RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)
-   -   The 14 Petitions (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/27074-14-petitions.html)

Mike Coslo December 5th 03 04:40 AM

Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
t...
[snip]
Reminds me of the first time I took the General test. I got up early

and drove to the Hamfest in Butler PA from State College PA. Drank
several cups of coffee on the way. I took the writtens first, and no
problem acing it. Then the combination of the trip and too much coffee
kicked in as I sat down for the Morse code test. As they say in the
Bronx fuggitaboudit! So I had to wait a while for my ticket.

Which makes me wonder, I do not do Morse well under stress. I wonder how
some of those who had to do it under some awful condx ever managed.

- Mike KB3EIA -



Those who can hold it together under stress come in two types: a - nerves
of steel (only a few of those around) OR b - they've done it so long that
it's no more stressful than talking (probably the more common reason).


I still think there is a fundamental problem I have with Morse code -
although I have come a long way, the effort I have to put in compared to
what others apparently have to do is nothing short of phenomenal. A half
hour at lunch, another half hour to an hour in the evening, 6 days a
week, and I am still struggling. I know I am nowhere near stupid, and
I've tried enough different methods to know that there is something
somewhere that makes my brain process sounds a bit differently than
those that find Morse easy.

But in most matters, I am one of those steely nerved types, and
consider myself too dumb to panic.

But, I persevere! I'm starting to catch whole words on the air (at
faster speeds) now, and it is exciting, despite my whining about it!

8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -


KØHB December 5th 03 05:38 AM

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

And, finally, remember that Hans' proposal would entirely drop the Novice,
Tech, and General (losing everything on those tests), making the Extra the
sole license test for full privileges.


Nope, you keep getting it wrong, Dwight. I'd also drop the Extra
examination, and institute a **new** Class A examination, similar in
difficulty (but with obviously different content) than the current Extra.

73, de Hans, K0HB






KØHB December 5th 03 05:46 AM

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Maybe the FCC should look very closely at the
power levels that hams use.


They recently did just that, and as a result the rules now include 97.13(c)
which require YOU to perform an environmental evaluation of your station if
you intend to use QRO, and certify that evaluation on your renewal
application. The "can of worms" is open.

73, de Hans, K0HB



KØHB December 5th 03 05:57 AM

"Mike Coslo" wrote


I think you disagree.


Yes, I do, but that doesn't make you (or me) a bad person. I appreciate
your input.

73, de Hans, K0HB





Kim W5TIT December 5th 03 10:18 AM

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

So please cite the statistical data that shows
people have had enough exposure to Morse
code to be able to evaluate it even though
they don't know it.



I'll tell you what, Dee. You show me where such statistical data is
collected and I'll cite it for you. Until then, it is clear that my

comments
were nothing more than opinions. Of course, you knew that before

responding.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


The angle of argument that Dee is trying to use is old, tired and *yawn*....

Kim W5TIT



Dwight Stewart December 5th 03 10:35 AM

"KØHB" wrote:

Nope, you keep getting it wrong, Dwight.
I'd also drop the Extra examination, and
institute a **new** Class A examination,
similar in difficulty (but with obviously
different content) than the current Extra.



I don't think so, Hans. You're advocating a test "similar in difficulty"
to the Extra. However, an Extra hasn't just taken that one test - he also
took the Tech and General prior to that. The material on each test is
different, with later tests building on the material in the earlier tests.
To cover the same material an Extra has covered today ("similar
difficulty"), your new test would have to include the material covered in
all three current tests (with over 120 questions in one sitting). So, are
you advocating that, advocating some type of reduced content test (less
questions), or did you simply forget the material on the first two tests?


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


Mike Coslo December 5th 03 01:26 PM

Dwight Stewart wrote:
"KØHB" wrote:

Nope, you keep getting it wrong, Dwight.
I'd also drop the Extra examination, and
institute a **new** Class A examination,
similar in difficulty (but with obviously
different content) than the current Extra.




I don't think so, Hans. You're advocating a test "similar in difficulty"
to the Extra. However, an Extra hasn't just taken that one test - he also
took the Tech and General prior to that. The material on each test is
different, with later tests building on the material in the earlier tests.
To cover the same material an Extra has covered today ("similar
difficulty"), your new test would have to include the material covered in
all three current tests (with over 120 questions in one sitting). So, are
you advocating that, advocating some type of reduced content test (less
questions), or did you simply forget the material on the first two tests?



Well said, Dwight. Everything is built on what went before it. So now
what sounded kind of easy is not so easy. Someone here, perhaps Jim,
pointed out how the Extra license tests did not address RF safety much
if at all. But wait! the Class B tests are apparently not going to
address RF safety either because the power is limited to a "safe"
amount. So now safety related learning is confined to the second test
for class A.

Dat's gonna be one big test!


- Mike KB3EIA -


KØHB December 5th 03 02:59 PM

"Mike Coslo" wrote


Dat's gonna be one big test!


Back when I took the Extra exam it had 100 questions. Seems about right to
me.

73, de Hans, K0HB





KØHB December 5th 03 03:18 PM

"Dwight Stewart" wrote

To cover the same material an Extra has covered today ("similar
difficulty"), your new test would have to include the material covered in
all three current tests (with over 120 questions in one sitting).


I expect it would be a longer test than todays Extra, but probably not 120
questions (since some things, like band segments for example, would be the
same as for the learner-permit level), and perhaps not necessarily in one
sitting -- could be structured to be taken in 2 (or 3?) sessions for those
who are intimidated by lengthy exams or have weak bladders.

My Extra exam was 100 questions. You were allowed 3.5 hours to complete it.

73, de Hans, K0HB






Alun December 5th 03 03:34 PM

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in
gy.com:


"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Alun
writes:

I think you're missing the point. I took _code_ tests to get _phone_
subbands. There's no logic in that. Never was, even from the
beginning.


Sure there is. Here it is, though you may argue that it doesn't hold
much water today:


In addition, anyone one who thinks they took the code tests to get
phone subbands isn't really viewing it from the right perspective
anyway. The code test, as well as the additional writtens, was to get
HF privileges or should have been. It happens that phone privileges
are included when one earns HF privileges.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



It's only the wrong perspective because it's not your perspective


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:33 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com