|
Those Old Study Guides
Mike Coslo wrote:
I had a rough time talking my parents into getting me my first radios. I had to convince them I was serious. Perhaps the same situation existed for you? My dad chucked a successful job as a writer at the Palm Beach Bureau of the Miami Herald to become an Episcopal priest. I lobbied for some help with gear and we made a deal. I paid for my used receiver from the proceeds of a newspaper route and he and Mom bought the used transmitter as a Christmas gift. Things like logbooks, a key, antenna wire and coaxial cable were begged or purchased from the paper route money. I listened to Dad for months about how all of this ham radio stuff (and my guitar) were just "kicks" I was on and that they'd be gathering dust in the closet. That sort of came true as my first hamshack was in the walk-in closet off my bedroom. If the stuff gathered any dust, it was in the closet. After I'd been a ham (and a guitarist) for a number of decades, I used to ask Dad if he thought there'd come a day when I'd pack all of that stuff up and put it into a basement somewhere. Dave K8MN |
Those Old Study Guides
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Dave Heil wrote in news:SKyuh.17581$w91.2494 @newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net: If anyone has questions about how the license manual questions and material have evolved through the years, I have the 1938, 1940, 1947, 1955, 1963, 1973, 1974 and 1975 ARRL License manuals and would be happy to field questions. Are those things still under copyright Dave? Scanning them and putting them on the web would be a tremendous asset, as well as interesting. I could provide the space. I'm pretty sure that they are still covered under copyright. The scanning could take a long, long time. Federal tests are copyrighted? Read along with us, "John". We're discussing ARRL License manuals. The study material was *not* actual FCC test material. What is wrong with that picture? If they are using my tax dollars, they are mine and everyone elses! You have some distortion in your receiver. Your tax dollars weren't in the picture. The material was copyrighted by the ARRL. Dave K8MN |
Those Old Study Guides
John Smith I wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Dave Heil wrote in news:SKyuh.17581$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. I'm pretty sure that they are still covered under copyright. The scanning could take a long, long time. Dave K8MN Federal tests are copyrighted? What is wrong with that picture? If they are using my tax dollars, they are mine and everyone elses! What part of "ARRL License manuals" are you having difficulty understanding? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
Those Old Study Guides
Dave Heil wrote:
... Read along with us, "John". We're discussing ARRL License manuals. The study material was *not* actual FCC test material. ... Dave: Sorry, you are quite right, should have paid more attention. Well, my red face will go away in a bit ... Regards, JS |
Those Old Study Guides
|
Those Old Study Guides
On Jan 27, 10:20�pm, Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote roups.com: On Jan 27, 8:11�pm, Mike Coslo wrote: wrote roup s.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. On what do you base that conclusion, Mike? I see the accessibility of the tests as improved. But that's about it. * * I had to chuckle at some of * * the early stuff, which was awkward, and most arbitrary. Like what?* I'll answer this and the last question at one time. 75 miles, 150 miles. mail in tests, move closer than the "limit" lose your license if you don't retest. Don't move, keep it. *That's just a little bit. It all seems arbitrary, and almost capricious to me. YMMV. The idea was that the FCC was balancing access to the test sessions with maintaining control over the process. They were very concerned about the whole process back then. Remember that we're talking about 50+ years ago. Back then, there were very clear memories of spy activities during both World Wars where radio was used. (A US *amateur* discovered one during WW1 and brought it to the attention of the authorities by recording the transmission). The '50s were the Cold War and the McCarthy era, too. Maintaining control over every step of the licensing process was a big deal to FCC back then. It may seem arbitrary and capricious today, but it didn't back then. Don't leave CONUS without a passport, btw. * * Some of * * those tests amounted to "open book" tests, which are surely easier * * than Open pool tests. How? The old tests were definitely not open book in any sense of the word. You weren't even allowed to bring your own pencils in some cases.* * * * Mailing the test in? At least ther was no chance whatsoever of looking up the answer in the book, eh? The way it worked was that you found a volunteer examiner (note the lack of caps) and *s/he* sent away for the exam and the other forms. When the test came from FCC in its special sealed envelope, the volunteer examiner would not open it until the actual exam session began, and would seal it up in another special envelope and send it back to FCC. There was a form that had to be notarized, where both the examinee and the volunteer examiner swore that the exam was conducted according to the rules. Most people took such things very seriously back then, particularly when the Feds were involved. This may seem wide open to corruption, but I do not know of *any* cases where the by-mail exam process was compromised. Rumors of cheating do not count. Remember too that this was in the days before copy machines were common, and getting a "photostat" was a big deal. I took the Novice exam from a local volunteer examiner back in 1967. He took the process very seriously, as did I. He wanted to help new hams, but he wasn't about to compromise the process or risk his license, a fine and a prison term. How about a question like this: "A manufacturer guarantees his crystals to be within .01% of the marked frequency, when used in the recommended circuit at 20 degrees C. The crystals have a negative temperature coefficient of 50 parts per million per degree C. What is the lowest whole-kilocycle frequency that should be ordered for a 40 meter crystal, if the crystal is to be used in the recommended circuit over the temperature range of 5 to 35 degrees C? Allow 1 additional kilocycle to allow for crystal and component aging. Show all work."* That was an important thing at that time. Still is, in a way. The question could be modernized to calculating the dial setting on a ham rig where the temperature coefficient and possible error of the reference oscillator are known. And to be honest, I would have to look a few things up to give a reasonable accurate answer. But the math is not that difficult, unless I am way off. The point is that the person taking the test did not have those options. They'd have to answer that sort of question with just pencil, paper, and maybe a slide rule. And the actual exam question would be similar, but different - maybe it would state that a certain crystal was on hand, and then ask if it met the criteria to be inside the band under all operating conditions. Maybe the temperature coefficient would be positive above a certain temperature and negative below. And that would be *one* question on the 50 question General test. I could give an answer I had around 50 percent confidence in now, but if I was wrong, it would be like the guff that Dave has to take with his "out of band frenchmen". Mike the dumb nickle Extra that couldn't answer a question from an old test! ;^) I am confident that if you studied the concepts in that question, and worked out the answer to it and similar questions a few times, you'd be OK. But that's not the point. Can you see that being given a study question like that, and having to work out a similar but different question during the exam, is a completely different thing from a multiple choice public pool test? But unless the question isn't from any book, or just somehow shows up on a test with no references anywhere to be found, I'd do a bit of research and the answer would be forthcoming. Hard? Not in the least. The research would have to be done before the test, though. And it's not about "hard". It's about how much the examinee has to actually understand the material, and be able to demonstrate that understanding. No open book, no cheat sheets, no formulas given - and that's just one question on the General exam.* * * Maybe the steely eyed FCC examiner watches you take the test you mail in so that you don't have to take the test in front of the steely eyed FCC examiner? See above about cheating. * * * * 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. How would the existence of a few tests argue against that? Jim, am I being obtuse or what? Seems to me that if there are only a couple tests, that cheating would be much easier, that retesting would likely expose the applicant to the same test again, and that your "buddy" could give you some valuable hints. There are ways to cheat almost any system. Do you know of any actual cheating under the old system? There have been documented cases of suspected cheating under the VEC system, where the FCC caleed in hams who then flunked the retest. I saw the same question from your 1960's essay type question, and my 1950's guide. Unless we are arguing extremely small points here, any differences between the tests of the good old days and now just aren't big enough to be that concerned about. The process is a big part of it. But as I said before, the old exam process is gone and won't come back any time soon - if ever. In fact, as this discussion goes on in here and outside of this group, I am more and more convinced that an equally acceptable explanation is a sense of nostalgia, a yearning for good old days that perhaps never really existed, and the fact that middle aged men are capable of becoming *upset about just about anything. Well, I'm not upset at all. Just accurate. Some people don't like accuracy. And I would say that *human beings* - young, old, male, female - are capable of becoming upset about just about anything. The most easily-upset person who posts to rrap isn't middle aged - he's old. Gets upset over *any* disagreement with his views...;-) I sometimes feel the tug myself, until I remember just how the good old days were. * * * * I could be wrong though..... "The good old days weren't always good Tomorrow's not as bad as it seems" - Billy Joel 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Those Old Study Guides
On Jan 27, 10:04�pm, wrote:
On Jan 26, 6:44 pm, wrote: 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. That resolves an ongoing bit of confusion on my part. I haven't been able to remember if I took my Novice exam in 1953 or 1954. What I do remember is that I took the exam during a Thanksgiving break at the FCC office in the Philly custom house and that there was no other way for me to take the test. Based on your June 10 '54 date I must have taken the test in the fall of '53 when I was a high school sophomore. Agreed. In those days there were three FCC offices in Texas - Houston, *Dallas and Beaumont. Houston and Dallas gave exams on a weekly schedule, while Beaumont was a sub-office that.gave exams by appointment. Exams were also given four times a year in San Antonio. Of course, in Texas, it's not at all difficult to be more than 75 miles from all four of those offices. The reason cited for the changes was that the FCC exam sessions were overloaded with amateurs taking the exams, and the FCC had almost overrun its 1953 budget for giving exams. In those days there were no license fees to defray the cost. That's very strange. There were very few ham tests given on the days when I took my Novice exam and again when I took my General exam a year later, the exam room was overloaded with guys taking commercial exams on both occasions. I was the *only * ham in the room when I took my General vs. a couple dozen others. The examiner opened the office with a question "is there anybody taking a ham radio license test today?" and I raised my hand. "OK, let's get you outta here." Being the only ham in a room full of grumbling commercial guys was a bit unnerving . . sorta like "OK kid just do it and hit the road." Those are just two data points, and if you went in the fall and spring, you missed the big summer push. In any event, work overload at FCC was the cited reason for the change. btw, when I was between sophomore and junior year of high school (1970), I went to that same office - to take the Extra exam. The place was crowded but I was the only one there to take the Extra, so the examiner took me first. I've taken three ham tests and one commercial license test in '53, '54 nd '68. All the exams were given by FCC examiners at the Philly office and none of them cost me a dime. I took the Novice from a local ham in '67, the Tech and Advanced in '68, the Extra in '70 and the commercial in '72. All the ham licenses except Novice cost money - you musta just missed the fee thing in '68. I think it was $9 back then. I swapped my original callsign for my current callsign at the FCC office in Gettysburg in '77. It's not a "vanity" callsign and it was also a freebie. I have yet to be be involved with a volunteer examiner or pay the FCC for anything. Cheap, cheap . . ! I swapped my old 2x3 3-land call for N2EY in '77 as well, when I moved to the Empire State. Sequentially issued and free, not a vanity call. Kept it when I moved back. This overload happened even though the FCC had stopped giving the Advanced exam 18 months earlier (end of 1952) and there were few applicants for the Extra because that license did not convey any additional operating privileges. Also, the "retest if you move closer" rule had been dropped in 1952, yet the FCC exam sessions were brusting at the seems.. Thanks again, Jim. You're welcome, Cecil. Hope that helps pin down the date. --- btw, in those days the FCC did not give credit for license exam elements previously passed unless they were passed in front of an FCC examiner. If a Novice who had gotten the license by mail went for the Technician, s/he had to do the 5 wpm code again. If a by-mail Technician went for the General or Conditional, s/he had to do the written exam again even though, back then, all three of those license classes used the same written test. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Those Old Study Guides
"John Smith I" wrote in message ... wrote: ... but in any case copyright lasts for 28 years as I recall althought that was lenghen so it might still cover 74 or 75 but not likely What is wrong with that picture? If they are using my tax dollars, they are mine and everyone elses! JS http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ Mark: Quite right. That is what I mean about that ARRL, they are dug into the hide of amateur radio deeper than a chigger in Lens' side! grin Geesh will I be glad when they are finally gone ... Regards, JS John, Here's a site that summarizes if documents are still under copyright or not. http://www.copyright.cornell.edu/tra...lic_Domain.htm Basically if the work was published in 1923 or later, there is a potential for it to be still under copyright. Copyright laws have changed a lot. Dee, N8UZE |
Those Old Study Guides
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote in ups.com: 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. It's a completely different situation. Learning Morse Code is directly related to getting the license and what is done with it. Traveling to a distant city back in the days before the Interstate Highway System isn't. I was a kid from a rather poor family. And yet I could get my parents to help out with things-once I convinced then that I was serious. That's great - and how it should be. But not all families are like that. For example, "helping out" is defined differently by different families. In my case, the parental units defined "helping out" as allowing me to use a corner of the basement for my radio stuff, and allowing me to hang antennas from the various trees and from the side of the house. Plus I didn't have to pay for the electricity I used to run the radio corner. *Everything* else connected with ham radio was on me. That's why I say I was lucky to live so close to an FCC exam point. Regardless, effort is the important thing, and I don't see it as different. But it *is* different. I can't imagine that a peron who went to the trouble of learning the material would feel otherwise. I can. And it's not about how anyone felt - it's about the reality of the requirements. It all depends on the situation, Mike. Consider the case posed by K8MN, which was very common in the 1950s and 1960s. How was a young 1950s ham supposed to get to a license test session 120 miles away, and be there before 8 AM on a weekday morning? Perhaps it was a filter like learning CW? (oops, my bad) Remember too that the distance rule was "air line", meaning straight- line distance on the map, not actual distance on the road. In many places, 125 miles air-line could be twice that on the road. More than three hours at the common speed limit of 40 mph - if everything went according to plan. Living in central PA, I'm painfully aware of that. My parents house is around 5 miles away by air, but no closer than 11 iles by car. How long would it take to drive from there to Philly or Pittsburgh back before the Interstate Highway system? What do you think it was like in the Rockies, where 175 miles air-line could be twice that by road? For me, the biggest difficulty in getting to the FCC office was the fact that tests in the Philly office were only given on Mondays, Tuesdays and Wednesdays - which were all school days. Young hams like me had to wait for summer, or a school holiday that was not a Federal holiday. (There was no way a school kid would skip school for a day to take a ham radio exam!) With the 30 day wait to retest, there was a real incentive to pass on the first try. I'll bet it was an incredibly exciting event for you, no? It was a *serious* event, more than exciting. If a kid timed it right, there could be as many as three chances to test in a single summer. But it was a long stretch through the school year. About the only chance we had back then was the Christmas break - if the holiday didn't also close the FCC office. No sarcasm here, I'm serious. The point I would make is that the perceived "difficulty" included both the test itself and accessing it. As I have said before, making the test sessions more accessible is a Good Thing. 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. Round trip or one way? Weekday or weekend? Did you have to be there at 8 AM or be turned away? I was going to become a ham, but I couldn't get there before 9 am..... ;^) I could leave the house at 7 and be at the FCC office by 8 without even walking fast. Easy. Most of all, note the wide variation in distances. I'll bet you went to different VE sessions at various hamfests, some close to home, some not. You went when it was convenient for *you*. Only the General CSCE was at a Hamfest. The rest I looked up and went to. Point is, you had lots of options. That's a Good Thing. My point is that in the Conditional days there was no choice. You went to the FCC office, on their schedule, unless you lived beyond the Conditional distance. And note this most of all: FCC didn't change the distance in 1954 because of concern for hams having to travel long distances to get to an exam session. FCC changed the distance to reduce their workload giving the exams! I had to look up to see what we were discussiong here, Jim. My point is that I seriously doubt that eliminating the mail ins harmed Amateur radio. Numbers continued to grow (I believe) and by the 60's, American society was becoming much more mobile. The facts are somewhat different. Amateur radio in the USA grew from about 60,000 hams in 1946 to about 250,000 in 1964. That's a quadrupling in less than 20 years, which works out to around 8% growth per year for 18 years. At least 190,000 new hams if nobody dropped out. Probably over 200,000 - more than 10,000 per year. Then in 1965 the growth suddenly slowed to a trickle. In the next decade or so, the numbers hovered around 250,000, with some years a little up and some a little down. That was the year the Conditional distance went from 75 miles to 175 miles, and the FCC added enough exam points so that almost all of CONUS was covered. Do you think that change might have affected growth? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:58 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com