Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
Alun wrote: (N2EY) wrote in om: Alun wrote in message ... The ITU requirement for a code test was dropped on July 5th, 2003, so evidently a majority around the world agree with you. A majority of the world's governments that bothered to attend and vote on the issue. And all they did was change the rules so each country can decide for itself what is required - just like the written test. Although a suggested standard for written tests was added at the same WRC, it's really more of a suggestion than anything else. Countries can have wide-ranging interpretations of what's "needed". For example, do you think ol' JY1 and his family had to sit for written and code exams that were equivalent to what US or UK hams had to pass for the same privileges? Or do you think the US writtens compare with, say, those in the UK? If I'm not mistaken, getting a license in some countries *requires* successful completion of an approved training course. (I know the "Foundation" license has this requirement). Doesn't matter if someone is a Ph.D. in EE, they have to attend and pass the ham radio classes to get the license - even though such courses are not part of any treaty and not required in many other countries. Actually, they only have to do the practical assesments, it's not necessary to attend the course. "Practical Assesmants" - as in tests? What, exactly, is required? Imagine the reaction here in the USA if the code test were dropped *and* getting a license required attendance at an approved ham radio training course. Not a "one day wonder" course such as was recently the subject of an article on the ARRL website ("Is Your License Class Efficient" or some such title), but rather a multisession course with quizzes and a final test that were not from a published pool. Point is, just because it's not in the treaty anymore doesn't mean all countries will or should drop it. Another point is that requirements vary from country to country, even with CEPT and S25.5 I think the FCC will drop it, but they move at a snail's pace. They're busy with other things. And perhaps they don't see what all the fuss is about. After all, we're talking about a 5 wpm code test that can be passed in a number of ways, with all sorts of adaptations and accomodations (tone, volume, headphones, typewriter, flashing light, Farnsworth, etc.) Add to this the fact that today there are training aids undreamed of in the past - most of them free or quite inexpensive. I doubt if they even think about any of that Why? Those accomodations and adaptations are all part of the rules. In fact, a lot is left to the VE's judgement. For example, a *sending* test can be substituted for the receiving test if the VEs think it is justified. I didn't think it would survive for as long as a year after it was no longer needed, but it's only nine months so far, so I could still be right. I think you meant 'no longer required by treaty'. Whether something is needed as a license requirement is purely a matter of opinion. I meant both, since I agree with the FCC that it was only needed because of the treaty It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months before we even get to the NPRM stage. That may be, although I still think it will be earlier than that. How do we stand with the pool, BTW? I just did an update. Google up the thread - WK3C wanted to change his date! Most of all, note that the 2000 restructuring did not result in lots of new hams, even though the requirements for all classes of license were lowered and the whole structure simplified. 73 de Jim, N2EY I think abolishing the code test will remove a block in the system, but won't have much effect unless we actively do something to recruit new hams. I don't really see much of that happening right now. What would you suggest? Here's what one ham is doing - and has been doing for years. I don't know this ham personally, but he is right here in EPA. Note the results and the reactions he gets. The following is a direct quote: BEGIN QUOTE I have had the privilege of teaching an after school activity, at the local middle school, for five years. I named it Tune in the World, and it covers many aspects of radio and television, and of course, pushes ham radio. Each year I have had several students, both boys and girls, obtain their license and try to help them continue on the hobby. With this as my basis, I can tell you that 95% of the students were a pleasure to work with and each year the district offers me a nice salary to teach the class and each year I decline it. Yes, it is a lot of work, but the students enjoy it and come away with a very positive idea of ham radio. The attention span varies, but I have found that I have to work at making sure I have an interesting program and that no part of it goes on and on and on. I set the rules at the first meeting and have not had any serious problems. (My son and his friends have been my biggest problem.) If one expects the students to sit in their chairs and listen to a presentation for an hour, after being in school all day, they good luck. I combine power point presentations, live demonstrations, parts of ARRL videos short movies, simple building projects and computers. Interestingly, the students are always VERY interested in the Morse code and seem less so in modes connected with the computer. I am not a STRONG disciplinarian, but we have rules and the kids obey them and something must be going right, a few kids who were in the previous class always take the next year's class and we always have 35 to 40 students. In fact, my biggest problem is that other students want to join the class after it has been on a few weeks. Last year at the last minute, I offer the Radio Merit Badge at Boy Scout Camp. I was given a terrible time and hoped for six kids. I had over 1/4 of the camp at the classes and more wanted to attend. We got a dozen hams out of that one. So, if we want to get new, young hams, then think about reaching out to the Middle Schools, and Scout Camps. Just the camp alone, with eight weeks of camp, would produce between 80 and 100 new hams....with about 400 Scout Camps in the USA, (Cub and Boy Scout) that would mean a very nice increase in our membership. I do agree, that like every previous generation, the new hams need help in getting into the hobby and if nothing else, get their email address and send them info as well as forwarding the address to the ARRL, and local clubs. We can sit here and complain about the lack of young people in our hobby, or we can do something, or expect someone else to do it. Ahhh, it is easier to complain...right? END QUOTE Note particularly when he writes: "the students are always VERY interested in the Morse code and seem less so in modes connected with the computer." A block to the license process? I guess the question is "What are YOU doing to recruit more hams", Alun? The torch is being passed, and it is being passed to those that "won" the code/no code debate. Exactly. I'm pretty new as a Ham, I try to recruit whenever possible, and will welcome new hams regardless of their education. Some people might feel otherwise at this point, having the wind knocked out of their sails, so to speak. My policy has always been that if they have the license, they're a ham. You guys won. You have the ball now. Using the NCI's polled membership as an example, you now want to make all Technicians Generals, and advanced, Extra's. A drastic reduction in entrance requirements seems to be the rationale du jour for the brave new Amateur Radio Service. Exactly! And who can really argue against it? Remember the question "why does someone have to learn code to operate voice"? Well, if you accept that argument, then what do you say when someone says "Why does it take a Technician license to operate legal limit SSB on 2 meters but a General to do the same thing on most of 20 meters?" and "Since the Technician written allows maximum authorized power on all authorized modes allocated to hams above 30 MHz,why is more theory testing needed to do the same thing below 30 MHz?" Etc. Really it's your ball and your game now. Godspeed! Don't hold yer breath, Mike. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote:
It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months before we even get to the NPRM stage. The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the mark). The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't been lighted. This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from without. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote: It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months before we even get to the NPRM stage. The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the mark). I recall that even before any petitions were filed, both of us agreed that if FCC "wanted to", Element 1 could be simply dropped once the treaty changed. I believe the procedure is called "Memorandum Report and Order" (could be some other name) but in any event a lot quicker and simpler than a complete NPRM cycle. The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't been lighted. Right. Could also be that "someone" doesn't want to get in the middle of the catfight and get scratched by both sides. In which case the thing to do is to entertain all sorts of petitions, (we're up to what - 17-18 of them so far?!) collect comments and reply comments and even ex partes on each of them, and allow the whole thing to percolate through the great bureaucratic machine. Then, when the flood of petitions has been reduced to a trickle, issue an NPRM with long comment time (like 98-143). Resolution of the issue could take years - and every new petition just resets the clock. IOW, don't hold yer breath. Lookit how long it took for the "incentive licensing" proposals of the '60s to take place. First proposals in 1963, final plan in 1966, major changes in 1968 and 1969. And they had far fewer proposals back then. This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from without. "Welcome To The Monkey House" ... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N2EY wrote:
"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net... On 7 May 2004 10:23:31 -0700, N2EY wrote: It's been ten months and two days since WRC-2003 ended, and given FCC's method of handling the issue it may well be another ten months before we even get to the NPRM stage. The NCI Petition for Rulemaking gave the FCC a quick out to drop Element 1 immediately, with sufficient legal foundation to do so without an NPRM (I read that part thoroughly, and it's right on the mark). I recall that even before any petitions were filed, both of us agreed that if FCC "wanted to", Element 1 could be simply dropped once the treaty changed. I believe the procedure is called "Memorandum Report and Order" (could be some other name) but in any event a lot quicker and simpler than a complete NPRM cycle. Yup! And do me that is the most damning indictement of the NCI crowd. Simply petitioning to simply dropo Element 1 would have been consistent with what we had heard their aims were all along. But that wasn't quite enough was it? The fact that it hasn't been done means that "someone's" fire hasn't been lighted. Right. Could also be that "someone" doesn't want to get in the middle of the catfight and get scratched by both sides. In which case the thing to do is to entertain all sorts of petitions, (we're up to what - 17-18 of them so far?!) collect comments and reply comments and even ex partes on each of them, and allow the whole thing to percolate through the great bureaucratic machine. Then, when the flood of petitions has been reduced to a trickle, issue an NPRM with long comment time (like 98-143). Resolution of the issue could take years - and every new petition just resets the clock. With all the complicated petitinos out there, I think it is time to add mine. Maybe in a year or so, when the initial furor dies down.... IOW, don't hold yer breath. Lookit how long it took for the "incentive licensing" proposals of the '60s to take place. First proposals in 1963, final plan in 1966, major changes in 1968 and 1969. And they had far fewer proposals back then. I *really* like my prediction in the poll. 8^) This is a phenominon that I am all too familiar with when dealing with The Monkey House whether from within or from without. "Welcome To The Monkey House" ... - Mike KB3EIA - |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Welcome To The Monkey House" ... So how many bananas will this require? :-) |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , daviesl2003
@aol.com says... I think that since Morse Code is old, but not completely useless, I feel it should no longer be made to be learned to gain access to the HF bands. Do I feel that Amateur Radio be made a free for all? No, it should not. There should be a test, but not a really hard test, but not a easy one either. I'll even admit, I'll never get a new Icom 7800, at $10,000.00 - I'll be lucky to maybe get a used 706 at about 400 or 500 or so. I didn't find the series of tests difficult at all. The 5WPM and 13WPM were fairly easy too, as I had time to practice the 5WPM while on a rainy camping trip. Good thing I brought plenty of batteries and a code practice tapes. 13WPM was gotten by actually working HF with what privileges I had as a Tech+. From there, up to 20WPM and all done. I think the biggest detriment to testing now is the publication of the question pools. People can get into the hobby via rote memorization, which by the way is what schools teach kids, not how to think but how to memorize. So over time the hobby is just going to be awash in nitwits, and then fade away. There are too many other options to communicate. |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Tony P. wrote in
: In article , daviesl2003 @aol.com says... I think that since Morse Code is old, but not completely useless, I feel it should no longer be made to be learned to gain access to the HF bands. Do I feel that Amateur Radio be made a free for all? No, it should not. There should be a test, but not a really hard test, but not a easy one either. I'll even admit, I'll never get a new Icom 7800, at $10,000.00 - I'll be lucky to maybe get a used 706 at about 400 or 500 or so. I didn't find the series of tests difficult at all. The 5WPM and 13WPM were fairly easy too, as I had time to practice the 5WPM while on a rainy camping trip. Good thing I brought plenty of batteries and a code practice tapes. I'll grant that 5wpm is relatively easy, but still a lot of work 13WPM was gotten by actually working HF with what privileges I had as a Tech+. From there, up to 20WPM and all done. I'd say it's a bit harder for those with no interest in using CW I think the biggest detriment to testing now is the publication of the question pools. People can get into the hobby via rote memorization, True in some instances, but most people don't have photographic memory which by the way is what schools teach kids, not how to think but how to memorize. So over time the hobby is just going to be awash in nitwits, I don't think so. Not any more than it already is, anyway! and then fade away. There are too many other options to communicate. ....which is another issue altogether. The Internet has hit the hobby pretty hard. |
#9
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alun wrote:
I'll grant that 5wpm is relatively easy, but still a lot of work There's a gaping contradiction buried in there some place. Dave K8MN |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Dave Heil wrote in news:409ABB0C.C1D993E8
@earthlink.net: Alun wrote: I'll grant that 5wpm is relatively easy, but still a lot of work There's a gaping contradiction buried in there some place. Dave K8MN Not atall. Something doesn't have to be hard to take a long time to do. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|