Dee D. Flint wrote:





This means that all the tests need to be harder as ordinary youths even
below the teen age level regularly pass the Technician and General class
exams. With a little extra elmering, some pass the Extra exam.



Maybe all those "ordinary" kids you see passing those tests are the
smart ones. Beavis
and Butthead probably never show up at a testing session, even if they
understood
what ham radio was about, and not confuse it with CB. And no wisecracks
that ham
radio is becoming like CB, okay?.....

On Tue, 13 Apr 2004 23:10:51 GMT, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:


"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
:
snip

And legal CB operators are not supposed to
talk internationally.

I know there's a distance limitation...but what about a
legal CBer in the USA talking to a legal Canadian CBer
over a distance of less than the specifid threshold limit?

I'm pretty sure that cross-border communications between Canada and
the US were illegal back in the 70s when I had a CB
license.....apparently, that restriction no longer exists.

In the US, Part 95 subpart D disallows International communications,
*except* between US and Canadian CB stations.

http://www.noard.com/citizensband.htm

On the Canadian side, RIC-18 mentions no specific restrictions on
International communications at all. There is a limitation on
communicating beyond the 'normal range' of the station (i.e. other
than by ground wave transmission only) which pretty much rules out
International comms except with anywhere but the US, geographically
speaking.

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.nsf/vwapj/ric18.pdf/$FILE/ric18.pdf


Cheers,
Bill K2UNK


73, Leo

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Indeed, if we support the lowered power limits, and all, is there a
good argument for simply letting Novices on the air with no
requirements? Learn as they go?

- Mike KB3EIA -

If the new "Novice" or "Communicator" proposals get instituted, I will
tell
any beginning class that I teach that we are going to go all the way to
General. It won't be worth my time to teach otherwise.

Do you really believe that bringing in a new ham at the
proposed novice level isn't worth it?

My goal or objective would be to encourage
as many new people, especially kids, to get a novice license
and just see how it goes from there.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

It is worthwhile to encourage them to become a ham yes and I will do so.
But from the discussion of what is proposed to be on the "new novice" or
communicator tests, a one evening two hour session will do to cover the
material in more depth than they will need. I'm not going to set up a
single session one hour class. It's too much hassle to get a room, books,
etc for that. I would willingly tutor individuals at my home for that
license for a few hours but will not run a class for it. I'd set up the
class so the first week, we discuss that study guide which they will have
been asked to read in advance. We will discuss any questions that they may
have on it. The remaining class weeks would cover the material to go on to
General.

I want to bring new hams into the hobby but I'm simply not going to spend my
time teaching material that simple. Nothing against the people or even
really against the material. I simply expect a better return on my
investment of time. I will not get that teaching material aimed at the
elementary school level when I am teaching adults. To me the satisfaction
comes in seeing their faces light up when we've conquered a difficult
chapter.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...

I was thinking of the part where you have to decide when and what to
add, multiply, etc.

Most 3 credit classes are harder, but I had a few that were
"give-aways". Maybe
I should say "as hard as an easier hour test taken early in a freshman
college class".

Robert,

All I can add here is that any Ohm's law problems I've seen have perhaps two
resistors in parallel with the combination in series with a third. That
hardly compares with first year college material with a modest network of
resistors (perhaps 12 or so) and a couple of different emf sources thrown
in - and you solve for the current and direction in one of the resistors
(first year, D.C. It gets worse, of course LOL).

Ah .... 1st year physics. Hmmm ... calculus was involved here. I don't
ever recall anything of that magnatude in an amateur radio exam. I also
doubt a 7 year old would likely pass such physics exams.

While I have no problem with the elimination of Morse code, nor have I a
problem with an easy entry level license, I am rather perplexed with the
continued insistance that the tests are too hard. I am also somewhat
surprised at a free ride of either codeless techs or tech plusses being
moved to general. The only techs which got the free ride were the techs
from years ago who took the general theory. The only difference was the 5
words per minute vs the 13 words per minute of the general class license.
When the code requirement was dropped to 5 words per minute, the old techs
had already passed the entire exam for new general class licensees. Hmmmm
.... come to think of it, they didn't get a 'free' ride - they passed the
same elements as newly issued general class licenses.

Just my thoughts ...


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/04

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...











The Tech exam is what, roughly equivalent to an honors level high school
physics
exam and history exam (I mention "history' as that requires memorizing
random
information, names and dates equivalent to frequency bands and such
rules). Not
the inner city non-honors public schools where if you can write your
name you
graduate)... The Extra exam might be roughly equivalent to an exam for
a 3 credit
college class.




Not hardly. The Tech and General exams are no harder than the material
that
students are learning in junior high if they are going to even a halfway
decent school. The Tech and General exams require nothing harder than
adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing.

I was thinking of the part where you have to decide when and what to
add, multiply, etc.

If you read the problems in the question pool, they are no more difficult
than the word problems that students are required to learn to work in 6th
grade and down. They just substitute things like amps, watts, etc for
apples and pennies.


I certainly hope our junior
high kids of average intelligence and standard class room training can
handle these basic math functions. The Extra exam couldn't hold a candle
to
the exams that I had to take in college for a 3 credit course.

Most 3 credit classes are harder, but I had a few that were
"give-aways". Maybe
I should say "as hard as an easier hour test taken early in a freshman
college class".


Possibly but that will also depend on the subject they are majoring and
minoring in.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Jason Hsu wrote:
Is the No-Code Technician license THAT hard to get? During the years
when both the Novice and No-Code Technician licenses were available
for new hams, the new hams (including myself) overwhelmingly chose the
No-Code Technician.

Not difficult at all. Many people have taken and passed the test. I
can't think of any good arguments for reducing it.

Think of a very basic entry level that more than just extraordinary
bright kids can take and pass.

In one of my recent classes, I had an 8 year old boy of ordinary grades and
ordinary intelligence take and pass the Technician. Sorry but the test does
NOT need to be easier. He made it on the second try. This is no worse than
many adults.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
Dee D. Flint wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Indeed, if we support the lowered power limits, and all, is there a
good argument for simply letting Novices on the air with no
requirements? Learn as they go?

- Mike KB3EIA -



If the new "Novice" or "Communicator" proposals get instituted, I will
tell
any beginning class that I teach that we are going to go all the way to
General. It won't be worth my time to teach otherwise.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



I would agree, *if* you mean that you will do a class where people,
partway in your
class, get the "Novice" or whatever it's called, and then continue on to
General.
How to enforce "no drop-outs" is another question....


Sure no problem with them taking the Novice as they feel like it. It might
even be beneficial as they will, as did we all, struggle a bit to get on the
air. What could be more convenient than going to a class you are already
enrolled in? I would stress the point that they can bring questions to
class as it will benefit all the other students. As to enforcing
attendance, we give our classes through the Parks and Recreation Department,
etc. They charge for the use of the room. Thus the students have to pay a
registration fee and that must be for the whole course that goes directly to
the Parks and Recreation depart. So some will stay just because they have
paid for the entire thing.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
Dee D. Flint wrote:





This means that all the tests need to be harder as ordinary youths even
below the teen age level regularly pass the Technician and General class
exams. With a little extra elmering, some pass the Extra exam.



Maybe all those "ordinary" kids you see passing those tests are the
smart ones. Beavis
and Butthead probably never show up at a testing session, even if they
understood
what ham radio was about, and not confuse it with CB. And no wisecracks
that ham
radio is becoming like CB, okay?.....

Actually we've had "Beavis & Butthead" and some even less bright. They
still passed.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Robert Casey" wrote in message
...
Jason Hsu wrote:




Granted, a No-Code Novice (if it existed)

Still tougher than a CB license (if they still did those).... ;-)

And cheaper than a GMRS license

Just a side note - I was shopping at Sam's club yesterday and they had some
small Motorola HTs. 5 watt output with a number of channels (it advertised
that some of these channels were FRS channels). I read both sides of that
bubble packed pair of radios (they were packaged as pairs, plus a recharger)
and nowhere could I find the mention of the necessity of a license. At 5
watts and capability of a number of other channels, the user should (but, of
course, won't) obtain a GMRS license. All they know is that FRS radios are
often advertised as 1 or 2 miles range - and this one is advertised as a 5
mile range. More talk power. As long as some companies make money, I guess
this is a very minor point.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.656 / Virus Database: 421 - Release Date: 4/9/04

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
[snip]
While I have no problem with the elimination of Morse code, nor have I a
problem with an easy entry level license, I am rather perplexed with the
continued insistance that the tests are too hard. I am also somewhat
surprised at a free ride of either codeless techs or tech plusses being
moved to general. The only techs which got the free ride were the techs
from years ago who took the general theory. The only difference was the 5
words per minute vs the 13 words per minute of the general class license.
When the code requirement was dropped to 5 words per minute, the old techs
had already passed the entire exam for new general class licensees. Hmmmm
... come to think of it, they didn't get a 'free' ride - they passed the
same elements as newly issued general class licenses.

Just my thoughts ...



And keep in mind that that upgrade isn't exactly "free". They have to take
the time and energy to find or get the necessary proof of license, find a
test session, show up at said test session, and process the paperwork.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE