In article , "Phil Kane"
writes:

On 16 Sep 2003 00:19:14 GMT, N2EY wrote:

The old code test worked like this:

A rather accurate description of how license tests should be
run.....

Thanks!

You were allowed to bring a mill for receiving and speed key for sending,
but you'd better be well-prepared if you showed up with same.

No mill was allowed for amateur tests - all copy was by hand.

I'll take your word for it, Phil. Were mills permitted if a person was
disabled? Perhaps that's the source of the stories I heard.

A
mill was allowed only for the First RadioTelegraph (Commercial) 25
WPM plain language test - not even for the 20 WPM code group test.

Yet oddly enough, the US Navy was very big on copy by typewriter.

Speed keys or later on electronic keyers were allowed only if they
could be hooked up to the straight key terminals (with about 67 V
"B+" on them).

And be sure the thing is battery powered or bring an extension cord.

Only once in all the years did I see anyone with a
bug who used that special "spring" for connection to the body of a
J-38 type straight key.

The term is "wedge".

Most of us just used the straight key.

I sadly do not expect the FCC to get back into the exam business,
but there is nothing stopping them for requiring the VEC/VEs to run
the tests like they used to be run.

All it takes is commitment.

And some rules changes.

Didja know that the FISTS petition to the FCC calls for an end to "instant"
retests? It proposes that if an element is failed, the person cannot be
retested on that element until the next day.

73 de Jim, N2EY

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article , Mike Coslo writes:


The examiner gave you a yellow lined legal pad and a #2 pencil. You put your
name at the top of the copy sheet and got ready. You put on a pair of 'phones
and when everyone at that test table was ready, the test was started. The test
was 5 minutes of plain-language code at the required speed (13 or 20 wpm - back
then only volunteer examiners gave 5 wpm tests)

Depends on which "back when". My 5, 13 and 20 wpm code tests were all
administered by FCC Examiners. And I took all of 'em one-on-one with
the Examiners, never as a member of a group taking the same test.

You were allowed to bring a mill for receiving and speed key for sending, but
you'd better be well-prepared if you showed up with same.

?? I don't recall using a typewriter being an option. Would have been
a lousy idea. I did use a bug to send 20 wpm. For maybe three seconds
before the Examiner waved it off. I shouldn't have bothered lugging
the bug to the exam.

You had to get a certain number of questions right (74%, as I recall) on the
written to pass. Miss by even one question less than the required and you had
to go home and study for at least a month before retesting - both sending and
receiving code, and the written. No do-overs, no credit for tests already
passed. All or nothing at all.

Yup, yup . . . no slack. At all.

$9 doesn't sound like much but back in those days it was a lot of money for a
high school kid. I think minimum wage back then was $1.20 or so, which meant
the test was a days' pay BEFORE taxes for a minimum wage person. And a kid
would have been glad to get minimum. I estimate that the equivalent today would
be $50-60.

Conversly I have yet to pay a dime for anything the FCC has ever done
WRT to any of my ham licenses. Not for any of the three tests and not
for the 1x2. "Life is all in the timing . . ".

So I went home and taught myself to block print. (Printing was not a parochial
school subject - only "publics" were allowed to print. Something about being
bold, brazen articles was involved). Next try, later that summer, I had no
problem.

Heh. Conversly again when I got yanked outta Quaker elemenatary school
and dumped into the public schools right off I landed in "remedial
penmanship" 'cause I had no idea how to write longhand, everything I
wrote was in block style. The code tests were no sweat, all block caps
but I flunked remedial penmanship and they finally gave up on me. I'd
still flunk a course longhand writing. So would every other
half-decent drawing board jockey I've known.


73 de Jim, N2EY

On 6 Sep 2003 07:23:43 -0700, (Brian) wrote:

S. Hanrahan wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 04 Sep 2003 10:00:13 -0400, Bob Brock
wrote:


Why would you want to foil computer copy?

Because no law says you can't.

For you to do the test to
make sure that it works and then advocate it's use, you can't really
say that wasn't your intention.

What if it was? Nothing you can do about it but learn the code.

Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
...
On 6 Sep 2003 07:23:43 -0700, (Brian) wrote:
Oh, geez. Here's another Morse Elitist that apparently advocates
sending code so **** poorly that it can't be computer copied. Hoo-ah!

At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.

I came into the fray relatively unbiased re. the code vs. no-code debate.
However, once you hear some of the arguments presented, it's hard not to see
it for what it really is.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
..
At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.

Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

As I said, I can copy 45-50 WPM solidly. 99.9% of my casual CW
contacts are no faster than 18 WPM or adjusted accordingly if I'm
responding to someones else's CQ.

Stacey/AA7YA

S. Hanrahan wrote in
:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
. .
At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard
or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the
initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.

Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

As I said, I can copy 45-50 WPM solidly. 99.9% of my casual CW
contacts are no faster than 18 WPM or adjusted accordingly if I'm
responding to someones else's CQ.

Stacey/AA7YA


5 wpm is easy. I admit that. However, as you can copy 45-50 wpm, you are
so far to the other extreme end of the bell curve that I don't beleive you
really know that yourself. It would be like Michelle Kwan wondering how
beginners can fall over on the ice.

More to the point, a 5wpm test is slow enough to be pointless, as someone
who passes it doesn't really have much of a useful skill level. At 13 wpm
it was a significant hurdle, but at 5 it's merely a waste of time. Either
way, it still has no relevance to the use of a microphone.It's like
learning to ice skate to take part in a bicycle race.

S. Hanrahan wrote:
On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:


"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
. .

At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.


Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

Now you have my attention, Stacey! What is the nature of your hearing
loss, if I may ask? I have tinnitus and am about 60 db down compared to
normal hearing, with several 100 db plus holes in various places. One
of the weird things about my particular flavor of hearing loss is that
all incoming sounds seem to get equal treatment in my brain. Whereas it
appears that most people can filter out the good stuff from the noise, I
end up treating all sounds equally. No mental DSP here, unfortunately! 8^)

At any rate, I've had to do a lot of work to get this far. Took 6 months
of intense work to get to 5wpm, and I've been working daily on
increasing my speed for the last month or so. I don't envy much, but I
envy those who were able to pick Morse code up in a few weekends.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Alun Palmer wrote in message . ..
S. Hanrahan wrote in
:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
. .
At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard
or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the
initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.

Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

As I said, I can copy 45-50 WPM solidly. 99.9% of my casual CW
contacts are no faster than 18 WPM or adjusted accordingly if I'm
responding to someones else's CQ.

Stacey/AA7YA


5 wpm is easy. I admit that. However, as you can copy 45-50 wpm, you are
so far to the other extreme end of the bell curve that I don't beleive you
really know that yourself.

Well, then here's the voice of the other extreme.

It would be like Michelle Kwan wondering how
beginners can fall over on the ice.

I more liken it to requiring the beginner to learn the basics before
they can skate in the same rink with Michelle Kwan.

More to the point, a 5wpm test is slow enough to be pointless, as someone
who passes it doesn't really have much of a useful skill level.

The value is not so much in one's instant proficiency, it's in the
exposure level sufficient to allow said newbie to make a truly
educated decision as to whether or not s/he wishes to pursue CW any
further. There is also the intangible feeling of accomplishment that
comes with "earning" privileges by meeting a significant challenge. I
truly don't consider a 35 or 50 question multiple choice test out of
published Q&A pools of approx. six to eight hundred questions, much of
a "challenge."

At 13 wpm
it was a significant hurdle, but at 5 it's merely a waste of time.

The more "challenging" the hurdle, the more "privileges earned." Most
licenses aren't "rights," they're "privileges." That includes AR.

Either
way, it still has no relevance to the use of a microphone.

I don't want to reduce it to just that. There's a bigger picture.
(Read: more rounded.)

It's like
learning to ice skate to take part in a bicycle race.

No, it's like learning the basics of cycling before being allowed to
participate in the race. Most people take issue with the "being
allowed to" part and try to give all sorts of lame reasons why they
shouldn't be made to "jump through hoops" and hurdle "barriers." Like
I said, when you peel away the layers of the onion...theres no
substance at the core. And that's the sacrifice some are willing to
accept for an "easier" ARS.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

"Bert Craig" wrote in message
m...
Alun Palmer wrote in message
. ..
S. Hanrahan wrote in
:

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 12:35:58 GMT, "Bert Craig"
wrote:

"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message
. .
At 5 WPM, you don't need a computer to copy good or poor code.

I think you've just hit the nail on the head. It's really not how hard
or
easy 5-wpm is, it's the willingness (or lack thereof) to make the
initial
(i.e. "initiative") effort to learn the 43 required characters.

Exactly. I look at it this way, if a person doesn't want to learn the
code, fine, if they want to fine, just don't come up to me and bitch
and moan that 5 WPM is a hurdle or mountain too high to climb.

I'm hearing impaired in both ears, and I can copy 45-50 WPM in my head
solidly, and attained the 20 before taking my General class written,
without waivers.

As I said, I can copy 45-50 WPM solidly. 99.9% of my casual CW
contacts are no faster than 18 WPM or adjusted accordingly if I'm
responding to someones else's CQ.

Stacey/AA7YA


5 wpm is easy. I admit that. However, as you can copy 45-50 wpm, you are
so far to the other extreme end of the bell curve that I don't beleive
you
really know that yourself.

Well, then here's the voice of the other extreme.

It would be like Michelle Kwan wondering how
beginners can fall over on the ice.

I more liken it to requiring the beginner to learn the basics before
they can skate in the same rink with Michelle Kwan.

More to the point, a 5wpm test is slow enough to be pointless, as
someone
who passes it doesn't really have much of a useful skill level.

The value is not so much in one's instant proficiency, it's in the
exposure level sufficient to allow said newbie to make a truly
educated decision as to whether or not s/he wishes to pursue CW any
further. There is also the intangible feeling of accomplishment that
comes with "earning" privileges by meeting a significant challenge. I
truly don't consider a 35 or 50 question multiple choice test out of
published Q&A pools of approx. six to eight hundred questions, much of
a "challenge."

At 13 wpm
it was a significant hurdle, but at 5 it's merely a waste of time.

The more "challenging" the hurdle, the more "privileges earned." Most
licenses aren't "rights," they're "privileges." That includes AR.

Either
way, it still has no relevance to the use of a microphone.

I don't want to reduce it to just that. There's a bigger picture.
(Read: more rounded.)

It's like
learning to ice skate to take part in a bicycle race.

No, it's like learning the basics of cycling before being allowed to
participate in the race. Most people take issue with the "being
allowed to" part and try to give all sorts of lame reasons why they
shouldn't be made to "jump through hoops" and hurdle "barriers." Like
I said, when you peel away the layers of the onion...theres no
substance at the core. And that's the sacrifice some are willing to
accept for an "easier" ARS.

73 de Bert
WA2SI

Dang Bert....I've never hear it put so well. Thanks for illuminating the
playing field.

Dan/W4NTI

"Bert Craig" wrote

No, it's like learning the basics of cycling before being allowed to
participate in the race.

Did your Dad & Mom make you take a test before they bought you your first
bike?

But actually, Morse code is a bit like learning to ride a bike.... it's
sort of "self testing"..... if you want to use it, you'll learn how.

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it,
and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous
resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by
their ignorance the hard way." --Bokonon