In article ilgate.org, "Hans
Kohb" writes:

"Dick Carroll;" wrote


http://www.qsl.net/n1ea/FIST_FCC_Petition_8-30-303.pdf


Perhaps FISTS should consider sending this in as a comment to be
considered with RM-10787, rather than a separate petition.

I think it's better as a separate petition.

If FCC grants the "no Morse test" petition, then it is unlikely to roll
back that decision at a later date.

Which is why a separate petition is a better idea.

The most likely scenario now is that FCC will continue to receive petitions,
assign them RM numbers, and take comments. Doing so takes almost no FCC
resources and allows lots of time for ideas to percolate through the process.
Perhaps FCC hopes some sort of consensus will be forthcoming.

There are also a couple of petitions from as far back as 2001 or so that are
still hanging fire. For example, FCC has not ruled on the ARRL petition to
"refarm" the Novice bands.

At some point, the flurry of petitions will slow down, comments taper off, and
FC can do one of two things:

1) Create an NPRM (most likely)

2) Change the rules without an NPRM.

I think a lot depends on whether a clear consnesus surfaces from the comments.

73 de Jim, N2EY

What the heck is "Memozizing"?

I wondered how long it would take you fools to catch that.

There are already folks like W5YI campaigning for less WRITTEN testing,
saying
the Tech test is too hard.

73 de Jim, N2EY

The whole plan is rather simple, there main goal is to turn it into the license
in the Box Concept. Once Cw Testing is gone, the rest is easy.

I hate to break it to you fine folks....But.....there is no such thing as a
1/4 wave DIPOLE.

Dan/W4NTI

"Bob Brock" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 6 Sep 2003 09:31:17 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:

"Bob Brock" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 5 Sep 2003 20:30:30 -0500, "Kim W5TIT"
wrote:


You're right, Dee. That's the point I try to make...I rote memorized
for
the test. Now, the argument for the above scenario could also be made
that
the instrukshions can be looked up. I've built quite a few antennas.
All
of them I used instrukshions for; and they all worked great.

Kim W5TIT


What would be wrong with requiring them to build a quarter wave dipole
that is resonate at a specified frequency as part of the test? That
is, if the test were changed to be written and performance based.


There's nothing at all wrong with having some part of the test be based
on
something related to performance--other than CW; comment on that in a
moment--if there could be a generally agreed upon topic. I think
establishing something like a digital station would be more appropriate
than
building an antenna, because I think what should be tested is something
everyone will do at one point or another. While not everyone may dabble
in
digital, APRS, SSTV, or whatever, everyone will have to establish a radio
set up at some point or another. The best would be a sucessful mobile
installation, but doing testing outside just wouldn't be feasible.

On your latter comment, be careful how you word things in this debate:
the
test is performance based right now. It baseed on one's ability to
understand CW, and that is performance.

Only if they know how to connect the antenna to the radio. ;-)

I hate to break it to you fine folks....But.....there is no such thing as a
1/4 wave DIPOLE.

Dan/W4NTI


Dan dont tell them that, if they keeping using a Quarter Wave Dipole we will
never have to listen to them

Maybe if they all use 1/4 wave DIPOLEs, they will be hard to hear. So it
won't matter.

Dan/W4NTI



Exactly, better yet tell them to use an 1/8 Wave Ant, they will not know the
difference.

Nor is you lack of basic knowledge regarding antennas.


Are you now suggesting TITs, TITs Draggin on the ground are some kind of ANT?

On 07 Sep 2003 23:03:13 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:

And, for goodness sake again--don't *even* be affected by anything Dick
Carroll, Waddles (WA8ULX or whatever), Larry Roll or even Dave Heil says.
They're humorous, at best. They all remind me of drunken old rambling men.

Kim W5TIT

Your TITs Draggin on the ground are not humorous

Nor is you lack of basic knowledge regarding antennas.

So, when HF goes codless, are you going
to stay there or are you going back to 11 Meters.

Oh no problem, I allready sold all my CBHam Stuff. As far as I am concerned you
CBers can have it, cant wait to see how you New CBHAMS deal with BPL.

On 07 Sep 2003 23:31:58 GMT, (WA8ULX) wrote:

Nor is you lack of basic knowledge regarding antennas.


Are you now suggesting TITs, TITs Draggin on the ground are some kind of ANT?

No, I'm just telling you that you are ignorant about radio.