|
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Just thought you should know that.
Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Who cares! HAM radio is dying fast and your ideas will just make it
come faster. The Kat wrote: On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 20:57:58 GMT, Slow Code wrote: Just thought you should know that. You're an ass. Just thought you should know that (AND you probably already did). Lumber Cartel (tinlc) #2063. Spam this account at your own risk. This sig censored by the Office of Home and Land Insecurity... Remove XYZ to email me |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Blow Code - your ideas will damn amateur radio and kill it. The ARRL is the
best thing we have and all amateurs should join the organization to help preserve amateur radio. Forcing CW onto newcomers will only turn them away from amateur radio since CW is seen by outsiders as old-fashioned and out-of-date. This is the 21st Century and people do not want to be forced to learn and use and communication method developed in the 19th Century. Grow up and face reality. Stop clinging to your old buggy whip communication methods and get over the fact that amateur radio is changing for the better. It's going to change with our without you. You can stop change. "Slow Code" wrote in message nk.net... Just thought you should know that. Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:45:57 -0400, "ohioradioham"
wrote: Blow Code - your ideas will damn amateur radio and kill it. That's evidently why the number of hams kept decreasing until code was eliminated, right? Oh, wait a minute - the numbers didn't START decreasing until code was eliminated. Forcing CW onto newcomers will only turn them away from amateur radio since CW is seen by outsiders as old-fashioned and out-of-date. This is the 21st Century and people do not want to be forced to learn and use and communication method developed in the 19th Century. People today don't want to be forced to learn - whether it's CW, or how to build a trivial little interface between a transceiver (modern invention) and a computer (another modern invention), or some antenna theory. Just hand them a license and a radio and they want to be on the air. Grow up and face reality. Reality is that ham radio is turning into a multi-band CB - just buy a radio and get on the air without actually knowing how it works or how to use it. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:41:23 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Reality is that ham radio is turning into a multi-band CB - just buy a radio and get on the air without actually knowing how it works or how to use it. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Much as it pains me, I have to admit the above is true. It is happening because that's what the majority wants. Isn't democracy wonderful? Sigh. Bill, W6WRT Licensed since 1957, the good 'ol days 20 WPM Extra who dislikes CW and always will |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"Bill Turner" wrote in message ... ORIGINAL MESSAGE: On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 13:41:23 -0400, Al Klein wrote: Reality is that ham radio is turning into a multi-band CB - just buy a radio and get on the air without actually knowing how it works or how to use it. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Much as it pains me, I have to admit the above is true. It is happening because that's what the majority wants. Isn't democracy wonderful? Sigh. Bill, W6WRT Licensed since 1957, the good 'ol days 20 WPM Extra who dislikes CW and always will I'll agree with this - to a point. While hams "could" go about their hobby and be creative - making gadgets and so on to aid in their hobby or whatever else to keep the "electronics" part of it alive, many don't. Many just do as suggested, buy a radio and operate it - not doing another thing. Yes it can be a bit of a pain to design a multi band or even single band transmitter/receiver or transceiver - while they may not equal an off the shelf unit such as a Icom 706 or whatever, it does add to the fun of "Creating" and "Using" it. Yeah I know - like a car, who wants to build when you can buy. But if you've not built from scratch - try it sometime. I've built many items and enjoy using them. They've also saved me umpteen hours of work to boot. I build only items I know I can get use of, not something I'm going to waste money on buying parts, time and labor and other materials - just to throw it in a drawer. IF you build something of use or convenience, you will appreciate it and desire to do even more. THAT is one way to carry out the Ham tradition EVEN IF you hate code and swear it off. I had to know code also for passing exams. I AM an examiner. I'm not "in love" with code, but then many are. To each their own. Radio is fairly diverse, it allows you to find your niche. Technology in itself has to carry some blame - not everyone can repair the current type of equipment being sold. Not everyone has the tools and necessary special soldering/desoldering equipment. Some of that can cost as much as a radio - itself. So, I say if ya want to at least "try" to participate in repairing your own, buy some older stuff, use it, repair it, ENJOY it. Enjoy using it AND being able to keep it alive. I guess to make a point short and to the point - if you like ham - try to get as much out of the hobby as you can - after all - you took the time to get a license and spent the money to get involved. IF you don't like ham - maybe into CB, fine - learn what you need about antennas, coax, etc...... and get into your hobby that way. There IS something for everyone if they just LOOK. A hoby, regardless of it's nature - is to be ENJOYED. Lou/Ka3flu |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 15:25:17 -0400, "clfe" wrote: Yes it can be a bit of a pain to design a multi band or even single band transmitter/receiver or transceiver - while they may not equal an off the shelf unit such as a Icom 706 or whatever, it does add to the fun of "Creating" and "Using" it. ------------ REPLY SEPARATOR ------------ Right you are, but there is one area where homebuilders can still equal or even outperform commercial manufacturers: High power amplifiers. Amplifiers these days are so expensive to buy and yet so simple to build that a lot of hams enjoying rolling their own. Anyone interested should join the Amps reflector at contesting.com or the RFAmplifiers group at yahoo.com, or both. Don't expect to throw one together in a weekend, but do spend some time learning the ins and outs of amp design and go for it. Fun, fun, fun! Bill, W6WRT |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Ya, and you're not a 'real' bowler either unless you have a $500 bowling
ball. And you're not a 'real' fisherman until you've caught a Marlin off the coast of Mexico either. It's only a hobby. If you don't like it, pick another one! "Slow Code" wrote in message nk.net... Just thought you should know that. Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"Steve" wrote in message
... Ya, and you're not a 'real' bowler either unless you have a $500 bowling ball. And you're not a 'real' fisherman until you've caught a Marlin off the coast of Mexico either. It's only a hobby. If you don't like it, pick another one! You use what you can afford. I bought my first ham set up for like $50 used - it was all I could afford at the time AND I had to fabricate some things to boot. I got my feet wet with it and it kept me interested. Not everyone can afford the "best". It doesn't mean they're any less of a hobbiest in that particular field. "I" do not try to keep up with the Jones' as they say. IF my friend comes home with a brand new radio - it doesn't mean I'll run out to buy one. Same with a bowling ball, etc. That NEW radio, bowling ball, fishing (equipment) / expedition, hunting rifle - isn't going to promise a damned thing. Human intervention "still" counts. Take astronomy as a hobby...... there are bigger and better(?) telescopes supported by large universities or other groups. Still - many finds are done with the smaller back yard telescopes. It's not the size - the cost that count. The "user" has to do something to make it count. AND in many cases - be it finding a rare station on the bands, an asteroid, bowling all strikes, etc........ LUCK has a hell of a lot to do with it. Even the best in esperience and equipment - fail - sometimes. Given a choice between a new H.F. rig and either an old boat anchor OR a homebrew rig to make a contact with, I'd pick the latter - hands down. It tends to give you a tad more pride using such old equipment that maybe you repaired or bought cheap OR built from scratch. Personally, I had an HW 101 and now have a TS440S (bought new when offered). If the Heathkit had as many bells and whistles as the Kenwood - only in the extra bands - I'd take it hands down. I love the audio of the tube radios over the newer radios. The Kenwood had an Autotuner - I could tune the Heath with an outboard tuner faster than that dumb autotuner did the Kenwood - in many cases. Point being, those older radios are not as sophisticated as the new stuff, but they sure still performed. Being new, being eh - better(?) isn't what it is always about. And even the homebrew stuff, be it solid state OR tube - when it comes alive with audio out of the speaker - or putting out that first signal over the air waves - there is no better feeling. You have a ham license and buy a used rig - you're a ham. Buy a used bowling ball, go bowling as often as possible - you're a bowler. Go fishing as often as possible even with a $10 fishing pole, you're a fisherman. Pitch a tent with a sheet over a line - you're a camper. Too many people worry about "impressing" others. Do you do code? IF so, is it at 5 wpm or 60? WHO CARES - you're enjoying the hobby at your own level. lou-ka3flu |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"clfe" wrote in message ... "Steve" wrote in message ... Ya, and you're not a 'real' bowler either unless you have a $500 bowling ball. And you're not a 'real' fisherman until you've caught a Marlin off the coast of Mexico either. It's only a hobby. If you don't like it, pick another one! You use what you can afford. I bought my first ham set up for like $50 used - it was all I could afford at the time AND I had to fabricate some things to boot. I got my feet wet with it and it kept me interested. Not everyone can afford the "best". It doesn't mean they're any less of a hobbiest in that particular field. "I" do not try to keep up with the Jones' as they say. IF my friend comes home with a brand new radio - it doesn't mean I'll run out to buy one. Same with a bowling ball, etc. That NEW radio, bowling ball, fishing (equipment) / expedition, hunting rifle - isn't going to promise a damned thing. Human intervention "still" counts. Take astronomy as a hobby...... there are bigger and better(?) telescopes supported by large universities or other groups. Still - many finds are done with the smaller back yard telescopes. It's not the size - the cost that count. The "user" has to do something to make it count. AND in many cases - be it finding a rare station on the bands, an asteroid, bowling all strikes, etc........ LUCK has a hell of a lot to do with it. Even the best in esperience and equipment - fail - sometimes. Given a choice between a new H.F. rig and either an old boat anchor OR a homebrew rig to make a contact with, I'd pick the latter - hands down. It tends to give you a tad more pride using such old equipment that maybe you repaired or bought cheap OR built from scratch. Personally, I had an HW 101 and now have a TS440S (bought new when offered). If the Heathkit had as many bells and whistles as the Kenwood - only in the extra bands - I'd take it hands down. I love the audio of the tube radios over the newer radios. The Kenwood had an Autotuner - I could tune the Heath with an outboard tuner faster than that dumb autotuner did the Kenwood - in many cases. Point being, those older radios are not as sophisticated as the new stuff, but they sure still performed. Being new, being eh - better(?) isn't what it is always about. And even the homebrew stuff, be it solid state OR tube - when it comes alive with audio out of the speaker - or putting out that first signal over the air waves - there is no better feeling. You have a ham license and buy a used rig - you're a ham. Buy a used bowling ball, go bowling as often as possible - you're a bowler. Go fishing as often as possible even with a $10 fishing pole, you're a fisherman. Pitch a tent with a sheet over a line - you're a camper. Too many people worry about "impressing" others. Do you do code? IF so, is it at 5 wpm or 60? WHO CARES - you're enjoying the hobby at your own level. lou-ka3flu Code - CW........ a big argument over someone doing it or not........ WHY? When I got into Ham, I got into CW for a while, but then as now, I'm NOT in love with it. At that time, RTTY (Radio Teletype - for those who may not know) was still fairly big. Packet came in as did other modes. I "tried" RTTY - to me, as CW/Code is to some of you - it was BORING. You could also argue how RTTY could save a life. Any mode "could" under the right conditions. Someone may be aware of a situation and have had ONLY an RTTY machine - send the message to another with other equipment who then gets the help enroute to help the distressed. Let's say someone in a lighthouse seen a sinking ship and they only had the RTTY working. So - yes it may be far fetched but show how a "single" mode "could" "help" save a life. To bring it all together - again I say - you use what you have and to your level. IF you help save a life - congradulations. If you merely spend a quiet evening getting enjoyment out of it, more power to you. I would have found packet boring too, but it was before the internet got going hot and heavy - and it allowed me to get and receive "typed" messages to my friends who were licensed and so equipped.- just like e-mail for those of you who aren't familiar with packet. Pick a mode, try it - if ya like it - use it. If not, try another one. To each - his/her own. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Slow Code wrote: Just thought you should know that. OTOH SC I am not disqualified from being a real ham by your title |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Are you ****ing stoned???
If it weren't for no code, there would be no new Hams! Another 20 years and all you legitimate code endorsed hams will be dx'ing with the worms. We have to go with the times fool! We've already lost 80% of interest to the Internet and all the IM's email and all.. You clearly are living in the dark ages.. If we are to save amateur radio at all, we need numbers. We've already lost too much spectrum due to the lack of use. So what if no code'rs gain access to HF? It's either that or we loose HF to the commercial interests. I took the 13 and used code a grand total of one time in the last 16 years. Asshole. "Slow Code" wrote in message nk.net... Just thought you should know that. Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 21:13:25 -0700, "Jimmy Mac"
wrote: Another 20 years and all you legitimate code endorsed hams will be dx'ing with the worms. We have to go with the times fool! Oh? Then you're in favor of REAL testing about digital modes? Like questions on how Rayleigh fading limits bit rates on HF? That sort of "the times"? (Or didn't you know that, without frame shifting, digital modes cause problems on HF?) Or are you one of those who favors as little testing as can be gotten away with? If we are to save amateur radio at all, we need numbers. So you'd rather have millions of unqualified hams who know nothing about radio than a few hundred thousand who do. We already have a Citizen's Band - we don't need a dozen more of them. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 08:45:57 -0400, "ohioradioham" wrote: Blow Code - your ideas will damn amateur radio and kill it. That's evidently why the number of hams kept decreasing until code was eliminated, right? The drop would have been far worse than it is now had the CW testing speed not been reduced. Oh, wait a minute - the numbers didn't START decreasing until code was eliminated. Sorry Al, but the drop of CW came around the explosion of the Internet. Young people see our hobby as outdated and the CW testing requirement reinforces that. What to see a huge drop in licenses? Bring back CW testing for all licenses and raise the speeds again. There will be hardly any new licenses issued if someone made such a gross and stupid error in judgement. Forcing CW onto newcomers will only turn them away from amateur radio since CW is seen by outsiders as old-fashioned and out-of-date. This is the 21st Century and people do not want to be forced to learn and use and communication method developed in the 19th Century. People today don't want to be forced to learn - whether it's CW, or how to build a trivial little interface between a transceiver (modern invention) and a computer (another modern invention), or some antenna theory. Just hand them a license and a radio and they want to be on the air. Grow up and face reality. Reality is that ham radio is turning into a multi-band CB - just buy a radio and get on the air without actually knowing how it works or how to use it. CW testing has nothing to do with knowing how the radio works or how it operates. Thanks for reinforcing some of my previous positions. The ham bands were filled with idiots when we had all that CW testing. CW testing has never kept out the idiots and never will. Besides, since the US is a democracy, the ham bands will turn into whatever we let it turn into because the majority rules and CW freaks like yourself are increasingly in the minority. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote:
Or are you one of those who favors as little testing as can be gotten away with? Yup, as a person who has been a ham for 35 years, yup that's what I believe. If we are to save amateur radio at all, we need numbers. I absolutely agree. So you'd rather have millions of unqualified hams who know nothing about radio than a few hundred thousand who do. Yup, that's what I also believe. Get people into the service and they will start learning what they need to know on their own. We already have a Citizen's Band - we don't need a dozen more of them. Actually the CB argument is really old. I got a CB radio for a trip two years ago so my 20 something daughters could talk on it. The reality is that hardly anyone is on CB either. Channel 19 was pretty quiet compared to what is sounded like 20 years ago. So not only are people avoiding ham radio, they are also avoiding CB. Find a new argument Al for keeping people out of ham radio will you? |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 08:49:35 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Young people see our hobby as outdated and the CW testing requirement reinforces that. What to see a huge drop in licenses? Bring back CW testing for all licenses and raise the speeds again. There will be hardly any new licenses issued if someone made such a gross and stupid error in judgement. The drop started MANY years before CW was dropped. Want to increase the number of hams? Eliminate cellular phones (a lot of people got on the air to have communications in the car) and the internet - since those are two of the prime causes of lack of interest in ham radio today. CW testing has nothing to do with knowing how the radio works or how it operates. But many of the same people who want to eliminate CW also want to eliminate any tests that would really test for knowledge. It's not CW they want to eliminate, it's effort. You can cheat on written tests but, since you can't cheat much on CW (although some have), they want it eliminated. Not just kept for one class of license. What's wrong with code-free HF, but an additional class with, say, a 20wpm CW test? It would have nothing to do with the number of people becoming hams. But those who are opposed to CW testing are opposed to ALL CW testing. Getting on the air - with the highest class license available is, to them, their right. It's like people who are adamantly opposed to having driver's licenses revoked because "driving is a right". Sorry, but getting on the public airwaves is not a right. Besides, since the US is a democracy, the ham bands will turn into whatever we let it turn into because the majority rules Democracy is a form of government that protects the minority from the excesses of the majority - the majority doesn't need protection from itself. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 08:56:58 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Yup, that's what I also believe. Get people into the service and they will start learning what they need to know on their own. What color is the sky on your world? (If you were correct, most CBers would have a pretty good knowledge of electronics and propagation.) So not only are people avoiding ham radio, they are also avoiding CB. So how does CW enter into things? Find a new argument Al for keeping people out of ham radio will you? Oh? It's not MY argument that CW keeps people from using radios, it's YOURS! And you just destroyed your own best argument. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Slow Code wrote: Just thought you should know that. Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
I can't for the life of me understand why there is so much concern over
learning code. After 20 yrs in radiation physics (ionizing, not RF communications) as a living, I finally decided to go for an amature radio license. It wasn't until I got here that I learned about this rift in the community (I have seen it in a few places)....granted it may be a few spirited individuals on each side that perpetuate this argument of learning code. I'm very dismayed by this rift, I wanted to join a fellow group of RF communication enthusianists. I don't need a segration here too...there is enough of that society already, I don't need that in a hobby too. I hear my family calling....thats were my time needs to be spent. Bruce Duluth, MN Slow Code wrote: Just thought you should know that. Help save Ham radio and ignore Markie to save usenet. Thanks 1- No more automatic renewals. Individuals must retest and pass all elements required for their license class every ten years. 2- The passing score for written exams needs to be raised to 85%. 3- Code elements should be 13 wpm for General, and 20 wpm for Extra. 4- Make the no-code license one year non-renewable. 5- Cancel your ARRL membership until they decide to work to improve things and stop them from proposing ham radio that is like CB. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On 24 Jul 2006 21:57:39 -0700, "BruceMN44" wrote:
argument of learning code. I'm very dismayed by this rift, I wanted to join a fellow group of RF communication enthusianists. I don't need a segration here too...there is enough of that society already, I don't need that in a hobby too. There are rifts in all hobbies. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
....Would any of you say that Heathkit, of Benton Harbour, Michigan, maybe
perpetuated the glamour within the ham hobby of the recent past, or did the glamour of the ham hobby past perpetuate Heathkit until there was no more glamour? Jack "Al Klein" wrote in message ... On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 08:49:35 -0400, "J. D. B." wrote: Young people see our hobby as outdated and the CW testing requirement reinforces that. What to see a huge drop in licenses? Bring back CW testing for all licenses and raise the speeds again. There will be hardly any new licenses issued if someone made such a gross and stupid error in judgement. The drop started MANY years before CW was dropped. Want to increase the number of hams? Eliminate cellular phones (a lot of people got on the air to have communications in the car) and the internet - since those are two of the prime causes of lack of interest in ham radio today. CW testing has nothing to do with knowing how the radio works or how it operates. But many of the same people who want to eliminate CW also want to eliminate any tests that would really test for knowledge. It's not CW they want to eliminate, it's effort. You can cheat on written tests but, since you can't cheat much on CW (although some have), they want it eliminated. Not just kept for one class of license. What's wrong with code-free HF, but an additional class with, say, a 20wpm CW test? It would have nothing to do with the number of people becoming hams. But those who are opposed to CW testing are opposed to ALL CW testing. Getting on the air - with the highest class license available is, to them, their right. It's like people who are adamantly opposed to having driver's licenses revoked because "driving is a right". Sorry, but getting on the public airwaves is not a right. Besides, since the US is a democracy, the ham bands will turn into whatever we let it turn into because the majority rules Democracy is a form of government that protects the minority from the excesses of the majority - the majority doesn't need protection from itself. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Really? My other hobby is model trains and I have never seen a rift in
model trains in 45 years. Ham Radio has rifts only because some people feel they are better than others and try to impose their will and superiority over others. Usually over a CW testing requirement, being able to repair old, outdated tube crap, and how fast one can send and receiver an old mode of communication. They feel that just because someone can't send and receive CW that they are somehow inferior. It is such foolishness. But hang in there. These old, unbending old-timers are dying off and eventually hams will all be united again promoting the service/hobby and joining the national organization in support of the service/hobby. I guess that's why God does not have people living forever. Death has a way of cleansing the hobby of the old, outdated, and outmoded. Al Klein wrote: On 24 Jul 2006 21:57:39 -0700, "BruceMN44" wrote: argument of learning code. I'm very dismayed by this rift, I wanted to join a fellow group of RF communication enthusianists. I don't need a segration here too...there is enough of that society already, I don't need that in a hobby too. There are rifts in all hobbies. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from
becoming like CB - right? CW does not keep people from using radios, it keeps people from seeking a amateur radio license. You and the rest of the crusty old and out-dated hams think that CW is kind of a filter or the price of admission. It's an over-rated and over-priced ticket. CBers do not have to have a good knowledge of electronics and propagation to use the radio because there is little else for them to venture into - unlike ham radio. But then again, there are darn few CBers anymore. You, like many other crusty old hams, hang onto this notion that there are so many CBers out there and that the CB band is still out of control like it was 25 years ago. It's not. It's somewhat quiet as people have left CB behind just like they are leaving ham radio behind - but each for different reasons. CB because cell phones have replaced its usage and the speed limit isn't 55 anymore. Ham radio has been left behind because of its image as a hobby for morse code freaks and glowing tubes. The CW testing requirement just reinforces that belief. Old fart crusty hams like yourself who continue to promote CW and CW testing keep reinforcing the belief that the hobby is old and crusty like yourselves and keep people out in favor of other interest where they don't have to take a test to get involved and have fun. I am not destroying any argument, you just cannot follow simple logic. Face it, we can spar back and forth on this forever. The reality is that CW testing in the US is going to die soon. You cannot stop the change. Most of the rest of the world has already changed - the US cannot be far behind. Be it now, or ten years from now, CW testing is going to be gone, out of here, adios, good riddance and so long. Hopefully it will not happen too late. The longer the CW requirement remains, the closer ham radio is to death. Al Klein wrote: On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 08:56:58 -0400, "J. D. B." wrote: Yup, that's what I also believe. Get people into the service and they will start learning what they need to know on their own. What color is the sky on your world? (If you were correct, most CBers would have a pretty good knowledge of electronics and propagation.) So not only are people avoiding ham radio, they are also avoiding CB. So how does CW enter into things? Find a new argument Al for keeping people out of ham radio will you? Oh? It's not MY argument that CW keeps people from using radios, it's YOURS! And you just destroyed your own best argument. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"J. D. B." wrote: Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? CW does not keep people from using radios, it keeps people from seeking a amateur radio license. You and the rest of the crusty old and out-dated hams think that CW is kind of a filter or the price of admission. It's an over-rated and over-priced ticket. CBers do not have to have a good knowledge of electronics and propagation to use the radio because there is little else for them to venture into - unlike ham radio. But then again, there are darn few CBers anymore. You, like many other crusty old hams, hang onto this notion that there are so many CBers out there and that the CB band is still out of control like it was 25 years ago. It's not. It's somewhat quiet as people have left CB behind just like they are leaving ham radio behind - but each for different reasons. CB because cell phones have replaced its usage and the speed limit isn't 55 anymore. Ham radio has been left behind because of its image as a hobby for morse code freaks and glowing tubes. The CW testing requirement just reinforces that belief. Old fart crusty hams like yourself who continue to promote CW and CW testing keep reinforcing the belief that the hobby is old and crusty like yourselves and keep people out in favor of other interest where they don't have to take a test to get involved and have fun. I am not destroying any argument, you just cannot follow simple logic. Face it, we can spar back and forth on this forever. The reality is that CW testing in the US is going to die soon. You cannot stop the change. Most of the rest of the world has already changed - the US cannot be far behind. Be it now, or ten years from now, CW testing is going to be gone, out of here, adios, good riddance and so long. Hopefully it will not happen too late. The longer the CW requirement remains, the closer ham radio is to death. If all you whiners would devote the time you spend whining about CW into actually learning CW you might just pass the test. dxAce Michigan USA |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
dxAce wrote: "J. D. B." wrote: Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? CW does not keep people from using radios, it keeps people from seeking a amateur radio license. You and the rest of the crusty old and out-dated hams think that CW is kind of a filter or the price of admission. It's an over-rated and over-priced ticket. CBers do not have to have a good knowledge of electronics and propagation to use the radio because there is little else for them to venture into - unlike ham radio. But then again, there are darn few CBers anymore. You, like many other crusty old hams, hang onto this notion that there are so many CBers out there and that the CB band is still out of control like it was 25 years ago. It's not. It's somewhat quiet as people have left CB behind just like they are leaving ham radio behind - but each for different reasons. CB because cell phones have replaced its usage and the speed limit isn't 55 anymore. Ham radio has been left behind because of its image as a hobby for morse code freaks and glowing tubes. The CW testing requirement just reinforces that belief. Old fart crusty hams like yourself who continue to promote CW and CW testing keep reinforcing the belief that the hobby is old and crusty like yourselves and keep people out in favor of other interest where they don't have to take a test to get involved and have fun. I am not destroying any argument, you just cannot follow simple logic. Face it, we can spar back and forth on this forever. The reality is that CW testing in the US is going to die soon. You cannot stop the change. Most of the rest of the world has already changed - the US cannot be far behind. Be it now, or ten years from now, CW testing is going to be gone, out of here, adios, good riddance and so long. Hopefully it will not happen too late. The longer the CW requirement remains, the closer ham radio is to death. If all you whiners would devote the time you spend whining about CW into actually learning CW you might just pass the test. then again we might not OTOH that isn't the point CW testing (and use for that matter) is bad for our image dxAce Michigan USA |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Oh, but I already did pass the 13WPM test way back in the 1980s. Most
of us objecting to the CW testing requirement have passed the test. We realize that the only way to save the amateur service is to get more people into the service. The way to do it is to eliminate old, outdated and useless requirements that keep us stuck back in time and create a perception that keeps people from even considering getting into the hobby and service. dxAce wrote: If all you whiners would devote the time you spend whining about CW into actually learning CW you might just pass the test. dxAce Michigan USA |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 10:34:17 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Really? My other hobby is model trains and I have never seen a rift in model trains in 45 years. So which is *really* the best gauge to model? Is it okay if you buy kits, or aren't you a real rail hobbyist unless you make at least all your cars from scratch? Or do you have to build your own engines from scratch too? Etc., etc. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:36:26 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? Wrong. I want ham radio to stop being what it's been for the last couple of decades - CB on different frequencies. There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. And no more published answers. Then let's see how many people talk about "modern" and how many yell "too difficult - there's no reason to know all this stuff". Which is why, on SWL fora, you'll see people complaining that they listened all day on 4.2 MHz and only heard noise. Or tried to get some foreign broadcast station up above 15 MHz all night and couldn't. It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote: On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 12:36:26 -0400, "J. D. B." wrote: Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? Wrong. I want ham radio to stop being what it's been for the last couple of decades - CB on different frequencies. then give it up along with your hang ups about cb if you please There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. granted now what is WRONG with that? Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. then how do they get the lecnse? they learn enough to pass clearly not more than that in many case I grant you Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. why? Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. why do you need to know that in order to operate? to just get on the air.. Understand in the case you mention is NOT required only obeinace understanding hopefully comes later different folks come to different levels of understanding about different subjects at different time the license is a permit to learn not proof you have learned you convince of the need and I will support you And no more published answers. NO can do the court have more or less so, along the long standing body of the FCC not chaleanceing Bash et all years ago to close the quiestion pools NOW would more or less require an act of Congress or a change in ITU treaty lang. It took us No Code what 4 or decades to acheeve the changes we needd in order to bring off No Code Then let's see how many people talk about "modern" and how many yell "too difficult - there's no reason to know all this stuff". Which is why, on SWL fora, you'll see people complaining that they listened all day on 4.2 MHz and only heard noise. Or tried to get some foreign broadcast station up above 15 MHz all night and couldn't. It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? never heard such a complaint ever It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." Funny all I heard of Ham radio for many years was the "wizards of 80M" all code tested hams I have never heard any realy bad behavoi r from any ham that hasn't had his license renewed at least twice (which leaves out ALL No code techs BTW) indeed I have never heard the sort of Vile lang I have heard from that bunch on CB perhaps midwestern Cber are just different prehaps you are just full of it |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On 25 Jul 2006 12:12:44 -0700, "an old freind"
wrote: Al Klein wrote: There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. granted now what is WRONG with that? That's fine - for CB - that's what it's for. Ham radio is NOT CB. (Or, at least, it wasn't supposed to be.) Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. then how do they get the lecnse? They memorize the answers. they learn enough to pass If you call learning how to cheat "learning". Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. why? Why what? You said we should forget CW and concentrate on more modern aspects of the hobby. A computer-radio interface is modern. Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. why do you need to know that in order to operate? to just get on the air.. Because if you try to run much over 100 baud on 20 you're just making interference. the fact that you didn't know that shows that there are things you need to learn before you start transmitting in "modern modes". Understand in the case you mention is NOT required only obeinace understanding hopefully comes later How do you begin to understand WHY you can't run more speed on 20 by just operating? different folks come to different levels of understanding about different subjects at different time you're saying that not everyone is equal. then why treat everyone as if everyone were equal? the license is a permit to learn not proof you have learned The license is a permit to operate. Whether you ever learn anything after you get it is totally irrelevant to the license. And no more published answers. NO can do the court have more or less so, along the long standing body of the FCC not chaleanceing Bash et all years ago to close the quiestion pools NOW would more or less require an act of Congress or a change in ITU treaty lang. Which part of any treaty says that the answers have to be published? Quote it. It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? never heard such a complaint ever I see it a few times a day on some fora. It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." Funny all I heard of Ham radio for many years was the "wizards of 80M" all code tested hams And all I heard was hams talking about designing and building things that everyone knew couldn't be done. I guess you don't remember when 440 MHz was considered much too high a frequency to be useful for anything. After all, how useful was a frequency you couldn't transmit on as far as you could read a billboard? indeed I have never heard the sort of Vile lang I have heard from that bunch on CB perhaps midwestern Cber are just different prehaps you are just full of it And perhaps you just don't know as much as you'd like to think you do. Let's start with English, shall we? Or do you think you really communicate well with the mish-mash you use instead of a real language? |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote: On 25 Jul 2006 12:12:44 -0700, "an old freind" wrote: Al Klein wrote: There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. granted now what is WRONG with that? That's fine - for CB - that's what it's for. Ham radio is NOT CB. (Or, at least, it wasn't supposed to be.) no way cb going to do what you can do on 20m man Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. then how do they get the lecnse? They memorize the answers. which is learning enough to pass the test they learn enough to pass If you call learning how to cheat "learning". I never call following the rules cheating Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. why? Why what? You said we should forget CW and concentrate on more modern aspects of the hobby. A computer-radio interface is modern. expect if you want something to work and be stable and movable you are not going to build a modem Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. why do you need to know that in order to operate? to just get on the air.. Because if you try to run much over 100 baud on 20 you're just making interference. the fact that you didn't know that shows that there are things you need to learn before you start transmitting in "modern modes". wrong if I run more than few buads over 100 (or under for that matter) nobody is going to be answer to since it is not one of the standard speeds the why is irelavant In this case I would venture to say you are wrong I supect you could run 110 on 20m after all rules are normaly set a bit on the conservsitive side you don't becuase people aren't looking for that speed and therefore are unlikely to make a concent if it were just and FCC it means maybe someone would be there to bust you if it truel is pphysics does not not what speeds you packet at on 20 requuires NO understanding merely obeinece to the rules Understand in the case you mention is NOT required only obeinace understanding hopefully comes later How do you begin to understand WHY you can't run more speed on 20 by just operating? you don't need to understand you may choose to learn in which case more power to use, but you are not required to learn this point different folks come to different levels of understanding about different subjects at different time you're saying that not everyone is equal. no I am not I am saying everyone will develope differently we all equal in our rights before the law then why treat everyone as if everyone were equal? the license is a permit to learn not proof you have learned The license is a permit to operate. Whether you ever learn anything after you get it is totally irrelevant to the license. a very grave difference and resaon why the ARS is in trouble this difinate split in philosophy but the point is what level is required to operate that level is easierly obtained with little real understanding indeed wether you learn anything after matters not to your stauts as a license holder And no more published answers. NO can do the court have more or less so, along the long standing body of the FCC not chaleanceing Bash et all years ago to close the quiestion pools NOW would more or less require an act of Congress or a change in ITU treaty lang. Which part of any treaty says that the answers have to be published? I made no such claim I claimed that amending the treaty was one of the few means to Close the question pools off the pools are open becuase the FCC felt it could no longer support legaly (or practicaly) keeping them closed. an act of congress closing them or enacting an ITU requirement that be closed is about the only to close them at this point Quote it. It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? never heard such a complaint ever I see it a few times a day on some fora. hang out with a better grade of ham then I have not seen one such claim in 8 years do you go out looking to be offended? It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." Funny all I heard of Ham radio for many years was the "wizards of 80M" all code tested hams And all I heard was hams talking about designing and building things that everyone knew couldn't be done. and you are one them "it can not be done" shame on you I guess you don't remember when 440 MHz was considered much too high a frequency to be useful for anything. Indeed I don't since I we TV on UHF if not before I was born at least before I paying much attantion to such details but you are tlaking the past After all, how useful was a frequency you couldn't transmit on as far as you could read a billboard? indeed I have never heard the sort of Vile lang I have heard from that bunch on CB perhaps midwestern Cber are just different prehaps you are just full of it And perhaps you just don't know as much as you'd like to think you do. prehaps I don't but ulike you I don't claim to know everything or that one needs to try and know everything you coment about needing to be able to caluate path loss before trying an EME qso for example Let's start with English, shall we? Or do you think you really communicate well with the mish-mash you use instead of a real language? obviously I do commucate wether you want to call it english or not since we are comucating with your proven hyperbole why some anyone believ what you type |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"J. D. B." wrote in
: Really? My other hobby is model trains and I have never seen a rift in model trains in 45 years. Well that explains everything. SC |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
"J. D. B." wrote in
: Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? CW does not keep people from using radios, it keeps people from seeking a amateur radio license. You and the rest of the crusty old and out-dated hams think that CW is kind of a filter or the price of admission. It's an over-rated and over-priced ticket. SNIP And people shouldn't have to learn multiplication tables because we have calculators now. SC |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Slow Code wrote: "J. D. B." wrote in : Al, you and the rest of the old farts want CW to keep ham radio from becoming like CB - right? CW does not keep people from using radios, it keeps people from seeking a amateur radio license. You and the rest of the crusty old and out-dated hams think that CW is kind of a filter or the price of admission. It's an over-rated and over-priced ticket. SNIP And people shouldn't have to learn multiplication tables because we have calculators now. agreed they should spend their school days learning something more important than that SC |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:36:37 GMT, Slow Code wrote:
And people shouldn't have to learn multiplication tables because we have calculators now. Why learn arithmetic or math at all? Spelling and grammar seem to be old-fashioned. Letz ghuct spel theengs thu wae thay soun. Maybe we can even make ourselves understood once in a great while that way. Digital modes are great - for someone who spells the words you understand the way you were taught to spell them. CW seems to work no matter what the accent or native tongue. But people don't want to learn digital modes either - it's just one of those things that sounds like a good argument until you actually look at it. How many hams can actually read a waterfall display for anything but PSK? And not that many can even do that. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote: On Tue, 25 Jul 2006 23:36:37 GMT, Slow Code wrote: And people shouldn't have to learn multiplication tables because we have calculators now. Why learn arithmetic or math at all? Spelling and grammar seem to be old-fashioned. Letz ghuct spel theengs thu wae thay soun. Maybe we can even make ourselves understood once in a great while that way. indeed sir consist spelling is something that is barely more half again as old as radio Digital modes are great - for someone who spells the words you understand the way you were taught to spell them. CW seems to work no matter what the accent or native tongue. funny thing that property how all the cw people claim they can't read text the monet it is mispelled but they can read CW all the time no matter the lang But people don't want to learn digital modes either - it's just one of those things that sounds like a good argument until you actually look at it. How many hams can actually read a waterfall display for anything but PSK? And not that many can even do that. really then why I am racking EME qso's my station needs ground gain to complete the contacts so I get only about 40 minute at moon rise and moon set but I have bagged a QSO everytime I have tried (and near the New Moon at that) |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
Al Klein wrote:
Wrong. I want ham radio to stop being what it's been for the last couple of decades - CB on different frequencies. There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. And what is wrong with that? Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. How does "passing tests" going to eliminate the problem? Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's How does memorizing answers to "technical questions" make you a better ham? that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes At least we agree on something and nice to see you admit that everyone is now saying this. have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. Yup, it is a simple circuit. It's also readily available in books, the Internet, etc., so how does memorizing the circuit to pass a test, make you a better ham? Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. "Rayleigh Fading" - that comes up in daily discussions on the radio. Never heard anyone complaining about not being able to run 9600 baud on HF - who the heck to you hang around with? And no more published answers. Why not? Memorizing answers has people learning just like reading a book. Learning is learning. Then let's see how many people talk about "modern" and how many yell "too difficult - there's no reason to know all this stuff". That's true, many of the things I had to learn for my test in the 1970s was worthless in my opinion. But it was conceived by people who had the same outdated opinion as you. Let's get people communicating and not continue to figure out ways to make it so hard that new people do not come into the service. Here's the choice for kids today. Learn code and other crap to get a license to use a ham radio - or - get on the Internet immediately where everyone is and communicate with them. Guess what choice is being made Al - it's a no brainer and why our testing should be a no brainer. Which is why, on SWL fora, you'll see people complaining that they listened all day on 4.2 MHz and only heard noise. Or tried to get some foreign broadcast station up above 15 MHz all night and couldn't. So what? They will seek out the answers and learn on their own. It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, You know that's true and some will seek answers, others won't. or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. I won't because those discussions never come up in our area. Where the heck do you live that you have these discussions with so many people? Arkansas or Mississippi? His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? Something tells me he'll figure it out on his own, via another ham, the Internet, etc. and he'll learn - learning without being forced is a wonderful thing. It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - Yup, that's true, and all those strict technical tests back then did not prevent this from occuring. but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. No proof of that statement Al. Just something in your own mind. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." Is this a great country or what? |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:35:37 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Al Klein wrote: So which is *really* the best gauge to model? Is it okay if you buy kits, or aren't you a real rail hobbyist unless you make at least all your cars from scratch? Or do you have to build your own engines from scratch too? Etc., etc. No Al, those are not arguments that take place with the model train hobby. The best scale is what is best for you. Unlike ham radio, no one tries to ram something down another hobbyist's throat. Same for buy vs. build. Not a discussion. You do what you want to do and no one is critical of the other. The way it should be in ham radio. That's the way it *is* in ham radio if you look at it through the same glasses you're looking at model railroading through. You want to use different scales to weigh the same thing, then claim it weighs a different amount? Sorry, but I don't play that game. |
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
|
You're not a real ham if you never took or passed a Code test.
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 07:51:19 -0400, "J. D. B."
wrote: Al Klein wrote: Wrong. I want ham radio to stop being what it's been for the last couple of decades - CB on different frequencies. There are CBers who are competent communications engineers, but the majority today - CB or ham band - want to buy a radio and put it on the air. And what is wrong with that? What's wrong with ham radio being turned into CB? For one thing, we already had a couple of citizen's bands - we didn't need a dozen more. Any license requirement is just an annoyance they get around any way they can - except by actually studying and learning enough to pass tests. How does "passing tests" going to eliminate the problem? For them? It's not. If they can't pass the test they don't get the privilege. That's just the way life is. If you're not 75 inches tall, we don't let you be 6'3". These days some people want to be what they aren't, regardless of reality. Giving ham licenses to anyone who wants one doesn't make hams of people who know nothing, it makes the ham license worthless. Take a close look at a General test from the 50s and one from today. The difference isn't that the current one dropped old technical questions and added equivalent questions about modern modes - it's How does memorizing answers to "technical questions" make you a better ham? I said it doesn't. I said that learning makes you more knowledgeable. that the current test has dropped the technical requirement low enough that it's a joke. Everyone says that CW is old hat and modern modes At least we agree on something and nice to see you admit that everyone is now saying this. That thing passing over your head was the point. have replaced it. Okay - let's see a question asking for a PSK interface schematic, including full isolation. That's just simple audio and DC stuff. Yup, it is a simple circuit. It's also readily available in books, the Internet, etc., so how does memorizing the circuit to pass a test, make you a better ham? Understanding how it works makes you more knowledgeable. Evidently you're one of those who needs things repeated a few times. Let's have questions on Rayleigh fading and its effect on maximum usable baud rate at various frequencies, so no one complains about the FCC not giving us permission to run 9600 bps on 20. Modern stuff. "Rayleigh Fading" - that comes up in daily discussions on the radio. Never heard anyone complaining about not being able to run 9600 baud on HF - who the heck to you hang around with? You never listened to QSOs on 20? Or questions asked at ham club meetings? Or in radio fora? And no more published answers. Why not? Memorizing answers has people learning just like reading a book. Learning is learning. Learning requires understanding. Memorizing isn't understanding. It was proved over 100 years ago that rote memorization isn't even a mediocre way of teaching. Then let's see how many people talk about "modern" and how many yell "too difficult - there's no reason to know all this stuff". That's true, many of the things I had to learn for my test in the 1970s was worthless in my opinion. But it was conceived by people who had the same outdated opinion as you. Let's get people communicating and not continue to figure out ways to make it so hard that new people do not come into the service. Here's the choice for kids today. Learn code and other crap to get a license to use a ham radio - or - get on the Internet immediately where everyone is and communicate with them. Guess what choice is being made Al - it's a no brainer and why our testing should be a no brainer. So let them get on radio immediately with no testing. The method has been available since the 60s. IT'S CALLED CB! You want HF? Get on 11 meters. You want UHF? Get on 465. It's all there. And leave ham radio to hams. Which is why, on SWL fora, you'll see people complaining that they listened all day on 4.2 MHz and only heard noise. Or tried to get some foreign broadcast station up above 15 MHz all night and couldn't. So what? They will seek out the answers and learn on their own. Or, as has happened over the past few decades, they won't. But now that you said they will ... magic ... they will, eh? It's the "why doesn't this work, and don't give me any of that technical BS" syndrome. People don't want to know how things work, You know that's true and some will seek answers, others won't. So those who seek answers become hams - those who don't become CBers. What's with the "everyone is equal even if the only way to achieve it is to dumb the entire world down" crap? or why they don't work, but they're angry that they don't. And don't you dare tell anyone it's his fault for trying to receive a 440 repeater 80 miles away with a 1/4 wave antenna 5 feet off the ground. I won't because those discussions never come up in our area. Where the heck do you live that you have these discussions with so many people? In the real world. His friend, just 3 doors down, copies the repeater S9+ (with a dual 11 element beam 75 feet in the air and LMR600 coax). Now, without any technical BS or monetary expenditure, what does he have to do to receive it? Something tells me he'll figure it out on his own, via another ham, the Internet, etc. and he'll learn - learning without being forced is a wonderful thing. Demanding answers without putting in any effort seems to have substituted for learning. It's not that no one ever pulled that stuff 50 years ago - Yup, that's true, and all those strict technical tests back then did not prevent this from occuring. but it was so far in the minority that it was below the noise level. Today it's the majority of newcomers. No proof of that statement Al. Just something in your own mind. About like everything you've said here. "I have a right to use the public airwaves, and I don't want to have to learn anything." Is this a great country or what? Yes, if you're in the bottom 10%, it must surely look that way. You get to be in the top 10% merely because that's the way you want things to be, and heaven help the rest of us if we don't give you your way. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:10 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com