Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
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. But emphasis on different things. However, an Extra hasn't just taken that one test - he also took the Tech and General prior to that. Depends what vintage Extra you're talking about. The material on each test is different, with later tests building on the material in the earlier tests. Yet if lots of time elapsed between upgrades, that's not going to be completely accurate. 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). Not really. It would only have to cover the stuff not covered in the Class B test. And if it takes a 120 or 150 question test, is that really a problem? We're not talking EE or PE level questions here, just multiple choices from a published pool. 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. I don't recall saying that, but maybe I did. Point is that a Tech today needs to be tested on RF safety at the 1500 W level for VHF/UHF/microwaves, which are obvioulsy present the most hazard (as WK3C says "meat-cooking frequencies"). Generals need to be tested on *all* RF exposure, because they have *all* bands and full power. Meanwhile us *old* (pre-1996) hams never had any RF safety stuff in our tests. (At least some of us - ahem - learned the stuff anyway so we'd be current with the current tests) But is RF safety really that tough a subject? 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! If so, is that really a problem? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The 14 Petitions | Policy | |||
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Dx |