"Bert Craig" wrote in message .net...
"N2EY" wrote in message ... I don't know if anyone offers "General in a day" or "Extra in a day" courses, but I have read of a "GROL in a day" course. Money-back guarantee, IIRC. 73 de Jim, N2EY My avionics professor noted this and developed a series of screening tests to thwart the "one day wonder" syndrome. You mean the "GROL in a day" thing is real? I wasn't sure. Sure, you could study the Q&A pool "guides" and get your tickets. (Both FAA & FCC) However, in order to pass the licensing courses, (Airframe, Powerplant, & Avionics) you had to score = 80 on you "screenings." Of course, the licensing classes were required to earn your sheepskin. At the time, we thought it "$ucked big time," but were thankful during our job interviews when little details like Kirchoff and Thevenin found their way into the interviewer's questions. bwaahaahaa Back in BSEE school, at least one prof used to make us get up and teach - totally at random. He'd put a problem on the board, then ask if we knew how to solve it. If we said yes, he'd toss somebody the chalk and say "show me". (There was no way we'd say no unless it was totally new material). One course (3 trimesters) in grad school had no tests at all. Instead you had to do presentations in front of the whole class, who would ask questions and pick apart your explanations. Back in the bad old days, the way you passed the code receiving test was that the examiner had to find at least a certain number of consecutive correct legible characters on your paper. If he couldn't read them, you failed. And you had to send with a straight key until he said passed or failed. Totally his judgement. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
In article , Mike Coslo writes:
Maybe my brain works differently, but if you have a question pool that has a certain number of questions regarding antennas, and you may be called upon to answer a few of any of those questions, its a lot easier for me to remember 468/[Frequency in mHz] for a dipole, 71.3/[Frequency in mHz] for a 1/4 wave vertical, and a few other quick calcs, than it is to remember the answer to a specific question. Since U.S. amateur radio frequency allocations don't allow any frequencies below the top of the AM BC band, I'd suggest you get your brain to work with MegaHertz (MHz), not milliHertz (mHz). The length of wire needed for a half-wave dipole is, in feet, equal to about 468 divided by the frequency in MegaHertz. A quarter- wave whip length in feet is 234 divided by the frequency in Mega- Hertz. [lengths will be way too short if you use milliHertz...:-) ] But, those values of 468 and 234 aren't correct for free space, yet they are good for wire antennas. The Why of that is handy knowledge that can be applied to other things. BTW, just to make sure that old threads "never die," a DIPOLE has just two elements (what the "di" part stands for). It doesn't have to be exactly a half-wave in length...it can be 5/8 wave, a full wave, most anything.. :-) A person would have to be a little dense to try to do otherwise. And of course, if you know the wavelength of the frequency in question, you can ballpark the answer pretty closely almost without thought. Constants like 2-3-4 or 4-6-8 have "built-in" mnemonics in the form of consecutive digit increases. The Boltzman Constant of 1.38 x 10^-23 doesn't have that digit relationship, quite. Yet, if one works with it often enough (noise voltage, noise figure, etc.) it becomes stamped in the synapses. The resonance formula is F (Hz) = 1 / (2 pi Sqrt (L C)) with L in Henries and C in Farads. Learned that many years ago. Same with inductive reactance, X_L = 2 pi L and capacitive reactance X_C = - 1 / (2 pi C). Those with a programmable calculator can store the 2 pi constant up to 10 digits for handy calculation recall...or try to remember the definitely not-consecutive digit string...or use a transcendental equality to get it or at least pi from a common value. :-) [watch while the knowitalls jump in here with the latter equality...] The lower end of "the bands" (on HF) for amateurs has the progressive relationship of 3.5 - 7 - 14 - 21 - 28 way back in time (AF or after Fessenden)...and for a reason less political and more for convenience of the hams of 1954. [watch here for remarks that aren't really pertinent about one of those bands and 1954...:-)] Please excuse me. I have to study some "important" material, all about the 1900 to 1906 period and how it "applies" to knoweldge in radio of 2000 to 2006 period. That seems to be very necessary to this venue and all must obey the newsgrope protocols... :-) LHA / WMD |
N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ... gotta do some snippage - this thread is getting loooonng I don't doubt it! That is the "cramming route", and it is a horrible way to learn - or not learn - anything. It's only horrible if the student really wants to learn the material. I say such courses actually do new hams a disservice because they are left with a license but not the knowledge or skills they need to use it. Right. All that does is puts the test material into mid-term memory, and from there it goes we know not where. Not only that, the person may not have any real understanding of how to actually get on the air. Heck, I know of a General who's had a license fo years but can't figure out how to get a simple end-fed random wire to work on HF. Well now, on-air experience is another kettle of fish! I've got mixed feelings about that. One thing is for sure - the beginner needs to stay away from rec.radio.amateur.antenna! Well meaning and quite a few astute people there, but they almost had me convinced I'd never get a signal out because of all the "problems". ARRL's mentor program is going to be a good resource for that sort of thing. They've already contacted us about a local new ham that would like some help. I don't know if anyone offers "General in a day" or "Extra in a day" courses, but I have read of a "GROL in a day" course. Money-back guarantee, IIRC. It isn't very smart to do it that way. 800 plus questions just for the Extra license is a *lot* of memorization. Not if you consider that: 1) You don't have to do it all at once. There are three writtens and they don't share pools Its a *lot* of questions between the three pools. Sure but you only need to pass them one at a time. 2) You don't have to memorize the pool - just enough of the correct answers. ? If you are going the rote route, you have to do something, because you don't know which questions will be used. You only need to word-associate the correct answer to each question, not recite them verbatim. Just how many people do you think would do such a thing anyway. Its still easier to simply learn the material. 3) Get ~74% right and you pass. You get the same license as someone who aced it. Just like a passing grade anywhere else Not completely. In many situations things like GPA and class ranking make a difference. In grad school I had to maintain a B average (3.0 GPA) just to stay in school. Wasn't a problem, even though I was working full-time while going to school at night. But this is Ham radio, not graduate school. 4) A guess is as good as gold. True of any multiple guess test I guess. Yep. That's the downside. The upside is that there is no chance for bias or interpretation of an answer - you either got the right one or you didn't. Correct. That's not a minor point, either. Suppose the question is and essay on "how long is a 40 meter dipole, and how do you determine the length?" Is 66 feet the right answer, or 67? If a person puts down 68 feet, is that wrong? How much explanation is enough? And if they give the answer in furlongs? ;^) Remember that simply stating 40 meters is out, because in the Ham section, the correct length at 7 mHz is over 2 and 1/2 feet longer than it is at 7.3 mHz. Now imagine 80 meters, where the diff is almost 17 feet!! Gonna have to use specific frequencies. Essay questions work best for essay type answers. Technical material is much more at home in the world of letters and numbers. A lot of hams I know used "Now You're Talking" as a study guide when they got their Technician's license. That has lots of other stuff besides just the pool. Good for them! Most of the new hams (and old ones too!) I've encountered really do want to learn the material, not just pass the test. There we agree for sure. The learning process for my General and Extra tests was *fun*. Certainly the Extra was more difficult, taking around a week of fairly intense study and reference. But it was still enjoyable. Actually I never formally studied for any FCC license exam. Just read my books, built and used my rigs and went for the test when I thought I was ready. Can a person do one of those license in a day things? I guess. They have my sympathy. Remember in "Family Vacation" when the family was at the Grand Canyon, but Clark Griswald was in a hurry to get to "Wally World"? He bob's his head up and down a few times impatiently, and tells them "Okay let's go". Never saw that one but you describe the scene so perfectly that I didn't have to. One sees this sort of thing in many ways. There's the parent who is so intent on videodocumenting all of their kids' school plays and sport events that they miss actually seeing/experiencing the kid perform or play. There's the air show/railroad buff/museum visitor/tourist who is so intent on getting the picture or marking the checklist of places visited that they don't actually experience the aircraft, trains, museum exhibits or local color. I'm really familiar with that one. As s professional photographer - don't get confused, my job entails several different things - I am sometimes asked to show up with my camera to social events or family weddings. That takes a lot of the fun out of it. Last year was the first time in 25 years I went to a family wedding without being asked to shoot it. WoW, what a difference! I really enjoyed that. Did you know that its kinda fun to dance and talk to other people and socialize? And there's the ham who doesn't experience actual radio operation... They were there, but they missed all the good stuff. Just like crammin' Hams. But we can't dictate how people pass the tests, only that they do pass them. We *can* have an effect. I've taught ham radio classes, code and theory, but I won't teach a "license in a day" class, nor endorse one. And I suspect that almost all new Hams try to do this the right way. Now ya just set yourself up to be a target, saying there's a right way! Yeah, Len just busted my chops! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Len Over 21 wrote: In article , Mike Coslo writes: The implication is that the Olde Wayes are the ONLY way to go. Some think so Their problem, not ours. :-) Times change and people of the now have to change, adapt. Passing the amateur test only yields personal authorization to transmit RF energy on certain frequencies using certain modes and modulations, always abiding by federal regulations thereto. True. I stated a "plain, simple fact" above. :-) I'd say that a "quickie cram course" fulfills getting a license. The license is not, nor was it ever, any "degree" or academic certificate of learning anything. The FCC is not chartered to be an academic organization. Oh, it fulfills it all right. And thousands (hundreds millions?) of university students work it that way. Is that a good thing though? I'll reserve the right to think that if there is a test, I'll figure out what's being tested and go learn it. Some people may or may not want to do that. If they want to cram and forget, so be it. No law says I have to like it! 8^) There's lots of personnel people in companies convinced that ONLY those academic certificates show an job applicant's ability. That's why the medium to large companies needing engineers do the second and final interviews by staff engineers. The academic certificate gets one in the door, so it is valuable. Looks good on a resume (not a curricula vitae) and some use that as a "title." Too many take Titles at face value. That's the old royalty thing coming alive again. But, does a Nobel Laureate biochemistry PhD have the SAME smarts in national socio-politics? Doubtful. [see Linus Pauling] An olde tyme hamme that is a whiz with "CW" can follow the absolute procedures, protocols, and other good things of the 1930s and 1940s and that makes him/her a Great Guru of modern amateur radio? They would say "absolutely yes, yes, yes!" but that is just themselves talking about what they can do. That doesn't necessarily fit what all modern radio amateurs (or prospective amateurs) "should be." And I suspect that almost all new Hams try to do this the right way. What is "the right way?" Is anyone going to lose their job for not doing it "the right way?" Is not passing a ham test going to subtract from college credits? Will your family, friends, neighbors all shun you if you fail a ham test? The "right way" is obviously an opinion. Right! OPINION. Personal opinion, biased by whatever They did. People following the thread will figure out that my version of the right way is to use whatever is given to you as study tools, and that which you don't know, you go find out about. Good answer! So far, with only 108 years of life as a communications tool, radio has been constantly growing, expanding, pushing states of the art beyond several plateaus. It hasn't stood still to allow everyone to catch their breath let along become stagnant on "knowing all the answers." New questions/answers keep appearing all the time. What was once the "best thing/way to do" has given way to numerous things/ways to do, not once but many times. One has to keep at the self-learning process to keep up. Schools can't keep up to date though many try. Who knows, I'm not an OF.... yet. Hope I eventually get to be one because the alternative ain't much fun. OF-ism is a mental thing, not a chronological thing. A good example is the fabulous Eric June who once graced this news- grope in a series of arguments with Cecil Moore. Two Extras with very different outlooks. Cecil was (is?) flexible despite being older. June was an inflexible thirtysomething...finally, grudgingly conceded defeat. Cecil has been around for a long time but one cannot call him an OF in thoughts or opinions...though many have tried. :-) The "alternative" awaits us all. Even the morseodists. No sweaty-dah. Might as well learn to live with it. :-) LHA / WMD |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:22 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com