KØHB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...


No other part of the testing is a skill.


My point EXACTLY, Mike.

While there are many skills associated with our hobby, only one of those skills
is singled out for a required demonstration.

Interestingly, if that skill is so vital as to need a skill demonstration, it
would seem that no-one who had not been tested would be allowed to use it on the
air. Yet a basic Technician licensee is perfectly free to use Morse on the air
without having passed a Morse test. So much for the need for a demonstration
before a license grant!


I see it as a license progression thing. The Morse code is the skill
demonstration, and HF access is the carrot.

I know someone who is going to bust my chops now!!! 8^)


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
KØHB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...


No other part of the testing is a skill.


My point EXACTLY, Mike.

While there are many skills associated with our hobby, only one of those
skills is singled out for a required demonstration.

Interestingly, if that skill is so vital as to need a skill demonstration, it
would seem that no-one who had not been tested would be allowed to use it on
the air. Yet a basic Technician licensee is perfectly free to use Morse on
the air without having passed a Morse test. So much for the need for a
demonstration before a license grant!


I see it as a license progression thing. The Morse code is the skill
demonstration, and HF access is the carrot.


But the skill demonstration should bear relationship to the privilege granted as
a RESULT of that demonstration. In other words, USE of Morse should be
restricted only to those who have successfully demonstrated their skill. Or to
use your example, the USE of Morse should be the carrot offered as a result of
passing a Morse test.

But by FCC regulation, a code-free Technician is allowed to use Morse on the air
WITHOUT a successful Morse demonstration, and the "demonstrate BEFORE privilege"
model is disconnected; ergo the demonstration is not vital to the successful use
of the mode and serves no rational regulatory purpose.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"cl" wrote in message
o.verio.net...
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...


[snip]


I wonder how VE Dee would accomodate the disabled in the Tower Climbing
pass/fail skill exam?


Tower climbing is not a basic skill so there is no need to test for it. One
can put up a wide variety of antennas without a tower. On the other hand,
I've often thought that a person (unless handicapped) should demonstrate
putting a simple PL-256 on coax.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:
"cl" wrote in message
o.verio.net...
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...


[snip]


I wonder how VE Dee would accomodate the disabled in the Tower
Climbing
pass/fail skill exam?


Tower climbing is not a basic skill so there is no need to test for
it. One
can put up a wide variety of antennas without a tower. On the other
hand,
I've often thought that a person (unless handicapped) should
demonstrate
putting a simple PL-256 on coax.

Blasphemy! Off with your head!

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

w3rv

cl wrote:
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...

K=D8HB wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...

No other part of the testing is a skill.

My point EXACTLY, Mike.

While there are many skills associated with our hobby, only one of
those skills
is singled out for a required demonstration.

Interestingly, if that skill is so vital as to need a skill
demonstration, it
would seem that no-one who had not been tested would be allowed to
use it on the
air. Yet a basic Technician licensee is perfectly free to use Morse
on the air
without having passed a Morse test. So much for the need for a
demonstration
before a license grant!

73, de Hans, K0HB

I wonder how VE Dee would accomodate the disabled in the Tower
Climbing
pass/fail skill exam?


Not that Tower climbing will likely ever become an issue with the
exam,

I'm going to advocate it during the next NPRM.

but
if it were, then I'd suggest there would be questions relating to the
proper
safety techniques of doing such a job,

No questions. They need to climb a 60 foot tower, haul up the coax and
an HF-tribander, fasten it, point it north, and make the connections.

wherein "actual" "physical"
demonstration is not needed nor required.

But it is. Otherwise, how would we know they could do it?

Given that - a wheel chair bound
person "could" pass those parts of an exam. I can't fathom tower
climbing
becoming a major issue.

Yet Morse Code has become a major issue. Just because not everyone is
going to have a tower is no excuse for not being able to demonstrate
the ability.

K=D8HB wrote:
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
K=D8HB wrote:

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...


No other part of the testing is a skill.


My point EXACTLY, Mike.

While there are many skills associated with our hobby, only one of
those
skills is singled out for a required demonstration.

Interestingly, if that skill is so vital as to need a skill
demonstration, it
would seem that no-one who had not been tested would be allowed to
use it on
the air. Yet a basic Technician licensee is perfectly free to use
Morse on
the air without having passed a Morse test. So much for the need
for a
demonstration before a license grant!


I see it as a license progression thing. The Morse code is the
skill
demonstration, and HF access is the carrot.


But the skill demonstration should bear relationship to the privilege
granted as
a RESULT of that demonstration. In other words, USE of Morse should
be
restricted only to those who have successfully demonstrated their
skill. Or to
use your example, the USE of Morse should be the carrot offered as a
result of
passing a Morse test.

But by FCC regulation, a code-free Technician is allowed to use Morse
on the air
WITHOUT a successful Morse demonstration, and the "demonstrate BEFORE
privilege"
model is disconnected; ergo the demonstration is not vital to the
successful use
of the mode and serves no rational regulatory purpose.
=20
73, de Hans, K0HB

We deserve logical regulations.

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
news I've often thought that a person (unless handicapped) should demonstrate
putting a simple PL-256 on coax.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Perhaps they could demonstrate a PL259 connector instead?

Brad VK2QQ

"bb" wrote

I wonder how VE Dee would accomodate the
disabled in the Tower Climbing pass/fail skill exam?

The Somolian judges gave this a 9.8 on the Olympic Troll-O-Meter,
but they were over-ruled by the umpires in instant replay, who
award it a 2.6

The Somolian judges lodged a formal protest!

It was sufficiently trollish, of course, but way too obvious.
It was poorly written, poorly executed, and was so incredibly
lame as to lack the true drawing power of a really masterful
troll. Maybe as high as a 3.3 for the intense stupidity of the
premise, but a 9.8? Never! The Somolian judges tear their
hair out, throw their balalaikas down in dismay, and perform
the traditional Somolian Dismay Chant! They demand a recount!

Recount denied.

Perhaps they could demonstrate a PL259 connector instead?

Extra credit if they can do it without melting the
dielectric insulation of the coax. More points if they
can get the solder to actually flow onto the connector body
where the shield solder holes are located (helps if you
use a small file to remove the plating first).
And more points if they remember to put the shell on the
cable in the correct direction before doing any soldering ;-)

I see it as a license progression thing. The Morse code is the skill
demonstration, and HF access is the carrot.

What does the FCC and the government get out of it today?

I know someone who is going to bust my chops now!!! 8^)

This wouldn't be rrap otherwise ;-)