|
N2EY wrote:
They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all blue book essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in 1967-70 were "dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all multiple choice. Only a few things in life that are certain. Death Things are not as good as they once were, and never ever were. The family is going to hell, and has been forever. and, When you see a wildebeest on TV, you know something really really bad is going to happen. - Mike KB3EIA - |
"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ...
"Brian" wrote in message om... W1AW also sends Morse Code practice on VHF, if you live close enough. But I don't think 8-land is close enough. Definitely, maybe the supposed field organizations can get together to rebroadcast the transmissions?? Sounds like an actual good idea. If not, Jim can tell you how to build an Elecraft K1 out of junk box parts, or something like that. Nice idea, but it will be deaf, as that is the problem until I move, which won't be happening for another 2 years. Will have to suffer till then. -- Ryan, KC8PMX FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!) --. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-. .. --. .... - . .-. ... Restricted neighborhood? Me too. |
"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ...
"Dick Carroll" wrote in message ... Brian Kelly wrote: "Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ... Yeah, that might be true if you have HF capability........ Can't argue with that. But as Jim points out it doesn't take much of a radio and antenna to at least listen on HF. What's the show-stopper in your case? Desire, obviously Yes, as in regards to listening to HF voice..... Sounds just like listening to CB. No, it is environmental conditions. Killer RFI that would make BPL look like nothing. Show stopper. Got my share. Dit-dit. w3rv |
N2EY wrote: some snippage The old code test worked like this: 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) Your job was to write down the code as received. When the code stopped, you had to put the pencil down IMMEDIATELY. No going back and fixing anything up, no filling in missed letters even if they were obvious, etc. The examiner pulled the pads away as soon as the code stopped, sometimes resulting in a long pencil mark down the page... The examiner had to find at least 1 minute of solid copy for you to pass. That meant at least 65 correct legible consecutive characters for 13 wpm or 100 correct legible consecutive characters for 20 wpm. "Legible" meant HE had to be able to read them easily the first time - no "what's this?" from The Man. If the examiner could not find the required 65 or 100, you failed. 64 or 99 wasn't good enough. Go home and study for at least a month before retesting. All sounds sensible, but the month before retesting thing seems a bit obsessive. I can understand not retesting the same day, but not a month wait. If you passed receiving, then you could try sending. You sent what was written on a laminated card that the examiner gave you. He was sole judge of your sending skill - he could decide you were OK in a few seconds, or keep you pounding away for a couple minutes. (It was rare for a sending test to last more than a minute). You had to send at the required speed, too - he would tell you if you were going too slow. If you failed the sending test, you had to go home and study for at least a month before retesting - both sending and receiving. I don't know anybody who failed sending, though. Yeah, I send much better than receive. 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. If you got that far, they'd give you the written test. After 1960 they were all multiple choice, but we did not know the exact Q and A, just general subject areas. The FCC published "study guides" in essay format. These were reprinted with permission in the ARRL License Manuals of the day. You were also expected to know the regulations (which were not part of the study guide questions). 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. Now here is something that seems has been improved upon. If there are going to be different elements, it makes sense that if one element was passed, that you don't have to be restested on it. I had to test for my General twice because I flunked element 1 the first time. I passed the writtens, I would have passed them again. Not muchpoint in wasting the VE's time. Usually they would not tell you how well you did other than "Pass" or "Fail". They did NOT tell you which ones you got wrong. (At least not in Philly). When I took the tests in 1968 and 1970, there was a fee of $9, IIRC. I'm not sure - the fee was instituted in 1963 and was $4, then $9, then $4, then eliminated. The fee was the same whether you passed or failed. Only the Novice was free. $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. The 2 year experience requirement for Extra meant that most hams needed to make at least two trips to the FCC office to get the top license. For those of us near an FCC office it was mostly a matter of getting off from school or work. The big offices held exams one or more days a week. For those farther out it was a much bigger deal. The VE system is a huge improvemnet over tha old system, I have to say. What all this did was to cause prospective and upgrading hams to be extremely well prepared before even attempting the trip to FCC. Today they would call it "overlearning". Was it a better system back then? You be the judge. It's not coming back any time soon. And it wasn't hams, new or old, who changed it. Regardless of the Morse requirements or the test contents, the testing system was not superior at all IMO. Interestingly enough, it would appear that matching up what was happening in the country at the time this was happening, the FCC tester (government) was replaced by the VE's (non-profit, but certainly private sector. The changes in the tests might seem like a de-regultion type of move. I guess I'm not going to blame the liberals for this one.... - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
When you see a wildebeest on TV, you know something really really bad is going to happen. Tsk, tsk, you've been watching too many wild animal shows on Discovery channel again! :-) LHA |
Extremely restricted, but I CHOSE to live there, and that is a choice, in
retrospect that I wish I hadn't made. In the long run it is actually a good thing, as I am saving monthly around 100-120 dollars towards the down payment on a house, as well as repaying some debts of which a hole that I am in that I still can't see any light at the top from where I am at, but I AM making progress, and that is the best way I can look at it. On a good note, I have almost $5,000 saved in about 3 years for this whole downpayment thing! :) -- Ryan, KC8PMX FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!) --. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-. ... --. .... - . .-. ... Restricted neighborhood? Me too. |
On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:58:42 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:
All sounds sensible, but the month before retesting thing seems a bit obsessive. I can understand not retesting the same day, but not a month wait. Made lots of sense. In SF we gave the tests once a week, on Friday, and we were not equipped to handle the same folks week after week. The five weeks between test-eligible days was adequate time to prepare better. Now here is something that seems has been improved upon. If there are going to be different elements, it makes sense that if one element was passed, that you don't have to be restested on it. I had to test for my General twice because I flunked element 1 the first time. I passed the writtens, I would have passed them again. Not muchpoint in wasting the VE's time. Elements 1 and 2 were simple stuff. Now if one passed the 13 WPM code and the General written but failed the Advanced written, one got a General license and did not have to retake the code or the General written test to take the Advanced written test the next month. The Extra, OTOH, was a "package". One could take the 20 WPM code, pass it, pass the General and the Advanced writtens, and fail the Extra written. Then, one would get an Advanced license, but would still have to retake the 20 WPM code and the Extra written. Usually they would not tell you how well you did other than "Pass" or "Fail". They did NOT tell you which ones you got wrong. (At least not in Philly). In NY, if things were quiet, "Uncle Charlie" Finkelman would let you watch while he graded the exam, but you could not review the grading. In SF, you handed the paper in, and if things were slow you would get the P/F results while you packed up your gear. Otherwise, you went home and you were notified by mail of passing or failing if you left a SAS postcard with the examiner. The VE system is a huge improvemnet over tha old system, I have to say. That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased. Regardless of the Morse requirements or the test contents, the testing system was not superior at all IMO. That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased. Interestingly enough, it would appear that matching up what was happening in the country at the time this was happening, the FCC tester (government) was replaced by the VE's (non-profit, but certainly private sector. The changes in the tests might seem like a de-regultion type of move. That was the era of privatizing the FCC's functions. I call it what it is - avoiding the FCC's responsibilities traceable to the ineptitude of leadership of the agency and of the country as a whole. "Get rid of what you don't understand" is the easy way out, not the smart way. The amateur testing was but the tip off the iceberg. Within ten years (1985 - 1995), the following responsibilities were "privatized", i.e. spun off to the private sector. Testing of amateur license applicants. Testing of commercial operator license applicants. Testing and certification of broadcast operators, now made voluntary. Testing and certification of land mobile repair and adjustment technicians, now made voluntary. Frequency coordination in the microwave, broadcast and land mobile services. Interference resolution in the microwave, broadcast and land mobile services. Bi-annual inspection and certification of compliance of broadcast stations. Inspection and certification of marine radio installations required for safety by statute or treaty on passenger-carrying and ocean-going cargo vessels. Auctions and encouraging wireline and wireless competition are deemed to be far more important than patrolling the ether. And the beat goes on. I guess I'm not going to blame the liberals for this one.... They're both guilty. Stupid is as stupid does..... -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
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..... 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. A mill was allowed only for the First RadioTelegraph (Commercial) 25 WPM plain language test - not even for the 20 WPM code group test. 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). 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. 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. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
Good Grief, what does FCC do nowdays except shuffle paper??? that, and make preparations to remove CW practical testing. Clint KB5ZHT |
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 |
|
|
"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 |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... 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 - We all envy those who can get it in a few hours. It takes a normal person 30 hours to get to 5wpm, 60 hours to get to 10wpm, 95 hours to get to 15wpm, and 150 hours to get to 20wpm (info from the book "Morse Code, The Essential Language"). Some of us will need more time and a few unusually talented people will get it in a lot less. So don't be discouraged. Keep at it. Get on the air and make some QSOs even though you need to go slow. If you can tolerate the frustration, try a contest even if you have to listen to the other station repeatedly to pick out the info and then throw in your call. You'd very likely see a noticeable improvement in speed. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"KØHB" wrote in message
hlink.net... "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? Nope, only before I actually used it. It involved training wheels, lots of patience, and constant evaluation...even more so when I "earned the privilege" of being allowed to ride in the street. Good analogy, Hans. Thanks. 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. I hope the "once you learn it, you never forget it" axiom holds true. 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 Is this referring to the 5-wpm test? I don't think so. "Murderous resentment?" ggg 73 de Bert WA2SI |
"Bert Craig" wrote in message
et... "KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net... "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? Nope, only before I actually used it. It involved training wheels, lots of patience, and constant evaluation...even more so when I "earned the privilege" of being allowed to ride in the street. Good analogy, Hans. Thanks. 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. I hope the "once you learn it, you never forget it" axiom holds true. 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 Is this referring to the 5-wpm test? I don't think so. "Murderous resentment?" ggg 73 de Bert WA2SI Heh heh...unless one need it for quick contacts, you only need to remember . .. . - - - . . . Just joking... Kim W5TIT |
"S. Hanrahan" wrote in message ... 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. not to worry, it won't be a hurdle or a mountain anymore when the FCC removes the code testing requirement. Clint KB5ZHT |
garigue wrote:
I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't completely eliminated in 10-15 years. Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any myself, but I've heard hearsay about how awful it was....... |
garigue wrote:
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. not to worry, it won't be a hurdle or a mountain anymore when the FCC removes the code testing requirement. Clint KB5ZHT Hello there Clint ..... I agree it will all be a rather moot point but it will be the drip off the leaf that eventually runs into the sea of a no test amateur radio license. The future ham will just access the FCC site and type in the info and hit print. I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't completely eliminated in 10-15 years. Here's another possibility, Tom. At some point in the near future, we will *buy* our licenses from Clear Channel! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Robert Casey wrote:
garigue wrote: I am not a betting man but Clint I will send you a six pack of Iron City beer if testing doesn't turn into a 5 WPM like sham or isn't completely eliminated in 10-15 years. Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any myself, but I've heard hearsay about how awful it was....... It is awful - if you like the Peewaa swill offered up by CorBuMil. (note that CorBuMil is the same sort of thing as YaeComWood) - Mike KB3EIA - |
Iron City? Isn't that the worst beer known to man? I never had any myself, but I've heard hearsay about how awful it was....... Na Bob ...local stuff ..accquired taste ...their lite beer blows away anything I have ever drank and don't mention that Coors Lite stuff. The rumor here is that they dilute regular Iron lager with 100 parts of water to make that stuff. Actually Bob a very good local beer is Stoney's but it has to be draught and fresh. They used to make it in Smithton Pa nr here but it is now made at the Iron City works. BTW Stoney was Shirley Jones's father. Oh my God ....I have broken one of Len's chat room rules ...... excuse my off topic pontification .... 73 God Bless Tom Popovic KI3R Belle Vernon Pa |
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:44 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com