|
"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. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com