|
"bb" wrote in message
ups.com... snipped My comments with respect to the NPRM were, "What I fear most about changing the Morse Code exam requirements is a lack of enforcement, and what I fear most about maintaining the status quo is a lack of enforcement." Everyone is entitled to their opinion. You may have a valid concern! You're right, it will take a while, even if they were to decide to write a NPRM to do such. If these people jumped into Alligator infested waters as fast as they do rumors, the population would take a sudden drop. I'm not a "lover" of code, but I have hold a license which required code. Ditto. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a test. 2 weeks is not long, It may be impossible for some. I learned it over a considerably longer period of time with frequent practice. you probably drove longer on a permit before being allowed to drive on your own. Probably studied the book longer too! It takes little effort. I disagree. It took a great effort. For some - it may! One argument I've heard, is that those musically inclined pick it up quicker than others, yet I knew some who "were" musically inclined and claimed to have a hell of a time with it. Reason? I don't know. I can't get inside their head. Steve can. He can even have them incarcerated with a simple phone calls. The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have learned the code in under a week? Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now an Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s. Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed myself. That wasn't my point. My point is that everyone is different, and the length of time it takes to learn 5WPM varies greatly. The time it takes to learn 20WPM could be lifetimes. Not everyone is even capable of 13WPM. I agree. As I've said, I learned the code well enough in 2 weeks to pass the exam but it didn't / doesn't make me a "CW" king. Time isn't really the factor here. My main point was (and I do know others who learned code quickly), you "have to start". I've heard people spout out - I can't learn those dashes and dots. Problem is, they never even tried. Maybe as kids - they may have had a set of cheap walkie talkies with the code on them or perhaps seen some code characters listed or heard them somewhere on tv or so. Did they "really" try to learn it? Nine chances out of ten - I'm willing to bet - NO. You have to "try". If you can't do it alone, seek out the help of one who has or any of the courses available and give it a chance. I will admit, some of the courses I have heard - sucked. They tended to turn me away from the desire to listen. One reason, one of the course tapes had an "echo" to it. Try listening to that for a while. If you were ever in a sub and heard sonar for 8 hours a day or more, you'd have felt right at home. So, yes - some things "can" drive you away from wanting to learn it. If one method doesn't do it, find one that will. If you're interested enough, you'll do what it takes to get through it. Time used to be a factor at one time as a license had to be upgraded in a certain time, so it sort of placed those who were lagging - in a bit of a turmoil. I guess that was the FCC's way of saying - you can do it if you put your mind to it. They kind of pushed you along or out of the way. Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such. Besides, at that time, I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium. I've been told that is absolutely no excuse. Nothing in your personal or professional life can be more important than learning the code. Hmmmmmm....... the only other one I can think of more important, is eating! Most recommendations are 15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a week. I used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than others, that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn ANYTHING. You can't absorb it through osmosis. Back to the timing thing, I hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time they were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram". They've finally left the group. They were paid to learn the code, and they kept getting paid even if they failed. Of course, insteading of doing intercept comms, they were peeling potatoes. Maybe you never will use it again. Perhaps. I've found little use for it so far. Maybe once I'm an old fart, have loads of time, and wax nostalgic for things that never were, I'll take it up and enjoy it, and demand that all learn it. Probably the same age bracket as me. I do listen to call signs now and then on the scanner to pick out the services they represent - if I don't immediately know who the service is. I do listen some times to code on the H.F. Bands. I don't dislike the code. It was difficult for me to make the few QSO's that I did make as a novice. I'd like to pick it up again someday. There are many things you learn in life and may never use again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the skeletal system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't mean they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated. But, it was "required". It's not a big deal people. Once you get past the "do I have to" and start doing it, you'll amaze yourself at how fast and easy it can be. Indeed. I never had the "do I have to?" attitude as there was no code-free license when I became a ham. Yet it took me about 9 weeks of daily practice. And you stuck with it!!!!!!!! You didn't quit, and it got you where you wanted to be. OR had to be - for your class of license. 2 weeks, 9 weeks, so what... you did it. A milestone to be proud of. No one can fault you for that effort. My ex-wife certainly can. So could my ex wife, but then again, with her being divorced for the third time in few years, I could care less what her opinion was of me. I gave my 50% and thats all I was worried about. I have no guilt - there. I DO use code now and then, but not daily like many others do. Everyone has their own thing. Some are into Packet, RTTY, AMTOR, etc, I'm not... To each his own. But we all had to learn "something" about those modes to pass an exam. cl Use it all you want. I'm against the Code Exam as an unnecessary government requirement. Funny thing is, we're all arguing pros and cons and in the end, it won't matter. WE do not have control. So, if we're going to debate the issues we have no control over, may as well keep it clean. Hardly any of us know the other and it isn't worth making enemies over. Certainly not worth name calling.... Whether I'm right or wrong, I do value opposing view points. Everyone has a right to his/her own opinion. It sure will be interesting to see how it all unfolds. I think in the end, we both know the answer to that. Pro or con, it is a matter of time. May be a year, may be 5, but it will come to pass. cl I don't think that's 100% correct. You and me don't write the FCC regulations, but the FCC looked to the ARRL to put forth modern exam requirements. The ARRL movers and shakers wrung their hands and bit "thier" knuckles and said that there was no concensus. So the FCC plowed ahead with modernization, and the ARRL came up with reductions in the Morse requirements lickety split. Amazing, all that. So in the end, if more folks has been exposed to viewpoints other than the ARRL's, there just might have been a concensus. Just my opinions, of course, but by tomorrow I'll probably be labeled a liar, a homosexual, and maybe even a horse thief. Not by me, I don't have a problem with opposing view points. You could be right, I could be wrong. It is good to debate. Name calling doesn't get it done. That is what kills me, many do that because they can't do a good debate. So what if we keep opposing each new point made, who cares? Just makes more to chat about. As to the ARRL, at one point - "I" thought and perhaps I read it somewhere - the FCC was getting fed up with the ARRL always trying to influence them. I'm not sure what is going on there anymore. The ARRL ****ed me off a long time ago and ever since then, it didn't matter to me whether they sank or swam. The local representative was one of the most cocky - arrogant people to walk the face of the earth. He was "supposed" to be at the Hamfest to meet people and to discuss things. He blew off most of those who approached him. Instead - always turning to his friend to talk to him. Well excuse US for the interruption......... With representation like that, who needs them? That wasn't the only issue. Their arrogance got the best of me and some others I know - a few times. I don't follow them anymore - like a dog on a leash. Funny, my brother just got an invitation the other day - to join. First one he got in a long time. I said - must need some money! The ARRL doesn't speak for me. Actually, I don't think they speak for themselves anymore. In the end, unless we continue to get government protection, big business will win. Money talks and bull **** walks. cl |
"bb" wrote in message
ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination That's what you ask in here for! There are VEs in here, myself included - who can give guidance to those who ask. cl |
"bb" wrote in message
ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination VEs can accommodate you if special testing is needed - BUT - if "special equipment" is needed, it is up to the examinee to provide it - the VEs are not liable for that. All Handicapped applicants "should" call ahead to make special arrangements so that any extra VE team members if needed - can be there to assist, or whatever other needs - can be met. For example, if I have a blind applicant, which I had - I can't read his test to him in the sitting of others taking the exams. That would be distracting. We instead - gave this person - his exam - after the others were done. "We" did not have any "Braille" equipment. I'm not even sure if such equipment exists which would have read the text to him - if fed in. IF so, it would have been up to him to supply it. Another case required an hour or so of prior preparation of materials and equipment. We've had other cases where special needs had to be met, but again - it was by prior arrangement. There is no other way to do it. For them to just show up - we simply wouldn't have been able to accommodate them. I don't know of any VEs who would shy away from testing the handicapped, but you have to work with them too. They don't know your problems until you tell them. Then - they can work with you to get you through the exam process. Even if you failed, they will most likely - now knowing of you and your condition - offer to help you learn it for the next time. Maybe even help set up a station. IF you have a tone problem as I've seen the example given, it could take some time and equipment to get "a" tone for you to be entirely comfortable with. IF for some reason - the computer can't do it, then perhaps a taped exam fed through a mixer to acquire the proper tone. OR maybe even a test - sent by a code practice oscillator set to a pitch - suitable. The code test may have to be broken down to allow the person to absorb the sound if they can't "hear" it properly. In this case, a CPO would work with a buzzer - to "feel" the characters - as an example. Perhaps - light flashing - if the tones are not able to be heard at all. Any number of issues could be prevalent and though there are ways to deal with them, it would be hard pressed to try and do it with a "walk in" handicapped applicant. Walk in - in case your not aware - means unannounced - in regard to Ham exams. cl |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "cl" wrote in message o.verio.net... I hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time they were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram". Navy RM "A" School, the basic school which trained Navy Radiomen, was 13-weeks long. Morse practice was 3 hours per day, 4 days per week, but students could come in after-hours for additional practice. Graduation requirement was to be able to copy 5-letter coded groups at 18WPM for 10 minutes, with 3 uncorrected errors allowed. 73, de Hans, K0HB Thanks! cl |
bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: wrote: Sorry, according to many in here you have to approach it as THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN YOUR LIFE!!! Actually, Lennie, YOU are the only one making that assertion. Nope, in-between homosexual and pedophilia inuendo, you have made such assertions. So that makes lie #25. Then here's yet another chance for you to prove yourself, Brain, and provide SOME sample of a post I have EVER made that asserts that ANYthing having to to with Amateur Radio must be approched as the "MOST IMPORTANT THING" in ANYone's life. You said it exists. Let's see it. Steve, K4YZ |
"bb" wrote in message
ups.com... cl wrote: Pure laziness. Licenses should be "earned" not given away. People are least likely to respect something "given" to them. The bands are already showing signs of deterioration from people who just don't care. cl So how is Bruce? Bruce? "I" don't know of any "Bruce".............. Being my message was included, I have to think you were asking me. cl |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
... cl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... cl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... cl wrote: which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a test. Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get to 5 wpm. I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people. I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a lot of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid. - Mike KB3EIA - Ok.... It took "me" 2 weeks, I know others who learned it quickly, but I can't provide a time frame. Yes, code "can" be harder for others to pick up. I don't doubt that for a minute. Point is, you have to put one foot in front of the other and stick with it, to get down the path to learn it. Yup. I must confess that I kind of drew you and some folks into this a bit, because I have some significant hearing defects. Several 60+ db notches,esp at the mid and higher frequencies and two separate tones of tinnitis, a different frequency for each ear. I haven't had a quiet moment for 30 years or more. When conversing with people, I read lips. I understand vey much the situation of the fellow whose wife has notches in her hearing.(conjecture alert) I would also say I suspect that the constant noise in my ears has turned of parts of my brain that process sound. And that is probably why I had such a hard time (conjecture alert off) All I can say for teh folks with hearing problems is that study, practice, and most importantly, relaxation during copying is the key. I can only imagine what it must be like with a significant hearing deficit. I can not and will not put anyone down who has such a problem. It really isn't so bad. In fact, it is sometimes hilarious, when I badly misinterpret what someone says. My family usually tells people of my "predicament" before I meet them, when they have the chance, so they don't think I'm whacked when I give them some off the wall response! 8^) Though there are some sleepless nights when the ears are really roaring.... So I just wear a headset to Op, and turn the sound up...... As to how they can learn code, there are many ways, but I guess it comes down to whatever works best for that person. Not everyone's condition is the same. I've tested folks with some difficulties, I followed the guidelines as given by the VEC/FCC. There are ways to test folks with such problems, but getting them to be able to learn the code - is the first hurdle. Does 6 months of constant hard effort indicate the desire to "stick with it"? Yes, I'd say it certainly does! You are to be commended for doing such. You're not a "quitter". And from the sounds of things, you didn't "whine" about it either. Whining doesn't help anything. And I am proud of having learned Morse code. Yes, that part was more difficult for me than some others. Big deal - I'm not going to demand that everything be changed to suit me. I fully support Morse code testing. Many don't want to start, and whine about it without ever putting forth effort. Hell, I know people who bitched about having to look at the "basic" Q/A manual! One remark was "Do I "have" to learn all this?" Another - "Do I "have" to read all these questions?" But yet they want a license. Pure laziness. Licenses should be "earned" not given away. People are least likely to respect something "given" to them. Most of what you say , I agree with. If a person doesn't want to study, they shouldn't have a license The bands are already showing signs of deterioration from people who just don't care. I've heard of some pretty wild times long before things were "dumbed down"! - Mike KB3EIA - Yeah, I know the bands started going to hell before that. Used to be I bragged about Ham to people who wanted their kids to get into radio but didn't want the CB garbage. I said Ham is clean. Today, you couldn't pay me to advertise ham as being clean. It is NOT. That is sad..... It really is. The exams test for proficiency in code, theory, rules and regulations. They're not psychological tests to weed out all the riff raff. IF such tests existed for Ham and all the other fields, maybe we'd have a better world. There are people in every field, be it a hobby or profession - who ruin it or at the very least - make it look bad for the rest. I don't know if you do PSK31 or not. But if you want to QSO with gentlemen and gentlewomen, it is the place to go. I've yet to hear a curse or even complaining gossip on that mode. The worst I ever heard was one ham (deservedly) upbraiding another for a horribly overdriven and powerful signal that was wreaking havoc with the rest of the segment. But even that was tame by comparison with the rest of the bands. 20 is great for DX, and 80 is the place to go to ragchew. And on psk31, I have no hearing problems at all, haha! - Mike KB3EIA - No as a matter of fact, I am not into PSK31. I've not really been on the Ham bands for a while. Just recently I did start scanning them though. First time in about a year. I'm waiting to do some more phone and yes - maybe even a CW contact!!!!! cl |
Mike Coslo wrote: bb wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: I've heard of some pretty wild times long before things were "dumbed down"! - Mike KB3EIA - Mike, I've been meaning to ask. Are you still sore at me for not giving your grief about the balloon project? HEH! Now you confused me Brian. But seriously, that you *didn't* give me grief was duly noted! I've been stressing over Steve's label of "antagonist" for not giving you grief for some time now. I'm such a terrible person. Hi! Ohh, you know how newsgroups are..... I know how they are, Mike! They're populated by people who don't have the intestinal fortitude to sign their names to their posts and they make up allegations to try and hide behind. Ask Brain where the Techs went. He insists that they were "chased away", yet refuses to say who chased them away or where they went. I've asked him repeatedly after he unequivocally stated they had. Ask Brain where the "unlicensed devices" are. He insists that "unlicensed devices" play a "major roll" in emergency communications. He WON'T provide any evidence of it, but he insists it's true. Brain has also recently asserted that ARES is "overblown", and that it won't respond to "real disasters" due to the age of it's membership. I've posted several news releases, all of them from within the last 2 weeks, and Brain won't explain how it is ARES is "overblown" when there's evidence to the contrary. Those are just the recents ones...The Somalia horse is pretty dead...He could never make that horse trot no matter how colorful a jockey he put on it. His "I've worked DXCC several times over" stories are cute, too... Now his most current diversion is adding up non-existant "lies". It just makes him look more feeble, but hey, it keeps him warm. Keeps me warm too....from laughing so hard! Steve, K4YZ |
Mike Coslo wrote in
: cl wrote: which required code. 5 WPM is not impossible to learn. It only takes a few minutes a day and about 2 weeks at least to get enough to pass a test. Took me 45 minutes a day for over 6 months, plus one failed test to get to 5 wpm. I'm all in favor of Morse code testing, but you guys have to show some understanding that it isn't that easy for a lot of people. I aced the writtens, without a whole lot of study by comparison to a lot of people. I don't go around calling them retards or stupid. - Mike KB3EIA - You have a good point Mike. I have seldom had any problems with written exams, but passing a Morse test was hell. Those of us who have had trouble learning Morse have taken a lot of abuse in this group. You hit the nail on the head when you said you wouldn't do the same if someone had trouble with the theory. |
Michael A. Terrell wrote:
wrote: Most of the hams I knew as a kid were home brewers. They were not designers but they could build a piece of equipment form a magazine article or the handbook. I lived about an hour from Mendelson's in dayton Ohio, and I ran into a lot of hams there, digging through the unmarked bins of parts to build their latest project or repair one of their projects. Been there, did that. I built my first SW receiver from junk parts I picked up along Radio Row in Philly. Radio Merit Badge booklet in hand circa 1950. Things have changed a bit since then though . . . (?!) In general the average ham learns as much about electronics as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment. Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is. The whole idea of a rig that isn't intended to be serviced is what kills my interest in the hobby. Too many custom parts made of "Unobtaium" and refusing to release schematics and manuals Maybe it's happened but personally I've never heard of an instance of anyone with a broken mainstream radio not being able to fix it or get it fixed because the manuals and/or the schematics couldn't be located. Parts are another story but that's SOP. Try to buy all the parts for a 1980 Ford from a dealer. really don't inspire any confidence in imported whiz bang rigs. All commodity widgets have design lifetimes particularly when they are based in the fast-moving field of electronics Japanese and otherwise. But there are tens of thousands of 20-year-old pieces of complex ham gear still regularly on the air. I can't imagine why you would expect any more than that for the service life of chunks of entertainment electronics. Not that I prefer tube only rigs, but they were built to do their job for years. Maybe the rest of the ham's life if he took decent care of his equipment. A lot of newer rigs end up as parts units because some cheap component is NLA. Do you think many of these all plastic LCD display radios will still work when they are 20 years old? I have no idea but a buddy of mine has an IC-781 xcvr which cost him over $6k 18 years ago and it's color LCD display still works as well as it did out-of-the-box. Boeing is replacing the conventional instruments in it's airliner panels with color LCD panels which better last 20 years and more or Boeing is gonna get spanked plenty. I was told that a couple retired EEs in the local club did all their repairs and I didn't know enough to be of any help. Then they told me to "stuff" my offer of free electronic components to help them with repairs. Are you kidding? That's nuts. With all due respect I'd like to hear the other side of that one. In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane details of electronics amongst the average members of the average neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios, they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking" fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in an offer to "help". w3rv Sorry, but that analogy just doesn't work. Several members told me they wanted to do minor repairs on their equipment but they didn't have access to the tools or equipment anymore. I offered them free use of my shop and to give them most of the components from my old repair business if I had what they needed and was laughed at. Makes no sense at all, I'd leap on an offer like that if I needed acess to an RF bench because I'm really ill-equipped in this area. Must be something in their water. As far as weapons, I have used a bow but I prefer an M-72. ;-) Yeah, RIGHT . . ! Whoosh: Thud. So re-up, Rumsfeld is offering bonuses. A lot of hams in Ohio were glad that I was willing to help out including an old ham in his late 70s that brought me a home brew receiver that a SK friend of his had built 20 years before. He had lost the hand drawn schematics and had a tear rolling down his cheek as he asked if there was any way I could possibly help him. He told me that he had been to every two way shop and ham equipment dealer to try to find someone to work on it and that one of them told him I was the only one in the county crazy enough to even attempt a repair. I tore it down and found a couple burnt resistors and shorted caps. I did a little math, dug around and found the parts. He was crying when the receiver came to life and kept thanking me. I charged him $10 and he hurried home to get back on the air. Helping someone like that is better than spending hours on the air to me. Nice job. Could not agree more. In a contorted way it appears that thee and me are basically the same basic breed of radio alley cat. Bear with me here. It's a tale. I got into ham radio over a half century because I wanted to move up from SWLing and just reading National Geographic as a kid to get on the air and communicate with others in foreign places. I'm still at it and in my mind the magic of DXing the HF airwaves hasn't diminished a bit. Here's part of the convergence: For the most part I simply can't stand most neighborhood radio clubs for all the reasons you've cited recently here and there in this NG. The poltics, the general clulessness, the rambling disorganization, the lack of interest in my particular hot buttons, etc. So I don't bother with 'em. Different strokes? You bet. I found my "cure" for the local radio clubs many years ago. I'm a member of a wide-area regional ham club which is tightly focused of HF DXing and DX contesting, a bunch who have the same narrow interests I have. Works for me, maybe the format would work for you. There's some huge number of electronics hobbyists across the country including hams who get their jollies from tube electronics. Since you're in what amounts to "geezer alley" in central Florida I expect that there is a higher concentration of "tube huggers"there than one would find elsewhere in the country. If I had your interests and lived where you do I'd seriously consider poking around the area for others of your ilk to clump with and form some sort of club centered on tube radio, etc. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida w3rv |
Phil Kane wrote: On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 02:41:32 GMT, robert casey wrote: And that was in the summer! I had to do a code sending test at 5wpm at the old FCC field office in New York City (I've heard the place is now condos). When the rats started to outnumber the people in that building, something had to be done.... A shame - 641 Washington Street was a beautiful example of 1920s Federal office buildings. A family friend who was my inspiration in joining the Federal workforce worked there most of her career as a secretary and then a claims examiner for the pre-OSHA Labor Department - may she rest in peace. I was in the FCC facilities there only six times - twice for amateur exams, three times for commercial exams, and once to the office (which was at the opposite end of the building from the exam rooms) to pick up travel orders to my first duty post in San Francisco. Maybe one of these days I'll get off my butt and see if I can find the Philly Custom House where the FCC lived around here in it's glory days. I still can't comprehend those old buildings as upscale condos.... Philly is *loaded* with 'em Phil. You'd have to see it to believe it. The really pricey versions are those which are converted multi-story waterfront warehouses on piers poking out into the river. When I was a kid you took yer life into your hands when you went into those waterfront areas. No more. Another big source of conversion properties in the city is the huge old 6-10 story light manufacturing buildings staffed by sweat-shop immigrant labor in the early 1900s. Out here in the 'burbs the hot ticket conversions are the surviving ancient (1700s-1800s) textile mills along the creeks most of which have been chopped up into big bucks office space. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane w3rv |
K=D8HB wrote: "cl" wrote in message o.verio.net... I hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time they were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram". Navy RM "A" School, the basic school which trained Navy Radiomen, was 13-weeks long. Morse practice was 3 hours per day, 4 days per week, but students could come in after-hours for additional practice. Graduation requirement was to be able to copy 5-letter coded groups at 18WPM for 10 minutes, with 3 uncorrected errors allowed. 156 hours worth of in-class code parctice and a pretty stiff exam. Sounds familaiar. I didn't clock it but the 156 hours total is probably in the realm I needed to get from zero to 20WPM. Which in my case was stretched out over years between the 5/13/20 WPM exams. I've heard some weird tales about how the Signal Corps used Draconian methods to quickly pound Morse into the heads of their WW2 radio ops. Stories about eight-hours-per-day seven days per weeks drills for 2-4 weeks or some such, nasty punishments for those who "didn't get it", etc. Have you ever heard any of these tales? =20 73, de Hans, K0HB w3rv |
|
Mike Coslo wrote:
Michael A. Terrell wrote: The whole idea of a rig that isn't intended to be serviced is what kills my interest in the hobby. Too many custom parts made of "Unobtaium" and refusing to release schematics and manuals really don't inspire any confidence in imported whiz bang rigs. Not that I prefer tube only rigs, but they were built to do their job for years. I like the modern equipment, but hollow state equipment is simply cool. Now that I have my main station set up, I'm going to start putting together some old tube rigs. Oh yeah! Maybe the rest of the ham's life if he took decent care of his equipment. A lot of newer rigs end up as parts units because some cheap component is NLA. Do you think many of these all plastic LCD display radios will still work when they are 20 years old? I was told that a couple retired EEs in the local club did all their repairs and I didn't know enough to be of any help. Then they told me to "stuff" my offer of free electronic components to help them with repairs. Mike, if I may be blunt, that is a pretty ****ty club. Pardon my French! I wasn't impressed by them. Sorry, but that analogy just doesn't work. Several members told me they wanted to do minor repairs on their equipment but they didn't have access to the tools or equipment anymore. I offered them free use of my shop and to give them most of the components from my old repair business if I had what they needed and was laughed at. AS I said, a poor excuse for a club..... I gave up on them and decide I don't want to join them. I offered to help plan the next hamfest and maintain a E-mail list for them. They asked if I had the money to pay the year's dues first, then told me, "Real hams will know about it, anyway" A lot of hams in Ohio were glad that I was willing to help out including an old ham in his late 70s that brought me a home brew receiver that a SK friend of his had built 20 years before. He had lost the hand drawn schematics and had a tear rolling down his cheek as he asked if there was any way I could possibly help him. He told me that he had been to every two way shop and ham equipment dealer to try to find someone to work on it and that one of them told him I was the only one in the county crazy enough to even attempt a repair. I tore it down and found a couple burnt resistors and shorted caps. I did a little math, dug around and found the parts. He was crying when the receiver came to life and kept thanking me. I charged him $10 and he hurried home to get back on the air. Helping someone like that is better than spending hours on the air to me. Different strokes? Different strokes indeed. The ARS has room for many different types. It sounds as if we would get along just fine. I'll bet you felt just darn good when you got to help that fellow. Yes, it was a good day at the bench. Much better than some whining CBer who bitched at paying $7.50 to put a plug on their third microphone that month. Sounds to me as if you *have* found your place in the hobby. Seems like a good one to me. - Mike KB3EIA - Yes, I've always enjoyed the equipment more than using it, and I have lost interest in getting a station on the air so I'll keep collecting and repairing old gear as long as I'm able to do it. I have a couple kids who are supposed to help me clean out my shop this summer so i can see how much equipment I can salvage. I still have the benches wrapped in plastic from last year's hurricanes. I pray they miss us this year. Three in my area were just too much. I have a couple websites, but no good pictures of the three shop buildings to put up, yet. Maybe I can do it this fall. -- Former professional electron wrangler. Michael A. Terrell Central Florida |
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "Mike Andrews" wrote in message ... In (rec.radio.amateur.misc), Cmd Buzz Corey wrote: I used to teach Novice classes, and I always assumed that anyone could learn the code if they really wanted to. I found that some people had difficulty telling the difference between a dit from a dah unless it was sent very slowy and the dah made a lot longer than the dit, but when sending a character that contained several dits or dahs or combinations, they simply could not tell one from the other. It wasn't that they lacked the skill to learn the code, I could right out characters in dits and dahs on the board and they could recoginize them, it was an interpertation problem with the brain of telling the sound of a dit from the sound of a dah. People with hearing aids often had a difficult time. You hit that part right on the head. My XYL has a deep notch in her hearing response curve, from about 400 Hz to about 2 KHz, due to playing viola in a symphony orchestra for 15 years, sitting right in front of the brass section[1]. She's having the very devil of a time with Morse, mostly because she has problems distinguishing between dit and dah. She has learned not to trust her ears, and now she's trying to learn to read with them. The deep notch right where most people tune to read CW and where the various tapes, CDs, and tutor programs all put the tone, also makes it very difficult for her. Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Or just make sure that you can turn the volume WAY up just like my ex had to (70% hearing loss in each ear and constant ringing of the ears). When she passes Element 1, I have to go learn American Sign Language and pass a proficiency test. Sounds fair to me. [1] I'll bet most people don't think much about hearing damage in people playing in symphony orchestras. It's fairly common. Being an amateur musician, I've read quite a bit about it. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I've recently read somewhere (if only I could remember where) of a totally deaf ham who operates cw. He was a no-coder until he became deaf. He uses a homebrew gizmo plugged into the headphone socket that flashes a light. Was allowed to use it for the test without any problems. His only problem is that from around 15wpm the light does not come on and go out fast enough. IIRC his device uses standard tungsten filament bulb. What would be the best alternative, i.e. "switches" faster, LED or neon bulb? The article had a schematic of the sound-to-light converter - I remember it could be adjusted to allow for signal strength, noise and variations in output characteristics of different radios. I suppose someone reasonably competent in electronic design, not me :( , could "re-invent" such a thing without raising a sweat. 73 Roger ZR3RC |
"Roger Conroy" wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "Mike Andrews" wrote in message ... In (rec.radio.amateur.misc), Cmd Buzz Corey wrote: I used to teach Novice classes, and I always assumed that anyone could learn the code if they really wanted to. I found that some people had difficulty telling the difference between a dit from a dah unless it was sent very slowy and the dah made a lot longer than the dit, but when sending a character that contained several dits or dahs or combinations, they simply could not tell one from the other. It wasn't that they lacked the skill to learn the code, I could right out characters in dits and dahs on the board and they could recoginize them, it was an interpertation problem with the brain of telling the sound of a dit from the sound of a dah. People with hearing aids often had a difficult time. You hit that part right on the head. My XYL has a deep notch in her hearing response curve, from about 400 Hz to about 2 KHz, due to playing viola in a symphony orchestra for 15 years, sitting right in front of the brass section[1]. She's having the very devil of a time with Morse, mostly because she has problems distinguishing between dit and dah. She has learned not to trust her ears, and now she's trying to learn to read with them. The deep notch right where most people tune to read CW and where the various tapes, CDs, and tutor programs all put the tone, also makes it very difficult for her. Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Or just make sure that you can turn the volume WAY up just like my ex had to (70% hearing loss in each ear and constant ringing of the ears). When she passes Element 1, I have to go learn American Sign Language and pass a proficiency test. Sounds fair to me. [1] I'll bet most people don't think much about hearing damage in people playing in symphony orchestras. It's fairly common. Being an amateur musician, I've read quite a bit about it. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I've recently read somewhere (if only I could remember where) of a totally deaf ham who operates cw. He was a no-coder until he became deaf. He uses a homebrew gizmo plugged into the headphone socket that flashes a light. Was allowed to use it for the test without any problems. His only problem is that from around 15wpm the light does not come on and go out fast enough. IIRC his device uses standard tungsten filament bulb. What would be the best alternative, i.e. "switches" faster, LED or neon bulb? The article had a schematic of the sound-to-light converter - I remember it could be adjusted to allow for signal strength, noise and variations in output characteristics of different radios. I suppose someone reasonably competent in electronic design, not me :( , could "re-invent" such a thing without raising a sweat. An LED would seem the ideal solution. I also have a significant hearing disability. My hearing chart shows my hearing drops off at about 1.5 kHz and is down 40 dB at 10 kHz. CW solution is to use RIT shifted so I hear about a 500 Hz tone. Ed N6EJ (No 'M' in my email addy) |
On 19 Apr 2005 18:16:07 -0700, bb wrote:
Phil Kane wrote: AFRTS IS NOT Amateur Radio Hi! Awesome! Can I borrow that sometime? It's in the public domain. Knock yourself out..... -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane |
|
"Ed Jay" wrote in message ... "Roger Conroy" wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "Mike Andrews" wrote in message ... In (rec.radio.amateur.misc), Cmd Buzz Corey wrote: I used to teach Novice classes, and I always assumed that anyone could learn the code if they really wanted to. I found that some people had difficulty telling the difference between a dit from a dah unless it was sent very slowy and the dah made a lot longer than the dit, but when sending a character that contained several dits or dahs or combinations, they simply could not tell one from the other. It wasn't that they lacked the skill to learn the code, I could right out characters in dits and dahs on the board and they could recoginize them, it was an interpertation problem with the brain of telling the sound of a dit from the sound of a dah. People with hearing aids often had a difficult time. You hit that part right on the head. My XYL has a deep notch in her hearing response curve, from about 400 Hz to about 2 KHz, due to playing viola in a symphony orchestra for 15 years, sitting right in front of the brass section[1]. She's having the very devil of a time with Morse, mostly because she has problems distinguishing between dit and dah. She has learned not to trust her ears, and now she's trying to learn to read with them. The deep notch right where most people tune to read CW and where the various tapes, CDs, and tutor programs all put the tone, also makes it very difficult for her. Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Or just make sure that you can turn the volume WAY up just like my ex had to (70% hearing loss in each ear and constant ringing of the ears). When she passes Element 1, I have to go learn American Sign Language and pass a proficiency test. Sounds fair to me. [1] I'll bet most people don't think much about hearing damage in people playing in symphony orchestras. It's fairly common. Being an amateur musician, I've read quite a bit about it. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I've recently read somewhere (if only I could remember where) of a totally deaf ham who operates cw. He was a no-coder until he became deaf. He uses a homebrew gizmo plugged into the headphone socket that flashes a light. Was allowed to use it for the test without any problems. His only problem is that from around 15wpm the light does not come on and go out fast enough. IIRC his device uses standard tungsten filament bulb. What would be the best alternative, i.e. "switches" faster, LED or neon bulb? The article had a schematic of the sound-to-light converter - I remember it could be adjusted to allow for signal strength, noise and variations in output characteristics of different radios. I suppose someone reasonably competent in electronic design, not me :( , could "re-invent" such a thing without raising a sweat. An LED would seem the ideal solution. I also have a significant hearing disability. My hearing chart shows my hearing drops off at about 1.5 kHz and is down 40 dB at 10 kHz. CW solution is to use RIT shifted so I hear about a 500 Hz tone. Ed N6EJ (No 'M' in my email addy) I have a homebrew electronic keyer that uses TTL devices. Years ago I added a simple led fed by a chip to drive that LED. I run some fast CW and the little LED keeps up just fine. Dan/W4NTI |
From: "bb" on Tues,Apr 19 2005 6:06 pm
wrote: From: "cl" on Sun,Apr 17 2005 11:33 pm Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now an Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s. Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed myself. Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such. Sorry, according to many in here you have to approach it as THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN YOUR LIFE!!! :-) I've heard that, too. Everybody wants to be Coach!! [I rode First Class...] Besides, at that time, I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium. Excuses, excuses, excuses! :-) I've heard that, too. Perhaps there was a lack of a medical certificate presented to the VEs at the test showing a sufficient sperm count to demonstrate "manhood." :-) Most recommendations are 15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a week. I used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than others, that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn ANYTHING. You can't absorb it through osmosis. Back to the timing thing, I hope someone from the military can step in to tell us how much time they were given to get the code down. I think they had to "Cram". "Caveat," I was in the military, the United States Army, voluntary enlistment beginning 13 March 1952. Went from Basic to Signal School at Fort Monmouth, NJ. Amount of Signal School time spent on morse code? ZERO! NO class, NO "cramming." That can't be right. Why there's a war museum in Canada that has a code key... Hi, hi! Mythology seems to be graven in stone images for some of the morsemen zealots. At that time the ONLY military occupation specialty in the Army requiring morsemanship was Field Radio. Just like Field Day, I'll bet. A picnic in da park it wasn't. Big HUT on the bed of a deuce and a half, towing a PE-95 motor generator on a trailer. Enough poles and wire under the single operator bench (a low cabinet with "cushions" on it) to make a small wire rhombic antenna. Smelly Model 19 TTY clattering away on the bench-desk and the venerable BC-610 400 Watt transmitter near the door. A couple fans to "cool" everything so it was miserable in the heat of summer and uncomformtable in winter. "5-packs" of canned/dry rations instead of hot dogs and soda. Nobody "kept score" in any competition...other than the competition of not being destroyed (literally) by any enemy. Field Radio circa 1950s, USA. Field Radio then required passing 20 WPM, was taught at Camp Gordon (later Fort Gordon, now the home of the Signal Corps). Fort Gordon? Where was Fort Farnsworth? Next to Camp Fessenden. Drop-out rate was roughly a quarter of all starting...that I know about. Those that didn't make it, but had some apitude for electronics, got to go to Inside Plant Telephone, Outside Plant Telephone, Carrier, Teleprinter Operator, Field Wireman...or the Infantry. :-) "Incoming!" Well, infantry is better than adultery... My Signal School classes taught Microwave Radio Relay (at a time when there was little of such operational). Radar was also taught at Fort Monmouth, had the same basic electronics as Microwave. I got assigned to a Fixed Station Transmitter site in Japan. Got all of about a day's worth of on-site "training" to operate one of three dozen HF transmitters having a minimum of 1 KW output. NO MORSEMANSHIP NEEDED THERE. Not even to open and close circuits? Nah...we were a close bunch but always open for suggestion. NO MORSE USED at the third-largest station in the Army Command and Administrative Network. That's when the US Army started it's downward slide and people now have to go to Canadian war museums to get "thier" morse code fixes. I know. The "shame" of it all... Probably the same age bracket as me. I do listen to call signs now and then on the scanner to pick out the services they represent - if I don't immediately know who the service is. I do listen some times to code on the H.F. Bands. ...or what you think is morse. :-) There's very LITTLE morse code on HF nowadays...EXCEPT inside the ham bands. With the RF Gain on maximum and AGC disabled, BFO on, one will eventually start "hearing morse code" on "the bands." :-) The discordant thrumming-whistling of old commercial muliti- channel SSB is less now than it was a quarter century ago. All kinds of OTHER weird sounds ARE there, but those are various forms of data that very few hams use (or can use) and ON HF but NOT in the ham bands. Once in a rare while one might catch an ALE burst from one of the 2500 gubmint radios of SHARES. There are many things you learn in life and may never use again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Tell that to Ken Jennings! :-) That guy could probably copy psk31. He's a machine. Nah. He's just an ordinary programmer, a regular young guy, a Mormon. He just happens to have gunfighter reflexes in his brain...and about $2.5 million extra now. :-) Jeopardy is now coming up on the FINALS in a sort of mental championship on ABC-TV. Fun programming to watch...and try to match wits with the various contestants and their amazing memories. My wife and I are regular viewers after supper...with a bit of friendly competition between us and the contestants. Meanwhile, the cardinals are gathering in Newington to elect a new poop to lead the morsemen into the righteous path of the true hamreligion...via the "history" of radio as only they have sterilized it. |
From: "Phil Kane" on Tues,Apr 19 2005 12:15 pm
On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:05:03 GMT, Michael A. Terrell wrote: The radio station at Ft Greely, Ak was built in 1948 as the first permanent "Armed Forces Radio Network" station. It was the first site built with commercial broadcast equipment instead of modified military gear used at some sites during WW II. The radio transmitter was a gates BC250 In the early '70s AFRTS claimed to be the only all tube network in the world. A former subordinate of mine at the FCC, Don Browne, was an EE and ROTC-trained AFRTS officer in the late 1960s and after his three years on active duty with the Signal Corps went Reserve and came to work for me. He spent several years at the field office and several more at headquarters. His reserve billet was abolished in an AFRTS reorganization (even though he was a MAJ) but when a vacancy on the civilian engineering staff of the AFRTS came up he transferred to that. He retired as the chief of engineering for AFRTS several years ago and still hangs around the broadcast business. Wow. I'm in the presence of Nobility. I am humbled. FWIW, AFRTS headquarters used to be just about a mile from my house on a little jog of La Tuna Canyon Road, just before it gets changed to Penrose. In some "economy move" of about 7 (or was it 6?) years ago, it was emptied out in Sun Valley, CA, and all staff moved east about 40 miles to a decommissioned USAF base somewhat close to Ontario, CA. The old AFRTS buildings haven't been leased to anyone yet after all this time (one can still read the name in smudges on the exterior wall where the raised lettering was). AFRTS IS NOT Amateur Radio It's SHOW BIZ !!! AFRTS IS NOT COMMUNICATIONS per se. shrug Did AFRS or AFRTS ever do morse code? :-) |
From: "K=D8=88B" on Tues,Apr 19 2005 6:32 pm
"bb" wrote in message roups.com... What was the wash-out rate? I don't have any statistics, but it was fairly small, probably on the order of 8-10%. Most washouts were for academic reasons. Very few failed because of the code. Riiiiiight. :-) What happened to the wash-outs? They were transferred to the fleet, where most of them were immediately snapped up by the Chief Radioman as undesignated strikers. Since we were chronically short of operators, any training at all was an asset, and a "second chance" is a great motivator. Geez, yeah...times were TOUGH during the Second World War! Usually these turned out to be above average sailors. Morsemen ALWAYS excell at anything they do. Just ask one. 73, de Hans, K0HB Master Chief Radioman, US Navy Dankie-shoe-in, 73, 88, and 103, ex-RA16408336, Microwave Radio Relay Operations and Maintenance (MOS 281.6) SUPERVISOR (E-5), US ARMY. |
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination Class instructors should also pass this info to their students if they are any good at being instructors. Of course there are people who choose to "go it alone" in becoming hams, but the study guides do mention that accomodations are possible. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
wrote in message oups.com... Geez, yeah...times were TOUGH during the Second World War! I'll take your word for it, Old Timer. My experience ran from the late 50's to the early 80's. ex-RA16408336, Microwave Radio Relay Operations and Maintenance (MOS 281.6) SUPERVISOR (E-5), US ARMY. 73, de Hans, K0HB Master Chief Radioman (E-9), US Navy |
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... cl wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... cl wrote: [snip] I disagree. It took a great effort. What is a great effort? Many times it is a matter of perspective. In other words what we expect versus reality may make something seem like a "great effort." For some - it may! One argument I've heard, is that those musically inclined pick it up quicker than others, yet I knew some who "were" musically inclined and claimed to have a hell of a time with it. Reason? I don't know. I can't get inside their head. Steve can. He can even have them incarcerated with a simple phone calls. The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Was that your problem? If you hadn't been so lazy you could have learned the code in under a week? Eh - I had the code down in 2 weeks for the Novice exam. AND I'm now an Extra. Been licensed since the early 80s. Yeah, I probably could have learned it in under a week, if I pushed myself. That wasn't my point. My point is that everyone is different, and the length of time it takes to learn 5WPM varies greatly. The time it takes to learn 20WPM could be lifetimes. Not everyone is even capable of 13WPM. Check out the book "The Art and Skill of Radiotelegraphy." Basically anyone without a handicap can master 20wpm with the proper training tools if they are truly motivated to do so. Keep in mind that we all talk faster than that. We even talk faster than that when we spell out words phonetically! Most anyone will tell you - it isn't good to do such. Besides, at that time, I was chasing rug rats - so study time was premium. I've been told that is absolutely no excuse. Nothing in your personal or professional life can be more important than learning the code. No one has ever said that. We each must choose our activities based on our personal priorities. But do not whine and cry to change the requirements simply because it's not high enough on your priority list to put some time into it. Besides if you haven't time to study code 15 minutes per day, you don't have time to study the theory either. Most recommendations are 15 minutes to a half hour a day. That hardly makes it possible in a week. I used the words " "AT LEAST" 2 WEEKS". Some are faster learners than others, that is a given. BUT my point was, you have to get started to learn ANYTHING. The book "Morse Code: The Essential Language" states that the AVERAGE person is going to need 30 hours of study and practice to get to 5wpm. Natural there are the "wunderkind" like my daughter who got it in a couple of weeks and there are others who need many months. As you said, a person must get started to learn anything. [snip] I don't dislike the code. It was difficult for me to make the few QSO's that I did make as a novice. I'd like to pick it up again someday. The first ones are difficult for all of us. Like anything else it takes time to get good. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Roger Conroy" wrote in message ... [snip] I've recently read somewhere (if only I could remember where) of a totally deaf ham who operates cw. He was a no-coder until he became deaf. He uses a homebrew gizmo plugged into the headphone socket that flashes a light. Was allowed to use it for the test without any problems. His only problem is that from around 15wpm the light does not come on and go out fast enough. IIRC his device uses standard tungsten filament bulb. What would be the best alternative, i.e. "switches" faster, LED or neon bulb? The article had a schematic of the sound-to-light converter - I remember it could be adjusted to allow for signal strength, noise and variations in output characteristics of different radios. I suppose someone reasonably competent in electronic design, not me :( , could "re-invent" such a thing without raising a sweat. 73 Roger ZR3RC It might not be possible to go any faster with a flashing light anyway as "persistence of vision" kicks in somewhere around there and it would look like a single long light anyway. That's how movies work. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... We each must choose our activities based on our personal priorities. Thank you very much, Captain Obvious. But do not whine and cry to change the requirements simply because it's not high enough on your priority list to put some time into it. I wouldn't characterize it as "whine and cry" (unless I wanted to prejudice the audience). Seems more like "this is my opinion on the matter". Besides if you haven't time to study code 15 minutes per day, you don't have time to study the theory either. Is that kinda like when you told your child "if you haven't got room for more green beans, then you don't have room for dessert either" As you said, a person must get started to learn anything. The first ones are difficult for all of us. Like anything else it takes time to get good. "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way." ---Bokonon in "Cat's Cradle" "Actually, what is being discussed is freedom of choice of modes in a hobby in a free society. There is absolutely nothing prohibiting someone who wants to take full advantage of CW's many advantages from becoming skillful in the mode." --- CAM in RRAP Sunuvagun! 73, de Hans, K0HB |
K4YZ wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote: bb wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: I've heard of some pretty wild times long before things were "dumbed down"! - Mike KB3EIA - Mike, I've been meaning to ask. Are you still sore at me for not giving your grief about the balloon project? HEH! Now you confused me Brian. But seriously, that you *didn't* give me grief was duly noted! I've been stressing over Steve's label of "antagonist" for not giving you grief for some time now. I'm such a terrible person. Hi! Ohh, you know how newsgroups are..... I know how they are, Mike! They're populated by people who don't have the intestinal fortitude to sign their names to their posts and they make up allegations to try and hide behind. Now that you mention it, I have taken amazing amounts of guff because I am "stupid enough" to use my own name and callsign. I've only been doing that since, oh..... the early '90's. And yet, there is no doubt that the more anonymous the poster, the more outrageous and profane the posts. Odd how the "smart" people seem to need to hide themselves. Big deal! Its sooo easy to be a big man when you hide who you are. Hey, are you going to be at Dayton this year? - Mike - KB3EIA - |
wrote in message ups.com... I've heard some weird tales about how the Signal Corps used Draconian methods to quickly pound Morse into the heads of their WW2 radio ops.Stories about eight-hours-per-day seven days per weeks drills for 2-4 weeks or some such, nasty punishments for those who "didn't get it", etc. Have you ever heard any of these tales? I think the operative word is "tale" (civilian "legend"). I don't go back that far, but seems to me a draftee kid who drew Signal Corps billet would recognize a cushy job when he saw it and such "motiviation" wouldn't be needed. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
KØHB wrote:
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... We each must choose our activities based on our personal priorities. Thank you very much, Captain Obvious. But do not whine and cry to change the requirements simply because it's not high enough on your priority list to put some time into it. I wouldn't characterize it as "whine and cry" (unless I wanted to prejudice the audience). Seems more like "this is my opinion on the matter". Besides if you haven't time to study code 15 minutes per day, you don't have time to study the theory either. Is that kinda like when you told your child "if you haven't got room for more green beans, then you don't have room for dessert either" As you said, a person must get started to learn anything. The first ones are difficult for all of us. Like anything else it takes time to get good. "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way." ---Bokonon in "Cat's Cradle" Wow, talk about prejudicing the audience! This assumes that those of us who support Morse testing simply do it because we had to. With my problems with it, that would make me the meanest SOB in the valley. Perhaps, just perhaps, some of us believe that it is a good idea simply because it is a good idea, a mode that cant be performed by picking up a mic and talking, or typing on a keyboard, and needs to be learned? "Actually, what is being discussed is freedom of choice of modes in a hobby in a free society. There is absolutely nothing prohibiting someone who wants to take full advantage of CW's many advantages from becoming skillful in the mode." --- CAM in RRAP Extended to all modes? Get rid of those darn satellite mode questions on the tests! I personally have no use for that! For a strict appliance operator who is going to buy everything they use and have someone else install it? No one should have to do anything they don't want to do! Ditch all those unneeded questions. Sunuvagun! Huzzanga! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Mike Coslo wrote: bb wrote: Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination Brian, Dee is a VE..... Steve is a VA. - Mike KB3EIA - Hey, are you going to Dayton this year? I have a batch of what promises to be an awesome Red Ale which should be ready to drink about that time...... Which day(s) are you going? I work Saturday. |
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net... "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... We each must choose our activities based on our personal priorities. Thank you very much, Captain Obvious. But do not whine and cry to change the requirements simply because it's not high enough on your priority list to put some time into it. I wouldn't characterize it as "whine and cry" (unless I wanted to prejudice the audience). Seems more like "this is my opinion on the matter". It's still whining and crying no matter how you sugar coat it. Besides if you haven't time to study code 15 minutes per day, you don't have time to study the theory either. Is that kinda like when you told your child "if you haven't got room for more green beans, then you don't have room for dessert either" If you don't have room for good food then you don't have room for junk. However I did not have to tell my children this because I never served dessert unless there was company and sometimes not even then. I eat too much junk during the day at work so try to avoid compounding the problem at home. As you said, a person must get started to learn anything. The first ones are difficult for all of us. Like anything else it takes time to get good. "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way." ---Bokonon in "Cat's Cradle" I only object to those who wish to change the rules without having the experience to judge for themselves whether they should be changed. You and I do not agree on the code test but I respect your opinion as you have experience in the field (but do not agree with it). When and if the majority of experienced hams say it should go, then I have no problem with that. So far that doesn't happen to be the majority opinion among the experienced hams. "Actually, what is being discussed is freedom of choice of modes in a hobby in a free society. There is absolutely nothing prohibiting someone who wants to take full advantage of CW's many advantages from becoming skillful in the mode." --- CAM in RRAP Sunuvagun! Actually people who are not required to learn something at a basic level too often bypass the activity altogether because they perceive it to be harder than it is. Therein lies the loss. We will be left with only 25+wpm CW people on the bands in that mode and everyone else will be too intimidated to get on. Only the extremely motivated will even bother to try. We will lose the "casual" CW operator who ragchews at the 13wpm level or so. I'd like to see people learn a much wider range of "basics" in life not just ham radio than they do now. For example, personally I believe that everyone should have a year of art class and a year of a musical instrument, among other things, to be well rounded. Yet we insist on eliminating more and more basics in all areas. How is a person to have any idea what they want to do with their life when they have not had an opportunity to gain some basic skill in a wide range of areas? Similarly how is a person to have any real idea as to whether they might like code and wish to pursue it if they do not have a minimal, basic skill level? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
cl wrote: "bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination That's what you ask in here for! There are VEs in here, myself included - who can give guidance to those who ask. cl "Here" is all knowing. Part 97 doesn't define Morse Code, but specifies that it is to be tested at 5WPM. Part 97 is silent on Farnsworth Code. Part 97 doesn't say that the VE's must accomodate variations in testing. Why does a person have to ask RRAP when they should be able to read it in the governing regulations??? |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... "Actually, what is being discussed is freedom of choice of modes in a hobby in a free society. There is absolutely nothing prohibiting someone who wants to take full advantage of CW's many advantages from becoming skillful in the mode." --- CAM in RRAP Extended to all modes? Get rid of those darn satellite mode questions on the tests! I personally have no use for that! Good point, and I agree. If we are going to have incredibly difficult satellite questions on the Extra written exam, like the following verbatim example..... Q: Which of the following types of communications may space stations transmit? A. Automatic retransmission of signals from Earth stations and other space stations B. One-way communications C. Telemetry consisting of specially coded messages D. All of these choices are correct ......then there ought to be similarly incredibly difficult CW questions on the Extra written exam, like: Q: Which of the following alphanumeric characters corresponds to the Morse sound "di-dah" A. A B. B C. C D. All of these choices are correct After all, fair is fair, and the CW mode ought to have test questions just like all other modes. Thanks for pointing that out. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
K4YZ wrote: bb wrote: K4YZ wrote: wrote: Sorry, according to many in here you have to approach it as THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN YOUR LIFE!!! Actually, Lennie, YOU are the only one making that assertion. Nope, in-between homosexual and pedophilia inuendo, you have made such assertions. So that makes lie #25. Then here's yet another chance for you to prove yourself, Brain, and provide SOME sample of a post I have EVER made that asserts that ANYthing having to to with Amateur Radio must be approched as the "MOST IMPORTANT THING" in ANYone's life. Good thing you didn't deny the homosexual and pedophilia inuendo. That would have made Lies #27 and #28. You said it exists. Let's see it. Steve, K4YZ Sorry, Steve, but I don't have to show you anything. BTW, you're up to Lie #26 with the "Bwhahaha..." laugh that you claimed you don't use. |
bb wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote: bb wrote: Dee Flint wrote: Most of the computer programs let you select a pitch you like. Of course you would have to arrange with the VE team well in advance of the test to have one set up at that pitch for her testing. Dee, not everyone has a ham-husband to tell them all of the modifications that the VE may make to an examination Brian, Dee is a VE..... Steve is a VA. - Mike KB3EIA - Hey, are you going to Dayton this year? I have a batch of what promises to be an awesome Red Ale which should be ready to drink about that time...... Which day(s) are you going? I work Saturday. I should be there al three days. - Mike KB3EIA - |
wrote: From: "Phil Kane" on Tues,Apr 19 2005 12:15 pm On Tue, 19 Apr 2005 06:05:03 GMT, Michael A. Terrell wrote: The radio station at Ft Greely, Ak was built in 1948 as the first permanent "Armed Forces Radio Network" station. It was the first site built with commercial broadcast equipment instead of modified military gear used at some sites during WW II. The radio transmitter was a gates BC250 In the early '70s AFRTS claimed to be the only all tube network in the world. A former subordinate of mine at the FCC, Don Browne, was an EE and ROTC-trained AFRTS officer in the late 1960s and after his three years on active duty with the Signal Corps went Reserve and came to work for me. He spent several years at the field office and several more at headquarters. His reserve billet was abolished in an AFRTS reorganization (even though he was a MAJ) but when a vacancy on the civilian engineering staff of the AFRTS came up he transferred to that. He retired as the chief of engineering for AFRTS several years ago and still hangs around the broadcast business. Wow. I'm in the presence of Nobility. I am humbled. FWIW, AFRTS headquarters used to be just about a mile from my house on a little jog of La Tuna Canyon Road, just before it gets changed to Penrose. In some "economy move" of about 7 (or was it 6?) years ago, it was emptied out in Sun Valley, CA, and all staff moved east about 40 miles to a decommissioned USAF base somewhat close to Ontario, CA. The old AFRTS buildings haven't been leased to anyone yet after all this time (one can still read the name in smudges on the exterior wall where the raised lettering was). AFRTS IS NOT Amateur Radio It's SHOW BIZ !!! AFRTS IS NOT COMMUNICATIONS per se. shrug Did AFRS or AFRTS ever do morse code? :-) "Sorry Hans, AFRTS IS NOT Amateur Radio!" Hi, hi! |
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... Actually people who are not required to learn something at a basic level too often bypass the activity altogether because they perceive it to be harder than it is. Therein lies the loss. I don't buy that line of reasoning at all. I was never "required" to learn to set up a "Lindy Rig", but saw other fishermen doing it and it looked like fun, so decided it must not be too difficult, so I learned how. I was never "required" to learn to swim, but saw other kids doing it and it looked like fun, so decided it must not be too difficult, so I learned how. I was never "required" to learn how to kiss a girl, but saw Clark Gable doing it, and it looked like great fun, so I decided it must not be too difficult, so I learned how. I was never "required" to learn Morse Code, but heard it on the Zenith and was curious about those beeps and boops, so I learned how (a decade before I decided to be a ham). I was never "required" to learn RTTY, but saw other hams doing it, and it looked interesting, so I decided it must not be too difficula, so I learned how. You probably get the drift. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... "Actually, what is being discussed is freedom of choice of modes in a hobby in a free society. There is absolutely nothing prohibiting someone who wants to take full advantage of CW's many advantages from becoming skillful in the mode." --- CAM in RRAP Extended to all modes? Get rid of those darn satellite mode questions on the tests! I personally have no use for that! Good point, and I agree. If we are going to have incredibly difficult satellite questions on the Extra written exam, like the following verbatim example..... Q: Which of the following types of communications may space stations transmit? A. Automatic retransmission of signals from Earth stations and other space stations B. One-way communications C. Telemetry consisting of specially coded messages D. All of these choices are correct .....then there ought to be similarly incredibly difficult CW questions on the Extra written exam, like: Q: Which of the following alphanumeric characters corresponds to the Morse sound "di-dah" A. A B. B C. C D. All of these choices are correct After all, fair is fair, and the CW mode ought to have test questions just like all other modes. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll bet you like those schools where the students determine the curriculum! Especially important is that those who do not know the material MUST determine what the material is that they must learn. That is always the smartest way to do things. The students must educate the teachers. - Mike KB3EIA - |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:46 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com