On Jan 26, 9:25?pm, Dave Heil wrote:
If anyone has questions about how the license manual questions and
material have evolved through the years, I have the 1938, 1940, 1947,
1955, 1963, 1973, 1974 and 1975 ARRL License manuals and would be happy
to field questions.

Dave K8MN

I'll be happy to field questions, too. I have the License Manuals from
1948, 1951, 1954, 1962 and 1971.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

On Jan 26, 9:25?pm, Dave Heil wrote:
If anyone has questions about how the license manual questions and
material have evolved through the years, I have the 1938, 1940, 1947,
1955, 1963, 1973, 1974 and 1975 ARRL License manuals and would be happy
to field questions.

I'll be happy to field questions, too. I have the License Manuals from
1948, 1951, 1954, 1962 and 1971.

1957 is as close as I've been able to get to 1953, the
one that I used.
--
73, Cecil http://www.w5dxp.com

wrote in message
ups.com...
From: Bob Brock on Wed, Jan 24 2007 9:12 am

On 23 Jan 2007 22:36:44 -0800, " wrote:
On Jan 22, 2:370m, "Bob Brock" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in
...
"KC4UAI" wrote:

From the same perspective, I think that all hams should be required to
re-test on a regular basis to keep their ham license.
Afterall, that is what they do with driver's licenses isn't it?

Can you drive your ham rig on the streets and
kill or main others by losing control?

That "license comparison" subject was done to
death in here years ago. It is presuming that a
hobby radio license "is the same as" vehicular
operation...it is far from that.

The FCC decides. In the case of the Commercial
Radiotelephone licenses (three classes merged
into one General class) they were made lifetime.
NO renewals needed. Ever. [sometime around
the 1980s? I'd have to look in my licenses folder
elsewhere to get the exact date]

I wasn't being serious Len. I didn't read here years ago and would be
surprised if someone seriously suggested periodic retesting.

My apologies to you, Bob. Sometimes it is hard to
discern who is serious or who is wry in this Din
of Inequity. [as in ham-on-wry... :-) ]

Not a problem Len.


In my
state, they don't require a written test to renew drivers licenses
unless the person has been convicted of a moving violation since the
last renewal.

That's pretty much the case in my state, California...but
somewhat graded. Every five years it was into a DMV
office to take a real shortie of a written test, check
appropriate physical things (corrective eyeware required
in my case), do the fingerprint thing, photos, etc. No
actual vehicle driving test. After ten years I was called
to take the full written.

In North Carolina, all one has to do to renew drivers licenses is an eye
examination, test for color blindness, and go through the road signs to tell
the examiner what the various signs mean. The only time you have to take
the written test or drivers test is if you have had a moving violation since
your last license issue date.


But, bottom line, the FCC is still the final decider. They
grant the licenses, try to enforce the written (and spirit)
law, can fine miscreants, and yank back the licenses of
offenders.

I agree completely. The test pools appear to be adequate. For the most
part the new hams I have observed appear to be capable of making that first
contact and improve as they gain experience. It's a safe and fun hobby that
has practical application during times of emergency or national need. My
experience has been that, when asked, they will make the sacrifice of time
and personal equipment during disasters to provide that essential common
radio communications between various federal and state organizations who
cannot communicate directly with each other via radio. IMO, having more
hams at the current level of standards is a good thing.

From: "Bob Brock" on Sat, 27 Jan 2007 09:12:18
-0500

In my
state, they don't require a written test to renew drivers licenses
unless the person has been convicted of a moving violation since the
last renewal.

That's pretty much the case in my state, California...but
somewhat graded. Every five years it was into a DMV
office to take a real shortie of a written test, check
appropriate physical things (corrective eyeware required
in my case), do the fingerprint thing, photos, etc. No
actual vehicle driving test. After ten years I was called
to take the full written.

In North Carolina, all one has to do to renew drivers licenses is an eye
examination, test for color blindness, and go through the road signs to tell
the examiner what the various signs mean. The only time you have to take
the written test or drivers test is if you have had a moving violation since
your last license issue date.

That seems to be the case with most, if not all, states in
the USA. In California the DMV has a "study guide" free in
printed form, PDF download, or HTML perusal on-line for its
written test. I did mine a couple years ago and it was
comprehensive. No qualms, no anxiety, just kicking myself
mentally for missing ONE question that was obvious as to
what the correct answer should have been. :-)

Interesting to note all the remarks some make about "needing"
real equipment to operate and a good simulation of station
environment. That's comparable to the driver's license road
test where an inspector rides along observing-directing as one
is out in traffic. Not a "simulation" but the REAL thing.
Yet MOST states have dropped that road test, satisfied with
the written test...plus the eye quick-check, new-legislation-
since-last-tested quickie quiz, and some other subtle clues
the clerks observe to find out if a person is "with it." :-)

Operating a ton or two of moving machinery in the midst of
other moving machinery on a street or road is FAR MORE
HAZARDOUS to both operator and anyone nearby. Yet most
states have dropped doing that sort of testing except, as
you note, moving violations have been done or just requiring
a ten-plus year period of such retesting. That's for
practical reasons NOT bounded on the cost of maintaining
road driving inspectors but more like the following:

1. Most drivers doing testing are NOT (generally) trying
to kill themselves or anyone else in the near future...they
will be needing an automobile for regular transportation
and have enough common sense to follow driving laws and
procedure to keep that ability.

2. Most DMV (or state equivalent) testing offices-locations
are some distance from a testee's residence and/or place of
work. They have used their vehicle to get to the test area,
itself a form of "being able to operate a vehicle."
Exceptions of first-license applicants are just exceptions
and a minority - they MUST have the road test in most states.
California used to be nit-picky about new residents bearing
another states' drivers license: in 1956 I had to take a
road test despite having held an Illinois license since
1950 (was "becoming a resident by accepting employment here").
That may still be in force but irrelevant.

3. In my infrequent observations of California DMV offices,
there's been no change of the number of road test inspectors
nor of facilities and they have made the same number of free
guides and information for the public. Plus, they've
implemented the photo ID and now issue license cards with
holographic impressions and a magnetic data stripe on them.
This state, like most states, has a computer data network
on drivers licenses as well as identified vehicles. The
cost of all those things has increased budget requirements,
not decreased them. Much of that has been to aid police
departments since vehicular operation CAN, and unfortunately
does lead to fatal incidents.

In comparison to the amateur radio hobby, there really isn't
much. Operation of a hobby radio seldom results in any
fatality. Of course, any amateur may make stupid mistakes
and off themselves but home accidents happen to all humans
and aren't related to amateur radio licensing. The RF
safety regulations have always been questionable to me (I've
dug into comprehensive medical studies of such things done
by the USAF by medical researchers). Much of today's "RF
Safety" regulations seem to be the result of legislative
hysteria based on such "dangerous" sources of radiation as
HVAC power lines, cell phones, and microwave ovens. :-)

To have "practical amateur radio station operation" as a
test is in the realm of the highly impractical. For one
thing there is little standardization in form-fit-function
or control of desk-mount transceivers...except for a single
brand's model series. Desk-mount transceivers share very
few common controls with compact, multi-function handheld
two-way radios. Compare any ready-built ham transceiver
of this brand-new century with any available in, say, 1960
and there is a world of difference in technology between
them. On the other hand, basic automobile operational
controls have only varied slightly in the last half century,
including instrumentation. Steering wheel, gearshift,
speedometer, lights, turn-signals, accelerometer, brake
pedal are all there today as they were in 1950. Only the
clutch as a basic control has all but disapperared with the
automatic transmission (the gearshift remains although its
function settings are different).

But, bottom line, the FCC is still the final decider. They
grant the licenses, try to enforce the written (and spirit)
law, can fine miscreants, and yank back the licenses of
offenders.

I agree completely. The test pools appear to be adequate.

I looked into www.ncvec.org to refresh my memory. There's
only ONE graphic file there and that for Extra. Seems to
be covering the FCC regulations as well as the California
DMV does its Motor Vehicle Code questions.

For the most
part the new hams I have observed appear to be capable of making that first
contact and improve as they gain experience.

I can't comment much on that since my "first contact" on
real radio was back in 1952 in training at Fort Monmouth,
NJ. :-) Very strict protocol observance, of course. The
Army was not a hobby activity, just involved in a skill
set of DESTROYING an enemy with self-survival a plus. :-)
The next three years of active duty was more of the same
with a much bigger, more complex set of "radios."

Much later as a civilian and taking flying lessons, I had
NO problem operating an aircraft radio, using Civil
Aviation flying jargon and FAA procedures. That seemed
to really **** off one of my two instructors. Apparently
he wanted to play control-freak in constantly berating me
for being such a newbie dummy. The other one kept
insisting I needed that 3rd Class (Restricted) Radio-
telephone License (no test required) to "be lawful." Had
to explain to VNY Skyways CEO that my First 'Phone (then
6 years since issuance) was quite lawful and had to get
an FAA tower man at VNY to back me up. Skyways had the
temerity of billing me the usual 1-hour rate of $17.50
I spent NOT in flying lessons but instead arguing with
folks who supposedly "knew better." I quit that flying
thing for various other reasons afterwards although lack
of spare money at the time was primary motivator. :-)

It's a safe and fun hobby that
has practical application during times of emergency or national need. My
experience has been that, when asked, they will make the sacrifice of time
and personal equipment during disasters to provide that essential common
radio communications between various federal and state organizations who
cannot communicate directly with each other via radio.

It's been my life experience that MOST citizens will
voluntarily help out others in REAL emergencies, whether
or not they know how to operate a radio. Having been
IN a couple of REAL emergencies locally, I have yet to
experience first-hand any flurry of amateur activity to
"aid organizations who cannot communicate directly via
radio." During one of those REAL emergencies I've found
that the existing organizations were quite adequately
prepared...and drilled and trained on emergencies WITH
their equipment and worked-out emergency plans that
weren't public-relations news releases.

IMO, having more hams at the current level of standards is
a good thing.

For the hobby, I'll agree with you. For the electronics
industry it won't make a dent either way...and it won't
much change the REAL Public Safety organizations in a
few urban government structures who've already had their
emergency plans proven by the REAL thing.

On the other hand, as a resident of the Center of Film
and TV production city of Los Angeles, CA, I have the
displeasure of being close to the show biz elite who
produced such "documentaries" as "Independence Day."
Still, I'm not worried about Alien Invaders from Outer
Space or whether or not there are enough morsemen to
"Save the World" with their intrepid morse skills...:-)

Best regards,
LA

wrote in
ups.com:

a most interesting history lesson snipped for brevity

Generals. This was in the era when FCC not only had many scheduled
exams, but would also send out traveling examiners upon request if a
minimum number of examinees could be guaranteed. Ham exam sessions
were being conducted by FCC at hamfests, conventions, and club
meetings, and the perceived need for the Conditional disappeared.

---

Your recollections are correct, Cecil, with minor corrections to the
Conditional distance. Which changed right around the time you got the
license, as did the retest rules.

Although I can see a few quirks here and there, I would have to say
that overall the testing, requirements, and methods have improved
over the years, rather than regressed. I had to chuckle at some of
the early stuff, which was awkward, and most arbitrary. Some of
those tests amounted to "open book" tests, which are surely easier
than Open pool tests.

Certainly if there were only a few exams existing for the different
levels, it would be very important to be hush-hush about the
contents of those exams. It certainly would argue against those few
tests being so much superior.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

wrote in
oups.com:

On Jan 25, 9:26*am, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:

Your recollections are correct, Cecil, with minor corrections to
the Conditional distance. Which changed right around the time you
got the license, as did the retest rules.

Thanks Jim, for the history lesson.

You're welcome, Cecil. Thanks for reading.

The old Conditional was preceded by the Class C, which was essentially
the same license with a different name. Early 1930s until the 1951
restructuring.

Some folks think that the 1964-65 rules Conditional changes really cut
into the growth of US ham radio. After those changes, a ham who wanted
a renewable license with HF privileges pretty much had to go to an FCC
exam point unless s/he lived *way* out in the boonies. Just getting to
the exam could be a major journey, depending on where you lived.

I understand what you say here Jim, but I don't agree. If a person
can go to the trouble of learning Morse code, they should be able to
go to the trouble of traveling to the FCC exam points. I can't
imagine that a peron who went to the trouble of learning the
material would feel otherwise.


I was lucky - all I needed was decent shoes and a couple of subway
tokens. Three quarters of a mile to the 69th Street Terminal, the
Market-Frankford Subway-Elevated to 2nd Street, and a block south to
the US Custom House.

I travelled about 120 mikes fro my Tech, about 300 for my General
written CSCE, a mere 20 for my Element 1, and aroud 70 for my Extra.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

wrote in news:1169855065.939325.130280
@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com:

On Jan 25, 7:52*pm, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Just getting to
the exam could be a major journey, depending on where you lived.

Come to think of it - my parents drove me to the Houston
FCC office for my Novice exam so at that time the distance
limit was still 125 miles. A year later, when my Novice
expired, I was eligible to take the Conditional by mail
because the distance limit had been reduced to 75 miles.
I have lost track of exactly when I got those licenses
but that knowledge should help to bracket the dates.

Here's an exact date, Cecil:

June 10, 1954

On that date, the "Conditional distance" was reduced from 125 miles to
75 miles "air-line" from a quarterly examining point.

Also on that date, FCC stopped giving routine Novice and Technician
exams at FCC exam sessions, and instead gave the job to volunteer
examiners. After that date, Novice and Technician exams wouyld be done
by mail regardless of distance from and FCC exam point.


HAR! exactly 1 day after I was born! They must have known......


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Dave Heil wrote in news:SKyuh.17581$w91.2494
@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

If anyone has questions about how the license manual questions and
material have evolved through the years, I have the 1938, 1940, 1947,
1955, 1963, 1973, 1974 and 1975 ARRL License manuals and would be happy
to field questions.


Are those things still under copyright Dave? Scanning them and
putting them on the web would be a tremendous asset, as well as
interesting. I could provide the space.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:

On Jan 25, 9:26 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Your recollections are correct, Cecil, with minor corrections to
the Conditional distance. Which changed right around the time you
got the license, as did the retest rules.
Thanks Jim, for the history lesson.
You're welcome, Cecil. Thanks for reading.

The old Conditional was preceded by the Class C, which was essentially
the same license with a different name. Early 1930s until the 1951
restructuring.

Some folks think that the 1964-65 rules Conditional changes really cut
into the growth of US ham radio. After those changes, a ham who wanted
a renewable license with HF privileges pretty much had to go to an FCC
exam point unless s/he lived *way* out in the boonies. Just getting to
the exam could be a major journey, depending on where you lived.

I understand what you say here Jim, but I don't agree. If a person
can go to the trouble of learning Morse code, they should be able to
go to the trouble of traveling to the FCC exam points. I can't
imagine that a peron who went to the trouble of learning the
material would feel otherwise.

Just for grins, Mike, make the applicant 12-14 years of age. Put him in
a family with one automobile where the father works during the day and
the mother doesn't drive.


I was lucky - all I needed was decent shoes and a couple of subway
tokens. Three quarters of a mile to the 69th Street Terminal, the
Market-Frankford Subway-Elevated to 2nd Street, and a block south to
the US Custom House.

I travelled about 120 mikes fro my Tech, about 300 for my General
written CSCE, a mere 20 for my Element 1, and aroud 70 for my Extra.

The nearest examination point when I was a kid would have been better
than 50 miles each way, in a time before there was an Interstate Highway
anywhere nearby. The journey each direction would have taken at least
an hour-and-a-half over two lane mountain roads. The examination point
was one of those which the FCC visited quarterly.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in
hlink.net:

Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote in
oups.com:

On Jan 25, 9:26 am, Cecil Moore wrote:
wrote:
Your recollections are correct, Cecil, with minor corrections to
the Conditional distance. Which changed right around the time you
got the license, as did the retest rules.
Thanks Jim, for the history lesson.
You're welcome, Cecil. Thanks for reading.

The old Conditional was preceded by the Class C, which was
essentially the same license with a different name. Early 1930s
until the 1951 restructuring.

Some folks think that the 1964-65 rules Conditional changes really
cut into the growth of US ham radio. After those changes, a ham who
wanted a renewable license with HF privileges pretty much had to go
to an FCC exam point unless s/he lived *way* out in the boonies.
Just getting to the exam could be a major journey, depending on
where you lived.

I understand what you say here Jim, but I don't agree. If a
person
can go to the trouble of learning Morse code, they should be able
to go to the trouble of traveling to the FCC exam points. I can't
imagine that a peron who went to the trouble of learning the
material would feel otherwise.

Just for grins, Mike, make the applicant 12-14 years of age. Put him
in a family with one automobile where the father works during the day
and the mother doesn't drive.


I was lucky - all I needed was decent shoes and a couple of subway
tokens. Three quarters of a mile to the 69th Street Terminal, the
Market-Frankford Subway-Elevated to 2nd Street, and a block south to
the US Custom House.

I travelled about 120 mikes fro my Tech, about 300 for my
General
written CSCE, a mere 20 for my Element 1, and aroud 70 for my
Extra.

The nearest examination point when I was a kid would have been better
than 50 miles each way, in a time before there was an Interstate
Highway anywhere nearby. The journey each direction would have taken
at least an hour-and-a-half over two lane mountain roads. The
examination point was one of those which the FCC visited quarterly.

Dave K8MN


It is interesting how times change, Dave. Just as an aside, those
are the types of roads I see out these days. Things have changed, I
suspect that autos are more comfortable and better handling today.
Certainly if a person couldn't drive yet, there would be another hurdle
getting the parents to join in on the fun. All the more challenge.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -