The following text (between the horizontal lines) is excerpted from a front page article in the April 1999 issue of the IEEE publication the institute, with comments added by Carl R. Stevenson, WA6VSE,  formatted in blue italics within the article excerpt to avoid any possible confusion as to their source.

This article shows, by direct quotes from Mr. Joseph Hersey, Chief, Spectrum management Division of the U.S. Coast Guard, that U.S. Coast Guard officials belive and admit that Morse code is an "insufficient" means of comunications in emergency situations and that earlier deployment of automated emergency communications systems like the new GMDSS with it's automatic Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons ("EPIRBs") and other advanced technology might have saved many lives.   (Sections of particular significance in making this point have been reformatted in bold italics in the excerpted  text for emphasis.)

(excerpted from)
"Signing off … latest technology replaces Morse code"

BY ANNETTE CODISPOTI
Assistant Editor, THE INSTITUTE (April 1999 issue)

After over 150 years of faithful service, Morse code has quietly retired from its role as a consistent and dependable rescuer of ships in distress After all these years and many advances in communications technology, Morse code is just now being replaced by something better.
(The editor's "consistent and dependable" characterization of the first sentence is contradicted later in the article by the direct statement of a senior U.S. Coast Guard official that "Morse code would have been insufficient in most of these cases.")

The transition began in 1979 with an international effort to improve maritime distress and safety communications. The International Maritime Organization, a United Nations agency, called for the development of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System (GMDSS).

The new system, according to the U.S. Coast Guard, is based on a combination of satellite and terrestrial radio services and has changed international distress communications from being primarily ship-to-ship based to ship-to-shore based. All ships subject to the new regulations had to fit all GMDSS equipment by 1 Feb. 1999.

"The introduction of satellites was indeed the turning point," said Joseph Hersey, chief, Spectrum Management Division of the U.S. Coast Guard, and an IEEE member.

"Morse telegraphy remained functional for so long for a number of reasons. It is reliable, it is simple, it works and it can operate at a lower signal to noise ratio than practically any other radio system," said Hersey.
(It appears that even Mr. Hersey may have been indoctrinated to some degree with what many of us often refer to as "The Morse Myths."  I believe that a more plausible explaination of why Morse code lasted so long in the maritime service is that took an inordinate amount of time to get around to replacing Morse with more reliable systems due to the necessity to get the nations of the world to a) agree to a standard, b) agree to spend the money to implement it, and c) actually implement something on such a grand scale.  Had the process started earlier many lives might have been saved, as pointed out in the following paragraph from the article.)

But as good as it was, there is always room for improvement. ‘‘Some elements of the GMDSS, such as satellite communications, emergency position indicating radio beacons, and marine safety broadcasts, have proven themselves over the last 10 years," said Hersey. In 1997 this system saved more than 540 lives in the U.S. alone. "In many of these cases, the EPIRB alert, generated when the buoy automatically deployed from a fast-sinking vessel, was the only alert received. Morse code would have been insufficient in most of these cases," said Hersey. "Had the GMDSS and elements such as satellite EPIRBs been around earlier, ships like the Edmund Fitzgerald, which sank suddenly with all hands (Nov. 1975), without warning in Lake Superior, might possibly have been saved."

(end of excerpt)

Thus, we see another clear indication that the maritime community has, with good reason, abandoned the use of Morse code.  Furthermore, that "good reason" appears to be rooted firmly in the desire to save lives and the views of the experts that Morse code is an "insufficent" means of communication in emergency situations.

This deflates "Morse Myths" such as  "Morse always gets through." and "Morse is important for emergency communications." which are often invoked in an attempt to "justify" forcing Morse code on all hams, whether they wish to learn and use it or not.

Morse code is no longer a part of any credible emergency communications plans ... the maritime services were the last "holdout."  Yes, amateurs use Morse, but only for recreational reasons.  No known governmental emergency management agency, public safety agency, or private relief agency such as the Red Cross, Salvation Army, etc. (our primary "customers" when we're providing emergency communications assistance) places any reliance on or plans to use Morse code in its emergency communications plans. Thus, no need exists for a cadre of Morse-trained amateurs willing and ready to step in a a moment's notice to "save the world from disaster with Morse code."

Amateur Radio is still an important part of the emergency communications plans of such "customers" however.  They simply want and need more modern and efficient services, such as tactical voice using VHF/UHF FM (for local work) or  HF SSB (for medium-long range work) and accurate, high-speed digital data transfer and messaging services such as packet radio and perhaps remote access to the internet and/or their own computer systems.

In light of this, while we accept (and have no quarrel with) the recreational use of Morse code by any amateur who chooses to employ that mode, we believe that the Amateur Radio Service has a public service obligation (and a survival-based self-interest) in modernizing and eliminating the undue emphais on Morse code proficiency which currently exists in the amateur licensing structure and testing process.

Carl R. Stevenson - WA6VSE
wa6vse@fast.net