Now That It's "Over"...
 

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

Just wondering.

Steve, K4YZ

In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here are some predictions for ya:

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the written exams.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

---

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they are
welcomed into the ARS.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 6 Jul 2003 22:27:00 -0700, (Steve Robeson, K4CAP)
wrote:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

It has long been my opinion that the single biggest quality that
distinguishes most hams from most operators in the personal radio
services such as CB, MURS, Marine VHF, GMRS, and so forth is that we
hams are not only interested in our own enjoyment of radio, but we
also have a genuine interest in others enjoying their use of their
privileges as well. There are of course exceptions on both sides of
the dividing line that one might consider the licensing process to
represent, but in general, most hams really want "the other guy" to
have an enjoyable experience when he (or she) goes on the air. We care
not only about ourselves, but about others as well.

As for those that do not, well, we've all seen troll messages posted
in this and other NG by such persons many times in the past. If such
folks continue to shun the ARS in the future, this is probably a good
thing for all parties concerned. Pirates - whether they are on the
so-called "freeband" or are simply bootleggers on the ham frequencies
or elsewhere, have that status by their own choice. I seriously doubt
that we will see a major influx of new hams from the ranks of people
who feel they are above such conventions as getting a license,
operating according to a set of regulations, and conducting themselves
in accordance with good amateur practice and gentlemen's agreements
and so forth.

Nevertheless, there most definitely are many operators in the other
radio services who do in fact possess this quality, and it is my hope
that we'll see them streaming into the VE sessions en masse once the
changes take effect. In fact, I'll be working to convince them to do
just that, and to get them into the club meetings and to help them
learn what they'll need to learn to fully enjoy their new privileges,
and I'll be encouraging others to do the same. As with other
opportunities given to us by such simplifications of the regulations,
it's up to us to either make the most of it or let the chance to do
some good on behalf of the ARS just slide on by...and I do believe
that those who are not part of the solution are part of the problem.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

On 07 Jul 2003 11:11:10 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:


Here are some predictions for ya:

Hmmm...hang on, lemme wipe the dust off the crystal ball for ya
first....okay, go ahead.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the written exams.

In the short term, probably not. In the long term, as the written
tests go through their normal revision and updating processes, I'd
expect and hope that the question pool committee members would begin
to include questions on practical operating knowledge in addition to
the questions on theory that are already part of the tests. I've long
felt that it was time for the CW testing requirement to go, but the
fact remains that it has indeed been the only practical skill (as
opposed to theoretical knowledge) tested, and I think that this does
need to change.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

Seems to me that the outcome, in this regard, is up to us. We have an
opportunity to start a significant influx of good operators into the
ARS provided we're willing to identify them and elmer them and welcome
them into the ranks, so to speak.

Those of us who go out of our way to meet these people and convince
them to get into the club meetings and the VE sessions, and who answer
questions and provide the guidance the newcomers will need and then
accept and respect them as fellow hams should, will be taking good
advantage of the opportunity.

Those of us who spend our time coming up with witty and derogatory
names like Extra Lite and insist on distinguishing between No-Code and
Know-Code and go out of their way to make people feel like
second-class citizens will be letting the opportunity just slide on by
and will be doing a disservice to the ARS.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

Again, this depends on us.

Hmmm...lemme see...we're faced with the possibility of having a lot of
newcomers with little or no practical experience WRT radio wave
propagation on the HF bands, and thus little knowledge on which to
base selection of a frequency band on which to begin making contacts
at any particular time. Isn't this exactly what ALE is supposed to do?
Yet, how many hams do you know of who have even heard of ALE, outisde
of those in this forum where I know the subject has come up
previously? How many hams in your local club know what ALE is? How
many would be willing to accept and use it if they did?

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they are
welcomed into the ARS.

To use the British term: Bloody Well Right! Especially since there
will undoubtedly be those who will not welcome them at all, and in
fact do quite the opposite. Those of us who wish to take advantage of
this opportunity will have to work doubly hard in order to overcome
the harm done by the minority that will attempt to ostracize and chase
away the newcomers, forgetting that they were newcomers themselves
once upon a time.

73 DE John, KC2HMZ

N2EY wrote:
In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:


Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?


There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here are some predictions for ya:

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the written exams.

Too bad. I'd like to see the exam restructured


The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

Agreed.


The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

Agreed. I'd like to hear just what sort of technorevolution some people
were expecting.

Do people who do not have the time to take the morse code test have the
time to invent new modes? Do they have time to invent digital voice
modes that take up bandwidth than ssb?


Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.


Just wondering.


Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they are
welcomed into the ARS.

And there you have one of the more interesting dilemmas to the ARS.

Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF, even accept Elmering?
Or will they insist that the conventions that have been developed over
the years are not applicable to them.

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a new
Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF experience at
all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After showing him where the
PTT was, and how to change bands, I started to explain the structure of
a contest QSO. He interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to
be rude, but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of 1 QSO
per hour under *good* band conditions!

Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I should
have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6 months.

I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.

=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

"Mike" =3D=3D Mike Coslo writes:

[...]

Mike And there you have one of the more interesting dilemmas to the
Mike ARS.

Mike Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF, even accept
Mike Elmering? Or will they insist that the conventions that have
Mike been developed over the years are not applicable to them.

Some do, some don't. I know my limitations, and I accept assistance
and information from those who can help me.

Mike This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a
Mike new Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF
Mike experience at all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After
Mike showing him where the PTT was, and how to change bands, I
Mike started to explain the structure of a contest QSO. He
Mike interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to be rude,
Mike but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
Mike the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of
Mike 1 QSO per hour under *good* band conditions!

This is the opposite of my first HF contest experience -- just over a
year ago at Field Day. The group I was with was very gentle to new
contesters, to the point that they had written down precisely what we
were to say, what we needed to ask for, even to the point of reminding
us to wish other stations "good luck". This year's Field Day was the
first year that I ran a contest station unattended, and I was able to
provide some assistance to Technicians who wanted to work HF. It was
a good feeling, and I look forward to learning more if only to share
that knowledge with others.

Mike Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I
Mike should have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6
Mike months.

I went from Technician to Extra. I had my Technician ticket for two
years, and had only actually operated for six months before
upgrading.

Mike I would propose that there be at least a year wait before
Mike upgrading to Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating
Mike knowledge in less time.

It's a good suggestion, but not something I'd like to see in FCC
regulations. Mileage may vary.

Jack.
=2D --=20
Jack Twilley
jmt at twilley dot org
http colon slash slash www dot twilley dot org slash tilde jmt slash
=2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQE/CcUoGPFSfAB/ezgRAgEDAKC+yK6va+8I9YCaIIGEK++3YJ5wfACg/WLN
ZDqLu+bRtnpsu6Sssr0RpKc=3D
=3DwX/f
=2D----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Jack Twilley wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


"Mike" == Mike Coslo writes:

some snippage

Mike This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a
Mike new Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF
Mike experience at all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After
Mike showing him where the PTT was, and how to change bands, I
Mike started to explain the structure of a contest QSO. He
Mike interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to be rude,
Mike but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
Mike the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of
Mike 1 QSO per hour under *good* band conditions!

This is the opposite of my first HF contest experience -- just over a
year ago at Field Day. The group I was with was very gentle to new
contesters, to the point that they had written down precisely what we
were to say, what we needed to ask for, even to the point of reminding
us to wish other stations "good luck". This year's Field Day was the
first year that I ran a contest station unattended, and I was able to
provide some assistance to Technicians who wanted to work HF. It was
a good feeling, and I look forward to learning more if only to share
that knowledge with others.


Fortunately, everyone who Elmered me on HF ops was very kind.

If I were to make a guess on that guy's thoughts, he was probably
embarrassed at his inexperience. Not wanting to appear foolish, he just
acted brusque, and ended up looking foolish anyhoo.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Robert Casey wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:


Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF, even accept
Elmering? Or will they insist that the conventions that have been
developed over the years are not applicable to them.

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a
new Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF experience
at all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After showing him where
the PTT was, and how to change bands, I started to explain the
structure of a contest QSO. He interrupted me after the first sentence
with a "not to be rude, but I'll take over now". I came back the next
morning and saw the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was working at
the rate of 1 QSO per hour under *good* band conditions!

Always some idiots.... When I got my "extra lite" on restructuring
day, went home to fire up the
Kenwood HF rig I bought used (strung an antenna that vaguely resembled a
dipole before) and
listened around a bit to get a feel on how QSOs are done on HF. That
and some experience
on ten between 28.3 and 28.5 I started keying up the mic mostly to
respond to CQs. After some
newbie type errors I think I have the hang of it now..... With the
combination of a boring common
prefix callsign, low power (~50 watts) and a crummy antenna, you develop
some skill.
The key is to realize that when entering into a new environment, one may
not have all the
facts right, and be willing to adjust accordingly.

That's the way to do it. By the time, I got my General, I was actually
pretty used to HF operation. As a tech, I had operated in some contests
that the club participated in, plus a field day. (to the sticklers -
yes, with a control op)

They tricked me! Got me hooked on contesting, and I had no choice but
to upgrade!!! Well they really didn't trick me, but it worked out that
way anyhow.

But every time I try out a different mode, I spen weeks listening
before I ever transmit. I hope these new people will do the same.

- Mike KB3EIA

"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
om...
Mike Coslo wrote in message
...

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a new
Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF experience at
all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After showing him where the
PTT was, and how to change bands, I started to explain the structure of
a contest QSO. He interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to
be rude, but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of 1 QSO
per hour under *good* band conditions!

I know this type...Not from Amateur Radio, so much, but from
flying...They learned enough to get into the air and that's ALL they
want to do. And usually he's the idiot that Civil Air Patrol has to
go find at 0300. Of course he's in bed (didn't close flight plan) of
the ELT on his aircraft is squawking because he didn't do a proper
shut down.

Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I should
have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6 months.

I forget who said there's two kinds of knowledge...there's the
things you know, and the things you know where to find the answers
to...

I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.

Yep!

Steve, K4YZ

Used to be back in the sixties. Think it was 2 or 3 years actual on the air
experience as General or higher (class A, Advanced) then you could take the
Extra test.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message
om...

Mike Coslo wrote in message

...

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a new
Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF experience at
all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After showing him where the
PTT was, and how to change bands, I started to explain the structure of
a contest QSO. He interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to
be rude, but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of 1 QSO
per hour under *good* band conditions!

I know this type...Not from Amateur Radio, so much, but from
flying...They learned enough to get into the air and that's ALL they
want to do. And usually he's the idiot that Civil Air Patrol has to
go find at 0300. Of course he's in bed (didn't close flight plan) of
the ELT on his aircraft is squawking because he didn't do a proper
shut down.


Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I should
have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6 months.

I forget who said there's two kinds of knowledge...there's the
things you know, and the things you know where to find the answers
to...


I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.

Yep!

Steve, K4YZ


Used to be back in the sixties. Think it was 2 or 3 years actual on the air
experience as General or higher (class A, Advanced) then you could take the
Extra test.


Yes to bothya'! It really isn't just the book learning.

Seriously, I learned so much in that first year that I really only now
consider myself a "real" extra, and at the bottom rungs of the ladder.

But I'm a quick learner........


- Mike KB3EIA -

In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

Just wondering.

Steve:

What do you mean, "no excuse remaining?" There are plenty of excuses
remaining. As long as a written theory test (if you can call a multiple-
guess test a "written" test) is required, there will be people whining and
complaining about having to prepare for it and take it in order to obtain
a license in whatever's left of the ARS. So, we'll change the debate over
to whether or not the ARS is a "technical" service and whether the testing
should be changed into something more dumbed-down than it already is.
After that, the next bone of contention will be whether or not a prospective
ham should be required to know how to spell his name correctly on the
application!

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here are some predictions for ya:

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant
change
in the written exams.

Too bad. I'd like to see the exam restructured

The writtens WERE restructured back in 2000. The number of tests and the total
number of questions were reduced.

There were all sorts of suggestions in the comments submitted about how to
improve the writtens, but the FCC ignored all of them and reduced the written
testing as well as the code testing.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term
surge, and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

Agreed.

Watch the thread "ARS License Numbers"...

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant
change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

Agreed. I'd like to hear just what sort of technorevolution some people

were expecting.

You shoulda been here a couple years ago when certain folks were telling us
what wonderful technologies we'd have it weren't for the code test. One of the
most vociferous is now Executive Director of NCI. He'd lecture us on how
primitive Morse Code and other modes hams use are, compared to what was
possible.

A year after the 2000 restructuring, he went from Tech Plus to Extra and went
on HF SSB, working DX with a manufactured transceiver. Last I heard he had over
70 countries. Surreal.


Do people who do not have the time to take the morse code test have the
time to invent new modes? Do they have time to invent digital voice
modes that take up bandwidth than ssb?

Ask 'em.

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop
the code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down
here in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change
will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they
are welcomed into the ARS.

And there you have one of the more interesting dilemmas to the ARS.

Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF, even accept
Elmering?

Some will, some won't. I'll do what I've always done - gladly help anybody who
asks.

Or will they insist that the conventions that have been developed over
the years are not applicable to them.

Some will, some won't. Those who won't will learn the hard way what works and
what doesn't.

This is not as far-fetched as it may seem. I tried to help out a new
Extra in a contest once. I knew he did not have any HF experience at
all, yet he wanted a bare minimum of help. After showing him where the
PTT was, and how to change bands, I started to explain the structure of
a contest QSO. He interrupted me after the first sentence with a "not to
be rude, but I'll take over now". I came back the next morning and saw
the results of his work. Six QSO's! He was woring at the rate of 1 QSO
per hour under *good* band conditions!

Been there, done that.

In fact I recall a certain FD a few years ago. Another rrap regular whom you
may know was working 20 CW, making about 40 QSOs/hr with a terrible antenna. He
was pressured into shutting down so that some folks could use 20 phone. Two
hours later, they had put maybe 4 contacts in the log. They complained that the
band was dead - so he sat down and proceeded to put a couple dozen in the log
on the "dead" band.

I recall another FD when somebody came over to the CW tent 3-4 hours into the
contest and wanted to know how I was doing. I said "just OK - only about 150 so
far". Guy cussed me out and called me a liar. So I showed him the log sheets.
bwaahaahaa

Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I should
have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6 months.

It ain't when ya get the license, it's what ya do with it.

I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.

Not gonna happen.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , "Dan/W4NTI"
writes:

I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.

Yep!

Steve, K4YZ

Used to be back in the sixties. Think it was 2 or 3 years actual on the air
experience as General or higher (class A, Advanced) then you could take the
Extra test.

Until 1952 when the license class was closed to new applicants, one year of
experience was required before you could try for the Class A/Advanced.
"Experience" did not include time as a Novice or Technician. When the Advanced
was reopened to new applicants in 1967, there was no experience requirment.

From its origin in 1951 until the mid 1970s, the Extra required two years'
experience. The requirement was then reduced to one year, then eliminated in
the late 1970s.

Of course there was no requirement to actually use your license during that
time.

I got my Advanced in the summer of 1968, age 14, and counted the days until I
could try for the Extra. On the first day it was legal to try, I was at the FCC
office to take the Extra exam. Passed it on the first go. No big deal, there
were Extras a lot younger back then.

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)

So, we'll change the debate over
to whether or not the ARS is a "technical" service

The ARS will not be a "technical" service with the current Ham radio culture.
Most homebrewing is for show or to boost the image of the ARS. They are too
snobby to include someone that is interested in Homebrewing. Or its some EE
that usually doesn't attend meetings.

The clubs and Hamfests focus on antennas, contesting, and CW. With the
exception of antennas, ARS is primarily an appliance operator hobby. One
example is people coming from scanner or CB to ARS. Another example is the
comparison that "without CW, its just CB". Note that CW is an operator skill.

ARS is not a technical service because Hams have "voted" by their actions to
not do these things. Furthermore, they discourage other amateurs from doing
other than what they like to do. They also strongly encourage others to learn
CW. At several antenna setups, club meetings, ham gatherings, I have
participated in, often Hams try to persuade me to learn CW.

and whether the testing
should be changed into something more dumbed-down than it already is.

After that, the next bone of contention will be whether or not a prospective
ham should be required to know how to spell his name correctly on the
application!

To you, taking away one requirement (the CW test) is dumbing down because its
one less requirement. If more people focus on the written material, ARS could
be more than an operator's hobby and more of a technical hobby. That's not
dumbing down of the hobby.

It is only required 5 wpm CW speed, yet many Hams take pride in increasing
their code speed. The easy written test is not the problem. Its lack of
interest in the technical material, and achieving skills in these areas -
that's the problem.

Yep, 1962 I got my novice. In 1964 I passed the general. In 1966 I passed
the 1st phone, 2nd telegraph, radar endorsement, and amateur extra. The
only hold up now is that the FCC has to figure out a way to package the
license in a box of Cheerios. :)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - yes, I'd like to get my old call back, but now all you do is pay your
money and get any call from any district that is available. So why do it
anyways?



---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/4/03

From: "Jim Hampton"

The
only hold up now is that the FCC has to figure out a way to package the
license in a box of Cheerios. :)


Fill out the questions on the back of the box (the written test). Then, you
just need 2 UPC codes from 2 boxes. Mail 2 UPC codes with written test and you
will get your license..

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Agreed. I'd like to hear just what sort of technorevolution some people


were expecting.


You shoulda been here a couple years ago when certain folks were telling us
what wonderful technologies we'd have it weren't for the code test. One of the
most vociferous is now Executive Director of NCI. He'd lecture us on how
primitive Morse Code and other modes hams use are, compared to what was
possible.

Figures. I still wait, and probably will continue to wait.......


A year after the 2000 restructuring, he went from Tech Plus to Extra and went
on HF SSB, working DX with a manufactured transceiver. Last I heard he had over
70 countries. Surreal.


Do people who do not have the time to take the morse code test have the
time to invent new modes? Do they have time to invent digital voice
modes that take up bandwidth than ssb?


Ask 'em.

I already know the answer. I doubt they will admit to their laziness
tho! 8^)

some snippage

In fact I recall a certain FD a few years ago. Another rrap regular whom you
may know was working 20 CW, making about 40 QSOs/hr with a terrible antenna. He
was pressured into shutting down so that some folks could use 20 phone. Two
hours later, they had put maybe 4 contacts in the log. They complained that the
band was dead - so he sat down and proceeded to put a couple dozen in the log
on the "dead" band.

Yeah, I know many of the newbies and rusties complain about how the
GOTA station "isn't working" when I know it is. Lots easier to make
QSO's on thos 1KW stations.

It really is about 80 percent OP and 20 percent rig.


Som Extras are going to look mighty foolish.

I recall another FD when somebody came over to the CW tent 3-4 hours into the
contest and wanted to know how I was doing. I said "just OK - only about 150 so
far". Guy cussed me out and called me a liar. So I showed him the log sheets.
bwaahaahaa

All the testing in the world cannot produce a good operator.

Even in my own experience, I know that I had my extra before I should
have. I went from General to Extra in a little over 6 months.


It ain't when ya get the license, it's what ya do with it.

And it was a rapid, and sometimes humbling experience. Then again,
maybe that's okay.

I would propose that there be at least a year wait before upgrading to
Extra. Ya just can't gain enough operating knowledge in less time.


Not gonna happen.

Is there an emoticon for a Bronx cheer? 8^P

- Mike KB3EIA -

You are correct in one regard....."Don't hold your breath" is about the best
comment I have heard here. Existing technicians may choose to utilize their
new privileges but the dropping of morse code completely is not going to
bring up our numbers any more than where we are at right now from a month to
month basis.

You could hand out free licenses with $100 bills attached to them but if
people are not aware of that, they are not going to be giving out that many.
It's all about the public relations/promotion of the hobby.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here are some predictions for ya:

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant
change
in the written exams.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term
surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant
change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing.
Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

---

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop
the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down
here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will
be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they
are
welcomed into the ARS.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote in part ...

In fact I recall a certain FD a few years ago. Another rrap regular whom
you may know was working 20 CW, making about 40 QSOs/hr with a terrible
antenna. He was pressured into shutting down so that some folks could use 20
phone. Two hours later, they had put maybe 4 contacts in the log. They
complained that the band was dead - so he sat down and proceeded to put a
couple dozen in the log on the "dead" band.
__________________________________________________ ________________________

When I started working CW, one of the first things I did was get involved
with traffic nets. Slow ones at first, then the State net, then Regional.
One of the advantages of working high speed traffic nets is learning how to
copy fast under very poor conditions. Seems to pay off during Field Day. I
had the same experience this year at FD as you. Between the two of us, we
were logging an average of 75 or so contacts per hour, while the SSB boys
were doing about 10. Dead bands plus QRN, QSB and all those repeats, I
guess. :-))

Arnie -
KT4ST

"Vshah101" wrote in part ...

ARS is not a technical service because Hams have "voted" by their actions to
not do these things. Furthermore, they discourage other amateurs from doing
other than what they like to do. They also strongly encourage others to
learn CW. At several antenna setups, club meetings, ham gatherings, I have
participated in, often Hams try to persuade me to learn CW.
__________________________________________________ _______________________

And they SHOULD. I always strongly encourage Hams to learn CW. It's a
great skill to have. I didn't blink when someone encouraged me to learn
about SSB operation, Manual tuning, PSK, Antennas, and APRS. I found all of
them very interesting and it added more tools to my ARS toolbox. You make
it sound like CW is something that should be avoided at all costs. You
couldn't be more wrong. It is narrow attitudes like yours that hurt the
ARS.

Arnie -
KT4ST

"What Hath God Wrought?"

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

And there you have one of the more interesting
dilemmas to the ARS.

Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF,
even accept Elmering?
Or will they insist that the conventions that
have been developed over
the years are not applicable to them.

That depends on how many existing Hams on HF take
a crappy attitude towards the upgraded newcomers
on the bands. After seeing the poor attitudes
shown by several of the more frequent posters on
this news group over restructuring etc., I
wouldn't let them near a radio, with or with out a
code key. They are a perfect example of what Ham
Radio is not all about. On the other hand the only
good thing about them is many are old timers, who
if we wait long enough will be SK's, then we can
get on with things without the name calling etc.
The only choices they have is either go with the
flow, get out of the way, or get run over by the
changes. Rolling back the clock is not an option.


--
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

ARRL Member
NCI Member

Charter member of the
Lawrence Technological University
Wireless Society W8LTU

"Leland C. Scott" wrote in part ...

That depends on how many existing Hams on HF take a crappy attitude towards
the upgraded newcomers on the bands. After seeing the poor attitudes shown
by several of the more frequent posters on this news group over
restructuring etc., I wouldn't let them near a radio, with or with out a
code key.
__________________________________________________ ________________________

What's a "code key" -- Could that possibly be something like a straight key?
Or maybe it is a secret way of learning CW? Please enlighten us, Leland.

Arnie -
KT4ST
FISTS 2940 CC 337

member of "Know Code" International

Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:
(Vshah101) wrote in message ...

From: "Jim Hampton"


The
only hold up now is that the FCC has to figure out a way to package the
license in a box of Cheerios. :)


Fill out the questions on the back of the box (the written test). Then, you
just need 2 UPC codes from 2 boxes. Mail 2 UPC codes with written test and you
will get your license..

Now Lennie and Vippy wil start an argument about how unjust the
two UPC requirement is.....


I simply *refuse* to buy a box of Cheerios just to get a Ham license.
Although my interest in the ARS is boundless, It IS unfair to make a
person buy a box of Cheerio's! it is keeping thousands of Technically
competent Cheerio's haters off the air!

I never intend to eat Cheerio's, and I know I never will. So why should
I have to buy a box of Cheerio's just so I can get a Ham license?

Unfair, Unfair, Unfair!!!! It's just another ham cult hazing ritual.....


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
Existing technicians may choose to utilize their
new privileges

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there've been any "new
privivleges" confered yet.

but the dropping of morse code completely is not going to
bring up our numbers any more than where we are at right now from a month
to
month basis.

Probably correct.

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here's and interesting query...and probabbly a tad trollish, but I wonder...

How long (or short, actually) will it take for many of the No-code Techs
that used to proclaim that their VHF and up allocation was all they wanted
because it completely satisfied their "technical" needs to suddenly become
Generals and Extras. I seem to remember reading how they could pass Element
1 if they wanted to but it would gain them nothing. I wonder if that's
changed?

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:

Hmmm...lemme see...we're faced with the possibility of having a lot of
newcomers with little or no practical experience WRT radio wave
propagation on the HF bands, and thus little knowledge on which to
base selection of a frequency band on which to begin making contacts
at any particular time.

Back in the early days of my HF career, I figured that if the band seems
empty, well either
propagation is out or everyone's asleep or at work or such. In any
event, there's nobody
to qso with, so check other bands.

After a while, one figures out that on say ten meters, you can (when the
sunspots are in)
talk to Texas from NJ, but not Ohio. That the coverage looks more like
a ring instead
of a disc. Which also means that the ham in Texas can hear a ham in
Ohio that you
cannot hear. Thus you could QRM a Ohio to Texas QSO while doing a QSO from
NJ to California. Thus you should realize that the Texan isn't talking
to himself, but
to someone you cannot hear. And QSY up or down a little. But say
you're using
a kilowatt linear to QSO from NJ to California, and the Texan is only
using 50 watts
and is S1 on your receiver and thus you don't know that he's there. BUt
things like this
happen, and it is understood that it is not malicious.

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote in message . ..
On 07 Jul 2003 11:11:10 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

Here are some predictions for ya:

Hmmm...hang on, lemme wipe the dust off the crystal ball for ya
first....okay, go ahead.

Thanks!

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the written exams.

In the short term, probably not. In the long term, as the written
tests go through their normal revision and updating processes, I'd
expect and hope that the question pool committee members would begin
to include questions on practical operating knowledge in addition to
the questions on theory that are already part of the tests.

The current writtens are a mixture of rules and regs, theory,
operating practices, and RF safety. They have been in constant
revision and development for over 20 years. I don't see them changing
all that much.

What sort of "practical operating knowledge" questions would you have
the QPC add? (Anyone can submit questions for review, btw).

I've long
felt that it was time for the CW testing requirement to go, but the
fact remains that it has indeed been the only practical skill (as
opposed to theoretical knowledge) tested, and I think that this does
need to change.

One of the problems with skill testing is that the test has to
actually include the skill - it can't be a purely paper test and
actually mean anything. (You can't judge my bicycle-riding or
stick-shift skills with a written test). And such testing means a
separate test element and the same problems that come with the code
test.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term
surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

Seems to me that the outcome, in this regard, is up to us. We have an
opportunity to start a significant influx of good operators into the
ARS provided we're willing to identify them and elmer them and welcome
them into the ranks, so to speak.

Those of us who go out of our way to meet these people and convince
them to get into the club meetings and the VE sessions, and who answer
questions and provide the guidance the newcomers will need and then
accept and respect them as fellow hams should, will be taking good
advantage of the opportunity.

I agree with all of the that - but a lot of it comes down to publicity
for the ARS, and the simple fact that most people are not interested
in radio as an end in itself. There's a limit to how much we can
"sell" amateur radio. The trick is to identify those who are really
interested, and help them out.

Those of us who spend our time coming up with witty and derogatory
names like Extra Lite and insist on distinguishing between No-Code and
Know-Code and go out of their way to make people feel like
second-class citizens will be letting the opportunity just slide on by
and will be doing a disservice to the ARS.

Agreed - and I challenge you to find any postings of mine where I have
done any of that.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

Again, this depends on us.

To a certain extent. There are not many hams who will homebrew
themselves a multiband multimode transceiver from scratch. Even if
someone has the time and tools, it's usually not cost-effective.

Hmmm...lemme see...we're faced with the possibility of having a lot of
newcomers with little or no practical experience WRT radio wave
propagation on the HF bands, and thus little knowledge on which to
base selection of a frequency band on which to begin making contacts
at any particular time. Isn't this exactly what ALE is supposed to do?

Sure.

Yet, how many hams do you know of who have even heard of ALE, outisde
of those in this forum where I know the subject has come up
previously? How many hams in your local club know what ALE is? How
many would be willing to accept and use it if they did?

Many of us know what ALE is, and even how it could be used on the
amateur bands.

The bigger question is - why would hams want to use ALE for normal
amateur operation? The whole point of ALE is to reduce/eliminate the
need for a knowledgeable operator. In fact, if you look at most
nonamateur radio equipment design philosophies, one of the driving
forces behind them is to replace the skilled "radio operator" with a
relatively unskilled "user", who doesn't really know what's going on -
and doesn't have to. Consider the nearly-ubiquitous cell phone - none
of the radio-specific functions are controlled by the user at all! In
fact, far too many people don't even realize a cell phone is a radio
transceiver. (I recall an indignant fellow airline passenger telling
me "I can use this while we take off! It's a TELEPHONE, not a
RADIO!!")

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they are
welcomed into the ARS.

To use the British term: Bloody Well Right!

Fair dinkum, mate!

Especially since there
will undoubtedly be those who will not welcome them at all, and in
fact do quite the opposite.

A few. That's not a new thing - ever hear of the fellow who used to
call CQ on 75 AM and add "no kids, no lids, no space cadets, Class A
operators only"?

Those of us who wish to take advantage of
this opportunity will have to work doubly hard in order to overcome
the harm done by the minority that will attempt to ostracize and chase
away the newcomers, forgetting that they were newcomers themselves
once upon a time.

All true. Actually, it doesn't seem like that long ago that I was a
newcomer.

But there is also the reverse problem: Newcomers who do not want
advice or elmering from the "old f@#$S", no matter how it is offered.
I've been on the receiving end of that more than a few times. What's
the right approach - just ignore them?


73 de Jim, N2EY

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
What's a "code key" -- Could that possibly be
something like a straight key?
Or maybe it is a secret way of learning CW?
Please enlighten us, Leland.

Are you really that "dense" Arnie where you can't
figure it out on your own?

73's de,

Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

ARRL member
NCI member

"You ask what Morse Code is good for? I'll tell
you. Morse
Code is used exclusively by Electronics Based life
forms to
communicate amongst themselves using advanced
Organic
Digital Signal Processors, running state of the
art Artificial
Intelligence Software, to perform the highly
complex
transmit encryption, receive decryption and error
correction
functions."

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 13:38:15 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

I simply *refuse* to buy a box of Cheerios just to get a Ham license.
Although my interest in the ARS is boundless, It IS unfair to make a
person buy a box of Cheerio's! it is keeping thousands of Technically
competent Cheerio's haters off the air!

I never intend to eat Cheerio's, and I know I never will. So why should
I have to buy a box of Cheerio's just so I can get a Ham license?

WE eat Cheerios (or a reasonable facsimile) as a regular staple (we
don't eat staples, we have enough iron in our diet).

If we send you two UPCs, is that the equivalent of a Dick Bash
examination "consultation" ?? ggg

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

On 8 Jul 2003 14:16:00 -0700, N2EY wrote:

The current writtens are a mixture of rules and regs, theory,
operating practices, and RF safety. They have been in constant
revision and development for over 20 years. I don't see them changing
all that much.

What I would LOVE to see is a set of 50-question elements on EACH
of the topics which you listed plus operating practices. Make it an
all-at-one-sitting procedure. Just like the olden days......

Let's make it more fun, and do it like the Nursing Board exam that
my daughter took several years ago:

The questions come out of computer at a speed which is dependent on
how fast the applicant is answering them. Scramble the qyestions
and the multi-choice answers so that if one memorizes the "little
red book" of all the questions and answers it won't help unless
s/he understands and knows the material.

The machine keeps feeding questions until it is a guaranteed "pass"
or a guaranteed "fail" and then it terminates the exam session. The
applicant does not know whether s/he passed or not until the
results are sent by mail. Just like the olden days.....

I'm sure that there are enough ham-programmers that can write such
a program.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

I don't know, Phil. My license expires in .. um ... September? I'd get my
wallet and check, but I know I'm close. The question is, can I renew and
get the call change all at once (you can get the call sign you want, but it
doesn't extend the expiration date of the license), or do I renew a day
after it expires to ensure a 10 year period before I shell out some serious
micro-buck$ :)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA

"Phil Kane" wrote in message
.net...
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 03:09:53 GMT, Jim Hampton wrote:

ps - yes, I'd like to get my old call back, but now all you do is pay
your
money and get any call from any district that is available. So why do it
anyways?

For the same reason that I ransomed my original call back on the
first day of Gate 1 - I didn't want anyone else to use it. It was
my primary station call from 1952 until 1957 and my secondary
station call from 1957 until 1983 when secondary station calls were
abolished. I even gave up a 1X2 to get it back.

My one slice of selfishness.

Go for it, Jim.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
(ex-W6VQM, ex-N6SP)




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.497 / Virus Database: 296 - Release Date: 7/4/03

"Leland C. Scott" wrote ...

Are you really that "dense" Arnie where you can't figure it out on your
own?

73's de,

Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

ARRL member
NCI member
__________________________________________________ ________________

Nope, but anybody who refers to a straight key as a "code key" and sends
73's is. I suspect you will make a fine operator -- at some point in the
future. Once you get the lingo down pat.

Best 73,

Arnie -
KT4ST

Member "Know Code International"

"I think this QRP unit is broken -- all it does is beep"

On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 02:10:24 GMT, Jim Hampton wrote:

I don't know, Phil. My license expires in .. um ... September? I'd get my
wallet and check, but I know I'm close. The question is, can I renew and
get the call change all at once (you can get the call sign you want, but it
doesn't extend the expiration date of the license), or do I renew a day
after it expires to ensure a 10 year period before I shell out some serious
micro-buck$ :)

I would renew it now if it is within the 90-day window. That can be
done on-line.

Once that is done (check the ULS a day or so after the on-line
renewal) THEN apply for the change of call sign. You can do that on
line as well.

It's just like when we applied for the club station license - it had
to be issued as a "sequential series" 2X3 license before we could
apply for the change of call sign (which was also a 2X3).

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

In article ,
(Vshah101) writes:

From: ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)

So, we'll change the debate over
to whether or not the ARS is a "technical" service

The ARS will not be a "technical" service with the current Ham radio culture.
Most homebrewing is for show or to boost the image of the ARS. They are too
snobby to include someone that is interested in Homebrewing. Or its some EE
that usually doesn't attend meetings.

Vipul:

I don't disagree.

The clubs and Hamfests focus on antennas, contesting, and CW. With the
exception of antennas, ARS is primarily an appliance operator hobby. One
example is people coming from scanner or CB to ARS. Another example is the
comparison that "without CW, its just CB". Note that CW is an operator skill.

Yup -- got it right that time. CW *is* an operator skill. Do you have
something
against operator skill -- or are you one of those New Age hams that think
yakking into a microphone is all the demonstration of operator skill that
should
ever be required of you?

ARS is not a technical service because Hams have "voted" by their actions to
not do these things. Furthermore, they discourage other amateurs from doing
other than what they like to do.

Funny -- nobody has ever been able to "discourage" me from doing anything
I wanted to do. I just went ahead and did it. I could care less what other
people think, do, or say as far as my personal participation in amateur
radio is concerned. Moreover, I don't waste valuable time whining about it --
as the no-coders apparently are inclined to do.

They also strongly encourage others to learn
CW. At several antenna setups, club meetings, ham gatherings, I have
participated in, often Hams try to persuade me to learn CW.

And this is a bad thing? How so? If you were around me at an antenna
party, I'd be nagging you to get involved in PSK-31 and other digital modes
in addition to the CW! It's all good!

and whether the testing
should be changed into something more dumbed-down than it already is.

After that, the next bone of contention will be whether or not a prospective
ham should be required to know how to spell his name correctly on the
application!

To you, taking away one requirement (the CW test) is dumbing down because its
one less requirement. If more people focus on the written material, ARS could
be more than an operator's hobby and more of a technical hobby. That's not
dumbing down of the hobby.

Well, you no-coders have always claimed that exact thing, but what has
happened is that ALL licensing requirements have been significantly
"dumbed-down." However, in spite of it now being easier than ever in the
history of the ARS to obtain a license with full privileges, our numbers are
not showing significant growth. What is wrong with this picture?

Oooooohhh. I guess it is the "attitudes" of all the CW-loving fossils
like me that is turning off the newcomers. Right. (There you go, Kim --
I saved you a few keystrokes!)

It is only required 5 wpm CW speed, yet many Hams take pride in increasing
their code speed.

Well, we can't have any of that now, can we?

The easy written test is not the problem. Its lack of
interest in the technical material, and achieving skills in these areas -
that's the problem.

Once again, I don't disagree. Soooo -- what are YOU going to do about it?

73 de Larry, K3LT

In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes:

is required, there will be people whining and
complaining about having to prepare for it and take it in order to obtain
a license in whatever's left of the ARS.

I feel compelled to point out that such negativity is not likely to
have a positive effect on "whatever's left of the ARS" and to remind
once again that anyone who is not a part of the solution is a part of
the problem.

John:

This is not "negativity," just a plainly truthful assessment of the present
situation regarding licensing standards in the ARS.

So, we'll change the debate over
to whether or not the ARS is a "technical" service and whether the testing
should be changed into something more dumbed-down than it already is.

Every time I hear someone lamenting the supposed dumbing down of the
ARS, I can't help but think of the number of longtime hams I've seen
over the past few years who brought a brand new 2m or dual-band mobile
or HT, or an Icom 706MKIIG or Yaesu FT-100 into a club meeting to seek
help in programming it.

I know what you're talking about -- and I'll concede up front that a lot of
these technically-inept OT's are 20 WPM Extras to boot! However, I have
always strove to keep up with the times as far as basic technical knowledge
is concerned -- and not just the bare minimum required to keep beeping
or yakking. I have always been involved in digital modes, for instance, and
now use them more than CW! I have been my club's "Digital Mode Captain"
for the past four Field Days, and will try to pass that job over to some
newcomer next year, if only I could find one willing to open some books and
turn some pages to learn everything I have -- instead of being "Elmered"
with "hands on" training which only gives them the basic operational
procedure and none of the background.

I'm not talking about relative newcomers
either, I'm talking about guys who were hams before I was even born.

Yup, I know. They're a real problem, all right. Usually the leaders of
the "Don't PL our repeater" pack of whiners.

Furthermore, sometimes it's a no-code Tech who picks up the
old-timer's HT and shows him how to program it.

Sometimes, but certainly not often enough. The No-Code Techs are at the
top of the list of the technically inept, in spite of their protests to the
contrary.

Never mind that the
HT's owner could have learned this for himself by reading the manual,
because many manufactuers' manuals leave a lot to be desired, and
we're talking about guys who once built microphones out of tuna fish
cans and can do 40WPM or better in their sleep.

Quite frankly, the tuna fish-can mics didn't sound that great, and the
40 WPM in their sleep would have sounded a lot better if they had used
25 WPM while wide awake.

How are we supposed to
be dumbed down if guys who have been extras since Moby Dick was a
minnow need help from another ham to get a new piece of equipment
operating? And how are we supposed to be dumbed down when it turns out
to be a guy with a license the ink isn't even dry on yet that is able
to provide that assistance, and is happy to do so? I'm not buying the
dumbed-down theory one bit.

This has always been the case, John -- I was one of the "technical
nerds" when I was a newcomer ham as well -- much to the dismay of
the OT's in my first club. And I don't claim to be a technical genius
or anything like it -- I have strictly "amateur" technical skills. I am,
however, technically self-sufficient as far as my own station set-up and
operation is concerned, and I have enough know-how to maintain our
club's repeaters, do all our computer logging for Field Day and other
contests, etc. etc.

I don't disagree with you whatsoever about the technical abilities of
hams past or present. However, I don't assign that technical inability
to knowledge of the Morse code, either. The two are not related, no
matter how hard the no-coders struggle to make that very same
connection in their arguments.

After that, the next bone of contention will be whether or not a prospective
ham should be required to know how to spell his name correctly on the
application!

If he can't, he gets a license that doesn't have his name on it and is
therefore invalid, doesn't he?

Dang it, John, you got it first time! You're a real fart smeller! Er, I mean,

smart feller!

BTW, Larry, you were supposed to look me up when you came up this way,
I still owe you a roast beef from a bet we made several years ago and
you haven't even bothered to collect your winnings.

My apologies. I don't even remember the bet. I guess my brain is too
full of Morse code knowledge to retain such things, eh? Please refresh
my memory!

73 de Larry, K3LT

Phil Kane wrote:


The questions come out of computer at a speed which is dependent on
how fast the applicant is answering them. Scramble the questions
and the multi-choice answers so that if one memorizes the "little
red book" of all the questions and answers it won't help unless
s/he understands and knows the material.

The machine keeps feeding questions until it is a guaranteed "pass"
or a guaranteed "fail" and then it terminates the exam session. The
applicant does not know whether s/he passed or not until the
results are sent by mail. Just like the olden days.....



Back in 1994 I lived in Oregon for a year. The written driver's test at
the DMV was
done with a computer with touch screen. I knew how many questions I got
wrong, but
lost track of how many more I had to complete during the test. Then it
told me that
I passed and my score, around 92%.

Paper tests generated just before the VE session via computer would be
cheaper and
easier than dedicated hardware like that DMV had anyway.

Hey Mike,

With the aging ham population as a whole, should that not be some type of
bran flakes or worse yet, Metramucil (i.e. fiber) ?? :)


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...

I simply *refuse* to buy a box of Cheerios just to get a Ham license.
Although my interest in the ARS is boundless, It IS unfair to make a
person buy a box of Cheerio's! it is keeping thousands of Technically
competent Cheerio's haters off the air!

I never intend to eat Cheerio's, and I know I never will. So why should
I have to buy a box of Cheerio's just so I can get a Ham license?

Unfair, Unfair, Unfair!!!! It's just another ham cult hazing ritual.....


- Mike KB3EIA -

Dick Carroll wrote:
Based on the required and demonstrated knowledge and
ability level demanded of the testing
today, it's simply not possible to say with any certainty that the new licensee
knows anything about the subject
matter, nor is competent to handle radiotelegraphy at effective communications
speeds.

This is not a new problem, it has been around for many years.

Mike Coslo wrote:


JJ wrote:



Larry Roll K3LT wrote:



Yup -- got it right that time. CW *is* an operator skill.



Yes it is.

Do you have
something
against operator skill -- or are you one of those New Age hams that
think
yakking into a microphone is all the demonstration of operator skill
that
should
ever be required of you?



Do you have something against someone who has no desire to operate CW?
There are many different modes of operation in ham radio, do you
operate them all?


No more than I have against someone who chooses to do satellite
work, while I have to test for it.

What if you decide at some later time to do satellite work?


Rf Safety is required to be calculated for by people when they run
over a certain power. Why should someone who never intends to work over
50 watts have to test for RF safety?

What if they decide at some later point to increase their power?


If someone never intends to homebrew, why should they test on any
equations.


What is they suddenly get the urge to build a homebrew transmitter
or amplifier?


Sounds like we should maybe make up our own tests.

Maybe you had rather be call in to be tested on a new mode each
time you decide to operate a new mode.