"KØHB" wrote in message link.net...
"N2EY" wrote


http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/12/03/1/?nc=1

Note this:

"The General class question pool does not contain any diagrams or
symbols."


NTI (No Theory International) at work in the background.

If this is a surprise to anyone, you only need examine the 'gang of four'
who is responsible for the question pools. This has the fingerprints of
W5YI smeared all over it. He has stated publicly that he feels that since
people who acquire entry level ham tickets invariably purchase their
equipment assembled these days, and send them in for repairs when broken,
they no longer need to possess theknowledge needed to build their own
stations, nor the knowledge to determine if their repairs/adjustments result
in proper on-the-air signals. Because of this fact, he thinks that the
majority of questions regarding math and theory (knowledge mainly needed to
build/repair/adjust equipment) should be removed from qualification tests,
and simply replaced with questions on operating technique and regulations.
If he had his way, math and theory questions would only be part of Amateur
Extra examinations.

73, de Hans, K0HB

Take note that that is the situation here in Canada.

When things were restructured back in 1990, not only was the code
test separated out, but the written test became simpler. And
that test did not allow for the building of transmitters. You had
to take the advanced test to do that.

I have no idea if that idea came from hams or the DOC. Certainly
there was the suggestion that since few were building, the test
did not need to deal too much with technical stuff. Of course,
the simpler test, and more important the rule that outright bans
a homemade transmitter's use with that Basic license, institutionalizes
the concept that it's a hobby of communication, not technical matters.

When I was licensed in 1972, it was still called the "Amateur Experimental
Service" here in Canada.

Michael VE2BVW

Michael Black wrote:

Take note that that is the situation here in Canada.

When things were restructured back in 1990, not only was the code
test separated out, but the written test became simpler. And
that test did not allow for the building of transmitters. You had
to take the advanced test to do that.

I have no idea if that idea came from hams or the DOC. Certainly
there was the suggestion that since few were building, the test
did not need to deal too much with technical stuff. Of course,
the simpler test, and more important the rule that outright bans
a homemade transmitter's use with that Basic license, institutionalizes
the concept that it's a hobby of communication, not technical matters.

When I was licensed in 1972, it was still called the "Amateur Experimental
Service" here in Canada.

Michael VE2BVW

I seem to recall seeing a notice on either the RAC's or IC's websites that
they would be removing the code requirement for anything lower than 6m. Do
you know anything about that? It almost seems like a priviledge to get onto
the low frequency bands with the 5wpm requirements.

On another note, do you know of any good morse resources? I'd like to learn
Morse (I got my license in 1999 and didn't take the morse test).

As far as the test goes, I took Electronics Engineering Technology in
college and I thought the advanced exam was quite easy, but I may be
biased.
--
Donovan Hill
VA7LNX (Basic, Advanced)