Like I said, cw gets through and it was shown on tv as you probably remember
not too long ago.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 8:19 PM
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: fcc -- no more mores code?


>i suppose there is some value to your point...however, satelites run on
> battery and solar power and are generally good for 20 plus years in orbit.
> Any computer system, like a radio can also be run on battery power and
> generally take up quite substantially less power resources then a
> transmitter does.
> With advances in digital technology an area or regional network of two way
> data communications using VHF or UHF can be set up and run for as long as
> there is battery power...not to mention the use of solar power and wind
> energy that is becoming popular at least here in Alberta.
> Yes, its a bit of a leap before we truely intigrate things like solar
> panels
> and battery banks in our basements but the option is there to run the
> devices that will still get through.
> I know cw is simple...so is a digital system if you know how to build it
> and
> have the right equipment.
> CW can be a part of that whole wide range of assets that one can draw upon
> if a true disaster ever happens and all communications systems are knocked
> out.  However, i am very reluctant to say that cw would be the only thing
> that could possibly get through in a critical situation.
> Yes, it might prove to be, but so could a whole number of other things as
> well.  No one person is going to be able to utilize every possible form of
> emergency or reliable communications and i can't see how cw should be that
> one that is chosen to be the means by which hams are required to
> communicate
> during emergencies.
> In fact, it may wel be reliable to an extent, but if you have to pass
> allot
> of information in a short period of time, perhaps to someone who doesn't
> know cw you would be a little stuck right?
> Especially if you know only 20 words a minute...that is pretty slow when
> compared to voice or FSK31.
> You would be taking allot more time to get information across using cw
> then
> you would using a digital method or some sort of data transfer via
> satelite
> or radio.
>
> Again, in any kind of large regional disaster the use of orbiting
> satelites
> would come into play long long long before cw would ever become the main
> stay....unless we are talking about something beyond earthly?
> again, all this is just my nickels worth.
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Kwan" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 5:56 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: fcc -- no more mores code?
>
>
>> An excellent point that was brought up on a local net here in Toronto was
>> that you may have the luxury of all this digital, and satellite
>> communications, That's good and yes we're in the new millennium so we're
>> moving ahead in giant leaps. What happens to all of this though in a
>> power
>> failure? Well computers won't work, you can't get a signal on the cell
>> phone, some land line service can sometimes be compromised, you might
>> have
> a
>> working phone, but the switching system in your city might not function,
>> especially if your area still uses the old electronic switching system
> (ess)
>> and god be with you if you're in a remote area still using the old cross
> bar
>> network. Now when nothing else gets threw, the cw is always reliable. You
>> can run a battery with a simple transmitter and that's quite enough to
>> get
>> threw. In ham radio it's all about communications, so we shouldn't turn a
>> blind eye on the old school ways. As out dated as you might think.
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Eric Patterson" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Sunday, July 24, 2005 11:48 PM
>> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: fcc -- no more mores code?
>>
>>
>> Hi all, I have been reading these threads on CW and would like to put in
>> some comments.
>>         First of all, I have mixed viewpoints about removing CW from the
>> license
>> requirements.  On one hand, I can understand what the FCC is thinking.
>> Morse Code is out-of-date and is being replaced by digital modes.  Under
>> those conditions, it might seem silly for amateurs to have to take a code
>> test in order to get licensed.  On the other hand, if CW goes away, there
> is
>> likely to be a problem with band width.  CW takes less  band width than
> most
>> other modes.  Without CW, the amateur bands will be a lot more crowded.
>>         I would also like to say that amateur radio is both a hobby as
> well
>> as a
>> service.  It is a hobby in that it people use it for recreation purposes
>> while they are not at work or at school.  However, it is also a service.
> It
>> is used during emergencies when no other communications are available.
> What
>> does everyone else think of this?
>>
>> Eric
>>