BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jeff Kenyon <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 1 Apr 2006 21:15:49 -0500
Content-Type:
TEXT/PLAIN
Parts/Attachments:
TEXT/PLAIN (49 lines)
That's true, I remember someone saying that we don't want our  ham bands
turning into something like 11-meters.





On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Amanda J. Rush wrote:

> I don't think they should get rid of the requirement.
> Otherwise, what's the insentive to work harder to get the general or extra
> class licenses?
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: For blind ham radio operators
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jeff Kenyon
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2006 9:06 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: FCC Morse code announcement
>
>
> Well, that is really good.   I still hear a lot of CW out there.  I think
> that there was actually a time where you had to have 20 words as a
> requirement.  What do the rest of you think of the FCC doing away with a
>  code requirement?  I think that if they do that, they should have more
> technical questions added to the theory.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 1 Apr 2006, Phil Scovell wrote:
>
> > Jeff,
> >
> > I think it was still 5 13 and 20 if I remember correctly.  It has been so
> > long ago I took the 20 Word per minute test, I can't recall for certain.
> I
> > still call CW the ODM for the Original Digital Mode.  It drives all my
> > packet and digital mode buddies crazy.  Back during my 60 and 70 WPM days,
> I
> > was typing faster than most digital people can type, haw.
> >
> > Phil.
> > K0NX
> >
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2