| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
September 24th 04, 12:57 PM
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... (Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... Which at this point is a dead topic since the code test is obviously not going away within any visible timframe if ever. Frankly, I'm amazed that FCC didn't MO&O it out of existence last summer. I think the code test flap is a universally dead issue at this point in history. Except in this toxic no-counter swamp. Cecil got it right, 5wpm is "good enough" under today's condx and I agree with that and I suspect that the FCC and the ARRL also silently agree too. The matter was a helluva brawl back when shreikers from both poles were going at each other here and elsewhere. Whatever. It's all worn out as is this NG. The way I see it another reasonable and not unexpected regulatory compromise has been reached. The NCTAs killed the 13 & 20wpm code tests but didn't achieve their ultimate objective. Us PCTAs lost the 13 & 20wpm code tests but the 5wpm test lives on. And the real truth may be even simpler. FCC enacted medical waivers back in 1990 at the request of a now-dead King via Papa Bush. Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. But there was a lot of complaining in some quarters about waivers, so FCC made 'em go away. So I expect the 5wpm test to continue to be required for some considerable time without further ado. 14 months since WRC2003 and nothing's changed.... Nobody got everything they wanted and nobody lost everything. It's a typical compromise solution for a regulatory hot potato. Welcome to America. Yup. On the other hand the FCC could drop the code test on Monday and life would go on as usual. Double yup. So Cecil, Hare, innumerable others and even Carl Anderson Stevenson Heh . . duh? Reminds me . . I owe him some e-mail . . he was having some issues with the base of the big used Trylon tower I spotted for him. Like I said about ham antennas being more ME than EE... for cripes sake, the Honcho Maximo of NCI wised up and bailed out of here long ago leaving us to bicker mindlesssly, circularly and endlessly with dim lights like Burke and the other Anderson. WE'RE the RRAP stupids for bothering with any of it Miccolis. Who is bothering? I read a few posts, write a few, discuss interesting topics with KB3EIA, N8UZE, and some others. Filtering what one reads works wonders. RRAP will prolly dribble along for years but it's pretty obvious that it's slowly "losing membership". Nothing slow about it... Refresh me here James, I think it was around the time that I logged XG that I/we started to hear a lot more signals from very far off places than I/we could hear from US FD stations. So to hell with FD, let's get back to basics and go dxing I sayithed to self. Worked the JA who was in some other contest. Logged him too. Apparently Newington did not disallow that one. DX contacts count for FD. They give you a signal report, it counts. They simpy doan give a **** abt FD logs good or bogus. Not true! The QSOs were good. There was one SP handing 'em out 2-3 a minute later on - remember? They all counted. DX qsos count; it's just that DX stations' logs aren't counted competitively in the listings. That's nice. You're the reason I don't bother reading the FD rules 'cause I know that you'll have 'em memorized, analyzed and carved six ways from Sunday into yer headbone. Which spares me from all that drudgery. It's always nice to have a "detail guy" like you on tap. 'zactly. Want a quick history of what the rules used to be, how the dates and operating times evolved and when the first FD was? Didn't think so. A year or two ago the definition was changed so that FD covers not just North America but SA too. At least I caught that change. That ZF1 9A catagory bunch musta had a blast. Yeah mon. Which means N2EY/Tierra del Fuego could compete... Oh just GO for it! Should I hold my breath? Not really... . . In the meanwhile the aformentioned collection of bull****ers wasn't more than eight feet from him throuhout all of it. I gotta tell you that in all my half century on the bands that was the worst of the worst of the bad experiences I've had in the game. Madonna was right: It's a material world. Yes, I fear for the future of ham radio. I did not know that story. Makes me sick. Now watch, somebody will spin it into being *your* fault. I could care less. But do not fear for the future of amateur radio too much. Here's why: Back when you started, and to a lesser extent even when I started, ham radio was populated mostly by folks who took it very seriously. "Radio for its own sake" wasn't something most people were interested in. The license process, operating skill requirements and equipment costs alone insured that most hams had a considerable personal investment - and the money was the least of it. Sure, there were some clueless folk but they either learned or were really frustrated. I agree with most of that. Then a bunch of things happened. The cb boom made 2 way radio popular and practical for lots of folks, the development of ssb and then fm transceivers and solidstate made the equipment small, less expensive and easier to use, etc. We got a lot of good hams, of course, but also a sizable number who are only "sort of" interested, and who don't take it that seriously, nor have a big personal investment. The whole code test issue is really just an iceberg-tip for the concept of personal investment. Now we have the internet and cheap cell phones and GMRS/FRS. Which have pulled away a lot of the folks who were "sort of" interested in ham radio. That's why repeater use and 'honeydew' licensing is down - much easier to just use the cell phone or FRS. So the future of ham radio relies on those who are really interested in radio for its own sake and are a lot more than "sort of" interested. That would take out probably 70% of the current licensees. Most of that 70% which are inactive anyway. Those folks are out there, and will continue to be. But they will not be attracted by lowering the requirements or trying to make ham radio a sort of rf version of the internet. I think you're 95% right on all counts. TU All depends what you think the goal is. You're thinking the goal is to put up an antenna. It's not. Right: PLONK again. Another technique to watch for is the misremembering of a past event in order to get your panties in a snarl. Such as the whole Cecil thing. Or the whole K8MN A1 op thing. Or the way I've been misquoted/misinterpreted... I ignore the circle-jerk games around here, I can't be bothered. 'zactly. I dumped the bait over the transom, I'm chumming for an on-the-air QSO with NØIMD via the end-fed wire he claims he has. It's put up or shut time time again around here. Tally Freaking Ho, this oughta be a real gooder. Don't hold yer breath. Watch - there will be all kinds of reasons it won't happen. Like a certain Extra license that is still in its box. We'll see. The prior RRAP vaguely similar event was not put together overnight. But when it came down to it, "pulling a Cecil" meant actually getting on the air and meeting others on the air. *Cecil* was a stand-up guy about the whole thing. The other Brian isn't. That's the bottom line. And it will be spun so that somehow it's *your* fault... Yawn. Didja read my UP/URS-2 story about what probably really happened in T5? Wanna bet that it's pretty darn close to the truth? Not that we'll ever get the real story or even a straight answer... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#3
September 24th 04, 09:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes: In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: But when it came down to it, "pulling a Cecil" meant actually getting on the air and meeting others on the air. *Cecil* was a stand-up guy about the whole thing. The other Brian isn't. That's the bottom line. No, not a "bottom line," just another denigration of someone who refused a demand from a Lord High God of Radio(telegraphy) to "sked" with "CW" at the appointed hour. Mother superior* has outdone herself. [* term does NOT have any religious connotation...] And it will be spun so that somehow it's *your* fault... Yawn. Didja read my UP/URS-2 story about what probably really happened in T5? Wanna bet that it's pretty darn close to the truth? Not that we'll ever get the real story or even a straight answer... Report back to us after your return from T5 land and tell us of your findings, Lord High Gods of Radio(telegraphy). Neither of you were there before...yet you are all so damn Expert on the matter. PCTA extras must stick together...and try to stick it to any NCTA within sight and hearing (like General Order #1). |
|
#4
September 25th 04, 06:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article , PAMNO (N2EY) writes: In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: But when it came down to it, "pulling a Cecil" meant actually getting on the air and meeting others on the air. *Cecil* was a stand-up guy about the whole thing. The other Brian isn't. That's the bottom line. No, not a "bottom line," just another denigration of someone who refused a demand from a Lord High God of Radio(telegraphy) to "sked" with "CW" at the appointed hour. Just another person willing to compromise his convictions so that "we can all just get along." In the end he didn't get along; his compromise was for naught; he left. Trying to appease terrorists just doesn't work. Mother superior* has outdone herself. She's on the run. [* term does NOT have any religious connotation...] Nor does "Morseodist" but one in particular took offense. I think it was too close to "Methodist." And it will be spun so that somehow it's *your* fault... Yawn. Didja read my UP/URS-2 story about what probably really happened in T5? Wanna bet that it's pretty darn close to the truth? Not that we'll ever get the real story or even a straight answer... Report back to us after your return from T5 land and tell us of your findings, Lord High Gods of Radio(telegraphy). I hope they decide to bring at least M16's. And tripple copies of "thier" CSCE's to impress the warlords with. Maybe they'll wire "thier" forward assists as code keys! Hi, hi! Neither of you were there before...yet you are all so damn Expert on the matter. Even Heil, The World's Greatest Ham, blew it WRT what is legal in countries without governments. He only has experience in countries with viable governments - especially the one's that deny him amateur privs! So, after I explained what was needed for licensing, none have taken the opportuinty to go operate from Somalia, not even that chickenliver that has visions of flying bricks. Maybe they're afraid of "Blackguard Down." Who would they pray to? PCTA extras must stick together...and try to stick it to any NCTA within sight and hearing (like General Order #1). Stickit to Ya while they brag about real military experience! Seben hostile actions. Hi, hi! |
|
#5
September 25th 04, 08:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... .. . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. But there was a lot of complaining in some quarters about waivers, so FCC made 'em go away. Once more the ADA cut both ways. So I expect the 5wpm test to continue to be required for some considerable time without further ado. 14 months since WRC2003 and nothing's changed.... There's a huge pile of updates of the ham regs which are overdue for FCC review and revision. I expect that the code test issue will be wrapped into some sort of major omnibus reworking of Part 97 a la the Incentive Licensing package of 1968 or so except that this pass ought to include a bunch more "real estate", 160 thru the millimeter bands and far more topics "To take ham radio into the 21st century". Someday. At their convenience. I'm not holding my breath here either. That's nice. You're the reason I don't bother reading the FD rules 'cause I know that you'll have 'em memorized, analyzed and carved six ways from Sunday into yer headbone. Which spares me from all that drudgery. It's always nice to have a "detail guy" like you on tap. 'zactly. Want a quick history of what the rules used to be, how the dates and operating times evolved and when the first FD was? .....#$!@^#!*&#@!. . . NO Dammit! Arrrgh! Didn't think so. ...$#&$!..RIGHT! So the future of ham radio relies on those who are really interested in radio for its own sake and are a lot more than "sort of" interested. That would take out probably 70% of the current licensees. Most of that 70% which are inactive anyway. In this respect I have my reservations abt 70% of the remaining 30%. I dumped the bait over the transom, I'm chumming for an on-the-air QSO with NØIMD via the end-fed wire he claims he has. It's put up or shut time time again around here. Tally Freaking Ho, this oughta be a real gooder. Don't hold yer breath. Watch - there will be all kinds of reasons it won't happen. Like a certain Extra license that is still in its box. We'll see. The prior RRAP vaguely similar event was not put together overnight. But when it came down to it, "pulling a Cecil" meant actually getting on the air and meeting others on the air. *Cecil* was a stand-up guy about the whole thing. The other Brian isn't. That's the bottom line. He "came through" exactly as as expected, he's as predictable as the tides. And it will be spun so that somehow it's *your* fault... Yawn. Didja read my UP/URS-2 story about what probably really happened in T5? Yes. Wanna bet that it's pretty darn close to the truth? Right off I dunno anything about current military HF comms. However it strikes me that given Burke's job in that timeframe and place, running around a USAF shipping/recieving dock with a clipboard chasing down missing boxes, that he wouldn't have had much in the way of access to HF comms gear. Not if decent security measures were in place. But like I said I dunno so I'll pass. Not that we'll ever get the real story or even a straight answer... We already got the only "story" which matters. 73 de Jim, N2EY w3rv |
|
#6
September 26th 04, 02:50 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
(Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com...
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... . . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. Interesting. Jim says anyone who wanted one could have one. Kelly says he doesn't know a single waivered ham. I wonder if there's any middle ground here that comes closer to the truth? |
|
#7
September 26th 04, 01:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"William" wrote in message om... (Brian Kelly) wrote in message . com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... . . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. Interesting. Jim says anyone who wanted one could have one. Kelly says he doesn't know a single waivered ham. I wonder if there's any middle ground here that comes closer to the truth? I personally know one person who got a waiver (my ex husband) and was present at a test session as a candidate where another person got a waiver. People didn't make a big deal of it so it's hard to say how many got them. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
#8
September 26th 04, 07:28 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(William) writes: (Brian Kelly) wrote in message .com... PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... . . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. Interesting. Jim says anyone who wanted one could have one. Kelly says he doesn't know a single waivered ham. I wonder if there's any middle ground here that comes closer to the truth? That all depends on the gossip heard at the captain's table during dinner (served by "drudges"). Whatever it is, it is 100% absolutely guaranteed TRVTH (engraved in marble) whenever spoken by a PCTA extra. [probably has an Underwriters' tag attached...] |
|
#9
September 26th 04, 04:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article ,
(Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... . . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. Nobody had to say they got one. I've known a few hams who did. All they needed to do was write a letter and get *any* practicing MD or DO to sign it. FCC gave detailed instructions about what info should be in the letter. Basically it could be almost anything medically related. But there was a lot of complaining in some quarters about waivers, so FCC made 'em go away. Once more the ADA cut both ways. Nothing to do with ADA at all. Waivers came about because ol' JY1 asked Papa Bush for a favor and the Prez passed the buck down to FCC. FCC dreamed up the medical waiver thing, not any handicapped-hams group. It became the law in 1990. The 2000 restructuring made it a moot point. So I expect the 5wpm test to continue to be required for some considerable time without further ado. Possibly. It's certainly not a high priority for FCC. 14 months since WRC2003 and nothing's changed.... There's a huge pile of updates of the ham regs which are overdue for FCC review and revision. I expect that the code test issue will be wrapped into some sort of major omnibus reworking of Part 97 a la the Incentive Licensing package of 1968 or so except that this pass ought to include a bunch more "real estate", 160 thru the millimeter bands and far more topics "To take ham radio into the 21st century". Someday. At their convenience. I'm not holding my breath here either. Maybe. Or maybe just the opposite - tinker with the details but leave the basic frame alone. Look at our license structure now - it's the linear descendant of the 1951 restructuring. That's nice. You're the reason I don't bother reading the FD rules 'cause I know that you'll have 'em memorized, analyzed and carved six ways from Sunday into yer headbone. Which spares me from all that drudgery. It's always nice to have a "detail guy" like you on tap. 'zactly. Want a quick history of what the rules used to be, how the dates and operating times evolved and when the first FD was? ....#$!@^#!*&#@!. . . NO Dammit! Arrrgh! Didn't think so. ..$#&$!..RIGHT! Here's a tidbit: Back in the early '70s, there was a rules change that prohibited setting up until the actual FD period. IOW you weren't supposed to do anything involving setup until 2 PM Saturday EST. You can guess how well that one went over! You already know the "aggregate mobile" story. So the future of ham radio relies on those who are really interested in radio for its own sake and are a lot more than "sort of" interested. That would take out probably 70% of the current licensees. Most of that 70% which are inactive anyway. In this respect I have my reservations abt 70% of the remaining 30%. You know what the bands sound like during a contest. Yet even the big contests like CQWW don't get more than about 50,000 hams on-air at one time, and most of them are listening at any given moment. So the number of truly active hams is but a fraction of the license totals. Otherwise the bands would sound like a contest all the time. I dumped the bait over the transom, I'm chumming for an on-the-air QSO with NØIMD via the end-fed wire he claims he has. It's put up or shut time time again around here. Tally Freaking Ho, this oughta be a real gooder. Don't hold yer breath. Watch - there will be all kinds of reasons it won't happen. Like a certain Extra license that is still in its box. We'll see. The prior RRAP vaguely similar event was not put together overnight. But when it came down to it, "pulling a Cecil" meant actually getting on the air and meeting others on the air. *Cecil* was a stand-up guy about the whole thing. The other Brian isn't. That's the bottom line. He "came through" exactly as as expected, he's as predictable as the tides. Whatever. And it will be spun so that somehow it's *your* fault... Yawn. Didja read my UP/URS-2 story about what probably really happened in T5? Yes. Wanna bet that it's pretty darn close to the truth? Right off I dunno anything about current military HF comms. However it strikes me that given Burke's job in that timeframe and place, running around a USAF shipping/recieving dock with a clipboard chasing down missing boxes, that he wouldn't have had much in the way of access to HF comms gear. Not if decent security measures were in place. But like I said I dunno so I'll pass. Not that we'll ever get the real story or even a straight answer... We already got the only "story" which matters. Exactly. No big deal. I dunno why K4YZ makes such a big deal about it. Nobody is complaining that they worked him but didn't get a card. So what's the beef? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#10
September 26th 04, 12:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message ... In article , (Brian Kelly) writes: (N2EY) wrote in message .com... . . . . . . Those waivers effectively meant that nobody really had to go beyond the 5 wpm test to get a US ham license. All it took was a doctor's note from *any* MD or DO, and you could write the letter and get the doc to sign it. You didn't need a diagnosis of any particular problem, nor any sort of permanent condition, just a rather vague certification that for medical reasons it would be harder for you to pass the test than the average bloke. Do you know of *anyone* who tried and couldn't get a waiver? Or *any* doc who was even questioned by FCC? I don't. I don't even know anybody who got one of those waivers much less how they pulled it off. Nobody had to say they got one. Why open themselves up to mountains of ridicule and scorn? I've known a few hams who did. All they needed to do was write a letter and get *any* practicing MD or DO to sign it. FCC gave detailed instructions about what info should be in the letter. Basically it could be almost anything medically related. Steve would say "who better than a licensed medical authority?" Maybe the ARRL Section Manager would have been a better way to go? Hi, hi! But there was a lot of complaining in some quarters about waivers, so FCC made 'em go away. Once more the ADA cut both ways. Nothing to do with ADA at all. Waivers came about because ol' JY1 asked Papa Bush for a favor and the Prez passed the buck down to FCC. FCC dreamed up the medical waiver thing, not any handicapped-hams group. Now you're starting to sound like K3LT. Do you have any opinions wrt Ten-Ten International? |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
| FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Letters for the Period Ending May 1, 2004 | General | |||
| First BPL License Awarded - | Boatanchors | |||
| First BPL License Awarded - | Boatanchors | |||
Hybrid Mode
