Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hou2g.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!houxm!hou2g!stekas
From: stekas@hou2g.UUCP (J.STEKAS)
Newsgroups: net.ham-radio
Subject: Re: Morse code stinks - (nf)
Message-ID: <285@hou2g.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 5-Jul-84 10:20:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: hou2g.285
Posted: Thu Jul  5 10:20:03 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 6-Jul-84 00:32:46 EDT
References: <2800003@uok.UUCP> <1977@hplabsc.UUCP>, <305@tpvax.fluke.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 23

As an ex-ham who worked CW exclusively (~30wpm) I vouch that it can't be
beat for inexpensive, reliable communications.  But as far as the code
requirement goes - it serves little purpose.

Certainly, it keeps out the CBers.  But wouldn't a more difficult technical
exam be just as effective?  And as for emergency communications, how much
proficiency is needed to copy QRRR or SOS at 5WPM and call the authorities?
Even the most die-hard, 60WPM, CW op would slow down to make sure his distress
signal was copied.

The fact is, one no longer needs to know the code to use it.  For $100 a box
can be had which will turn a home computer into a RTTY/Morse terminal.  It's
true that the box needs a higher S/N than a good operator, but you can't
beat it for armchair copy.

So I move that code requirements be dropped to 5WPM and the technical
requirements raised.  Then maybe every ham will know enough to keep
his modulation  <100% and all those 5WPM distress now obscured by
splatter could be copied! :-)

Jim

ex- WA2IAA