|
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv BWAHHHHHHHHH....we both know the "Tech" license stopped being technical in nature way back in the early 60s. Dan, I've never seen you advocating "Truth in Licensing." Have you said as much to the FCC in any of your NPRM comments? And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode. Dan/W4NTI If most of the VHF/UHF Contestors are Extra's as Dee says, why isn't CW used most often? No I have not commented on anything with the FCC other than BPL and sending in reports about K1MAN. I figured out a long time ago the FCC was basically a lap dog of the ARRL when it comes to dumbing down of the license structure. And my pitiful input wasn't going to have any affect at all. So "bb".....does that blow your mind, or what? Dan/W4NTI No. I can understand your attitude about the FCC. |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv BWAHHHHHHHHH....we both know the "Tech" license stopped being technical in nature way back in the early 60s. Dan, I've never seen you advocating "Truth in Licensing." Have you said as much to the FCC in any of your NPRM comments? And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode. Dan/W4NTI If most of the VHF/UHF Contestors are Extra's as Dee says, why isn't CW used most often? How do you know it wasn't/isn't? I worked a fair number of stations on CW in that contest. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Because Dan said, "And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode." Was Dan wrong? You know, you and David Heil K8MN ought to let Dan answer the questions that I asked of Dan instead of jumping in here and getting it wrong. Best of Luck. Not a problem Dee. "bb'' is just showing his ignorance. Dan/W4NTI |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... wrote: Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv It's so refreshing to see Extras being Extras again; having their usual disdain for the No Code Techs. And some people have to ask who chased away the Techs. Does the name "DIP****" mean anything to you "bb" ? Just curious. Dan/W4NTI Yes, it does, but Steve Robeson K4YZ isn't part of this thread. |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv BWAHHHHHHHHH....we both know the "Tech" license stopped being technical in nature way back in the early 60s. Dan, I've never seen you advocating "Truth in Licensing." Have you said as much to the FCC in any of your NPRM comments? And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode. Dan/W4NTI If most of the VHF/UHF Contestors are Extra's as Dee says, why isn't CW used most often? How do you know it wasn't/isn't? I worked a fair number of stations on CW in that contest. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Because Dan said, "And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode." Was Dan wrong? You know, you and David Heil K8MN ought to let Dan answer the questions that I asked of Dan instead of jumping in here and getting it wrong. Best of Luck. Not a problem Dee. "bb'' is just showing his ignorance. Dan/W4NTI Dan, is or isn't "MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode?" Thanks. |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: Dan/W4NTI wrote: wrote in message groups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv BWAHHHHHHHHH....we both know the "Tech" license stopped being technical in nature way back in the early 60s. Dan, I've never seen you advocating "Truth in Licensing." Have you said as much to the FCC in any of your NPRM comments? And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode. Dan/W4NTI If most of the VHF/UHF Contestors are Extra's as Dee says, why isn't CW used most often? It is used, "bb", but ops are attempting to maximize score by working everyone, even those not using CW. I switch modes quite often during the course of a VHF/UHF contest. During heavy aurora, CW works much better than SSB. I'd have thought you'd have already known it. Dave K8MN Dee made it sound like Extras were working Extras on SSB. I guess it wasn't at all like Dee claimed. You read way too much into the original post. I didn't mention mode. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Hey Dee, Good question actually. Perhaps they are part of the vast majority of hams that are inactive. More likely they are all "stuck" on FM and have not a clue what else is going on with V/Uhf. What a shame. Dan/W4NTI Ah, yes. The Shameful, Clueless Techs. With attitudes like yours, it's no wonder they don't hang around. I don't recall anyone on here, other than you "bb", using the word Shameful or Clueless regarding the Technician licensees. I do. You used the phrases, "not a clue" and "what a shame" to describe Techs who chose to be "stuck" on FM. All I see is folks stating they don't understand why the Techs don't take full advantage of their full license privileges. You go beyond that. You imply that there's something wrong with them. You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Dan/W4NTI You are the disgrace, Dan. Your bad attitude about Techs says it all. Let me guess... You're an Extra, right? |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: Dan/W4NTI wrote: wrote in message groups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? It's Techs being Techs again, they're too busy "advancing the state of the art" to be bothered with learning the code and contesting. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE w3rv BWAHHHHHHHHH....we both know the "Tech" license stopped being technical in nature way back in the early 60s. Dan, I've never seen you advocating "Truth in Licensing." Have you said as much to the FCC in any of your NPRM comments? And MOST VHF/UHF contesting is done in SSB mode. Dan/W4NTI If most of the VHF/UHF Contestors are Extra's as Dee says, why isn't CW used most often? It is used, "bb", but ops are attempting to maximize score by working everyone, even those not using CW. I switch modes quite often during the course of a VHF/UHF contest. During heavy aurora, CW works much better than SSB. I'd have thought you'd have already known it. Dave K8MN Dee made it sound like Extras were working Extras on SSB. I guess it wasn't at all like Dee claimed. You read way too much into the original post. I didn't mention mode. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE You're correct. Dan claimed the mode most often used was SSB, not you. So, in the interest of accuracy, can you give a breakout by mode and by class? |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Dee Flint wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message thlink.net... [snip] Why do I contest? To improve my score by improving my station and myself. Its as simple as that. Have a good day PS; I worked a bunch of sporadic skip yesterday on six meters in the June VHF contest.....with 8 watts and a 3 ele yagi at 20'. It's all a matter of perspective. Dan/W4NTI I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Oh, they're still trapped on VHF, Dee. Most of 'em are so trapped that they know only one mode--FM and do all of their operating via repeaters. What a wunnerful attitude you have toward Techs, Oh Mighty DXer. And people have to ask who chased away the Techs. I guess the only time you would embrace a Tech is if he were calling you out of band on 6M. Hi! I don't embrace radio amateurs at all, "bb". A firm handshake is good enough for me. That's not what the French do. They kiss you on both cheeks, especially for handing out contacts and QSL cards for out of band contacts. My attitude toward many of the current crop of new techs is one bathed upon five years observation, since returning to the U.S. I haven't chased them anywhere. In fact, it has been just the opposite. I've tried to encourage them to use simplex on FM. I've tried to encourage them to try 6 meters along with 432 and 144 MHz SSB and CW. I can't be faulted that they don't act after being encouraged. If these folks are, in fact "trapped" in a world of 2m only FM repeater operation, they have fashioned the trap themselves by not being more curious about the rest of VHF/UHF amateur radio. There are avenues open to them but they aren't participating. Dave K8MN A penny for your thoughts. Maybe they are on FM yet not trapped at all. Maybe if you let Dee and Dan finish their thoughts on why they think the Techs are trapped we would have something worth discussing. I have never said that they were trapped. It happens to be a belief expressed by some of the anti-code test people that they are trapped above 30mhz. I've always contended that any such trap is one of their own perception. My opinion (that means it's my opinion and I don't have to spend weeks at the Library of Congress to back up anything that I might say or forever be known as a liar and/or a gay man) is that those who joined for emergency communications purposes are perfectly happy with FM, and do not consider themselves as "trapped." All the "encouragement" in the world doesn't change their perspective. They're getting what they want out of amateur radio. What they don't need is to be denigrated by the Extras that think they need to do more to be a "real" ham. I do not denigrate any one based on their license class. For those who are getting all they want out of VHF FM, I am happy for them. But I have no patience for those who want additional privileges without passing whatever is the license requirement of the day. I know a couple of Techs who have been waiting to get a General until the code test is removed but they have been waiting for ten years. Wasting 10 years is foolish. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... bb wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Dee Flint wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message rthlink.net... [snip] I and the OM (who is our local club's VHF/UHF SSB guru) have worked hard at trying to get Techs involved with something other than repeater FM. Why? Because they have expressed dissatisfaction with repeater FM. While we have had some modest success, it's only a small percentage of the Techs who have jumped into these waters. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Have you asked them why they are reluctant to jump into those waters? They are unwilling to commit to the equipment until they have their General, not realizing how much fun they can have in the meantime. Since they've not jumped in, does that change your attitude about them? Nope, we just keep trying to find ways to let them know that there is much more available to them than they realize. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... bb wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Dee Flint wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message rthlink.net... [snip] I and the OM (who is our local club's VHF/UHF SSB guru) have worked hard at trying to get Techs involved with something other than repeater FM. Why? Because they have expressed dissatisfaction with repeater FM. Who hasn't? While we have had some modest success, it's only a small percentage of the Techs who have jumped into these waters. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Have you asked them why they are reluctant to jump into those waters? They are unwilling to commit to the equipment until they have their General, not realizing how much fun they can have in the meantime. I was told, when Novice Enhancement came along, not to pick up a microphone because I would never get good at the Morse Code and advance. Since they've not jumped in, does that change your attitude about them? Nope, we just keep trying to find ways to let them know that there is much more available to them than they realize. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Fair enough. Don't overdo it though, they might think you are "pushy." |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. What kind of things? However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. No other operating mode/skill has a practical pass/fail exam. That makes it arbitrary. I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Please state the regulatory purpose that a Morse Code exam and CW use provides. |
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... "Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... My attitude toward many of the current crop of new techs is one bathed upon five years observation, since returning to the U.S. I haven't chased them anywhere. In fact, it has been just the opposite. I've tried to encourage them to use simplex on FM. I've tried to encourage them to try 6 meters along with 432 and 144 MHz SSB and CW. I can't be faulted that they don't act after being encouraged. If these folks are, in fact "trapped" in a world of 2m only FM repeater operation, they have fashioned the trap themselves by not being more curious about the rest of VHF/UHF amateur radio. There are avenues open to them but they aren't participating. Dave K8MN Man does that say it all in a well articulated paragraph. Valid points out there in tech land. The Technician ticket originally was envisioned to enable those that had a technical slant that needed a place to play on the "air". It has degenerated into a defacto "entry level" to present day Ham Radio. What a bummer. I bet a lot of those out there don't know that the original Tech written was exactly the same as the General. The ONLY difference was the General had a 13 WPM cw test. Send and Receive. And the Tech had a 5wpm......and was available by mail. Dan/W4NTI Hello, Dan Been there, didn't want that T-shirt. The danger back when was that if you couldn't pass the 13 WPM, you had two choices: one was work on your code while the other was to take the tech. Some folks back then wanted the General but settled for a tech license when they couldn't pass muster at 13. Unfortunately, if you got on the air (back when, 2 meters was the novice voice band to try and get more activity on 2 meters!) it was possible to *never* work on the code and you were stuck as a tech. Most likely 6 meters was the band of choice as the best front ends might have had a 4.5 dB noise figure on 440 MHz. Even 2 meters wasn't all that busy; Heathkit sixers and twoers were the rigs of the day. I really wan't familiar with any territory above 30 MHz back then. The other choice was to work on your code. The novice license was issued for one year and was not renewable. I took this choice and it took me a while to get my code speed up. When I did take the test and pass 13, I was good for about 18 (which helps when you're nervous and travel 60 miles to take the test administered by the FCC, not a VEC). Of course, there were those that were only interested in VHF and above. Moonbounce was just starting to happen and dx records at 1.2 GHz and above were likely measured in miles. Not many. A very low noise pre-amp on 440 MHz probably had a 4.5 dB noise figure. Once you headed into microwaves, you simply had a diode mixer front end and not only noise, but signal loss as well. Not at all like today. Most vacuum tubes had interelectrode capacitances and delays in getting electrons across the void that prohibited most from operation much above 500 MHz. There were lighthouse tubes, travelling wave tubes, and others (I had a couple of gizmos that looked like Sputnik. I never knew what they were intended for LOL). Funny thing is that if you do get to a reasonable level of code proficiency (as required by the General class and above back when) there was yet another danger: you just might enjoy it :)) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA |
From: "bb" on Sat 18 Jun 2005 17:01
Dee Flint wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message bb wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Dee Flint wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message I agree with you Dave, Of course you do. The Elite always seem to do that... :-) I and the OM (who is our local club's VHF/UHF SSB guru) have worked hard at trying to get Techs involved with something other than repeater FM. Why? They like feeling superior... While we have had some modest success, it's only a small percentage of the Techs who have jumped into these waters. Have you asked them why they are reluctant to jump into those waters? The Elite don't "ask." They COMMAND. :-) Since they've not jumped in, does that change your attitude about them? They are allowed to continue existance. [ho hum] As of 17 Jun 05, there were 722,134 U.S. amateur radio licenses exclusive of Club Calls. Of those, 293,897 were Technician Class making them 40.70 percent of all licensees. There were 55,816 Technican Plus licensees, 7.73 percent of the total. Combined, Technician and Technician Plus licensees number 349,713 or 48.43 percent of the total number of licensees. The Elite (the PCTA Extras, that is) will rationalize that "few of those Techs are active" in an attempt to rationalize that "they don't count." :-) Unfortunately for the Elite, they will soon be the MAJORITY among all U.S. licensees. Dee and the others will "change their attitude" only in a quasi acknowledgement that they MIGHT exist...but wouldn't want their daughters marrying any of them (or equivalent). |
From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 00:07
"bb" wrote in message You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Godwin invoked. [ :-) ] Attitude-wise, Dan = Stebie. ALL shall march to the same drummer, in ranks, with one voice counting cadence as taught in the Church of St. Hiram. NONE shall speak against the Elite, the PCTA Extras. ONE "service," all wearing the same "uniform." Totalitarian. |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. What kind of things? Not all items apply to all people but here are a few: Walking, talking, reading, writing, riding a bicycle, skating, mathematics, any sport at even the the most rudimentary level, playing any musical instrument at even the most rudimentary level, computer literacy, typing, college courses. The list could go on, but just about everything mental or physical a person has learned is harder than code. However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. No other operating mode/skill has a practical pass/fail exam. That makes it arbitrary. All the tests are arbitrary as well as is the material chosen for coverage. I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Please state the regulatory purpose that a Morse Code exam and CW use provides. The regulator purpose of the exam is that it shows the candidate knows that particular basic of ham radio. No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "bb" wrote in message No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Correction: "So I will not continue replying to your comments in this thread" Some people here will interpret my previous comment to mean I'll not reply to any people in this thread and that may or may not be the case depending on how interesting their comments are. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
In article .com, bb wrote:
Maybe they are on FM yet not trapped at all. Maybe if you let Dee and Dan finish their thoughts on why they think the Techs are trapped we would have something worth discussing. My experience, which is now 8 years out of date, is that the techs did not own the kind of station that you need to operate ssb or cw in a contest. We would go to a friends house who had a wider range of bands (6m,2m,220,440 and 1.2gHz) than we had at home and work the contest from their using his call sign. It was quite fun, he had a barbecue in the summer and pizza in the fall. One guy (a tech) would show up with a commander 2m amp at 1pm, spend an hour getting ready and would not leave it except for "nature breaks" and grabbing some food for the entire contest unless someone asked to work 2m. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM IL Voice: (077)-424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 VoN Skype: mendelsonfamily. Looking for work as a CTO or consultant in handheld gaming, large systems development, handheld device construction, etc. See U.S. patent applications 20050108591, 20050107165. |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dave Heil wrote: bb wrote: Dave Heil wrote: Dee Flint wrote: "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message thlink.net... [snip] Why do I contest? To improve my score by improving my station and myself. Its as simple as that. Have a good day PS; I worked a bunch of sporadic skip yesterday on six meters in the June VHF contest.....with 8 watts and a 3 ele yagi at 20'. It's all a matter of perspective. Dan/W4NTI I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Oh, they're still trapped on VHF, Dee. Most of 'em are so trapped that they know only one mode--FM and do all of their operating via repeaters. What a wunnerful attitude you have toward Techs, Oh Mighty DXer. And people have to ask who chased away the Techs. I guess the only time you would embrace a Tech is if he were calling you out of band on 6M. Hi! I don't embrace radio amateurs at all, "bb". A firm handshake is good enough for me. That's not what the French do. They kiss you on both cheeks, especially for handing out contacts and QSL cards for out of band contacts. My attitude toward many of the current crop of new techs is one bathed upon five years observation, since returning to the U.S. I haven't chased them anywhere. In fact, it has been just the opposite. I've tried to encourage them to use simplex on FM. I've tried to encourage them to try 6 meters along with 432 and 144 MHz SSB and CW. I can't be faulted that they don't act after being encouraged. If these folks are, in fact "trapped" in a world of 2m only FM repeater operation, they have fashioned the trap themselves by not being more curious about the rest of VHF/UHF amateur radio. There are avenues open to them but they aren't participating. Dave K8MN A penny for your thoughts. Maybe they are on FM yet not trapped at all. Maybe if you let Dee and Dan finish their thoughts on why they think the Techs are trapped we would have something worth discussing. I have never said that they were trapped. It happens to be a belief expressed by some of the anti-code test people that they are trapped above 30mhz. I've always contended that any such trap is one of their own perception. That explains why you've put quotes around the word "trapped" in your description of those Techs. My opinion (that means it's my opinion and I don't have to spend weeks at the Library of Congress to back up anything that I might say or forever be known as a liar and/or a gay man) is that those who joined for emergency communications purposes are perfectly happy with FM, and do not consider themselves as "trapped." All the "encouragement" in the world doesn't change their perspective. They're getting what they want out of amateur radio. What they don't need is to be denigrated by the Extras that think they need to do more to be a "real" ham. I do not denigrate any one based on their license class. For those who are getting all they want out of VHF FM, I am happy for them. But I have no patience for those who want additional privileges without passing whatever is the license requirement of the day. I know a couple of Techs who have been waiting to get a General until the code test is removed but they have been waiting for ten years. Wasting 10 years is foolish. Lack of patience and describing them as foolish does indicate your feelings for them. Waiting is worth it to them or they wouldn't do it. Is it so hard for you to consider that they really, really don't want to learn THE code? |
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote: In article .com, bb wrote: Maybe they are on FM yet not trapped at all. Maybe if you let Dee and Dan finish their thoughts on why they think the Techs are trapped we would have something worth discussing. My experience, which is now 8 years out of date, is that the techs did not own the kind of station that you need to operate ssb or cw in a contest. We would go to a friends house who had a wider range of bands (6m,2m,220,440 and 1.2gHz) than we had at home and work the contest from their using his call sign. It was quite fun, he had a barbecue in the summer and pizza in the fall. One guy (a tech) would show up with a commander 2m amp at 1pm, spend an hour getting ready and would not leave it except for "nature breaks" and grabbing some food for the entire contest unless someone asked to work 2m. Geoff. In the USA, the FM equipment has hit rock bottom in the last few years. Almost any amateur of any income level can purchase new FM equipment. Multi-mode rigs of course are much more expensive. Many, but not most of the Techs that I knew had at least 2M ssb. |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. What kind of things? Not all items apply to all people but here are a few: Walking, talking, reading, writing, riding a bicycle, skating, mathematics, any sport at even the the most rudimentary level, playing any musical instrument at even the most rudimentary level, computer literacy, typing, college courses. The list could go on, but just about everything mental or physical a person has learned is harder than code. Can you play the string bass? There's an FCC sticker on teh back of my stereo. What if the FCC were to make it a requirement that you have to pass a string bass exam in order to play music on your stereo? However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. No other operating mode/skill has a practical pass/fail exam. That makes it arbitrary. All the tests are arbitrary as well as is the material chosen for coverage. They are? I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Please state the regulatory purpose that a Morse Code exam and CW use provides. The regulator purpose of the exam is that it shows the candidate knows that particular basic of ham radio. But why no other practical operating exam for other modes? No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. No mode is mandated, yet we have a practical operating pass/fail exam for one mode. That is arbitrary. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. Dee, not at all. I wish only the arbitrary Morse/Farnsworth Exams to be retired. But recognize that the FCC mandates the use no particular mode. You can use CW all you want or not us it at all. So why is there a practical operating exam for this one mode but not all other modes? And why is CW use allowed by No-Code Technicians on VHF, but not HF? Why did Jim Miccolis N2EY say about Hans restructuring proposal, that a CW exam would be a barrier to CW use? So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I understand how uneasy it must make you to have to face the truth of arbitrary licensing requirements and still advocate a Morse/Farnsworth Exam. If you wish to discontinue healthy, legitimate discourse with respect to amateur policy, I understand. It is not for the faint of heart. Best of Luck, Brian |
Dee Flint wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "bb" wrote in message No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Correction: "So I will not continue replying to your comments in this thread" Some people here will interpret my previous comment to mean I'll not reply to any people in this thread and that may or may not be the case depending on how interesting their comments are. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I'm sorry that legitimate, civil discourse on amateur radio policy has you upset. The past couple of days exchanges has been more policy discussion that this group has seen in years. It's too bad that you want to abstain just when I thought we were getting somewhere. Your core beliefs about amateur radio must have been shaken, so I wish you a speedy recovery. |
Jim Hampton wrote: Funny thing is that if you do get to a reasonable level of code proficiency (as required by the General class and above back when) there was yet another danger: you just might enjoy it :)) Now thats a real danger! Hams having fun. ;^) |
bb wrote: wrote: From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 00:07 "bb" wrote in message You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Godwin invoked. [ :-) ] Attitude-wise, Dan = Stebie. ALL shall march to the same drummer, in ranks, with one voice counting cadence as taught in the Church of St. Hiram. NONE shall speak against the Elite, the PCTA Extras. ONE "service," all wearing the same "uniform." Totalitarian. Len, it looks like Dan and Dee have bailed out on civil, legitimate discourse on amateur radio policy. Dave has made himself pretty scarce as well. I see there's a Jim Miccolis N2EY posting below. I haven't gotten to it yet, as I'm saving the best for last. Hope he doesn't disappoint as he has ever since he made the comment, "A Morse Exam would be a barrier to CW use." bb Welp, Jim continues to disappoint. He's made some vague denials as usual, nothing substantive. bb |
From: "bb" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 08:50
wrote: From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 00:07 "bb" wrote in message You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Godwin invoked. [ :-) ] Attitude-wise, Dan = Stebie. ALL shall march to the same drummer, in ranks, with one voice counting cadence as taught in the Church of St. Hiram. NONE shall speak against the Elite, the PCTA Extras. ONE "service," all wearing the same "uniform." Totalitarian. Len, it looks like Dan and Dee have bailed out on civil, legitimate discourse on amateur radio policy. Dave has made himself pretty scarce as well. Maybe there's been some band openings to France on 6m? Dan and Dave and the remaining living PCTAs haven't much changed since '98 in here. They command a consensus of common thought; i.e., CONCEDE to THEIR consensus, none others. I see there's a Jim Miccolis N2EY posting below. I haven't gotten to it yet, as I'm saving the best for last. Hope he doesn't disappoint as he has ever since he made the comment, "A Morse Exam would be a barrier to CW use." Oh, oh...dat put Sister Nun of the Above into ruler-spank mode again. She demand posting quote of where, when she make dat. Dis be court of law! Bang da gavel, heah come de judge, heah come de judge... Jimmie can't bear to acknowledge that the current percentage of Technician and Technican Plus class licensees are now at 48.4 percent of all individual (non-club) licensees in the USA. Jimmie has to rationalize that with all sorts of rather irrelevant "excuses" common to the Elitist PCTA viewpoint of all those commonfolk not embracing morsemanship with loving open arms. ARS (aka Archaic Radiotelegraphy Society) is in full flower in here, their self-appointed self-righteous "representatives" damning all who do not respect their mighty elitist rule. The ARS only has "fun" when all licensees do as the Elites do, that is, doing narrowband morse beeping. The LAW is the LAW and NO LAWS CAN EVER BE CHANGED according to these "guardians of amateur paradise." Code test MUST remain. PCTA say so. No arguments against. Period. [sigh...] Happy Father's Day to you, Brian. |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. What kind of things? Not all items apply to all people but here are a few: Walking, talking, reading, writing, riding a bicycle, skating, mathematics, any sport at even the the most rudimentary level, playing any musical instrument at even the most rudimentary level, computer literacy, typing, college courses. The list could go on, but just about everything mental or physical a person has learned is harder than code. Can you play the string bass? There's an FCC sticker on teh back of my stereo. What if the FCC were to make it a requirement that you have to pass a string bass exam in order to play music on your stereo? However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. No other operating mode/skill has a practical pass/fail exam. That makes it arbitrary. All the tests are arbitrary as well as is the material chosen for coverage. They are? I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Please state the regulatory purpose that a Morse Code exam and CW use provides. The regulator purpose of the exam is that it shows the candidate knows that particular basic of ham radio. But why no other practical operating exam for other modes? No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. No mode is mandated, yet we have a practical operating pass/fail exam for one mode. That is arbitrary. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. Dee, not at all. I wish only the arbitrary Morse/Farnsworth Exams to be retired. But recognize that the FCC mandates the use no particular mode. You can use CW all you want or not us it at all. So why is there a practical operating exam for this one mode but not all other modes? And why is CW use allowed by No-Code Technicians on VHF, but not HF? Why did Jim Miccolis N2EY say about Hans restructuring proposal, that a CW exam would be a barrier to CW use? So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I understand how uneasy it must make you to have to face the truth of arbitrary licensing requirements and still advocate a Morse/Farnsworth Exam. Ok, one more round but that's it. All the licensing requirements are arbitrary. Every single one of them. There are several radio services for which no testing is required. So if some services do not need testing, then it is arbitrary for those that do. However the goals and purposes of amateur radio make it desireable to test candidates for these licenses. If you wish to discontinue healthy, legitimate discourse with respect to amateur policy, I understand. It is not for the faint of heart. Best of Luck, Brian The problem with the Morse discussion is that every possible conceivable argument on either side has been aired dozens, if not hundreds, of times. It is not healthy to continue discussing this policy issue. No new data comes to light. No new rational has come up. There's no point in rehashing the same issues. Sooner or later the FCC will rule and we'll all have to live with the consequences good or bad. If the result is as the NCTA state that it will be, i.e. a big wave of new hams plus a big wave of hams upgrading and getting on HF, just watch the DX stations, especially the rare ones, hide down on CW even more than they are now. If you exclude Japan, the US has more amateur radio operators than the rest of the world combined. If the bands get as busy as the NCTAs imply they will from this rush of new and upgrading hams, a lot of us will be drifting even more to CW just to find some room. On the other hand, if the PCTAs are correct, i.e. the impact will be insignificant just as other changes of the recent past have been, then there is NO reason to change the requirements. Changes that have little to no noticeable impact aren't worth the bother of implementing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I'm sorry that legitimate, civil discourse on amateur radio policy has you upset. The past couple of days exchanges has been more policy discussion that this group has seen in years. It's too bad that you want to abstain just when I thought we were getting somewhere. Your core beliefs about amateur radio must have been shaken, so I wish you a speedy recovery. Doesn't bother me in the least. Nor are my beliefs shaken. It is simply a waste of your time and my time for either of us to continue further when it is quite obvious that each of us is firm in our point of view. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
From: Dee Flint on Jun 19, 1:40 pm
"bb" wrote in message Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message Dee Flint wrote: I understand how uneasy it must make you to have to face the truth of arbitrary licensing requirements and still advocate a Morse/Farnsworth Exam. Ok, one more round but that's it. All the licensing requirements are arbitrary. Every single one of them. HERESY! Wash your mouth out with soap! How dare you say that?!? Test Element One is the LAW! That LAW! can't be changed! There are several radio services for which no testing is required. Irrelevant. OTHER radio services are NOT amateur radio! So if some services do not need testing, then it is arbitrary for those that do. However the goals and purposes of amateur radio make it desireable to test candidates for these licenses. EVERYBODY has to test for morsemanship for below 30 MHz. FINAL. The Elite PCTA have spoken. No arguments against. If you wish to discontinue healthy, legitimate discourse with respect to amateur policy, I understand. It is not for the faint of heart. Best of Luck, Brian The problem with the Morse discussion is that every possible conceivable argument on either side has been aired dozens, if not hundreds, of times. Elite PCTA have spoken. No arguments against them. It is not healthy to continue discussing this policy issue. True. Two Elite PCTA have died since 1999. No new data comes to light. NO new data PERMITTED in here. No new rational has come up. WRONG. Rationales and rationalizations of ancient reasons abound. Elite PCTA have spoken. No arguments against them. There's no point in rehashing the same issues. Elite PCTA have spoken. No arguments against them. If the result is as the NCTA state that it will be, i.e. a big wave of new hams plus a big wave of hams upgrading and getting on HF, just watch the DX stations, especially the rare ones, hide down on CW even more than they are now. Who say "big wave on HF coming if no code test?" Who? WHO? Show reference, show work. If you exclude Japan, the US has more amateur radio operators than the rest of the world combined. If the bands get as busy as the NCTAs imply they will from this rush of new and upgrading hams, a lot of us will be drifting even more to CW just to find some room. Ham bands get crowded? Hams ask for more bandwidth. Simple. Ask ARRL to lobby for more bandspace. ARRL "representative of 'all' hams." Not too swift. ARRL try to get new band at 60 meters, get only five channels. League not very good now. Why not? PCTA Elite at "inside" of league, should be able to effect what they want. FCC no give. Why that? On the other hand, if the PCTAs are correct, i.e. the impact will be insignificant just as other changes of the recent past have been, then there is NO reason to change the requirements. Old = Good. Change = bad. Changes that have little to no noticeable impact aren't worth the bother of implementing. "I'm all right, Jack!" [old Brit saying] "We've got ours, nyah, nyah, nyah" [old childhood taunt] All must show DEDICATION and COMMITMENT to AMATEUR COMMUNITY by learning and testing for morse code! [PCTA mantra] Meanwhile, since 1991, that no-code-test (horrid!) Technician class license got OVER a HUNDRED THOUSAND *NEW* radio amateurs BEFORE restructuring. Many, many more new than all the other old classes combined and the only ones which contributed to holding the average total licensee numbers not quite constant. Right now, the two Technician class licensees make up 48.4% of ALL invidual (non-club) licensees and it keeps rising and rising and rising. Why that? The Novice class, the supposed "entry level" license NEVER grew like the no-code-test Tech numbers. No way. You don't suppose the (dedicated, committed) code test could have anything to do with it, do you? Of course not. The dedicated, committed amateurs would "always" struggle and work to learn code, the best of all possible modes, right? Ho hum. The "arguments" continue with the PCTA Extras NOT listening. They will not accept arguments against their beloved code test. They are manly macho morsemen, dedicated and committed to their "service." None shall naysay them, no way. Screum say I (in a most non-gender-specific way, of course). Yours most sincerely and with all best wishes, |
|
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... I was told, when Novice Enhancement came along, not to pick up a microphone because I would never get good at the Morse Code and advance. That was good advice. I did the same thing. I had my Novice for 3 months, skipped the Technician, and got the General. I could have got on 2m AM as a Novice. I had a Gonset II on load from Civil Defense. I flat refused to do so until I got the General. Glad I did. Dan/W4NTI |
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... My attitude toward many of the current crop of new techs is one bathed upon five years observation, since returning to the U.S. I haven't chased them anywhere. In fact, it has been just the opposite. I've tried to encourage them to use simplex on FM. I've tried to encourage them to try 6 meters along with 432 and 144 MHz SSB and CW. I can't be faulted that they don't act after being encouraged. If these folks are, in fact "trapped" in a world of 2m only FM repeater operation, they have fashioned the trap themselves by not being more curious about the rest of VHF/UHF amateur radio. There are avenues open to them but they aren't participating. Dave K8MN Man does that say it all in a well articulated paragraph. Valid points out there in tech land. Indeed it does. David has articulated, and Dan has agreed that a Tech really isn't worth much as an amateur if they don't do the things that Dave, Dan and Dee want them to be doing. I'm sure that your attitudes spill over into your communication with those unworthy Techs. Not only a Dip****, but a dumbass as well, eh N0IMD? Just keep making up what you want. The FCC wants the Technician to UPGRADE. So do we......whats wrong with that? Dip****/Dumbass The Technician ticket originally was envisioned to enable those that had a technical slant that needed a place to play on the "air". It has degenerated into a defacto "entry level" to present day Ham Radio. What a bummer. Degenerated? Dan, I'd like to introduce you to the FCC sometime. It was the FCC that turned the Technician license into your disdained entry level to present day "Ham Radio." Sure was.....and the FCC has degenerated into a home for Lawyers sucking on the Federal tit. Got a problem with that? Truth is truth. The FCC makes the rules...yep they do. And they haven't a clue. Yep thats true too. Argue that one. I bet a lot of those out there don't know that the original Tech written was exactly the same as the General. The ONLY difference was the General had a 13 WPM cw test. Send and Receive. And the Tech had a 5wpm......and was available by mail. Dan/W4NTI Thanks for the insight into the "Mind of Dan." Just tellin the truth and you cain't stand it. Dan/W4NTI |
Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. There are none who cannot learn the code. Really? Why do you say that? Because they have already learned many things far tougher than the code. What kind of things? Not all items apply to all people but here are a few: Walking, talking, reading, writing, riding a bicycle, skating, mathematics, any sport at even the the most rudimentary level, playing any musical instrument at even the most rudimentary level, computer literacy, typing, college courses. The list could go on, but just about everything mental or physical a person has learned is harder than code. Can you play the string bass? There's an FCC sticker on teh back of my stereo. What if the FCC were to make it a requirement that you have to pass a string bass exam in order to play music on your stereo? However there are those for whom other activities can and should have priority on their time. However that is no excuse for eliminating it as a test element since the same argument can be applied to the theory. You hold a very interesting point of view. You say that since everyone can learn the code, that it must be retained as a test element? No it should be retained because it is one of the basics of amateur radio along with things like Ohm's law, propagation, etc. No other operating mode/skill has a practical pass/fail exam. That makes it arbitrary. All the tests are arbitrary as well as is the material chosen for coverage. They are? I say that it should be removed as a test element because it no longer serves a regulatory purpose. That's a matter of opinion. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Please state the regulatory purpose that a Morse Code exam and CW use provides. The regulator purpose of the exam is that it shows the candidate knows that particular basic of ham radio. But why no other practical operating exam for other modes? No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. No mode is mandated, yet we have a practical operating pass/fail exam for one mode. That is arbitrary. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. Dee, not at all. I wish only the arbitrary Morse/Farnsworth Exams to be retired. But recognize that the FCC mandates the use no particular mode. You can use CW all you want or not us it at all. So why is there a practical operating exam for this one mode but not all other modes? And why is CW use allowed by No-Code Technicians on VHF, but not HF? Why did Jim Miccolis N2EY say about Hans restructuring proposal, that a CW exam would be a barrier to CW use? So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I understand how uneasy it must make you to have to face the truth of arbitrary licensing requirements and still advocate a Morse/Farnsworth Exam. Ok, one more round but that's it. All the licensing requirements are arbitrary. Every single one of them. There are several radio services for which no testing is required. So if some services do not need testing, then it is arbitrary for those that do. However the goals and purposes of amateur radio make it desireable to test candidates for these licenses. Has Jim approved these thoughts of yours? If you wish to discontinue healthy, legitimate discourse with respect to amateur policy, I understand. It is not for the faint of heart. Best of Luck, Brian The problem with the Morse discussion is that every possible conceivable argument on either side has been aired dozens, if not hundreds, of times. It is not healthy to continue discussing this policy issue. No new data comes to light. No new rational has come up. There's no point in rehashing the same issues. Sooner or later the FCC will rule and we'll all have to live with the consequences good or bad. If the result is as the NCTA state that it will be, i.e. a big wave of new hams plus a big wave of hams upgrading and getting on HF, just watch the DX stations, especially the rare ones, hide down on CW even more than they are now. If you exclude Japan, the US has more amateur radio operators than the rest of the world combined. If the bands get as busy as the NCTAs imply they will from this rush of new and upgrading hams, a lot of us will be drifting even more to CW just to find some room. I'm not stating that there will be hordes of unwashed nor waves of intelligent technogeniuses. But if the code exam remains, I don't think there's much hope of anything positive happening. On the other hand, if the PCTAs are correct, i.e. the impact will be insignificant just as other changes of the recent past have been, then there is NO reason to change the requirements. Changes that have little to no noticeable impact aren't worth the bother of implementing. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Of course, I disagree. I think it is worthwhile to have regulations and a licensing structure which makes sense, regardless of negligible impacts. |
"Jim Hampton" wrote in message ... "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in message ink.net... "Dave Heil" wrote in message ink.net... My attitude toward many of the current crop of new techs is one bathed upon five years observation, since returning to the U.S. I haven't chased them anywhere. In fact, it has been just the opposite. I've tried to encourage them to use simplex on FM. I've tried to encourage them to try 6 meters along with 432 and 144 MHz SSB and CW. I can't be faulted that they don't act after being encouraged. If these folks are, in fact "trapped" in a world of 2m only FM repeater operation, they have fashioned the trap themselves by not being more curious about the rest of VHF/UHF amateur radio. There are avenues open to them but they aren't participating. Dave K8MN Man does that say it all in a well articulated paragraph. Valid points out there in tech land. The Technician ticket originally was envisioned to enable those that had a technical slant that needed a place to play on the "air". It has degenerated into a defacto "entry level" to present day Ham Radio. What a bummer. I bet a lot of those out there don't know that the original Tech written was exactly the same as the General. The ONLY difference was the General had a 13 WPM cw test. Send and Receive. And the Tech had a 5wpm......and was available by mail. Dan/W4NTI Hello, Dan Been there, didn't want that T-shirt. The danger back when was that if you couldn't pass the 13 WPM, you had two choices: one was work on your code while the other was to take the tech. Some folks back then wanted the General but settled for a tech license when they couldn't pass muster at 13. Unfortunately, if you got on the air (back when, 2 meters was the novice voice band to try and get more activity on 2 meters!) it was possible to *never* work on the code and you were stuck as a tech. Most likely 6 meters was the band of choice as the best front ends might have had a 4.5 dB noise figure on 440 MHz. Even 2 meters wasn't all that busy; Heathkit sixers and twoers were the rigs of the day. I really wan't familiar with any territory above 30 MHz back then. The other choice was to work on your code. The novice license was issued for one year and was not renewable. I took this choice and it took me a while to get my code speed up. When I did take the test and pass 13, I was good for about 18 (which helps when you're nervous and travel 60 miles to take the test administered by the FCC, not a VEC). Of course, there were those that were only interested in VHF and above. Moonbounce was just starting to happen and dx records at 1.2 GHz and above were likely measured in miles. Not many. A very low noise pre-amp on 440 MHz probably had a 4.5 dB noise figure. Once you headed into microwaves, you simply had a diode mixer front end and not only noise, but signal loss as well. Not at all like today. Most vacuum tubes had interelectrode capacitances and delays in getting electrons across the void that prohibited most from operation much above 500 MHz. There were lighthouse tubes, travelling wave tubes, and others (I had a couple of gizmos that looked like Sputnik. I never knew what they were intended for LOL). Funny thing is that if you do get to a reasonable level of code proficiency (as required by the General class and above back when) there was yet another danger: you just might enjoy it :)) 73 from Rochester, NY Jim AA2QA Yep indeed....it was "up or out". Novice good for 1 year, non renewable and can't get it again. Talk about incentive licensing. A very good friend mine, Ray, K8DEN recently passed away. I am so happy he finally was able to get on HF. Thats right as a 5wpm General. He was like you said, just could NOT learn the code. Whether physical or mental I don't know. Yes indeed VHF back then was tough. But it was fun. I had it both ways. I was on CW on HF and phone on 2m AM. Loved them both. It is much easier for the beginning ham now than it was for us Jim. Perhaps it is too easy and that is the problem. Dan/W4NTI |
Dan/W4NTI wrote: The FCC wants the Technician to UPGRADE. So do we......whats wrong with that? Dip****/Dumbass Perhaps the FCC should sent out invitations to upgrade if they want so desperately for it to happen. |
"bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Hey Dee, Good question actually. Perhaps they are part of the vast majority of hams that are inactive. More likely they are all "stuck" on FM and have not a clue what else is going on with V/Uhf. What a shame. Dan/W4NTI Ah, yes. The Shameful, Clueless Techs. With attitudes like yours, it's no wonder they don't hang around. I don't recall anyone on here, other than you "bb", using the word Shameful or Clueless regarding the Technician licensees. I do. You used the phrases, "not a clue" and "what a shame" to describe Techs who chose to be "stuck" on FM. All I see is folks stating they don't understand why the Techs don't take full advantage of their full license privileges. You go beyond that. You imply that there's something wrong with them. You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Dan/W4NTI You are the disgrace, Dan. Your bad attitude about Techs says it all. Let me guess... You're an Extra, right? Not a clue as to what else is out there. What a shame the dont. That is what I meant and you know it. Yep I am an extra, so what? I've been one since I passed in in front of the FCC in 1977. Again so what? I spend most of my time talking with, as you think, lower class amateurs. Most of my SSB on HF is in the General sub bands. Most of my CW is the same. ALL of my VHF is in the Tech sub bands, and I operate there a LOT. Don't come off with this crap that I have a problem with the Tech ticket. Screw you N0IMD. Dan/W4NTI |
wrote in message ups.com... From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 00:07 "bb" wrote in message You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Godwin invoked. [ :-) ] Attitude-wise, Dan = Stebie. ALL shall march to the same drummer, in ranks, with one voice counting cadence as taught in the Church of St. Hiram. NONE shall speak against the Elite, the PCTA Extras. ONE "service," all wearing the same "uniform." Totalitarian. Hey Lennie....did that beating you took with the lye soap leave any permanent scars? I've figured this guy out folks. He was a barracks lawyer that got caught up in several barracks parties. A total loser. Dan/W4NTI |
"Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "Dee Flint" wrote in message ... "bb" wrote in message No one has ever claimed that CW use or the use of any other mode (SSB, non-code digital) provides a regulatory purpose. However throwing that comment into the discussion illustrates that you wish to get rid of not only the test but the use of CW. So I will not continue to participate in this thread. Correction: "So I will not continue replying to your comments in this thread" Some people here will interpret my previous comment to mean I'll not reply to any people in this thread and that may or may not be the case depending on how interesting their comments are. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE After he got cozy with Lennie the lizard I decided he is here to agitate....oh...didn't someone say that already? Dan/W4NTI |
"bb" wrote in message ups.com... Dan/W4NTI wrote: "bb" wrote in message oups.com... Dee Flint wrote: I and the OM also worked some of the VHF contest and noticed a very strange thing. Only 10% of the contacts that we made were Technician operators. On the other hand, 80% of them were Extra class operators. So where are all the Techs who are "trapped" in VHF and above because they "can't" pass the code (as some would have us believe)? Dee D. Flint, N8UZE Dee, I'm going to guess (i.e., don't ask me for facts, figures, substantive studies, reports from the FCC/ARRL, etc) that of the Techs that have stayed in amateur radio, most have done so for the emergency communications aspect of the service. As such, they would typically stay on FM. The ones who could learn Morse Code and have had to time to do so have moved up. Those who didn't have the time or couldn't learn it have moved on. It's nice to see Miss Manners finally noticing something amiss in the ARS. "bb" is just full of all sorts of assumptions, ain't he boys and girls? Using his logic then all us "higher" class operators need to get out of EMCOM, eh? I'll be sure to tell the Extra class Emergency Net Control operator next time I see her. Dan/W4NTI Dan, you're welcome to tell her anything you want. She's probably already aware that you usually get it wrong anyway. Do you have trouble chewing gum and walking Bryan? Dan/W4NTI |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:57 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com