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 -