Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes: "William" wrote in message om... Has the FCC "dissented" to the use of Farnsworth-spaced Morse Code? That is what I asked. Has it not had the opportunity to intervene if it DID think that it was improper or illegal to use? I believe that the FCC is unaware. After nearly 20 years or so, the FCC is unaware?? Not hardly. Unaware? I'd say so just on the Commissioners' statements whooping and hollering about Access BPL at the back end of NPRM 04-29. They are UNAWARE of the most basic things about RF transmission lines. QED. LHA / WMD |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
|
#124
|
|||
|
|||
"William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... "William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... Naturally. Farnsworth spaced code for slow word speeds is much easier to copy than using slow letters. Unnaturally. If the person prepared for Morse Code as stated in the regulation, the Farnsworth Code will zip by. Failure is predictable. No current study materials omit explaining to the student that the Farnsworth spacing will be used in the test. Anyone who ignores that information has set themselves up for failure. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE The ARRL used Farnsworth for years before publishing a notice that they were doing so. Sorry but it was published. If you missed it, that's your problem. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Wrong Yet Again, Len!
From: (William) Date: 4/1/2004 8:58 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Subject: Wrong Yet Again, Len! From: (William) Date: 3/31/2004 5:09 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: (Steve Robeson K4CAP) wrote in message ... Does it matter? Do you matter? Of course I do. Just like you matter. Now you're lying again. You've treated a whole parade of people on rrap as if they were chewing gum or worse stuck to the sole of your jump boots. Too bad for you, Brain, that you can't see beyond your own wounded pride. Of course it wouldn't BE wounded if you'd quit shooting yourself in the foot in public all the time. But you STILL matter, whether you beleive it or not. Steve, K4YZ |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
Subject: Wrong Yet Again, Len!
From: (William) Date: 4/1/2004 12:35 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... "William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... Naturally. Farnsworth spaced code for slow word speeds is much easier to copy than using slow letters. Unnaturally. If the person prepared for Morse Code as stated in the regulation, the Farnsworth Code will zip by. Failure is predictable. No current study materials omit explaining to the student that the Farnsworth spacing will be used in the test. Anyone who ignores that information has set themselves up for failure. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE The ARRL used Farnsworth for years before publishing a notice that they were doing so. In which FCC or other pertient federal law or regulation were they obligated to announce that they were, Brain? Steve, K4YZ |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ...
"William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... "William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... Naturally. Farnsworth spaced code for slow word speeds is much easier to copy than using slow letters. Unnaturally. If the person prepared for Morse Code as stated in the regulation, the Farnsworth Code will zip by. Failure is predictable. No current study materials omit explaining to the student that the Farnsworth spacing will be used in the test. Anyone who ignores that information has set themselves up for failure. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE The ARRL used Farnsworth for years before publishing a notice that they were doing so. Sorry but it was published. Years later. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
"William" wrote in message m... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... "William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... "William" wrote in message om... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message ... Naturally. Farnsworth spaced code for slow word speeds is much easier to copy than using slow letters. Unnaturally. If the person prepared for Morse Code as stated in the regulation, the Farnsworth Code will zip by. Failure is predictable. No current study materials omit explaining to the student that the Farnsworth spacing will be used in the test. Anyone who ignores that information has set themselves up for failure. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE The ARRL used Farnsworth for years before publishing a notice that they were doing so. Sorry but it was published. Years later. Nope published from the beginning. You just didn't look the right places. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
In article et, "Bill Sohl"
writes: "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , Robert Casey writes: Carl R. Stevenson wrote: I don't see the 5 wpm for Extra thing as a problem - because I don't think it has a snowball's chance in [expletive deleted] of getting approved by the FCC. One has to ask the question of what the FCC gets out of requiring code for extras. That's the key question these days for any license requirement these days. You make an excellent point. Good...so far. The problem is that it also applies in other areas, such as "what does FCC get out of protecting hams from BPL interference?" Then will we expect you to make that argument to the FCC when you comment? HECK NO, BILL! The answer to that question could very well be "Gee, we *don't* get anything out of protecting hams from BPL - so we won't!". As the treaty requirement is now gone, and no other service uses it, why bother. Because hams *do* use it. Yet hams do NOT need to pass a CW test to be allowed to use morse. If a "no-code" tech decides to operate morse on VHF, they are free to do so without ever being tested. If the ARRL proposal gets the nod, the same would be true for Novice and Generals on HF also. There are all sorts of things hams are allowed to do without being tested, or without being tested in depth. For example, a ham who passed the tests before, say, PSK-31 was invented is still allowed to use that mode without being tested. But that does not mean no test is needed, or that the current tests should not have PSK-31 in them because the old tests didn't. Some other services use it too, but not to any great extent. And certainly not to any extent that one would expect any ham to need to know code to read or operate with nay of those other services. By the way...what other services are you thinking of? There is still some maritime Morse code use, and it is used for ID in some applications. The FCC isn't in the business of giving out gold stars for the [expletive deleted] Jim, even I am not offended by "hell" It was a joke, Bill ;-) of it. Not about "gold stars". About qualifications. Of course there's differences of opinion on what qualified means. The retention of a 5 wpm test for Extra in light of no code for all others makes even less sense. I disagree. Morse code is the second most popular mode in amateur radio. For even the most privileged license to require no skill in its use makes no sense. Code isn't a lid filter, *No* test is a perfect "lid filter". No test is in any way a lid filter...as you note below. You misunderstand what I wrote. No test is a *perfect* lid filter. Particularly not a test given one time. There are bad doctors, lawyers, engineers, etc., who have been through much more extensive and rigorous testing and education, yet were not filtered out by those testing and education systems. I repeat...NO test is a lid filter. If that's true, why have tests at all? No test is a *perfect* lid filter. as witness 14.313 back in the days of 13wpm to be allowed to operate there. You mean before 1990? (medical waivers) Are you assuming all the 14.313 loonies had code medical waivers? Nope - but neither is it safe to assume that none of them did. Remember this: All those folks on 14.313, 3950, W6NUT, etc., passed *written* exams that included the rules and regulations. Most of them passed multiple written exams, yet they broke the rules anyway. So obviously those written tests aren't a perfect lid filter either. Note that I wrote "perfect lid filter". Shall we dump the rules and regs from those written exams because they didn't do the job? oh wait, that's what NCVEC is proposing for the entry level! A point we agree on. Exactly. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
New ARRL Proposal | Policy | |||
My restructuring proposal | Policy | |||
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | General | |||
What's All Dose Numbers Hams Use | Dx |