HarryHydro wrote:

Hi Folks:
Just remeniscing and old realistic CB walkie talkie I had. It had
the metal ground-straps on the side and it could talk 2.4 miles (just
measured on a map) with an S7. My Wife just picked up two similar
walkie-talkies at a yard sale for $5! I was wide-eyed at the size of
the thing! I remember when I was a kid wanting one of these
walkie-talkies so bad that I got the dimensions and made a cardboard
model to see 'how it felt holding one'! Wow! Thinking back! Anyone
ever routinely talk further on a CB walkie talkie?
The guy I use to talk to frequently in South Toms River was
Electro-Express. I - you guessed it - was Hydro! (hydrofoil) He'd
say, "The only walkie-talkie I know that'll talk that far is Hydro's".
I currently use a Johnson Messenger Viking. Yes, I know it's
2005.. ;-) This radio talks and sounds nice too!

Take Care!
Hydro

I was somewhere between 8 an 10 years old when I got my first pair of CB
walkie-talkies for Christmas or my birthday back in the early 70s. This
was the results of my parents recognizing a talent for electronics in me
back then. By then, I'd put together a myiad of electronic projects like
crystal radios, alarms, mosture detectors, dc motors, light detectors, etc.
These little CB walkie-talkies were in little plastic blue briefcase-style
boxes, less than 1 foot by 1 foot. You'd open them up, extend the
telescopic antenna and turn it on. Ony one channel (14) and 100
milliwatts. They'd only work for about a block. I was hooked then.

My father saw my frustration with them after he'd tell me stories of back
when he was stationed in Morocco working the other side of the world with a
Heathkit DX-40, a Hammurland receiver, and a knife switch to a long-wire
antenna.

After he retired from the Air Force, he commuted to school. We set up a 4
watt mobile into a ground plane strapped to the chimney and put an
identical mobile rig in his Datsun B210 with a base loaded whip. And then
we waited for our CB license to come from the FCC. KCN-6537! Not amazing
I still remember that, we used it. We were scared to death of the law back
then. Back in the mid-70s, when he took off for school, I'd talk to him
until he was out of range. When he came home on Friday's, I'd be at that
radio waiting to hear him and talk him in. Range was about 13 miles. It
was fun! Back in the 70's, the locals in Louisiana made it difficult
because their pleasure was to maliciously interfere with us. Then one day,
he came home and showed me the window had been smashed and his CB was gone.
At 12 years old, I became frustrated with CB. At 13 I became a ham. After
my father saw me get a ham license, he passed his test soon after I did
again, after letting his ham license expire years ago. I started off with
an "N" in my call sign. Still have that call sign, but I made "extra" back
when you had to pass a 20 WPM morse code test.

When I was waiting for my "N" call sign, I put together a 6L6
oscillator/transmitter and borrowed an old tube-type receiver. My first
few contacts in the novice band of 40 were miraculous to me--100s of miles
away!. I was hooked at 13. Soon after, I put together a 6146 transmitter
for a few more watts. Wow, I was fascinated. Sure was fun back then.
Both my mother and father became nervous when they found out about the
exposed plate voltage. I mounted that 6146 on top of the aluminum box so I
could see the filiment glow and the plate connector was bare metal. My
father finally broke down and bought an Yaesu FT-101. Wow! A radio that
put out 180 watts AND a VFO AND all bands AND all MODES! I remember making
sure it wasn't putting out more than 75 watts--that would have been
breaking the rules. It didn't get any better than that. I still have that
radio. Needs new tubes (and of course the modification for the available
replacement tubes).

I still always travel with channel 19 in the truck. It still works better
than a radar detector. Today, I'm frustrated with hams. Back then, my ham
friends were techies. It's hard to find a techie on the ham bands
now-a-days.

Yup, sure was fun back then. It's a new era today.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Guy

I still always travel with channel 19 in the truck. It still works better
than a radar detector. Today, I'm frustrated with hams. Back then, my ham
friends were techies. It's hard to find a techie on the ham bands
now-a-days.

How do hams become techies when all they have to do is memorize some
answers to a preprinted test? I'm for making it an essay/fill-in-the-blank
test. Drop the code. Don't do away with code-only portions of the band.

Code shouldn't be forced on you, but it shouldn't be brushed away.

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:45:07 -0400, Scott in Baltimore
wrote:

I still always travel with channel 19 in the truck. It still works better
than a radar detector. Today, I'm frustrated with hams. Back then, my ham
friends were techies. It's hard to find a techie on the ham bands
now-a-days.

How do hams become techies when all they have to do is memorize some
answers to a preprinted test? I'm for making it an essay/fill-in-the-blank
test. Drop the code. Don't do away with code-only portions of the band.

I used the answers in the book method. I learned quite a bit just from that. Now
that I passed the tests, I will get the standard ARRL tech and general books,
before I go on the air.

I think the problem with essay, it time and age. I studied for a month, almost
every night. Having no kids, that wasn't a problem. Get a kid or 2, and you will
have a harder time. Also, it seems the youth are so preoccupied with the Net,
IPODs and cell phones, making the tested harder is not going to get any new
members. Most of the hams I talked to want to get more young people interested
in ham, because it appears to be on it's way out with that age group.

Code shouldn't be forced on you, but it shouldn't be brushed away.


Code is a complete waste. I studied for a month, passed the test, and already
have forgotten the letters. What they should do if make it optional for code
users. Give a real test, and give out licenses for code users. IOW, those who
want to use it, test for it.

Vinnie S.

Vinnie S. wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 11:45:07 -0400, Scott in Baltimore
wrote:

I still always travel with channel 19 in the truck. It still works
better
than a radar detector. Today, I'm frustrated with hams. Back then, my
ham
friends were techies. It's hard to find a techie on the ham bands
now-a-days.

How do hams become techies when all they have to do is memorize some
answers to a preprinted test? I'm for making it an essay/fill-in-the-blank
test. Drop the code. Don't do away with code-only portions of the band.

I used the answers in the book method. I learned quite a bit just from
that. Now that I passed the tests, I will get the standard ARRL tech and
general books, before I go on the air.

I think the problem with essay, it time and age. I studied for a month,
almost every night. Having no kids, that wasn't a problem. Get a kid or 2,
and you will have a harder time. Also, it seems the youth are so
preoccupied with the Net, IPODs and cell phones, making the tested harder
is not going to get any new members. Most of the hams I talked to want to
get more young people interested in ham, because it appears to be on it's
way out with that age group.

Code shouldn't be forced on you, but it shouldn't be brushed away.


Code is a complete waste. I studied for a month, passed the test, and
already have forgotten the letters. What they should do if make it
optional for code users. Give a real test, and give out licenses for code
users. IOW, those who want to use it, test for it.

Vinnie S.

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:54:39 -0500, Guy wrote:

Code is a complete waste. I studied for a month, passed the test, and
already have forgotten the letters. What they should do if make it
optional for code users. Give a real test, and give out licenses for code
users. IOW, those who want to use it, test for it.

Vinnie S.

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?

Because it's the opposite right now. People who don't use it, test for it. Might
as well right that ship.

Vinnie S.

Vinnie S. wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:54:39 -0500, Guy wrote:

Code is a complete waste. I studied for a month, passed the test, and
already have forgotten the letters. What they should do if make it
optional for code users. Give a real test, and give out licenses for
code users. IOW, those who want to use it, test for it.

Vinnie S.

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?

Because it's the opposite right now. People who don't use it, test for it.
Might as well right that ship.

Vinnie S.

Why not just do away with the morse code test? WRC-03 did away with the
international requirement.

As a matter of fact, can you think of a reason to have *any* testing
requirements to operate in the ham bands these days?

You say code is a complete waste. I could say the same about memorizing
things like the frequencies of a particular ham band, or answering "yes" to
radio waves travelling at the speed of light in a vacuum, or which
ionospheric region is closest to earth, or the meaning of the term "73", or
the meaning of the Q-Signal "QRS", or how much voltage is there from an
automobile battery, or the difference between microfarad and picofarad, or
how to figure out a 1/4 wavelength, or ... I just finished looking through
the element 2 question pool and I can't think of a reason why people are
tested on this stuff anymore.

Can't buy any ham gear today that operates outside the ham bands. Why not
just make it illegal to modify store-bought ham gear and then just call it
the Citizen's Bands (bandS -- plural).

A few decades ago, you had to have a little bit of knowledge to
build/operate home brew equipment, and a little less knowledge to operate
store-bought gear and keep it inside the ham bands and prevent
unintentional interference. Now-a-days, it's not economically feasible to
home-brew your own ham gear anymore. It's cheaper to buy it from a store.
And the stuff you buy from the store today almost can't be made to operate
outside the ham bands or un-intentionally interfere with others unless you
pop the lid and screw it up with silly modifications.

Element 4 has questions like, "What's the audio frequency of the color Black
in amateur SSTV?" Who cares? Why would knowing this make you more
qualified to download MMSSTV, hook up your computer sound card to your
radio (using a store bought interface) and start exchanging pictures?

If CW has been superceded by technology, couldn't you say the same thing
about all of amateur radio?

Heck, I just saw an advertisement for a cell phone that accepts broadband TV
now.

I don't mean to sound combative to you or anyone else, I just woke up a few
days ago and started having some epiphanies on this subject.

Guy

On Sun, 12 Jun 2005 16:10:06 -0500, Guy wrote:

..
Because it's the opposite right now. People who don't use it, test for it.
Might as well right that ship.

Vinnie S.

Why not just do away with the morse code test? WRC-03 did away with the
international requirement.

You'd have to ask a morse guy. I don't know.

As a matter of fact, can you think of a reason to have *any* testing
requirements to operate in the ham bands these days?

Yeah, regulation. Clearly, there is working regulation on ham bands. And there
is no regulation on CB band, unless you are running 10,000 watts.

So, you already have both. If you don't want to test for anything, there is CB.

You say code is a complete waste. I could say the same about memorizing
things like the frequencies of a particular ham band, or answering "yes" to
radio waves travelling at the speed of light in a vacuum, or which
ionospheric region is closest to earth, or the meaning of the term "73", or
the meaning of the Q-Signal "QRS", or how much voltage is there from an
automobile battery, or the difference between microfarad and picofarad, or
how to figure out a 1/4 wavelength, or ... I just finished looking through
the element 2 question pool and I can't think of a reason why people are
tested on this stuff anymore.

Well, they ask you 35 questions. I read the queston pool book 3 times. There had
to be hundreds of questions. So to answer your question, ye, I think they should
keep the test. Clearly, I learned from it.

Can't buy any ham gear today that operates outside the ham bands. Why not
just make it illegal to modify store-bought ham gear and then just call it
the Citizen's Bands (bandS -- plural).

A few decades ago, you had to have a little bit of knowledge to
build/operate home brew equipment, and a little less knowledge to operate
store-bought gear and keep it inside the ham bands and prevent
unintentional interference. Now-a-days, it's not economically feasible to
home-brew your own ham gear anymore. It's cheaper to buy it from a store.
And the stuff you buy from the store today almost can't be made to operate
outside the ham bands or un-intentionally interfere with others unless you
pop the lid and screw it up with silly modifications.

Element 4 has questions like, "What's the audio frequency of the color Black
in amateur SSTV?" Who cares? Why would knowing this make you more
qualified to download MMSSTV, hook up your computer sound card to your
radio (using a store bought interface) and start exchanging pictures?

If CW has been superceded by technology, couldn't you say the same thing
about all of amateur radio?

Heck, I just saw an advertisement for a cell phone that accepts broadband TV
now.

I don't mean to sound combative to you or anyone else, I just woke up a few
days ago and started having some epiphanies on this subject.


You don't sound combative. You have a different opinion. You make some valid
points. But as I said before, there is a licensed and unlicensed option. Now,
what you might be asking it to expand the CB band to have more unlicensed
frequencies. I would not have a problem with that.

I did actually enjoy reading those books. So whether the questions are dumb or
not, I did learn a few things.

Vinnie S.

"Guy" wrote in message
news:TKMqe.15606$mC.3822@okepread07...
wrote:

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?


Why not? If you want to drive, you have to take a test, if you want to
get into college you have to take a test, so what's wrong with if you are
going to use code only about taking a test?

Landshark

Landshark wrote:


"Guy" wrote in message
news:TKMqe.15606$mC.3822@okepread07...
wrote:

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?


Why not? If you want to drive, you have to take a test, if you want to
get into college you have to take a test, so what's wrong with if you are
going to use code only about taking a test?

Landshark

I don't understand the logic in what you're saying.

Are there other tests that we should introduce into society?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to open a
credit card account?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to take
the mail out of your mailbox and bring it into your house for further
sorting, opening, and reading?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to operate
a gas pump to fill your car with gasoline?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to
reproduce?

Ok, I'm stating some crazy things here to try to make a point...

How about just leaving some space in the ham bands for CW? If it gets used,
fine, keep it. If CW dies out (and it will eventually--us old timers who
got their ham ticket the hard way will eventually RIP) then reallocate it
for other modes.

By the way, I don't remember having to take a test to get into college. I
have a BS in Computer Science and a Masters in Computer Information
Systems. As long as I paid my bill, they allowed me to go to class.

And the reason for the test to drive a car is to show something in the way
of being able to drive a car and not kill someone else while doing it. I
can understand the reason for the test to drive a car. I can explain valid
reasons for some of my crazy examples above also.

So why test for CW? It's not like anyone who attempts to operate CW without
knowing all the letters at an arbitrary speed will endanger anyone or
themselves while doing it.

Why have a test to operate any mode in any ham band these days?

Guy

"Guy" wrote in message
news:F64re.15840$mC.13248@okepread07...
Landshark wrote:


"Guy" wrote in message
news:TKMqe.15606$mC.3822@okepread07...
wrote:

Why should people who *want* to use it have to test for it?


Why not? If you want to drive, you have to take a test, if you want to
get into college you have to take a test, so what's wrong with if you are
going to use code only about taking a test?

Landshark

I don't understand the logic in what you're saying.

Are there other tests that we should introduce into society?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to open
a
credit card account?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to take
the mail out of your mailbox and bring it into your house for further
sorting, opening, and reading?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to
operate
a gas pump to fill your car with gasoline?

Should we implement taking a test before you are deemed qualified to
reproduce?

Ok, I'm stating some crazy things here to try to make a point...

A little, but a couple might have possibilities



How about just leaving some space in the ham bands for CW? If it gets
used,
fine, keep it. If CW dies out (and it will eventually--us old timers who
got their ham ticket the hard way will eventually RIP) then reallocate it
for other modes.

Good, no problem there either.


By the way, I don't remember having to take a test to get into college. I
have a BS in Computer Science and a Masters in Computer Information
Systems. As long as I paid my bill, they allowed me to go to class.


Maybe not a community or Some state college's, but most want some
sort of aptitude test to make sure you are not wasting the teachers
& university's time.

And the reason for the test to drive a car is to show something in the way
of being able to drive a car and not kill someone else while doing it. I
can understand the reason for the test to drive a car. I can explain
valid
reasons for some of my crazy examples above also.

So why test for CW? It's not like anyone who attempts to operate CW
without
knowing all the letters at an arbitrary speed will endanger anyone or
themselves while doing it.

If you can read 20 to 30 WPM, would you want to here somebody
pounding out only 5 WPM? Otherwise would you want to see the bands
allocated to certain speeds? Point being, it would be called a qualifying
test, to make sure you are able to operate in the mode you test for.


Why have a test to operate any mode in any ham band these days?

Most modes you are correct, but CW is almost an art, as such is
dieing out.


Guy

Landshark


--
Some of them are living an illusion
Bounded by the darkness of their minds,
In their eyes it's nation against nation,
With racial pride, sad hearts they hide,
Thinking only of themselves,
They shun the light,
They think they're right
Living in the empty shells.