Thread
:
Canadian No Code Proposal Open For Comment
View Single Post
#
7
September 3rd 04, 12:44 AM
Leo
Posts: n/a
On 02 Sep 2004 04:18:56 GMT,
(Len Over 21) wrote:
In article , Leo
writes:
On 01 Sep 2004 20:09:31 GMT,
(Len Over 21) wrote:
snip
The Notice is available at:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/inter.../sf06456e.html
Thank you for the link!
Any Canadian radio amateurs care to comment on that?
I'm not Canadian, but I think it fails to follw the KISS principle. They
want to add an Intermediate licence to their Basic and Advanced. Why don't
they just abolish the 'Plus' categories (i.e. plus Morse)? That would be
much simpler.
I'm not Canadian either as a "Carbo-American," but I think the "plus"
category is a sop to the existing Canadian mighty morsemen.
Canada must have its share of olde-fahrt hamme morsemen and
those must be "satisfied."
I am
- and fully agree with your observation that there are -um-
a fair number of 'old school' amateurs up here, who do not believe in
the abolishment of the Code Test (approximately a third of the
respondents to the RAC survey on this subject). The RAC proposal
attempts to meet the needs of both the "Pro Morse" and "No Morse"
factions of the hobby - in quite an interesting way. Both sides win -
either path leads to a full HF-access Amateur license.
Now dat's a typically Canadian solution, eh?
I'm not familiar with that sort of "typicalness." Been in here
in this ultra-conservative retro-tech newsgroup too much. :-)
Hmmm - not good for a guy like you, living in one of the more free
thinking areas of the country....
(an aside ... I have relatives in Redondo Beach - spent a few happy
summers there when I was a teenager learning Californian
philosophy.... and a fair bit of anatomy too, on the beach....wow!
I would say instead it is a GOOD COMPROMISE and to the
credit of the Radio Amateurs of Canada and Industry Canada.
I believe that the proposal is a good one - inasmuch as it provides
access to HF without the requirement of Morse testing. It does
recommend that Morse testing be made available should the applicant
desire it - I have no problem with that. Status quo - or not. Your
choice.
That's fair and equitable in my viewpoint.
Mighty macho morsemen will disagree and ignite (again) Flame
Wars instead of simple bonfires.
That would be typical......unfortunately.
Realistically, this hobby has more than enough breadth to accomodate
the needs of both the Morse and No Morse proponents.
It recommends raising the pass marks on the exams - good idea, most
believe that they are way too low right now (60% is a pass on both the
Basic and Advanced tests currently). No issue there.
That's good in my view.
Mine too. The more knowledge, the better.
It is indeed a compromise intended to satisfy both the Morse and No
Morse factions of the hobby - but it does so with considerably more
elegance than the ARRL proposal, in my opinion.
ARRL is not fully into this new millennium. :-)
Some wonder if they ever made it into the last millennium...
In some ways, only the first quarter of it.....
Frankly, they seem too concerned with playing politics than guiding
the hobby into the future.
The RAC proposal to IC was based on an Internet survey which was open
to all licensed Canadian amateurs (not just RAC members).
The ARRL proposal seems to have been developed autonomously by the
Directors, with little (if any) input from the Amateur community. No
wonder everyone was surprised when it was filed!
I'm in favour of it - and my comments to that effect have been filed
with IC, as of today.
Good on you!
I have to agree with Hans Brakob in that our northern neighbor in
Norse America is doing the right thing for their future. Modernization
is long overdue. [excuse me...NORTH America...;-) ]
heh.....that brought back memories of Leif The Lucky from grade
school!
Norsemen were the first European discoverers of North America.
Yup - long before Columbus got lost and thought this was India!
Settled in what is now Canada (New Foundland) for a while.
Dunno why they left...maybe they objected to speaking French?
....they probably left because they couldn't find jobs
(the unemployment rate in Newfie is a whopping 20% or so - WAY above
the national average of just over 7%!)
:-)
Industry Canada has much simpler regulations for their radio
amateurs but accomplish the same thing in the hobby.
Well said. The less regulations, the better the hobby!
.....and the less I gotta remember....
Band limits and other technical necessities should be enough.
Fully agreed. Up here, bandplans for the various operating modes are
compiled by the RAC, and adhered to by gentlemen's agreement. It is
absolutely legal to operate SSB on 7.100 MHz, or CW on 7.250 MHz, but
it just isn't done! Peer pressure is the only enforcement tool
required.
BTW, that electronic test that can run on any PC looked rather
neat! Simple way to do it and the computer does most of the
paperwork as well as keeping a record of it being done and
when.
It is pretty neat indeed! Free, too!
Normally, one should be wary of free things from the Government....
Learning skills of long ago just to get a license in here and now
is nowhere close to being progressive and just doesn't keep up
with the times.
Again, fully agreed. Especially since the rest of the world is
moving towards the future - we would look pretty silly clinging
steadfastly to the past.
73, Leo
PS - WTF is a "Carbo-American"? - never heard that one before!
Came from a couple of comic strips running in the L.A. Times as
well as elsewhere. Backlash to the "Adkins Diet" craze. :-)
[or "Atkins Diet" or whatever..."zero carbohydrates"]
Got it - we have been bombarded by the "Adkins" diet craze up here
too. It's nothing that a Big Mac and a couple of beers won't fix
BTW, the Olay cosmetics company now has a body wash product
called "Ohm." [just saw it on the shelves at market today] I think
that will meet with some resistance in some U.S. ham circles... :-)
Ooh - that one hurt!
BTW, if we keep this up, you might be in danger of buggering up your
reputation with - ahem - some of the regulars here as a difficult guy
to converse with....
Reply With Quote