time.  I passed
my advanced class license on the first try.  I have operated CW and 
ENJOYED it (I also have operated RTTY - yet I do not ask that everyone
be familiar with this mode as a prerequisite to obtaining a license).
Although I frequently disagree with ARRL policy, I am a full member. 
As for the technical/professional end of things,  I am a degreed digital 
design engineer working with a university research group in the computer 
networking/distributed processing area.  

(flame off)

 	   (return flames encouraged -- send to net.ham-radio).

					_.. .

					Rick Spanbauer, WB2CFV
					SUNY @ Stony Brook

					allegra!sbcs!rick or
					peri!sbcs!rick