Al Klein wrote:
On 2 Aug 2006 20:05:21 -0700, wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, wrote:
how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge?
No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is
putting the law "over all ham knowledge".
CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska).
Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of
correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ...
There is no pass/fail practical for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY, FAX,
Packet, PSK, etc, etc, etc.
There's no test at all, so those claiming that the reason they want a
test for CW dropped because it's not "modern" have no argument - they
want no test for FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is also pretty old hat),
packet, PSK, etc. They want no test at all, unless they can memorize
a few answers to "pass" it.
You couldn't be more wrong. If there were practical exams for SSB, FM,
AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc,
then it would be CRYSTAL clear that a Morse Code exam is valid.
However, there are no such practical exams for the other modes. So
there need be no exam for Morse Code, either.
How progressive is it?
How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah,
that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses
because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air.
Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se
guys want to "beef up" the written exams?
We don't.
That is not true.
Sure it is. "Beefing up" the written exam is a counter to "drop CW
because it's old fashioned". If you want modern you want the testing
to be turned from CW to modern modes.
That is not true. You wish to change the written exams, not add
practical exams for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is pretty
darned old), packet, PSK, etc.
Those who want CW dropped just
want what they can't memorize dropped so they can get a ticket without
really being tested on anything.
So all ham radio is is Morse Code on HF? Or is it more than that?
Actually knowing anything is so old
fashioned, isn't it?
Not at all.
We want to get back the level it used to be before it was
dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never
heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics.
You're referring to the Conditional license, right?
No, I'm not addressing *where* the test is held at all - I'm
addressing *whether* there's any real test, which there isn't, except
for CW right now. Spitting out something you memorized is only a test
of memory.
Sounds like the Conditional License to me.
Just by guessing at the
answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics.
You tell me? Was it 2 or was it 3?
I don't remember after almost 50 years - but I could still draw them
today, and it's not a test of remembering what's on the test, it's a
test of knowing what's in a radio.
Then advocate passing the current exam at every license renewal. You'd
probably be weeded out pretty quickly.
From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A
Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that
I've forgotten at the moment.
You should self-modify your license and cease amateur operation until
you remember.
Why? Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge.
What if you forgot your band edges?
The amateur is self-policing, and you no longer meet your own standard.
Sure I do. The test wasn't to remember what circuits to draw, it was
to draw them. And I can draw them any time.
Then do so. Quit complaining to me that you can't remember what it was
that you were supposed to draw.
They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago.
Other things are relevant today that weren't even known 50 years ago.
So let's have them on the test.
But if a practical exam is necessary for Morse Code, why isn't it
necessary for other modes? If all radio is merely plug and play, why
do the services still have radio schools (that aren't teaching Morse
Code)?
Oops, that's right - no more relevant testing, isn't that what people
are asking for? Just give me the answers so I can memorize them and
pick them out on the test.
Who said that? We absolutely NEED relevant exams. That is my whole
argument!
how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more
operators
What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who
don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.)
It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already
assembled.
But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally.
No you didn't.
Yes, you did - you had to pass a test to show that you did.
There has never been a practical test to show that you could operate a
radio. Ever.
All you
have to do now is memorize a few answers.
That's all you had to do then.
I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military.
I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce
power once.
But you had to learn how to use the radios.
I did?
Hams today don't - they
memorize a few answers, buy equipment and get on the air - with no
understanding of what they're doing, and no desire to learn.
Then it hasn't changed much since you were first licensed.
That's exactly what he's talking about. Give someone a radio and a
"license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for
service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up
above. How does one acquire skill by playing radio?
We self-train.
You may, but I can see from many of the comments that have been posted
here that a lot of people don't. They don't want to learn, they want
to get on the air. Period.
W3RV didn't wait to get a ham license before operating! He just wanted
to get on the air. Period.
It is a continuous process of improvements. You
mistakenly believe that at the conclusion of The Exam, the "operator"
is 100%.
And you mistakenly believe that most hams today want to learn how to
operate properly. Listen to 75 some evenings.
Lots of OFs on there who should know better. That's why I hold the
opinions that I hold. Your generation doesn't have a lock on decency,
respect, or apatite for knowledge. Far from it.
But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators"
if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill
or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic?
I've listened to emergency responders on a scanner before. They don't
use Morse Code, they don't use CW. They use FM/Voice. Somehow they
are effective at it, not having taken a Morse Code test. How can this
be?
They were trained.
Not in Morse Code. If you must retain a Morse Code Exam, then you must
also administer practical exams for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY
(which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc.
So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy
one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too
obvious to need mentioning.
Please diagram that radio from "Scratch."
Any time. Filter or phasing? BFO receive or quadrature detection?
I've designed them, built them and used them, and still could.
What is/was your profession?
Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a
test should actually test for something. There are actually millions
of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing
in the world.
Dial 911 and tell the operator that you don't need instant
gratification, take your time.
Very bad example of an attempt at sarcasm and a misunderstanding of
"gratification".
What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries?
You seem to be confused. DXCC is an award offered by the ARRL, not the
FCC. It has nothing to do with licensing.
But an award for wanting has to do with "I want it so it's my right to
have it", which is what I'm talking about. No one has any "right" to
get on the air.
Correct. And no one has a right to force their favorite mode on
everyone else. Your days of doing so are numbered.