RadioBanter - View Single Post

February 23rd 05, 10:04 PM

wrote in news:1109166707.942384.171130
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109088706.576066.237160
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109065656.859950.28030
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109009984.323422.143080
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

snip

5wpm isn't very fast, but why is it required to operate phone?

A couple of reasons:

For the same reason hams have to pass written *theory* tests to
use *manufactured* rigs with no critical tuneup adjustments.

For the same reason hams have to pass written tests on VHF/UHF to
operate HF, high-power RF exposure questions to operate QRP, etc.

And because code is a big part of amateur radio, and a ham who
doesn't know any just isn't fully qualified.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think we can agree to differ on that last point.

Perhaps.

Do you agree that Morse code is a big part of amateur radio? Not
that it needs a test, but just that it is a big part of today's
amateur radio, particularly on HF?

Well?

Agreeing that something is a big part of amateur radio does *not*
mean that something deserves its own stand-alone test.

It's maybe about 40% of HF, so I suppose it's big enough.

As a matter of fact, even directly after passing the US 20wpm test
I couldn't have passed the UK 12wpm test.

Perhaps. But I thought we were discussing *US* code test
requirements.

5wpm is not too difficult, especially the way it is tested in the
US, but until recently it only gave access to the 'novice' subbands
in the US, all of which except for 10m didn't allow phone. From my
PoV, it would only have given me 10m at that time. I never took 5.

Since 1990 it has been possible to get an Extra (or any other
HF-privileges amateur radio license) with just the 5 wpm code test
and a waiver. 15 years - hardly "recently".

I probably could have passed 5 when I came to the US, but I simply
didn't realise how much easier the tests were here. Thinking it
would have been as hard as a UK test I didn't bother to take it.

The test procedures here aren't secret. Never were.

I was operating above 30MHz
on a 610A permit, and when the 'no code' licence was introduced I
decided to get a US call. Having 'aced' the Novice and I think
dropped one question in the Tech paper, I was given the General
paper, for which I hadn't looked at the syllabus or question pool
atall, and I passed that. Ditto the Advanced, but they didn't have
a spare Extra paper. None of this really surprised me, as the UK B
licence had the same theory as the A licence, and I have an EE
degree anyway, but it surprised the VEs.

Why should it? The US writtens were *never* very hard - if you knew
a little radio and some regs.

Back in 1968 I went for General at the FCC office in early summer.
Did not pass 13 wpm code because the examiner couldn't read my
longhand. Got credit for 5 wpm, took the written (which was same as
General back then), walked out with a Tech. Could not use the new
privs until the actual license arrived in the mail, though.

Went home, taught myself Signal-Corps-method block printing and more
practice until I could do 18 wpm W1AW bulletins solid. Went back and
passed 13 wpm code easily, sending and receiving.

Then the examiner says "why not try Advanced while you're here?".
Now in those days the Advanced was supposedly the toughest of the
writtens, with all sorts of math and circuits and such. But one did
not say No to The Man, so I tried, with zero preparation. Passed
easily and wound up with Advanced instead of General.

That was back before question pools, Bash books and computerized
practice tests. Didn't have an EE back then either - I was 14 years
old and it was the summer between 8th and 9th grades.

Two years later I went back to get the Extra. Would have been sooner
but in those days you had to have two years experience as General or
Advanced to even *try* the Extra.

This gave me 12 months to pass 13wpm if I didn't want to have to
take the General and Advanced theory again. With the help of
computer software and slow Morse transmissions I did it in six
months.

Bingo.

How long do you think it would have taken

*you*

to get to 5 wpm, tested the way the USA does?

Hmm?

I think that's probably about where I was when I came here in '89, so I
could just say 19 years. I suppose you would have to knock something off
that as I had been stuck at that level for a while!

Note that Mike got there
in that amount of time from scratch even with hearing problems, and
it took me that long when I wasn't starting from the beginning, and
there's no problem with my hearing. Also, I had a relay of all the
VEs sending code on 2m five nights a week. They saw it a a
challenge to teach me code. I almost passed 20, but I had to come
back a couple of months later.

To get up to 13wpm meant copying whole characters instead of dits
and dahs, no matter how easy the type of test. OK, so that's gone,
but that means the remaining Element 1 doesn't test the ability to
copy complete characters, so on the one hand it's relatively easy,
but on the other hand it's pointless.

Not at all.

If the code uses Farnsworth spacing, you copy characters, not dits
and dahs. This isn't anything new - W1AW has been sending code
practice that way since at least 1966 (first time I heard it,
anyway).

Why preserve a test that doesn't test an adequate level of a skill
as a requirement for access to a particular part of the spectrum,
when there's no requirement to use that skill anyway?

Same reason for written tests. Do the writtens guarantee that all
who pass can design/build/modify/repair/operate all amateur
equipment they are authorized to use? Or do they test basic
knowledge?

5 wpm is basic Morse skill, that's all.

Why is it too much to ask?

I think that one major reason some people are so
against the code test is that it isn't something
you can learn by reading a book or watching a
video.

Tradition? That's a
weak reason, but it seems to be the only one. Sure, 40% of HF may
be CW, but I can (and do) operate 100% phone .

And my HF operation is 99% CW on 80/40/20, with 100 watts or less
output, yet I had to learn all kinds of stuff about high power,
'phone modes, RTTY, SSTV, other HF bands, VHF/UHF, etc. Most of that
knowledge I've never needed, and some of it (like band edges) has
changed since I took the test. So why did I have to learn all that
in the first place, just to operate a QRP rig on 7015 CW?

73 de Jim, N2EY

I'm not sure this is getting us anywhere. This is all old ground.

Let's boil it down to basics:

Your argument is that nobody should have to learn Knowledge A in order
to
do Activity B if Activity B can be done without Knowledge A.

In this case

Knowledge A = basic Morse skill, Activity B = amateur radio HF phone

The problem is that if you accept that reasoning, you must logically a
accept a lot mo

Knowledge A = radio theory, Activity B = operate modern manufactured
rig

Knowledge A = limits of Band X, Activity B = operate on Band Y

Knowledge A = SSB theory, Activity B = operate Morse

Knowledge A = high power RF exposure safety, Activity B = operate QRP

and much more.

Despite all the colorful false analogies with buggywhips and such, no
one has been able to show why the above arguments don't follow.

In fact, the NCVEC proposal takes it to that level, not only dumping
code testing but further watering down the *written* requirements to
an almost absurd level.

Do you think NCVEC has the right idea?

Suppose someone proposed to eliminate the Extra and Advanced class
licenses, give those hams Generals - and give all Generals full
privileges.

And suppose the proposal argued that since a General was qualified to
use
all modes, bands and power levels allowed to Advanceds and Extras,
there
was no need for the two higher level license classes.

How would you counter that argument?

73 de Jim, N2EY

Just the same way I did before when discussing it with you, Jim (shades of
deja vu?). The Morse test is a skill test, and all the others are theory
tests. I have no objection to theory tests on all aspects of the hobby,
including Morse code. That would be a balanced approach.

73 de Alun, N3KIP