|
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 4, 8:02�pm, "
wrote: On Mar 4, 5:00?pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: wrote: ? ?[which the FCC received in 1998, *not* in 2000...] Rip Van Deignan... ?overslept. The last I looked, the restructuring took effect in April 2000. Hence, "...my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments..." Should have said "...my Y2K restructuring NPRM comments..." Alas, I'm not above misplacing an adjective or adverb at 5am, however, the gist of my comments is still accurate. Nitpick if you have nothing better to add. * *You don't get "gist," tweetie. *MyReplyto Comments was to * *YOUR Comments on FCC 98-143 and YOUR Comment was * *dated 1998. *Do you want a copy? *:-) * [it's still in the ECFS * *for 98-143] Yep, it is. It was filed by mail because Len couldn't get ECFS to work for him back then. Len did not file any Comments to 98-143 at all. Len only filed Reply Comments to KH6HZ's Comments - even though KH6HZ supported the NCI position on Morse Code testing. (That 1998 position was to eliminate all testing except the 5 wpm required to meet the old treaty, and to include a sunset clause that would automatically eliminate the 5 wpm test if/when the treaty no longer required it.) Why Len would use the FCC comment system to argue with someone who *supported* elimination of all Morse Code testing at the earliest possible date remains a mystery. Perhaps he could not control his actions.... Reply to Comments are *only* supposed to be rebuttals of others' comments. They are not supposed to include any subjects not already discussed - that's what Comments are for. Len did not file any Comments to 98-143 at all. Yet in Len's Reply Comments he proposed that the FCC add a new, arbitrary and completely unnecessary minimum age requirement of 14 years to the rules, so that no class of amateur radio license could be issued to anyone under that age. There has never been a minimum-age requirement for a US amateur radio license, and to date Len has not been able to come up with a single instance of problems caused by the lack of such a requirement. Jim, N2EY |
Marie A. Loses Her Head Again
On Mar 7, 3:47?am, wrote:
On Mar 4, 8:02?pm, " wrote: massive snip of OLD, ANCIENT Spite of Miccolis... There has never been a minimum-age requirement for a US amateur radio license, and to date Len has not been able to come up with a single instance of problems caused by the lack of such a requirement. Still trolling right along after 8 years, Jimmie? :-) Let's see...your line got bitten off years ago...your pole is broken...the reel is rusted shut...and your boat keeps taking on water...and the fish have moved on to another pond. "A River Runs Through It" A very big river starting 23 February 2007. Happy "phishing." :-) LA |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 5, 10:11 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... On Mar 4, 8:16 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] You run the risk of simpler questions being selected for that 50 question exam. It is easier. I said the material was combined. I did not say that the question pools were combined verbatim. Instead, a new question pool is/was developed that covers the combined material. The "simpler" versions of the questions aren't used. For example, the Tech test might ask a question such as what is the approximate length of a quarter wave vertical for the 10m band while the General test would have a question that is much more specific like what is the calculated length for a quarter wave vertical for 28.300. The question on the Tech test would have choices that would be enough different that you would not have to actually calculate the exact value. The question on the General test would have at least two of choices close enough together that you would have to calculate the value. Let us say they combined the Tech and General. The approximate question would never be considered for the new pool. Therefore there is no risk of getting "simpler" questions when the material is combined. Dee, N8UZE Dee, you really need to let it go... |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 7, 6:47 am, wrote:
On Mar 4, 8:02?pm, " wrote: On Mar 4, 5:00?pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: wrote: ? ?[which the FCC received in 1998, *not* in 2000...] Rip Van Deignan... ?overslept. The last I looked, the restructuring took effect in April 2000. Hence, "...my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments..." Should have said "...my Y2K restructuring NPRM comments..." Alas, I'm not above misplacing an adjective or adverb at 5am, however, the gist of my comments is still accurate. Nitpick if you have nothing better to add. ? ?You don't get "gist," tweetie. ?MyReplyto Comments was to ? ?YOUR Comments on FCC 98-143 and YOUR Comment was ? ?dated 1998. ?Do you want a copy? ?:-) ? [it's still in the ECFS ? ?for 98-143] Yep, it is. It was filed by mail because Len couldn't get ECFS to work for him back then. Len did not file any Comments to 98-143 at all. Len only filed Reply Comments to KH6HZ's Comments - even though KH6HZ supported the NCI position on Morse Code testing. (That 1998 position was to eliminate all testing except the 5 wpm required to meet the old treaty, and to include a sunset clause that would automatically eliminate the 5 wpm test if/when the treaty no longer required it.) Why Len would use the FCC comment system to argue with someone who *supported* elimination of all Morse Code testing at the earliest possible date remains a mystery. Perhaps he could not control his actions.... Reply to Comments are *only* supposed to be rebuttals of others' comments. They are not supposed to include any subjects not already discussed - that's what Comments are for. Len did not file any Comments to 98-143 at all. Yet in Len's Reply Comments he proposed that the FCC add a new, arbitrary and completely unnecessary minimum age requirement of 14 years to the rules, so that no class of amateur radio license could be issued to anyone under that age. There has never been a minimum-age requirement for a US amateur radio license, and to date Len has not been able to come up with a single instance of problems caused by the lack of such a requirement. Jim, N2EY- I'm going to have to re-evaluate NY whine. Them's some sour grapes. |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote:
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message roups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Lessee... The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 5, 7:02 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote:
"Thomas Horne" wrote in message nk.net... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message groups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. The European approach with one "extra" license class and compulsory classroom training is not such a bad idea for people who operate on HF. Can you imagine that we are now allowing kb9rqz to operate a linear amp whose plate voltage might be /= 3KV? Do you think kb9rqz is technically qualified to open an AL80-B and change the 3-500Z tube? What if he forgets (or doesn't know to) bleed the the DC bulk caps or even forgets to unplug it? When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Perhaps linear amp usage should be restricted to extra class, or, we should apply the above stated European approach.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Plenty of Morse Code Tested Generals, Advanced, and Extras have had their health records closed by amplifiers and towers. And Mark has had 1,500W privs from the Get-Go. So what are you whining about now? |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 5, 7:06 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
"Stefan Wolfe" wrote: When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Message volume in this newsgroup would drop by 99%. So, is that a 'bad thing'? Exactly why did you return to RRAP? |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 6, 1:48 am, "K4YZ" wrote:
On Mar 4, 12:25?pm, " wrote: ? ?The military is IN the business of DESTRUCTION at the ? ?very real fact of part of the military being destroyed in ? ?the process of doing "defense." ? Wrong again. The Armed Forces is in the business of defending the United States and implementing of US foreign policy, by force of arms if necessary. Even the most casual of reader of military teechnology knows that the current state of the art of that "business" is LIMITING that "destruction" (read that "collateral damage") at every possible level. Today's military can do far more tactically and strategically with far less damage than their forebearers did in World War 2. If you'd like, I can suggest a couple of sources of research for you to follow-up on so you can get future posts more accurate- sounding... Or....You can just go on pounding us with tons of windy arguments about how since the correspondents weren't really "there" when "it" happened, we can't possibly know what's going on.... Putz. Steve, K4YZ What would Robesin know of the armed forces? Perhaps he was reading a 1950's copy of "This is the Air Force..." |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 7, 9:45 pm, wrote:
On Mar 5, 7:06 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Stefan Wolfe" wrote: When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Message volume in this newsgroup would drop by 99%. So, is that a 'bad thing'? Exactly why did you return to RRAP? to help his buddy Robeson? |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 7, 8:32?pm, "an_old_friend" wrote:
On Mar 7, 9:45 pm, wrote: On Mar 5, 7:06 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Stefan Wolfe" wrote: When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Message volume in this newsgroup would drop by 99%. So, is that a 'bad thing'? Exactly why did you return to RRAP? to help his buddy Robeson? Sounds like a winner opinion, Mark! :-) "Frauds of a feather stick together..." 73, AF6AY |
just another stalking thread
On Mar 8, 10:58�am, wrote:
On 7 Mar 2007 18:43:42 -0800, wrote: On Mar 5, 7:02 pm, "Stefan Wolfe" wrote: "Thomas Horne" wrote in message link.net... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message groups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. *Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. *When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. *No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. *In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? *It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. *I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. *I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. The European approach with one "extra" license class and compulsory classroom training is not such a bad idea for people who operate on HF.. Can you imagine that we are now allowing kb9rqz to operate a linear amp whose plate voltage might be /= 3KV? Do you think kb9rqz is technically qualified to open an AL80-B and change the 3-500Z tube? What if he forgets (or doesn't know to) bleed the the DC bulk caps or even forgets to unplug it? When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Perhaps linear amp usage should be restricted to extra class, or, we should apply the above stated European approach.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Plenty of Morse Code Tested Generals, Advanced, and Extras have had their health records closed by amplifiers and towers. *And Mark has had 1,500W privs from the Get-Go. *So what are you whining about now? about the fact I did not have to go through the same hazing ritual he did at this point Hoesntly I don't how to service the amp in question. the reason in my case is I don't own one. ifI aquire one I either get with a service manual or go looking for service info I know enough. I know poking aroing in an amp is dangerous without futh knowledgehttp://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - just another stalking thread http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/ -- Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
wrote in message oups.com... 73, AF6AY Congratulations on getting your license, Len. |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
|
Passing Element 4 (Was: "....Revolution?"
On Mar 9, 5:49�pm, Thomas Horne wrote:
wrote: On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote: I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. *I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... I take it you're suggesting that I take all of the ARRL advanced classes as a substitute for a single class that is focused on the body of knowledge that the exam tests for. *At the urging of the VEs that ran my general exam I took the extra the same day. *I didn't pass but I did get a sense of what the exam is testing for. *I only recall two questions on digital circuits or logic. *Should I really take an entire course for the sake of those two questions? Tom, Congrats on your new General! A suggestion on the Extra written: The entire question pool is available free-for-the-download at various sites. Also, there are online *practice* exams at a number of sites, too. They use the actual test Q&A, and will tell you which you get wrong and which you get right, so you know your strong points and where you need a bit more study. If you (or anyone else here) are stumped by any of the questions or explanations, just ask me and I'll help out. Email or newsgroup, here or rec.radio.amateur.moderated. 73 es GL de Jim, N2EY |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 9, 5:49 pm, Thomas Horne wrote:
wrote: On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message egroups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Lessee... The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... I take it you're suggesting that I take all of the ARRL advanced classes as a substitute for a single class that is focused on the body of knowledge that the exam tests for. At the urging of the VEs that ran my general exam I took the extra the same day. I didn't pass but I did get a sense of what the exam is testing for. I only recall two questions on digital circuits or logic. Should I really take an entire course for the sake of those two questions? -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR Tom, if you failed the Extra exam by two questions, then perhaps an entire course is worthwhile... And what would it hurt to have more knowledge than that minimum required to pass an exam? After all, it's what you do with your license that's important. The Old-Timers felt that the ARS gave up a lot when the FCC reduced the Morse Code Exam to a single 5WPM (at 13-15WPM) exam. The ARRL struck back with any number of on-line courses to beef up the knowledge base of the service. I asked this very group if anyone had taken any of the courses... no positive responses. They already know everything. You admit that you don't, so perhaps a course would benefit you. Good luck getting to Extra. |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 9, 6:05 pm, wrote:
On Mar 9, 5:49?pm, Thomas Horne wrote: wrote: On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote: I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. ?I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... I take it you're suggesting that I take all of the ARRL advanced classes as a substitute for a single class that is focused on the body of knowledge that the exam tests for. ?At the urging of the VEs that ran my general exam I took the extra the same day. ?I didn't pass but I did get a sense of what the exam is testing for. ?I only recall two questions on digital circuits or logic. ?Should I really take an entire course for the sake of those two questions? Tom, Congrats on your new General! A suggestion on the Extra written: The entire question pool is available free-for-the-download at various sites. Also, there are online *practice* exams at a number of sites, too. They use the actual test Q&A, and will tell you which you get wrong and which you get right, so you know your strong points and where you need a bit more study. If you (or anyone else here) are stumped by any of the questions or explanations, just ask me and I'll help out. Email or newsgroup, here or rec.radio.amateur.moderated. ..moderated indeed. I'd be cautious of asking questions on RRAP... W3RV might try to be "helpful." 73 es GL de Jim, N2EY- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
|
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 9, 10:30 pm, Thomas Horne wrote:
wrote: ..................... The Old-Timers felt that the ARS gave up a lot when the FCC reduced the Morse Code Exam to a single 5WPM (at 13-15WPM) exam. The ARRL struck back with any number of on-line courses to beef up the knowledge base of the service. I asked this very group if anyone had taken any of the courses... no positive responses. They already know everything. You admit that you don't, so perhaps a course would benefit you. Good luck getting to Extra. I didn't say that I missed by two questions. I said I only saw two questions on the exam that were related to digital circuits. I was wondering if it was worth taking the entire digital course to prepare for two questions. No, it's not. A night spent digesting a chapter or two on the subject area in the ARRL Handbook should be more than enough prep on the subject. I'd like to get the license as soon as possible so that I can serve as a control operator on any frequency that might be useful for emergency services work. That is were my particular interest lies. I will be taking those courses once I have finished the Exam preparation. What I was hoping to find was a course that is focused on preparing for the Extra Class Exam. ~~~ You might consider one of these: http://www.arrl.org/catalog/?item=8659#top http://www.amazon.com/Extra-Class-El.../dp/0945053266 ttp://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/ http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/FCCTest/ -- Tom Horne w3rv .. . One of those nasty hostile old 20wpm Extras who knows EVERYTHING . . Like how to put up antennas and get T5 cards . . |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 9, 10:30 pm, Thomas Horne wrote:
wrote: On Mar 9, 5:49 pm, Thomas Horne wrote: wrote: On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message glegroups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Lessee... The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... I take it you're suggesting that I take all of the ARRL advanced classes as a substitute for a single class that is focused on the body of knowledge that the exam tests for. At the urging of the VEs that ran my general exam I took the extra the same day. I didn't pass but I did get a sense of what the exam is testing for. I only recall two questions on digital circuits or logic. Should I really take an entire course for the sake of those two questions? -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR Tom, if you failed the Extra exam by two questions, then perhaps an entire course is worthwhile... And what would it hurt to have more knowledge than that minimum required to pass an exam? After all, it's what you do with your license that's important. The Old-Timers felt that the ARS gave up a lot when the FCC reduced the Morse Code Exam to a single 5WPM (at 13-15WPM) exam. The ARRL struck back with any number of on-line courses to beef up the knowledge base of the service. I asked this very group if anyone had taken any of the courses... no positive responses. They already know everything. You admit that you don't, so perhaps a course would benefit you. Good luck getting to Extra. I didn't say that I missed by two questions. I said I only saw two questions on the exam that were related to digital circuits. Sorry. I was wondering if it was worth taking the entire digital course to prepare for two questions. I'd like to get the license as soon as possible so that I can serve as a control operator on any frequency that might be useful for emergency services work. That is were my particular interest lies. That was my interest for getting a license, too. I will be taking those courses once I have finished the Exam preparation. What I was hoping to find was a course that is focused on preparing for the Extra Class Exam. -- Tom Horne The ARRL publishes videos for licensing. Maybe some group locall has them. Good luck, bb |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 8, 1:31 am, "
wrote: On Mar 7, 8:32?pm, "an_old_friend" wrote: On Mar 7, 9:45 pm, wrote: On Mar 5, 7:06 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Stefan Wolfe" wrote: When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Message volume in this newsgroup would drop by 99%. So, is that a 'bad thing'? Exactly why did you return to RRAP? to help his buddy Robeson? Sounds like a winner opinion, Mark! :-) "Frauds of a feather stick together..." 73, AF6AY No tar required. |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 10, 9:41 am, wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:30 pm, Thomas Horne wrote: wrote: On Mar 9, 5:49 pm, Thomas Horne wrote: wrote: On Mar 5, 12:12 am, Thomas Horne wrote: Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message glegroups.com... On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: [snip] All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses. All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own. Dee, N8UZE Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Lessee... The ARRL has on-line classes for EMCOM, Antennas, Propagation, Digital.... I take it you're suggesting that I take all of the ARRL advanced classes as a substitute for a single class that is focused on the body of knowledge that the exam tests for. At the urging of the VEs that ran my general exam I took the extra the same day. I didn't pass but I did get a sense of what the exam is testing for. I only recall two questions on digital circuits or logic. Should I really take an entire course for the sake of those two questions? -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR Tom, if you failed the Extra exam by two questions, then perhaps an entire course is worthwhile... And what would it hurt to have more knowledge than that minimum required to pass an exam? After all, it's what you do with your license that's important. The Old-Timers felt that the ARS gave up a lot when the FCC reduced the Morse Code Exam to a single 5WPM (at 13-15WPM) exam. The ARRL struck back with any number of on-line courses to beef up the knowledge base of the service. I asked this very group if anyone had taken any of the courses... no positive responses. They already know everything. You admit that you don't, so perhaps a course would benefit you. Good luck getting to Extra. I didn't say that I missed by two questions. I said I only saw two questions on the exam that were related to digital circuits. Sorry. I was wondering if it was worth taking the entire digital course to prepare for two questions. I'd like to get the license as soon as possible so that I can serve as a control operator on any frequency that might be useful for emergency services work. That is were my particular interest lies. That was my interest for getting a license, too. I will be taking those courses once I have finished the Exam preparation. What I was hoping to find was a course that is focused on preparing for the Extra Class Exam. -- Tom Horne The ARRL publishes videos for licensing. Maybe some group locall has them. check the larger radio clubs when looking for the extra class or get it yourslef donate it to a club when you are finshed and deduct it on your taxes Good luck, bb- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 10, 7:49�am, wrote:
On Mar 8, 1:31 am, " wrote: On Mar 7, 8:32?pm, "an_old_friend" wrote: On Mar 7, 9:45 pm, wrote: On Mar 5, 7:06 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote: "Stefan Wolfe" wrote: When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Message volume in this newsgroup would drop by 99%. So, is that a 'bad thing'? Exactly why did you return to RRAP? to help his buddy Robeson? * *Sounds like a winner opinion, Mark! *:-) * *"Frauds of a feather stick together..." No tar required. "Crazy Glue" might apply... :-) "Mankind invented language to satisfy its need to complain." (anonymous saying) 73, Len AF6AY |
A "Codeless Revolution?"
|
A "Codeless Revolution?"
wrote:
On Mar 9, 10:30 pm, Thomas Horne wrote: wrote: .................... The Old-Timers felt that the ARS gave up a lot when the FCC reduced the Morse Code Exam to a single 5WPM (at 13-15WPM) exam. The ARRL struck back with any number of on-line courses to beef up the knowledge base of the service. I asked this very group if anyone had taken any of the courses... no positive responses. They already know everything. You admit that you don't, so perhaps a course would benefit you. Good luck getting to Extra. I didn't say that I missed by two questions. I said I only saw two questions on the exam that were related to digital circuits. I was wondering if it was worth taking the entire digital course to prepare for two questions. No, it's not. A night spent digesting a chapter or two on the subject area in the ARRL Handbook should be more than enough prep on the subject. I'd like to get the license as soon as possible so that I can serve as a control operator on any frequency that might be useful for emergency services work. That is were my particular interest lies. I will be taking those courses once I have finished the Exam preparation. What I was hoping to find was a course that is focused on preparing for the Extra Class Exam. ~~~ You might consider one of these: http://www.arrl.org/catalog/?item=8659#top http://www.amazon.com/Extra-Class-El.../dp/0945053266 ttp://www.gordonwestradioschool.com/ http://www.dauntless-soft.com/PRODUCTS/FCCTest/ -- Tom Horne w3rv . . One of those nasty hostile old 20wpm Extras who knows EVERYTHING . . Like how to put up antennas and get T5 cards . . W3RV de KB3OPR/AG TNX for trying to help but I'm not finding the prep as hard as I expected. I'm now passing my practice exams without difficulty at forty plus questions correct and I'm only two chapters into the ARRL extra license book. I bookmarked the links for future reference and I do appreciate the effort you went to in finding them for me. -- Tom Horne |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:21 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com