RadioBanter - View Single Post

October 27th 05, 10:45 AM

wrote:
wrote:
From: on Oct 21, 4:25 pm
Leo wrote:
On 20 Oct 2005 09:40:10 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 15 Oct 2005 14:02:03 -0700, wrote:
From: Leo on Oct 15, 9:36 am
On 14 Oct 2005 15:02:32 -0700, wrote:
Leo wrote:
On 14 Oct 2005 12:39:50 -0700, wrote:
From: on Oct 14, 9:20 am
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
wrote:
In the '60s, morse code was a mandatory requirement for an amateur
license (up here anyway) - and at a difficult 13 words per
minute, not our easy 5.

It was a requirement for all US ham licenses until 1991, when
the Technician lost its code test requirement.

That code test is STILL an absolute pass-fail separate test
for any amateur radio privileges below 30 MHz.

Not in every country of the world.

But in the USA, it still is. And that's a good thing IMHO. Of course
that requirement might change in the future, as it has changed in a few
other countries pf the world.

The Technician DID NOT LOSE its code test requirement.

Actually, Len, it did. February 14, 1991.

Oh no! Lennie got yet ANOTHER key Amateur Radio policy issue
wrong...A MAJOR one, considering the nature of thios forum....

WHO wudda thunk it?

The former Technician class got RENAMED to "Technician Plus."

The Technician Plus did not appear right away. Only after some hams
complained that there was no obvious difference in the license class
of code-tested vs. noncodetested Techs was that class created. Late
1992 or so.

Just a simple mistake on your part. Understandable ;-)

More like a concious attempt to try and fold reality into his own
distorted concept.

Didn't work. Nice catch, Jim.

Whether 13 wpm is "difficult" or not depends on the person
and the training methods.

Riiiiiiight...

Glad you agree!

ALL human beings have the SAME aptitudes and
abilities!

Who said that?

I wrote:

"Whether 13 wpm is "difficult" or not depends on the person
and the training methods."

Is that not a fact?

Seems that since partnering-up with Markie, some of Markie's
English comprehension issues have been rubbing off on Brain and Lennie,
including changing complete words and phrases in order to fit their
arguments even though they quote your original statement.

Pretty lame.

All one has to do is "work hard" in order to
pass a federally-mandated morse test in order to transmit
below 30 MHz as an amateur.

No, one has to study effectively. And pass the required tests -
Morse Code and written.

I didn't have to work hard for either.

It's pretty clear what your story is, Len. Here's what
I think is behind all your verbiage he

Back in the mid-1950s, you decided to try for an amateur radio
license. The written test was no big challenge - you'd already
been taught the basics of radio theory at taxpayer expense in
the Army, and IIRC had a First Class 'Phone license as well.

But the Army didn't teach you Morse Code because that training
was reserved for radio *operators*, not technicians. And they
were phasing out the use of Morse Code in the Army anyway, even
though they would continue to use it for a couple more decades or
so.

Getting an *amateur* license back then required passing a
Morse Code test. And you started studying Morse Code, but
discovered that, for you, it wasn't as easy as most things
you'd learned up to that time. Plus you didn't much like the
fact that many you considered your inferiors were allowed on
the amateur bands, but you were not, regardless of your
commercial license or Army experience.

Strange, too, that Lennie alleges that he was once proficient to
"about 8WPM or more". Guess he was only THAT "proficient" if no one
was looking...Kinda like he "knows" all these "facts" about Amateur
Radio as long as he's got a mouse in his hand...He's scared to death of
that VE exam...

Then in 1958, 27 MHz cb was authorized, and you jumped on it.
You had fun with it for a few years, tooling around in your
radio-equipped little car. But then things changed on cb, the
band became overrun with truckers and trucker wannabes, and
the whole thing became a fad.

He probably never got more than the five channels his Lafayette
HB15 would allow him to go...Musta been frustrating with that tunable
receiver to hear those others talking and not being able to "get back"
to them.

Of course you could have gotten a Novice license with your limited
Morse Code skills - but there's no way you wanted to be a "Novice"
anything, particularly considering that many if not most Novices then
were 'teeners'......

He COULD have gone right to Technician...

Tsk. That is NOT required for General Radiotelephone
(Commercial) Radio Operator license holders at HF and below.

Sure - but GROL licensees cannot operate Amateur Radio stations. Nor
can they have their own stations at all unless they also qualify for
a station license in some commercial radio service (like broadcasting).

Ahhhh...He knows that, Jim...How many times have we had to remind
him that he can't operate a single transmitter with that GROL unless
it's got an FCC station license with it...Just like it says on the back
of HIS GROL!

That is NOT required for UNLICENSED CB radio operators on
27 MHz, yet their signals can - during certain propagation
conditions - be heard all over the world.

Sure...can be HEARD "all over the world".

Now...try and pick a discreet signal out of the caucophony of 11
meters, Lennie...

Sure - but cb operations in the USA are not permitted beyond a certain
limited distance (150 miles?) and that service only allows the use of
very low power, certified equipment, two modes, and 40 channels (80 if
you consider upper and lower sideband as separate).

Do you think amateur radio should be just like cb?

He wishes it were...then he'd be vindicated.

Thankfully it's not.

Slightly less than half of US hams hold Technician licenses, but
there's no way of knowing how many have passed the code test.

A mere 48+ plus percent of ALL USA amateur radio licensees
are Technician class.

You might want to check those numbers, Len.

The Technician class (exclusive of
the Technician PLUS class) is over TWICE as numerous as
General class (most numerous of the "code tested" classes).

So?

The Technician class includes a considerable number of code-tested
amateurs.

I've signed quite a few CSCE's for guys and gals who passed
Element 1 and "only" had a Technician.

There's also the factor of how long somebody stays interested. And what
they do when they have the license.

That's NOT a LEGAL requirement, is it? :-)

No, but it's an important consideration for the future of the Amateur
Radio Service.

The ONLY requirement I can find in all of Part 97, Title 47 C.F.R.
as to "doing" when a person has an amateur radio license is to
OPERATE LEGALLY ACCORDING TO THE REGULATIONS.

From a legal standpoint, that's true.

Is there something
I missed in Part 97 about "building from scratch," "devotion to
morse code," or being an acolyte at the Church of St. Hiram?

Try reading the "Basis and Purpose" part with an open mind, Len.

THAT'S a stretch, Jim.

Lennie's about as flexible as a pane of glass.

As far as populatity goes, I'd say that the general public back
then
seemed to be far more aware of even the existence of the hobby
than it appears to be today (wonder if there's a survey available
anywhere on
this anywhere.....). For example, all of my friends and I knew
about amateur radio back then - both of my teenage sons indicate that
the majority of their contemporaries have no idea at all that the hobby
even exists. Those who are aware are pretty much disinterested
in the activity - they have more fun and interesting things to do!

But are you and your friends a representative sample?

Why not?

Because they're a small sample.

YOU seem to hold yourself as a "representative sample"
of the very model of a modern major marvel in amateur radio. :-)

I'd rather be me than you, Len ;-)

Halleleuja on that one...

[apologies to Gilbert & Sullivan]

When I was growing up, most people, kids or adults, had no idea
what ham radio was unless they were related to or good friends
with a ham.

In 50 years little has changed in that regard...

No thanks to "professionals in radio electronics who have had a
lifelong interest in Amateur Radio..."

I'm still waiting for Lennie to regale us with tales of all the
kids he's "mentored" in an electronics career....

Seems Lennie's real poor with his "sharing" skills...No doubt part
of the reason he so covets the Amateur allocations yet won't join
in....If he can't "have it all" he doesn't want ANYthing.....

Where is the ARRL Public Relations effort when it is sorely
needed?

I grew up in a suburb of Philadelphia that was mostly blue- and
white-collar middle class families. Lots of kids, houses ranging from
rowhomes to big single Dutch Colonials. Yet there were less than a
dozen hams in the whole township then, all spread out, and about half
were inactive or minimally active.

"Typical?" :-)

Yes.

Tsk, didn't you claim to have begun amateur radio in another
state?

No. You are mistaken - again.

Show us where I made such a claim - if you can.

It's Lennie that's in "another state"...of confusion...!

In my high school (grades 9/10/11/12), which had over 2500 boys and
emphasized math and science, there were perhaps a half-dozen hams in
the 4 years I was there.

Ah, an "all boys" school. That may explain a lot...?

Such as?

Jim has kids. What happened to you, Lennie?

The all-girls school was right next door. Both schools are still there
and still educating young people.

The main problem wasn't code or theory, for those who were interested.
It was space for an antenna and money for equipment.

Amazing how the story changes as time goes on... :-)

No change.

NOBODY had an "attic antenna" back in those ancient days?

That requires an attic. Not everyone has one. Row houses usually don't.

Tsk, the "beer can vertical" started in the 1950s..

Did you ever build one? I did - from steel *soda* cans. ;-)

NOBODY managed to attend a Field Day exercise back then?
[were there any parks to hold them in?]

I've been on the air at every Field Day since 1968. My score for
this year is listed on the ARRL website. I was #1 in my category
for the Hudson Division.

Did anyone hear Lennie and his Part 15 rig on 20 meters?

NOBODY scrounged for "old radio parts" to build a whole
station for $100 then?

I did. Built stations for a lot less than $100. Pictures of
one of my receivers are on the HBR website.

I built the 35W crystal controlled transmitter with a single 6146
from the 69 Handbook. Used a Heathkit HR-10B receiver that I built.
After you add in some crystals and other accessories from a local
hamfest, I think I got WN8OAH on the air for under $100 in 1972.

Most people, young or old, thought ham radio looked like a kind of fun
thing, when they found out about it. But not enough to spend the
necessary time and money to set up a station, let alone get a license.

Too busy playing with car fix-ups?

Yes, for many 'teeners' of that time.

They couldn't get part-time jobs to afford $100 to build a
"Southgate" transceiver?

You seem to forget how much $100 really was back in the 1960s.
A week's gross salary for you, I'd expect....;-)

Oh no, Jim...Now we will be subjected to yet another diatribe on
how he was making "the big bucks" in "aerospace".

Well, I have to give you slack on that. "Surplus" in the late
1940s was very inexpensive: $6 for a brand-new Command Set
receiver, $12 for a brand-new Command Set transmitter, $18 for
the Command Set antenna tuning unit and modulator...at H&H
Electronics, co-owned by Gene Hubbel (then W9ERU, later W7DI
and then SK...a VERY high-rate tested morseman).

There's Lennie dropping Amateur callsigns as if it means something
to him.

That's nice, Len. But I didn't grow up in the 1940s. I was talking
about
the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Tsk, I used
my part-time earnings to buy and convert (to 110 VAC power)
TWO Command Set stations...sold them quickly at a very modest
profit by 1950. "Surplus" radios cost much more 30 years later.

That's nice, Len.

But I bet you never actually *operated* a Command Set station. I did.
Converted both the receivers and transmitters. Had a complete setup of
them before I was 16.

What was "very modest" about Lennie's command set story was the
quantity of truth, I bet...

But I soon found I could build better receivers and transmitters. So
surplus became a parts source for my projects.

Hmmmmmmmmmm.....Reminds me...Lennie STILL hasn't ponied-up some
pics or specifics on HIS "station", other than a 30 year old Icom
receiver and an un-named scanner he listens to LAX ATIS on...

It's not like it would be a technically challenging project,
considering his seven AOL accounts and their allocated "webpages" allow
the posting of multiple jpeg's or bitmap pics.

IMHO one of the biggest reasons ham radio isn't better known
is that it's not a very "visual" thing - it doesn't translate well to
TV or a movie.

Really? Ernest Lehman didn't think so. He wrote a fairly
popular novel entitled "The French Atlantic Affair" which was
made into a two-part TV movie on one of the networks. Lehman
was a respected award-winning screenwriter ("North by Northwest"
is perhaps the most notable). Lehman was also a licensed ham.

And you're not.

And obviously you were right in this case, Jim...Wonder where all
that literary skill went to...?!?!

Of course, CB Radio has been featured in many a TV show and
movie such as "Convoy," "Smokey and the Bandit," and (would
you believe this title) "Flatbed Annie and Sweetiepie"...not
to mention an essential part of "The Dukes of Hazzard" series.

Where it is depicted being used to avoid law enforcement and in
violation of the Communications Act.

Yep...criminals and rednecks...Those are the kinda folks I
would want to be associated with!

A later movie, "Frequency" used amateur radio as essential to
enable communications time-travel between deceased father and
son, but that was more science-fantasy in its plotline and
didn't really showcase radio as much as the supernatural.

And only the laws of nature were "broken".

Not a redneck in sight.

Then there's "Contact" in which the main character is a young radio
amateur, and amateur radio operation is fairly adequately portrayed
in the opening sequence. But the terms "amateur radio" and "ham radio"
are not mentioned in the film!

When depicted operating her amateur radio station in that film, the
main character is well below the minimum age limit you would have
imposed on US amateur radio, btw.

Uh huh...And also played a very pivotal part in the character's
developing scientific future. Again, all very positive
representations.

And let's not forget "The Anderson Tapes" (how ironic!) in which a
bed-ridden youth in a high rise calls for help when thieves loot their
flats...?!?!

Again...very positive and technically accurate portrayals of
Amateur Radio.

Maybe we're using the wrong term - perhaps instead of "popularity",
what you are describing is better described as "visibility" or
"recognition by the public".

Tsk. You should have a long heart-to-heart talk with ARRL
Public Relations (excuse me, "Media Advisors") people on
getting amateur radio more popular with the general public.
ARRL hasn't done much in THAT regard for the last half
century...they've spent most of their time preaching to the
choir to try and enlarge their membership numbers (haven't
done too well there, either, still only 1 out of 5 licensed
U.S. radio amateurs are members).

You know this how?

He doesn't. It's a bunch of bufoonery.

But, you are NOT offering any possible solutions to either
popularity, visibility, or recognition by any public.

I've done so many time, Len.

Ditto. I've set up at my kids grade school...Assisted at
JOTA...done "PA" functions at Field Day sites...Taught classes...

Hey Lennie...How many kids have YOU mentored in electonics..?!?!

Even ONE...?!?!

Your
aim is to disrupt any talk of eliminating the code test by
any means possible.

Typical - when someone disagrees with you,
you make claims that are simply not true.

Notice, Jim, that he puts this at the END of a lengthy, windy post
wherein he FIRST took great liberties to try and undermine any "good"
references to Amateur Radio, with or WITHOUT the "code test" being
mentioned....Seems he made QUITE A FEW refrences of his own that had
NOTHING to do with "code testing".

NOT a democratic-principle effort on
your part. But, it's par for the course in this newsgroup.

Sorry, that's just not true.

Again, another lame swipe AFTER he has taken HIS liberties....That
is par for HIS course...

73

Steve, K4YZ