Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote in
ups.com:
Here's another example: In the old exam methods, there would be a few
sample questions on Ohm's Law for DC, as an example. These would *not*
be the exact questions on the actual exam, though, but they would
cover the general areas of resistance, power, parallel, series, etc.
So the typical ham-to-be would learn those subjects backwards,
forwards and sideways, in order to be ready for anything on the test.
Frankly, that is what I did for my Extra exam. That was much easier that
trying to memorize the pool.
OTOH some of the materail is only possible to learn by memorization the
band edges, rules. I find the RF safety easy but then I have studied
maxwells equation and reconzie element from them but the answer is an
arbitary limit set by the FCC
But with the actual Q&A available, all one needs to do is to be able
to solve the particular problems in those questions - or recognize the
correct answer out of the four supplied.
I am so weary of that chestnut. I suppose real engineers don't
consult design manuals for hints and ideas.
me too
In any field these days where it is necessary to prove that the
worker has been exposed to a particular bit of knowledge, there will be
a question pool. I've seen it for fields where a mistake can cost lives,
such as study guides with question pools for electrical code work. I can
get you the name of the book if you are skeptical. Its just how it is.
And I can remember what I studied for on my tests - I believe that the
pool does no harm, and a de facto pool has existed for many years.
I think that in the past couple of decades the focus has been too much
on learning just enough to pass the test, and reducing how much has to
really be learned to pass those tests, rather than understanding basic
radio. I don't think it helps a newcomer to have a license yet not
know the basics, like how to put up an effective HF antenna in a
limited space.
My own thoughts on how Amateur radio should be organized are that
the higher classes of license should be earned by time in grade, so to
speak. I don't think that an extra should not know how to erect a HF
antenna, or have no experience with operations in general - and the
present system allows that.
interesting diea Id coment more and negitively but I see your next para
Of course, it is possible for the person to wait out the period of
time before upgrading, but two things work against that - attrition due
to lack of interest, and the likelyhood that a person who does simply
wait it out without actually doing anything before upgrading is just
going to be some sort of statistic.
I would agree with your point. In this day of 100 percent appliance
stations, Amateurs should build as much as they can.
funny I have built a few thing I am found of vacutumed 6 m am unit I
built from direction in CQ VHF was supposed to be based of a radio
originaly published for use on an 5 m band with just the compents
altered a bit to fit 6m
And consider this: There are classes today that promise "Technician in
a day" - and they succeed. Is that a good thing, though? Do the new
hams who get their licenses that way really have the background
needed?
I think that the old novice test could have been taught in a day
also. Much of what is on the Technician test is common sense.
As for needed background, I think that getting licensed, getting on
the air and being elmered is what produces good hams.
elmerd and not abused
Too much of what I have heard from a lot of old time hams is
disdain for newcomers - even now before the "great unwashed" come into
the hobby. Fortunately nickle Extras such as myself will be there to
help, not belittle or chase away.
I think I'm going to go heat up the Garage and get to work on that
mobile antenna I am building. Fun chat, Jim.
- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -