Yes, i would tend to agree. the feather in the cap is precisely how i view
it.
I might also add, that cw is technically a digital mode as well.
just throwing another towel in the ring here.
73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Vece" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2006 7:20 PM
Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> Hi Colin;
>
> I'm not saying it is the one and only mode.
>
> I'm saying that it is another facet of the hobby and, if you can learn it,
> that's just another feather in your cap.
>
> 73 De Anthony W2AJV
> [log in to unmask]
> ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 7:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [BLIND-HAMS] New Frequencies
>
>
> >I guess that makes me a chicken bander.
> > I never new until now.
> > That attitude is what is making ham radio an antiquated, excentric
> > non-progressive hobby in many places.
> > Who wants to learn to communicate using a bunch of short and long beeps
> > when
> > you can talk, or use digital modes using computers.
> > Learning CW has to be the most awcward thing imaginable at first. Until
> > you
> > become really good at it, its slow, tedious and takes much more time to
> > convey a thought then simply speaking it or sending it via pSK31 or
other
> > digital modes.
> > And the idea that CW is the one and only method of communication that
can
> > get through when nothing else can is also a very outdated theory.
> > Any digital mode will accomplish the same task, and offen with much
lower
> > error rate then a typical CW operater who is attempting to pull a signal
> > out
> > of the noise, or below the noise floor.
> > Using PSK31, you offten can't even hear the signal, but the computer can
> > and
> > puts it out to the screen as text.
> > So the idea that not learning some antiquated form of communicated just
> > for
> > the sake of doing so, and therefore getting a free ride because you
didn't
> > have to learn it is a very narow minded and outdated point of view.
> >
> > Now, all that said, i think CW is a very important aspect of amateur
radio
> > below 30MHZ and that it certainly has its place and usage. I don't
> > begrudge
> > anyone their decision to use any mode of communication on any amateur
> > frequency.
> > However, i really don't believe anyone mode should be chosen over all
the
> > rest as one that a person must have near to absolute perficiency in in
> > order to communicate below 30MHZ.
> >
> > Naturally, the arguement that CW transmitters and receivers are some of
> > the
> > simplest and easy to setup and operate when compared to voice or digital
> > stations always comes up. It comes up in the context of emergency
> > measures
> > or emergency communications.
> > If that arguement is made, then the argument must also be made to
include
> > vastly more emergency training aspects to the general class or extra
class
> > licensing examinations.
> > If you are going to force someone to learn CW because there just might
be
> > a
> > once in a life time situation where they absolutely must use it, then it
> > should also be required for those same individuals to learn vast amounts
> > of
> > procedural knoledge regarding emergency communications and procedures.
> >
> > Its a great mode, but its not the most important anymore.
> >
> > 73
> > Colin, V A6BKX
> >
|
