Contents

Created 16 Jun 97, Updated 24 June 2006.

The abolition of the international requirement for morse proficiciency testing of radio amateurs

Note: this document is now retained purely for historical interest. The morse examination requirement has been removed by the ITU but individual countries have the option of retaining the test if they want. Readers from countries which have not yet removed the morse test may be interested in this article.

I support the abolition of the morse test as a licensing requirement, because:

  1. the role of the test is now no more than a filtering mechanism which reduces the number of people able to satisfy the licence requirements
  2. passing the test is no indicator of whether people ever become good or frequent users of morse therefore the test does not actually promote any development of operating skills
  3. the test is no longer a test of a vital skill required to operate a station (which it once was, i.e. in the 1920s)
  4. the testing of morse speed is not a proper test of proficiency (a true test would be interactive)
  5. different countries have vastly different standards for the test, supporting the concept that the test exists for its own sake, rather than to prove a skill at a given standard
  6. morse is increasingly irrelevant in the information age, where a country would be better off developing radio amateurs who are able to integrate technical radio skills with technical networking and computer skills.

Why examine amateurs for morse code proficiency?

The majority of arguments against removal of morse examinations focus on the USE of morse code, based on the benefits of the morse mode on the basis of efficiency, simplicity of transmitter construction, the pleasures of using morse being similar to other simple pleasures such as boat building and bushwalking, etc.

These arguments do not provide reasons for examining amateur operators in this mode.

What is missing from the "logic" of their arguments, consistently, is a link between the advantages of using morse and being examined in morse.

They don't address these issues, for example:

  1. whether examining people in morse actually promotes morse as a mode for new amateurs to use on the air;
    We all know of many licenced amateurs who have passed their full call morse test yet proudly state that after passing the exam they put the morse key away, or sold it, and never intend to use it again in their life.
  2. whether morse exams improve the "quality" of licencees, whatever the definition of quality is;
    There are plenty of examples of people without morse qualifications but who are leaders in their professional fields. There are also plenty of examples of amateurs who are leaders in amateur VHF/UHF communications. To risk losing such people to other hobbies in the 21st century because of a requirement to pass a practical test in the communications technology of 1920 is ludicrous.
  3. whether conducting morse exams support the continued existence of the hobby, knowing as we do that all government-controlled activities require political clout;
    There must be many people whose ambitions for using amateur radio have been thwarted by the morse test requirement. The movement needs all the numbers it can get. Again, to lose such people to other hobbies because of a slavish adherence to the rules of a bygone era is shortsighted.
  4. whether morse exams are anything other than a filter mechanism to reduce the number of successful applicants for licences, ie. an artificial device, a "hoop" to jump through.

Examinations

Why it is necessary to examine people's morse skills, but not necessary to examine skills in any other mode, such as those using voice or keyboard, nor to examine technical skills such as construction of crystal filters for SSB generation, colour TV adjustments, alignment of notch filters for repeaters, tuning of bandpass filters for wideband intermediate filters. Why pick on morse code as the skill that needs examination when lots of other skills relevant to today's amateur radio operator are simply not mentioned?

I think the answer is that there is no good reason why skills in morse alone are examined. In fact the morse test is an anachronism left from a bygone era when morse skills did equate to the only operating skills required to operate a radio station.

Emergency Response

The idea that amateurs have a role to play in emergency communications because of their morse skills is based on an anachronism which is difficult to imagine in today's world of digital frequency control, narrow bandwidth equipment and satellite communications. In past years the only way communications took place was by morse code using buzzing signals from a spark, filtered by tuned circuits and connected to a huge antenna. Receivers were wide band and everyone heard everyone for hundreds of miles, which we now understand given the MF frequencies used. In that situation, an incompetent operator was a nuisance who could interfere with other stations, would just make meaningless noises and would not understand requests from other operators. In that situation it was necessary to insist that all persons operating radio stations, especially amateur operators, should be tested for proficiency in morse code.

The use of HF communications by shipping is now virtually ended. The use of morse code on the shipping bands is continuing but is becoming less commonly used. For commercial operations, teleprinters, fax machines and satellites have completely replaced the shipboard HF operator with a morse key. And on the amateur radio side, tight frequency bands for equipment have made it virtually impossible that an emergency call issued by a ship would be heard on an amateur band, or that an amateur could answer an SOS call heard on a marine band. The amateur would not be able to answer on the marine band as their equipment is not legally able to do that.

So unless the emergency call is issued on an amateur band the amateur won't hear it, and can't answer.

Then we have the question of what mode a commercial ship would use to issue an emergency call. It would be SSB if voice was used, or a SITOR or FEC type mode if a RTTY mode was used. Plain Baudot is less likely. Would they use morse code? No.

In that case, why are millions of radio amateurs worldwide being tested for morse code proficiency? It is clearly nothing to do with emergency responses.