About Us

February 2nd 04, 03:38 AM

In article , writes:

Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:
wrote in message
...

The discussion was the the testing practices of an agency of the
US government.

Comparing the practices of another agency gives a reality check on
the possibility of closed question pools.

Yep - and there's ain't much chance!

My position is that we are not going to completely (or even
remotely) get the degree of "training" the FCC sets before us with
open pools. We have far too many "Extra's" who can't calculate the
length of a dipole or know the difference between peak-envelope-power
and PeeWee Herman. That's a shame.

I have mixed feelings on that.

I think the perception of the ignorance level is skewed for those that
spend a lot of time on USENET for the simple reason that those that do
know how to calculate the length of a dipole are not going to post
a message stating that.

Only the ignorant are going to post things like that and the posts
will stand out in your memory but you will never know how many read
that post and just thought to their self "how did that guy get a
license".

If such questions were answered simply and correctly, and perhaps some
references given as to where such things may be found (such as ARRL
publications) without the usual derisive comments, maybe a goodly
part of the training you hope for would take place.

I believe the term for such actions is "elmering" and at one time it
was a major part of the amateur training process.

Yep. But there's also the aspect of "self-training", where the person with the
question tries to find the information on their own *before* asking.

The ignorance problem is hardly a new problem. I can remember being
at a ham gathering circa 1965 where a guy didn't know the difference
between a short and an open. To have had the license he had at that
time he would have had to take the old essay style tests complete
with diagrams.

A closed test pool is no panacea.

There's mo

I have the old ARRL License Manuals from 1948, 1951, 1954, 1962 and 1971. The
study guides in those books are full of draw-a-diagram questions, power supply,
filter and transmitter questions, plus all sorts of other stuff like
magnetrons, neutralization, TV, RTTY, FM and SSB.. But there are very few
questions on receivers and antennas, particularly in the lower license calsses
and older versions.

The length of a dipole question appears exactly once - in the 1971 manual only,
for the Advanced class.

In fact, if you read the study guides carefully, it becomes clear that they
are heavily focused on transmitter design and operation to avoid interference,
and regulations.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Response to "21st Century" Part Two (Communicator License)	N2EY	Policy	0	November 30th 03 01:28 PM
Low reenlistment rate	charlesb	Policy	54	September 18th 03 01:57 PM
There is no International Code Requirement and techs can operate HF according to FCC Rules	JJ	General	159	August 12th 03 12:25 AM
ATTN: Tech Licensee USA Morse Code Freedom Day is August 1st	Dwight Stewart	Policy	300	August 12th 03 12:25 AM
Hey CBers Help Get rid of Morse Code Test and Requirement	Scott Unit 69	Policy	9	August 1st 03 02:08 AM

Menu

About Us