N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...

N2EY wrote:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:



So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license?

As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on
the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem
areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such.



Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough?

I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to
get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air.


OK, fine. Pretty basic stuff like what a MHz is and such.


And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf
access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking
about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that
access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely
*nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less
qualifications than we have now.


That all depends on what is actually in the tests. The old Novice test
was around for almost a half century and turned many, many hams loose
on HF - me included. With a 20-30 question written test and 5 wpm
Morse, often using homebrew, kit or converted-surplus gear.

Before we go too much further, I need to say that I don't think all
that highly of the old Novice test.

When we are talking about people of yore and now, I think that most
people that decided to go for a license at that time had some inkling
that the tube equipment usually used some pretty high voltages. Now the
highest voltage most people use is the 120 volts coming out of the wall
socket. Inside most electronics, the voltages are pretty low.

But that is for *most* equipment. A fun part of the hobby is operating
old tube equipment. Most amplifiers are still tube driven. Lots of
*hurty* things.

And I think that times have changed enough that we should coach the
newbies on that. I like to lump HV and RF in the same general area. Many
of the concepts for staying safe around V can translate over to RF. Of
course the newbie needs to know that RF has a nasty habit of getting
into places that won't be so obvious.


And for most of that time, the new ham had to tune the gear up in
order to transmit, and had to figure out things like how to build a
transmit-receive system to go between the separate tx and rx.

We did OK.

Of course. And I think your pre-exposre to the concept of high voltages
running around inside the equipment went a long way towards making it okay.



Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many
people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by
drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an
engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering
requirements improve something?


It only works if the privileges are reduced accordingly. Which is a
key part of the "NewNovice" concept.

I dunno, Jim. Less is more? Newspeakish to me.


Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power.



Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes.

If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts.
QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and


In the bad old days I was turned loose with high voltages and up to 75
watts. I'm still here and the house didn't burn down.

All this talk makes me want to homebrew something with tubes. (I've
never done that outside of one project in school)


- Mike KB3EIA -