Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Robert Casey
writes:

At which age did you pass an amateur radio license exam, Leonard?

Never tried, snarly dave.

I passed my First Phone exam on the first try in Chicago at an FCC
field office in March 1956. Never looked back.

Then learning the 5 wpm and getting the extra should be a walk in the park
then.
It took me about a month to learn 5 wpm and I'm no good at such motor skills.

Gosh, olde-tymer, I've walked in many fine parks in my time but not
a single one of them required any morse code proficiency to walk.

That "Extra right out of the box" park requires it at the breakneck pace
of f i v e w o r d s p e r m i n u t e.


Psycho-motor skill I learned in middle school (we called it
"junior high school" back then before educational PC) was typing
at tested maximum of 60 WPM. On typewriters that had no key
markings. :-)

There's no typing test involved in the Amateur Extra. Just a morse test
of f i v e w o r d s p e r m i n u t e.

Now, let's concentrate on WHY there's still a morse code test for
an AMATEUR radio license...and WHY it must remain law forever
and ever. Or, at least until the last PCTA has their code key
forcibly removed from their cold, dead fingers.

At the rate you're progressing toward that Extra Class ticket, there
won't be any amateur radio license at all to pry from your cold, dead
fingers.

Is morse code not so wonderful that the feds have to keep the
morse test in law so that cute little seven-year-olds can have
radio playmates? Or forty-seven-year-olds and older?

It still gets you that mere children can obtain that which you covet,
doesn't it?

Ever wonder why morse code is the SECOND most used mode
on HF, a distant second behind voice? All the HF hams had to
test for code but so few continued to use it.

Let's see.....hmmm....It is probably because the overwhelming majority
can already talk? Operating on SSB would seem to be as easy
as...talking.

I guess it must not be
so wonderful, so popular after all.

....but you'll have to continue to rely upon second-hand information.

Dave K8MN

In article ,
(William) writes:

Billy:

Point taken, and I offer all appropriate apologies to Miss Clauson.
However, her achievement, while a fairly notable one ***for a child,***
is no longer noteworthy for anyone over the age of, say, 10 years,
and certainly a meaningless one for an adult.

Larrah, at what age did you pass the Extra exam elements?

Billy:

I was born Oct 31, 1952. I got my Novice ticket July 21, 1981. I passed
Extra Feb, 7, 1983. I reckon that made me 30 years, 4 months, 7 days
old at the time. My figuring may be a bit off, as I'm somewhat bleary-eyed
due to it being past my bedtime.

73 de Larry, K3LT

Len Five Decades Over 21 but not acting a day over eleven wrote:

In article , Dave Heil snarly
aka "Mr. Warmth" writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil

writes:

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article ,
(William) writes:

Larrah, at what age did you pass the Extra exam elements?

Mental or physical age? :-)

At which age did you pass an amateur radio license exam, Leonard?

Never tried, snarly dave.

Well, there you have it.

Have what? I don't have any amateur license. Got several others.

In the context of this newsgroup, that means just what?

I passed my First Phone exam on the first try in Chicago at an FCC
field office in March 1956. Never looked back.

I don't care about your commercial ticket. I asked about your amateur
radio license. Maybe you should look back.

Snarly dave, I don't care about your amateur wonderfulness and
vindictiveness and bigotry to non-amateurs. I'm a pro, like it or no.

If you don't care, why are you still haunting a newsgroup dealing with
amateur radio? It is clear that you are not a radio amateur and that
you are not, after all these years, "getting into amateur radio". Haunt
some radio professionals, using the endearing manner you've displayed
here and see how long they put up with your condesent. I worked
professionally in radio and electronics. A number of us here have done
so or do so. What sets you apart is that you are a non-amateur who
seems to get his jollies taking potshots at radio amateurs.

You do NOT get to choose anything about what anyone is "supposed"
to say, to reply to, or anydamnthingelse. You keep thinking you do
every time you put on the SS uniform with the monocle. Try keeping
the armband off, it's so 40-ish.

Get it straight, Len. This is an open newsgroup dealing with amateur
radio. You are in no way involved with amateur radio. I am free to
choose to respond to anything posted here and shall do so as the spirit
moves me.

Shave the head and learn to smile. That will make you more like
Colonel Klink. Lose several pounds too.

As a last resort, you can always go to your strength and bring in the
Nazi images.

Now Larrah, the self-professed paragon of determination and moral
virtue, once bragged and carried on that his "summa cum laude"
standings in post-service college would get him any top spot job
in human resources after graduation. He now drives a bus.

What has that to do with his amateur radio license and why is it of
concern to you?

What have you to do with anything? :-)

Let's see. Amateur radio newsgroup. I'm a radio amateur. Now, back to
the question: What does your comment have to do with Larry's amateur
radio license and of concern is his job to you? It seems to be karma
that forces you to live up to the N2EY profile of your likely actions.

Tsk, tsk, tsk, snarly dave, all you seem to do is try to fight with
others who don't bow down and kiss your asterisk.

Actually, old boy, you have quite the attitude toward radio amateurs.
You're insulting, rude and immature. If you're waiting for radio
amateurs to be impressed by your professional credentials, you're likely
going to be disappointed.

Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

You bragged *four* years ago that you'd get "an Extra right out of the
box". You still have not even the most basic amateur radio license.

Q.E.D.

Ah, so in "correct" amateurism, any statement anyone says in the
past MUST be kept forever and ever? Even casual throwaway
mentions? :-)

It wasn't a casual, throwaway mention and your newsgroup statements of
the past are here for a long, long time. If you wish to now retract
your statement, I have no problem with that.

I changed my mind, sweetums. Stuff it. :-)

I haven't changed my mind about you, Len. You're a victim of your own
inertia and braggadocio. To twist a phrase: If you haven't done it, it
is most certainly bragging. You haven't obtained a license and aren't
likely to do so. Consider yourself stuffed.

I saw the way you acted in here and didn't want to become a snarly
dave clone. Or a gunnery nurse.

That "fox and grapes" routine of your is a classic.

Please continue your civil debate on morse code elimination.

As soon as you show the way, snarly dave.

So far you haven't exhibited much civility in that regard.

I didn't state that as my "only purpose" here, Leonard. You did.

So, snarly dave, your purpose in here is to make nasty to everyone
that doesn't agree with you and kiss your asterisk?

I haven't stated a purpose here, Leonid.

I'm very glad the State Department never had you on any official
negotiating team. We would all be nuclear toast, clicking counters
for a very long half-after life.

Snarly dave, I'm just trying to discuss the morse code test issue.

As Steve so often tells you, you're a liar, Leonora.

Dave K8MN

In article , ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

I was born Oct 31, 1952. I got my Novice ticket July 21, 1981. I passed
Extra Feb, 7, 1983. I reckon that made me 30 years, 4 months, 7 days
old at the time.

What a great new game! I'll play:

I was born April 24, 1954. I got my Novice ticket October 14, 1967. I got my
Extra September 26, 1970. (Dates are when the actual license arrived - passed
the tests about six weeks earlier). I reckon that made me 16 years, 5 months,
2 days old when the Extra came in the mail. That 2 year experience requirement
held me up at least a year).

Anybody else?

73 de Jim, N2EY

..

N2EY wrote:

In article , ospam
(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:


I was born Oct 31, 1952. I got my Novice ticket July 21, 1981. I passed
Extra Feb, 7, 1983. I reckon that made me 30 years, 4 months, 7 days
old at the time.


What a great new game! I'll play:

I was born April 24, 1954. I got my Novice ticket October 14, 1967. I got my
Extra September 26, 1970. (Dates are when the actual license arrived - passed
the tests about six weeks earlier). I reckon that made me 16 years, 5 months,
2 days old when the Extra came in the mail. That 2 year experience requirement
held me up at least a year).

Anybody else?

Born June 9, 1954

Technician license October 21, 1999 - tested Williamsport PA

General license June 25, 2001 - E-2 Butler, E-1 State College PA

Extra License February 26, 2002- Tested Lock Haven PA


So I was 45 when I got my Tech, 47 for my General, and 47 for my Extra.

Just a baby!

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Fri, 06 Feb 2004 05:34:03 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Len Five Decades Over 21 but not acting a day over eleven wrote:

If you're waiting for radio
amateurs to be impressed by your professional credentials, you're likely
going to be disappointed.

I must admit, I've taken a shot or three at Len over exactly the same
issue - no Amateur callsign = no valid opinion on Amateur issues.

However, a little research reveals that this distinction would be
irrelevant in Canada, as we grant full Amateur license privileges upon
request to persons with appropriate Professional license
qualifications.

An excerpt from Industry Canada's Radio Information Circular follows:

================================================== =====

Persons holding any of the following Canadian certificates may be
issued an authorization to operate in the amateur radio service with
the same operating privileges as the holder of an Amateur Radio
Operator Certificate with Basic, Morse Code and Advanced
Qualifications: (** NOTE: equivalent to US Amateur Extra license)

- Radiocommunication Operator’s General Certificate (Maritime)
- Radio Operator's First Class Certificate
- Radio Operator's Second Class Certificate

Persons holding any of the following Canadian certificates may be
issued an authorization to operate in the amateur radio service with
the same operating privileges as the holder of an Amateur Radio
Operator Certificate with Basic Qualification: (** NOTE -
approximately equivalent to US Technician license)

- Radiotelephone Operator’s General Certificate (Aeronautical)
- Radiotelephone Operator’s General Certificate (Maritime)
- Radiotelephone Operator’s General Certificate (Land)
- First-class Radioelectronic Certificate

The full text of IC RIC-3 is available at:

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/ric3.pdf/$FILE/ric3.pdf

================================================== ======

It would seem to me that this makes perfect sense - radio operation is
radio operation, and the Pros have made a career of it - and invested
considerably more education, time, effort and ongoing training than
would be possible for most hobbyists. After all, it would be pretty
silly for the folks at the local photo club to argue that Yosuf
Karsh's pictures were pretty good, but not up to "Amateur" standards!

After all, the testing done for Amateur licences today is pretty easy
to pass, even without a formal education in electronics. Too easy,
I'd say, but that is another issue......(when 7 year olds can pass
exams with questions requiring calculation of squares, logs and
complex numbers - which sure as heck weren't part of my kids Grade 2
syllabus - I start thinking rote memorization of question pools....)

A question - was a similar arrangement for the recognition of
professional credentials in the Amateur service ever in place in the
US? With the reciprocity agreement between Canada and the US, someone
who has obtained their Amateur licence based on their Professional
qualifications automatically gains full Amateur operating privileges
when travelling in the US. One would think it logical for this
arrangement to be bidirectional, n'est pas?

I'm not sure if Len's First Class license is equal to any of the
Canadian ones listed in RIC-3 above - but if they are, the Canadian
equivalent to his license would be sufficient to acquire a VEx
callsign absolutely free upon request.

Well, for a 49-cent stamp, anyway :)

Dave K8MN

73, Leo

In article , Leo
writes:

in Canada, as we grant full Amateur license privileges upon
request to persons with appropriate Professional license
qualifications.

In the USA, there are almost no professional radio operator licenses
left. There's the GROL and some radiotelegraph licenses, the latter
because Morse operation on ships is still permitted (but no longer
required).

An excerpt from Industry Canada's Radio Information Circular follows:

It would seem to me that this makes perfect sense - radio operation is
radio operation,

Is it? Then why all the various endorsements? Is "operating" a TV broadcast
transmitter the same thing as 160 meter RTTY operation? I don't think so.

and the Pros have made a career of it

All that means is that they get paid. There are some ladies and gentlemen
on the streets of most major cities who make a "profession" out of something
most people do as amateurs. (Some say it's the oldest profession). Those
people must be qualified to give advice on the subject of their profession,
don't you think? ;-) We should revere what they say and do, and not
question their knowledge and opinions on the subject, right? ;-) ;-) They
must be better at it than us unpaid amateurs because they get paid to
do it, right? ;-) ;-) ;-)

- and invested
considerably more education, time, effort and ongoing training than
would be possible for most hobbyists.

Maybe - remember that most of them got the license *before* the job. Back when
the USA granted such things, the old Extra written was considered by most to be
at least the equivalent of the First 'Phone.

But now here's the big one: do the professional licenses include testing of
the
amateur rules, regulations, and operating practices? USA ones don't.

And are professional licensees allowed to build their own transmitters and put
them
on the air without any certification?

After all, it would be pretty
silly for the folks at the local photo club to argue that Yosuf
Karsh's pictures were pretty good, but not up to "Amateur" standards!

After all, the testing done for Amateur licences today is pretty easy
to pass, even without a formal education in electronics.

Agreed! But at least it still exists.

Too easy,
I'd say,

The FCC disagrees.

but that is another issue......(when 7 year olds can pass
exams with questions requiring calculation of squares, logs and
complex numbers - which sure as heck weren't part of my kids Grade 2
syllabus - I start thinking rote memorization of question pools....)

And that's not going to change any time soon. The GROL pool is public info,
too.

Do you know the 7 year old in question? If not, how can you say whether or not
she's qualified or knows how to do the required math?

A question - was a similar arrangement for the recognition of
professional credentials in the Amateur service ever in place in the
US?

No, except that some radiotelegraphy test elements were credited
because they were essentially the same in both services.

The problem has always been that the commercial (not professional - in the USA
that means something very specific) licenses did not test for knowledge of
amateur regs or operating practices. So a commercial licensee was not
qualified to operate an amateur station based on the commercial license test
alone.
And that's still the case.

With the reciprocity agreement between Canada and the US, someone
who has obtained their Amateur licence based on their Professional
qualifications automatically gains full Amateur operating privileges
when travelling in the US. One would think it logical for this
arrangement to be bidirectional, n'est pas?

No. It's a bad arrangement. Unless the Canadian professional tests include
the amateur rules and operating practices, your government is derelict in
its duty to the ARS. That's a plain and simple fact. For the USA to make the
same mistake would be a very bad thing, unless the GROL tests were changed.
Even then it would be questionable, because it would probably be possible
for someone to pass the Commercial exam but get all the amateur-radio-related
questions wrong. Such a person is simply not qualified to operate an amateur
radio station.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On 06 Feb 2004 14:54:40 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

In article , Leo
writes:

in Canada, as we grant full Amateur license privileges upon
request to persons with appropriate Professional license
qualifications.

In the USA, there are almost no professional radio operator licenses
left. There's the GROL and some radiotelegraph licenses, the latter
because Morse operation on ships is still permitted (but no longer
required).

An excerpt from Industry Canada's Radio Information Circular follows:

It would seem to me that this makes perfect sense - radio operation is
radio operation,

Is it? Then why all the various endorsements? Is "operating" a TV broadcast
transmitter the same thing as 160 meter RTTY operation? I don't think so.

Of course not - operating RTTY on the Amateur bands is dead easy -
connect the transmitter to your sound card, install a software
program, make a couple of tests and adjustments, and away you go!
And, if you make a few mistakes along the way, or if it takes a week
to get it running, so what? You're experimenting, and that's what
amateur radio is all about.

Now, make a couple of mistakes and knock WNEP-TV off the air for a
couple of minutes - you might be an unemployed professional!


and the Pros have made a career of it

All that means is that they get paid. There are some ladies and gentlemen
on the streets of most major cities who make a "profession" out of something
most people do as amateurs. (Some say it's the oldest profession).

Politicians? :)

Those people must be qualified to give advice on the subject of their profession,
don't you think? ;-) We should revere what they say and do, and not
question their knowledge and opinions on the subject, right? ;-) ;-) They
must be better at it than us unpaid amateurs because they get paid to
do it, right? ;-) ;-) ;-)

I'll take your word for it, having no personal experience with the
profession that you are referring to. If you say they're good, Jim,
then they're good! :)

Generally speaking, though, professionals are more knowledgable than
lay people because they are involved in their field full time, and are
held to standards of conduct and proficiency set by not only the
regulators but by their employers. And, rather than just sounding like
experts, they are expected to demonstrate their proficiency - that's
what they get paid for! 'Stay current or move out' is the rule of the
technically-oriented workplace.


- and invested
considerably more education, time, effort and ongoing training than
would be possible for most hobbyists.

Maybe - remember that most of them got the license *before* the job. Back when
the USA granted such things, the old Extra written was considered by most to be
at least the equivalent of the First 'Phone.

But now here's the big one: do the professional licenses include testing of
the
amateur rules, regulations, and operating practices? USA ones don't.

Of course not - they don't teach professional photographers how to
take amateur pictures either....

But the rules and regs can be learned pretty easily - the pros are
used to keeping abreast (sorry)! of the laws and regulations
pertaining to their field....it goes with the territory!


And are professional licensees allowed to build their own transmitters and put
them
on the air without any certification?

Nope - this is what the Amateur bands are for (type approval not
required, unlike the commercial frequencies).

In fact, there are precious few Amateurs left who could do that, Jim,
even though our bands permit it. Passing any one of the current ARS
tests does not require that sort of undestanding of electronics
anymore. Not like when you first got involved - it has changed a lot
since then.


After all, it would be pretty
silly for the folks at the local photo club to argue that Yosuf
Karsh's pictures were pretty good, but not up to "Amateur" standards!

After all, the testing done for Amateur licences today is pretty easy
to pass, even without a formal education in electronics.

Agreed! But at least it still exists.

Sort of, in vestigial format.


Too easy,
I'd say,

The FCC disagrees.

Unfortunately.

IC has been advised of this under the recommendations that the RAC
made to them following WRC-03 - I sincerely hope that they listen!


but that is another issue......(when 7 year olds can pass
exams with questions requiring calculation of squares, logs and
complex numbers - which sure as heck weren't part of my kids Grade 2
syllabus - I start thinking rote memorization of question pools....)

And that's not going to change any time soon. The GROL pool is public info,
too.

True, but if one did that, they'd have a tough time staying employed
with it - employers have a nasty habit of asking their staff to
demonstrate their abilities empirically, on a frequent basis!

Rote memorization was what my point was about, though - and I'm sure
that was the case.


Do you know the 7 year old in question? If not, how can you say whether or not
she's qualified or knows how to do the required math?

Well, if she can, she certainly is a prodigy alright. Grade 11 math
in Grade 2 - that is impressive! I'd say highly unlikely. Ever talk
to a 7-year old kid, Jim? They just don't operate at that level.
Good memories, though - like a sponge!

She is an Extra, though - I'll just bet she could build her own
transmitter from scratch (forgetting for a moment that 7-year olds
generally have enough trouble making neat letters with a pencil, let
alone operating a soldering iron....) - unlike the chief engineer at
your local NBC affiliate, who is merely a professional in his field
:)

You know, everyone seems to be holding this event up as a great
accomplishment for Amateur Radio. And I applaud the little girl's
dedication to memorizing the material and passing all of the required
tests. That took a lot of effort on her part.

But it is a clear indication that the testing procedure is far too
easy - IMHO. It can be memorized, which removes any requirement to
comprehend the material. Do you believe that a 7-year old can
comprehend the theories of complex numbers as they relate to impedance
in a resonant circuit? Bull.


A question - was a similar arrangement for the recognition of
professional credentials in the Amateur service ever in place in the
US?

No, except that some radiotelegraphy test elements were credited
because they were essentially the same in both services.

The problem has always been that the commercial (not professional - in the USA
that means something very specific) licenses did not test for knowledge of
amateur regs or operating practices. So a commercial licensee was not
qualified to operate an amateur station based on the commercial license test
alone.
And that's still the case.

With the reciprocity agreement between Canada and the US, someone
who has obtained their Amateur licence based on their Professional
qualifications automatically gains full Amateur operating privileges
when travelling in the US. One would think it logical for this
arrangement to be bidirectional, n'est pas?

No. It's a bad arrangement. Unless the Canadian professional tests include
the amateur rules and operating practices, your government is derelict in
its duty to the ARS. That's a plain and simple fact.

IC disagrees. But I'll ask them to take your opinion under advisement
:)

Personally I'd think, for example, that the guy who sits in a control
tower accurately vectoring planes all over our busy airspace is far
better equipped to carry on a two-way conversation on 2-meters than
the average amateur who passed a relatively simple test! He could
learn all of the operating procedures that he needs by reading a
couple of sections of the RAC study guide....a couple of nights would
be all it would take. And, in a real emergency, that's the guy that I
would want to see on the radio, coordinating things! Not the guy with
the mag mount 2-meter antenna on his callsigned baseball cap at the
local hamfest.....(I swear he goes to every hamfest in the world -
you've seen him at yours, haven't you? :) )

For the USA to make the
same mistake would be a very bad thing, unless the GROL tests were changed.
Even then it would be questionable, because it would probably be possible
for someone to pass the Commercial exam but get all the amateur-radio-related
questions wrong. Such a person is simply not qualified to operate an amateur
radio station.

....unless they can find a 7-year old to elmer them, that is. That is
some prettty tough material to master! LOL!


73 de Jim, N2EY

73, Leo

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Brian Kelly wrote:

(N2EY) wrote in message . com...

Her folks shepherded her into ham radio beacause ham radio is a great
way for kids to learn geography??

Not necessarily, Brian, but studying for an amateur ticket gets kids
fired up about learning. I can certainly see Jim's point about kids
becoming interested in geography, the sciences and math.

I dunno, I guess but experiences, perceptions and observations vary
all over the lot when it comes to educating kids. Never mind opinions
on the subject. I'll cite my own case. As were all four of my parent's
kids I was a pretty early and prolific reader. Implanting the joy of
reading was the big gift our parents bestowed on us and they both
worked at it. Hard. Once that bug was firmly installed we were pretty
much left alone to find our own paths without much if any "hands-on
participation" in our interests on their parts.

To wit: Geography was one of my hot buttons going way back long before
I had the first clue about ham radio. Usta love to cruise the maps
which came with National Geo. Any maps. Still do. When I finally
bumped into ham radio and disovered that hams could actually
communicate with people in those far off places I'd read about my
course was set: I absolutely was gonna become a ham so I could go
dxing. I did and I still do. It was my interest in geography which led
me to ham radio. I don't give ham radio any credit at all for my
interest in science. If I hadn't already had an interest in science I
wouldn't have developed an interest in ham radio to start with. I was
into building electric motors before I got interested in ham radio for
instance. And in geology, bugs and weather science. I didn't have any
interest at all in math as such until I was halfway thru engineering
school with a General and it finally dawned on me that I was actually
sort of enjoying the stuff.

It didn't work
toward interesting me in geometry though. I was caught reading QST
hidden within my open geometry book.

Geometry was no sweat here but I got tossed outta 10th grade English
class twice for laying out equipment panels at the back of the class.
Then the flaming fairy teach caught Sally Leinhauser and I playing
footsie. Such "activities" apparently really annoy fairies. No
problem, life coulda been a *helluva* lot worse than sitting out in
the hallway with Sally.

During the same year I built an AM BC rcvr which used five of the tiny
AG-1 flashbulb envelope subminiature tubes and stuffed the whole thing
into a small Band-Aid can which I carried in my shirt pocket. Walkman
Numero Uno. I went into biology class one day and strung the wire
antenna to an overhead lamp fixture, put on the earplug "speaker" and
started tuning around. The teacher, good 'ole Floyd Neff finally
noticed the antenna and stormed to the back of the room, "What are you
doing, what is that thing?" I cupped my ear, "Uh, it's my hearing aid,
could you speak up a bit please?" Tossed outta class again.

You brought back a lot of hilarious memories of "electronerd
educations" gone awry David. Gawd we had fun . . !

For the first few weeks of my interest, my dad actively discouraged me
with talk of amateur radio being a passing fad for me.
He had visions
of mounds of equipment gathering dust in a closet.

He was right, I've seen it happen . . !

My mother encouraged
me and was able to convince my father that some of the meager family
income should be spent on a transmitter for me if I earned the money for
the receiver from my paper route.

You got lucky, I got NOTTING in the way of economic support for
diddling with radios despite the volume of coin my parents had. Their
policy was that if some pursuit or another was important enough to
their kids we could bloody well work out how to pay for it on our own
or drop it. With the notable exception of cheerfully paying the
expenses related to Boy Scouting. I *really* needed radio gear so I
had a couple paper routes, peddled magazine subsciptions, painted
house numbers on curbs in December, etc. Got the equipment and some
early lessons on how much work hot buttons can actually cost.

My dad had and has no technical abilities whatever. My mother was
deathly afraid of electricity and wouldn't even clean my ham shack. She
just knew that lightning was going to enter the house via my antennas.
Both parents saw value in amateur radio as a wholesome activity, one
which would nurture an interest in science and possibly lead to a career
in electronics.

Once more we all obviously came from very different directions to a
sort of convergence here. My Dad excused himself from an orphanage at
age 14 and became an apprentice tool and die maker. Eventually he
moved on into the U of P med school research labs as a creative guru
in the electrical instrumentation, glass-blowing and mechanical shops.
Mom became a secretary-turned-lab-assistant in the same research
facility where they met in 1933 or so and here I is. Mom had a much
older civil engineering student brother who "fiddled with radios all
night" and who might have been an early ham. He passed away before he
graduated so I'll never know if he was a ham or not. Bottom line here
being that when I got into ham radio and hung wires all over the yard
none of it particularly attracted much parental attention. At dinner
one night I puffily announced that I'd worked Africa for the first
time the night before, a ZS6 on 80 CW. "That's nice dear. Did you
clean your bedroom yet?" Career guidance via ham radio? Ha! As if.

Just after WW2 they put together the family tool and die works in
which all four of their offspring were raised. So of course we all
became gearheads, even the girl knows wrenches. Two mechanical
engineers, another tool and die maker (turned statistician and
programmer), the girl got into computer programming about the time the
first punch card decks showed up. What I have gotten out of ham radio
as it relates to my career is a *much* better grip on EE sorts of
things than the average ME has. Has proven to be a very big asset on
many occasions.

I raised my three daughters pretty much the way I was raised and none
of 'em are slouches in their various professional technical fields.


I know Janie. Her father was Jesse Bieberman W3KT who is still a
legend. Honer Roll top-ender for decades, phone and cw dx contester,
25wpm with a straight key for 48 straight. Vice Director of the
Atlantic Division for decades and one of the most powerful voices in
Newington in those days. Ran the W3 buro single-handed also for
decades.

...and ran the W3KT outgoing QSL forwarding service for a number of
years.

I forgot all about that, tnx.

Speaking of QSL card handling Joe Arcure W3HNK is in this
neighborhood, I gotta look him up.


Dave K8MN

Brian w3rv

Born Aug 1 53. Got my old style Tech (took tests at the old FCC field
office
in NYC) October 76. Upgraded to Extra on Restructuring Day (April 15, 2000)
and got the paperwork the next week. So that works out as 0, 23, and 46
years. Aug 1, 1953 was my zeroth birthday.

-