|
What should a license test for ham radio demand knowledge of anyway?
So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license?
As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. What else should be here? |
In article , Robert Casey
writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Is the purpose of the safety questions to protect a ham from himself, or to protect those around him? Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. Agreed. What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices - Morse code tests 73 de Jim, N2EY |
N2EY wrote:
In article , Robert Casey writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air. And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering requirements improve something? Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Is the purpose of the safety questions to protect a ham from himself, or to protect those around him? The answer is yes. Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. Agreed. What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices - Morse code tests Oh-oh! ;^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices This would be an extension of distingushing between malacious interefernce and the "facts of life" on HF ham bands (that nobody has exclusive rights to a specific frequency and that both parties involved in QRM move away (up or down) in frequency to clear each other. And that some bands have unexpected patterns of propagation (like 10m has the usual circle of nearby coverage, then a ring of no coverage, and another ring of "skip". And thus you can QRM the reception of a ham in the skip zone trying to copy someone you can't hear. So you would then understand why someone seems to be talking to himself.). Also some basic knowledge of the "syntax" of a QSO. XX#XXX, this is WA2ISE. - Morse code tests Why this today? Back in the vacuum tube era, morse code (CW) transmitters and receivers were simple but required human encode and decode. Today we have digital technology and such for automated encode and decode of modes more robust than old fashined CW. Morse can be a fun mode for those interested, but should it be required? |
And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. It's been done. Namely the old Novice on HF. Albeit at lower power, a novice still had to contend with TVI and RFI issues. Sometimes he had help from an Elmer. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done harm to myself at 50 watts Except for unusual propagation, 5 watts won't go far. You won't be heard and you won't be able to play with the bigger dogs. That could be a serious turn off to a beginner. "Nobody will talk to me". Running 100w can still require patience in a crowded contest environment. |
Robert Casey wrote:
And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. It's been done. Namely the old Novice on HF. Albeit at lower power, a novice still had to contend with TVI and RFI issues. Sometimes he had help from an Elmer. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done harm to myself at 50 watts Except for unusual propagation, 5 watts won't go far. You won't be heard and you won't be able to play with the bigger dogs. That could be a serious turn off to a beginner. "Nobody will talk to me". Running 100w can still require patience in a crowded contest environment. Agreed, Robert. My actual position on the RF and high voltage is "test 'em for it, and let 'em play with it". If we don't test 'em for it, then we shouldn't let them play with *anything* they can hurt themselves with. Some of the proposals want to limit the beginners power levels, ostensibly for safety reasons. They rationalize that if we reduce power levels, or even have bizarre requirements such as a "voltage to the finals" limit for the newbies, this will even serve to reduce the questions needed on the test, making it easier to get a license. I wonder how many prospective hams have ever stated "I was going to become a Ham, but a 50 question test? I absolutely refuse to take a test with more than 30 questions!" oops, I digress..... Hams should be taught from the get-go about RF and high voltage safety. We operate with high voltages, and if we homebrew (ohh noo, that is another thing some proposals want to eliminate for the young'uns) we will possibly have some serious voltage running around. And the transistor and IC generations should probably be reminded of that. I think that elimination or even reduction of the number of test questions by eliminating the RF safety questions verges on criminal negligence by the parties involved. there has been a precedent set in what we have now. I wonder if the ARRL might feel itself at the pointy end of a lawsuit (remember, they are involved in the makeup of the tests) if it reduces that requirement. After all, someone at some point felt it was a good idea to put those questions in. That is why I believe if we're putting them out to play without adequate learning, we must limit that power to something that is not likely at all to hurt them. - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air. OK, fine. Pretty basic stuff like what a MHz is and such. And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. That all depends on what is actually in the tests. The old Novice test was around for almost a half century and turned many, many hams loose on HF - me included. With a 20-30 question written test and 5 wpm Morse, often using homebrew, kit or converted-surplus gear. And for most of that time, the new ham had to tune the gear up in order to transmit, and had to figure out things like how to build a transmit-receive system to go between the separate tx and rx. We did OK. Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering requirements improve something? It only works if the privileges are reduced accordingly. Which is a key part of the "NewNovice" concept. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and In the bad old days I was turned loose with high voltages and up to 75 watts. I'm still here and the house didn't burn down. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Is the purpose of the safety questions to protect a ham from himself, or to protect those around him? The answer is yes. HAW! Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. Agreed. What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices - Morse code tests Oh-oh! ;^) I miss Sam Kinison too. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"Robert Casey" wrote in message ... What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices This would be an extension of distingushing between malacious interefernce and the "facts of life" on HF ham bands (that nobody has exclusive rights to a specific frequency and that both parties involved in QRM move away (up or down) in frequency to clear each other. And that some bands have unexpected patterns of propagation (like 10m has the usual circle of nearby coverage, then a ring of no coverage, and another ring of "skip". And thus you can QRM the reception of a ham in the skip zone trying to copy someone you can't hear. So you would then understand why someone seems to be talking to himself.). Also some basic knowledge of the "syntax" of a QSO. XX#XXX, this is WA2ISE. - Morse code tests Why this today? Back in the vacuum tube era, morse code (CW) transmitters and receivers were simple but required human encode and decode. Today we have digital technology and such for automated encode and decode of modes more robust than old fashined CW. Morse can be a fun mode for those interested, but should it be required? Each and every mode will have conditions under which it will out perform others. When there is a high static level and phase shifts induced by severe auroras, voice fails and so do all computer aided digital modes currently in existence. This was proven last fall with the large number of major solar flares we had last fall. Code with human encode/decode held up longer than any other mode under that set of conditions. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air. OK, fine. Pretty basic stuff like what a MHz is and such. And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. That all depends on what is actually in the tests. The old Novice test was around for almost a half century and turned many, many hams loose on HF - me included. With a 20-30 question written test and 5 wpm Morse, often using homebrew, kit or converted-surplus gear. And for most of that time, the new ham had to tune the gear up in order to transmit, and had to figure out things like how to build a transmit-receive system to go between the separate tx and rx. We did OK. Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering requirements improve something? It only works if the privileges are reduced accordingly. Which is a key part of the "NewNovice" concept. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and In the bad old days I was turned loose with high voltages and up to 75 watts. I'm still here and the house didn't burn down. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Is the purpose of the safety questions to protect a ham from himself, or to protect those around him? The answer is yes. HAW! Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. Agreed. What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices - Morse code tests Oh-oh! ;^) I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. - Mike KB3EIA |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: N2EY wrote: Mike Coslo wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air. OK, fine. Pretty basic stuff like what a MHz is and such. And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. That all depends on what is actually in the tests. The old Novice test was around for almost a half century and turned many, many hams loose on HF - me included. With a 20-30 question written test and 5 wpm Morse, often using homebrew, kit or converted-surplus gear. And for most of that time, the new ham had to tune the gear up in order to transmit, and had to figure out things like how to build a transmit-receive system to go between the separate tx and rx. We did OK. Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering requirements improve something? It only works if the privileges are reduced accordingly. Which is a key part of the "NewNovice" concept. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and In the bad old days I was turned loose with high voltages and up to 75 watts. I'm still here and the house didn't burn down. 75 watts input meant about 50 watts output. Only 3 dB down from 100 W. Since then, the Novice power ilmit was more than doubled - the proposed 100 W limit is actually *less* than current Novices and Tech Pluses are allowed. This doesn't mean all the RF safety questions are removed! It means the RF safety basics are left in. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Is the purpose of the safety questions to protect a ham from himself, or to protect those around him? The answer is yes. HAW! The serious part of all this is that we must avoid absurdities like the NCVEC "30 volt rule". Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. Agreed. What else should be here? - Basic knowledge and skills for the basic level, more advanced stuff for the higher license levels. - Operating skills and practices - Morse code tests Oh-oh! ;^) I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. Oh yes. He's with Chris Farley now. Fortunately George Carlin is still with us. And while we're on the subject - didja see Bob Dylan in the Victoria's Secret commercial? Surreal, as dear departed N0BK would say. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Subject: What should a license test for ham radio demand knowledge of
From: Mike Coslo Date: 4/6/2004 6:48 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: N2EY wrote: I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. My favorite Samisim was about just finding a woman he absolutely hated and buying her a house...forget all the yelling and screaming between "I do" and "Get lost"...! ! ! 73 Steve, K4YZ |
|
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: snippage Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. Oh yes. He's with Chris Farley now. Fortunately George Carlin is still with us. And while we're on the subject - didja see Bob Dylan in the Victoria's Secret commercial? Surreal, as dear departed N0BK would say. Wasn't that predicted by Nostradamus as a sign of the end times? No, I didn't see it, and well no I don't want to. Love Dylan and the VS girls are noting to sneeze at, but combining them together is kinda like having the pope with the old "Solid Gold Dancers"! 8^0 - Mike KB3EIA - |
Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote:
Subject: What should a license test for ham radio demand knowledge of From: Mike Coslo Date: 4/6/2004 6:48 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: N2EY wrote: I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. My favorite Samisim was about just finding a woman he absolutely hated and buying her a house...forget all the yelling and screaming between "I do" and "Get lost"...! ! ! Was he the one that did the "hallway sex" bit? - Mike KB3EIA - |
N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... N2EY wrote: In article , Robert Casey writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Agreed. But how much is needed is the tough question. How much is enough? I think that "enough" is testing that will allow the prospective ham to get enough knowledge to know where to start to get a station on the air. OK, fine. Pretty basic stuff like what a MHz is and such. And here is the conundrum IMO. We are now considering allowing hf access to a batch of new amateurs. At the same time, we are talking about s significant (IMO) reduction in the qualifications for that access. So unless the General test element meant and means absolutely *nothing*, we are going to launch a lot of people onto HF with even less qualifications than we have now. That all depends on what is actually in the tests. The old Novice test was around for almost a half century and turned many, many hams loose on HF - me included. With a 20-30 question written test and 5 wpm Morse, often using homebrew, kit or converted-surplus gear. Before we go too much further, I need to say that I don't think all that highly of the old Novice test. When we are talking about people of yore and now, I think that most people that decided to go for a license at that time had some inkling that the tube equipment usually used some pretty high voltages. Now the highest voltage most people use is the 120 volts coming out of the wall socket. Inside most electronics, the voltages are pretty low. But that is for *most* equipment. A fun part of the hobby is operating old tube equipment. Most amplifiers are still tube driven. Lots of *hurty* things. And I think that times have changed enough that we should coach the newbies on that. I like to lump HV and RF in the same general area. Many of the concepts for staying safe around V can translate over to RF. Of course the newbie needs to know that RF has a nasty habit of getting into places that won't be so obvious. And for most of that time, the new ham had to tune the gear up in order to transmit, and had to figure out things like how to build a transmit-receive system to go between the separate tx and rx. We did OK. Of course. And I think your pre-exposre to the concept of high voltages running around inside the equipment went a long way towards making it okay. Is this doing them a service? That's what I wonder about. I doubt many people would argue for turning out more Electrical engineers by drastically reducing the requirements to be one. Yes I know that an engineer is a professional, but my point stands. How does lowering requirements improve something? It only works if the privileges are reduced accordingly. Which is a key part of the "NewNovice" concept. I dunno, Jim. Less is more? Newspeakish to me. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. Agreed - or a reduced power level for some classes. If we don't test for safety, I would support a reduced power of 5 watts. QRP level. I've done arm to myself at 50 watts, and In the bad old days I was turned loose with high voltages and up to 75 watts. I'm still here and the house didn't burn down. All this talk makes me want to homebrew something with tubes. (I've never done that outside of one project in school) - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Steve Robeson K4CAP wrote: Subject: What should a license test for ham radio demand knowledge of From: Mike Coslo Date: 4/6/2004 6:48 PM Central Standard Time Message-id: N2EY wrote: I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. My favorite Samisim was about just finding a woman he absolutely hated and buying her a house...forget all the yelling and screaming between "I do" and "Get lost"...! ! ! Was he the one that did the "hallway sex" bit? - Mike KB3EIA - He was the one in "Back to School" with Rodney Dangerfield. He played the History Prof. |
And with Carlin, also Gallagher and some other comedians who are "creative
thinkers" who get you to actually think, and don't always resort to the "F" word, except for effect. I am a huge fan of comedy, as well as collecting antique radio broadcasts like Jack Benny etc. Ryan KC8PMX I miss Sam Kinison too. Heh! remember his "why do they live in the desert" sthick from the first gulf war? Profane, but hilarious. Oh yes. He's with Chris Farley now. Fortunately George Carlin is still with us. And while we're on the subject - didja see Bob Dylan in the Victoria's Secret commercial? Surreal, as dear departed N0BK would say. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
In article , Robert Casey
writes: So what should a candidate know to get a beginner, and upper level license? As we are allowed to modify and homebrew equipment, we should have on the tests questions on how such equipment works, and how to identify problem areas like RFI, TVI, harmonic emissions and such. Also RF safety issues, as we are allowed kilowatt levels of power. electrical safety techniques, as much equipment use hazardous voltages (also we should know not to wear wedding rings and such near car batteries, a short thru a ring can burn a finger off). Rules and regs. Like no business traffic. What constitutes malicious interference and what is just normal life on the HF bands when conditions are crowded. Some knowledge of modes and bandwidth, especially why you don't want to set your rig on 14.349 in USB mode. Basically, we should know how not to trash the RF spectrum and screw up other users. What else should be here? We should know how to utilize a highly practical, effective, efficient, and universal non-voice means of communication which doesn't require any computerized hardware to encode/decode the messages, and makes the best possible use of the least possible power. This mode is, of course, Morse/CW. It should be learned at progressive levels of 5, 13, and 20 WPM for an entry level, intermediate, and full-privilege licenses, respectively. Those who disagree are dumbed-down whiners whose opinions are invalid. Anyone who receives a license without having passed the 3-level Morse code proficiency learning requirement is incapable of providing a true emergency backup communications service to the public, and therefore is not of any value to the ARS. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:54 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com