| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
September 18th 05, 07:12 PM
|
|||
|
|||
From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sat 17 Sep 2005 22:29
"Dan/W4NTI" wrote in No "Alun L. Palmer" Lennie the loser is transfixed on the anti-CW testing campaign. He can not carry on a discussion that has NOTHING to do with CW or testing without out bringing it into the discussion. Get it now? Why put my name in quotes? Plug it into the FCC database and it will come back with N3KIP, and show you that I am an Extra. Do you think I'm someone else? Jeswald wants all to be identified by their "tribal name" (the callsign in a ham radio group). When the "tribe" gathers, all must stay within the "tribal rules." :-) I[f] Len is transfixed on this issue, I suspect it's because he really wants a ham licence, despite his protestations to the contrary. "Transfixed?" No. Just terribly, terribly PERSISTENT. :-) Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. Radiotelegraphy was the very first - and ONLY possible way - to communicate by radio. That was a mere 109 years ago, before all of electronics had rather revolutionized our society, before the vacuum tube was invented, well before the transistor was invented. Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. [the largest use of radiotelegraphy is the long pulse code of the keyless auto entry "fob" transmitter, but that is for control, not communications and does not use the Morse-Vail coding] Modernization should be the order of the day, not the odor of antiquity. The "necessity" of testing for morse code cognition to operate any radio transmitter at 30 MHz or below is an old artificiality of the mind, abandoned by all other radio services, technically invalid, kept alive only by the egos and fantasies and conditioned thinking of those needing something, some ability to be "better than average." It is out of date, out of time, out of steam, and out to lunch. Do "I" want a ham license? Yes and no. :-) I've had a commercial license since '56, tested for it at a real FCC field office (not a COLEM), had experience in operating HF, VHF, UHF, microwave radios prior to that, more afterwards including LF, VLF and microwaves on up to 4mm wavelengths. I've retired from a career in radio-electronics design engineering (but only for regular hours). I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947, something on-going. I don't really NEED an amateur license to fulfill my Life's Ambition. But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Maybe I "should" get one? :-) "Tribal rules," ey what? :-) dit dit |
|
#2
September 18th 05, 10:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
See what I mean AGAIN? He simply can't keep on a subject, always brings
it back around to CW, or in his case anti CW. And most always brings in his so-called military exploits. What a boring jerk he is. Dan/W4NTI wrote in message oups.com... From: "Alun L. Palmer" on Sat 17 Sep 2005 22:29 "Dan/W4NTI" wrote in No "Alun L. Palmer" Lennie the loser is transfixed on the anti-CW testing campaign. He can not carry on a discussion that has NOTHING to do with CW or testing without out bringing it into the discussion. Get it now? Why put my name in quotes? Plug it into the FCC database and it will come back with N3KIP, and show you that I am an Extra. Do you think I'm someone else? Jeswald wants all to be identified by their "tribal name" (the callsign in a ham radio group). When the "tribe" gathers, all must stay within the "tribal rules." :-) I[f] Len is transfixed on this issue, I suspect it's because he really wants a ham licence, despite his protestations to the contrary. "Transfixed?" No. Just terribly, terribly PERSISTENT. :-) Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. Radiotelegraphy was the very first - and ONLY possible way - to communicate by radio. That was a mere 109 years ago, before all of electronics had rather revolutionized our society, before the vacuum tube was invented, well before the transistor was invented. Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. [the largest use of radiotelegraphy is the long pulse code of the keyless auto entry "fob" transmitter, but that is for control, not communications and does not use the Morse-Vail coding] Modernization should be the order of the day, not the odor of antiquity. The "necessity" of testing for morse code cognition to operate any radio transmitter at 30 MHz or below is an old artificiality of the mind, abandoned by all other radio services, technically invalid, kept alive only by the egos and fantasies and conditioned thinking of those needing something, some ability to be "better than average." It is out of date, out of time, out of steam, and out to lunch. Do "I" want a ham license? Yes and no. :-) I've had a commercial license since '56, tested for it at a real FCC field office (not a COLEM), had experience in operating HF, VHF, UHF, microwave radios prior to that, more afterwards including LF, VLF and microwaves on up to 4mm wavelengths. I've retired from a career in radio-electronics design engineering (but only for regular hours). I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947, something on-going. I don't really NEED an amateur license to fulfill my Life's Ambition. But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Maybe I "should" get one? :-) "Tribal rules," ey what? :-) dit dit |
|
#3
September 19th 05, 05:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#4
September 19th 05, 08:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. That's fine for you. I'm sure that you'll understand that radio amateurs don't feel bound by what is important to you. Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. The fantasy seems to be yours alone. You like to use terms like "fantasy" and "artificiality" and "last stand" when you write of morse code. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It bothers you. I can live with your being bothered. right that is of course why the Views of the advocates of Morse Code are being ignored by the FCC, ITU, IARU, and many of the nations on the planet ...[the largest use of radiotelegraphy is the long pulse code of the keyless auto entry "fob" transmitter, but that is for control, not communications and does not use the Morse-Vail coding] Modernization should be the order of the day, not the odor of antiquity. Fine, let Detroit modernize those keyless fob transmitters. Start a campaign. again your ability to understand english shows it sad state Do "I" want a ham license? Yes and no. :-) I've had a commercial license since '56, tested for it at a real FCC field office (not a COLEM), had experience in operating HF, VHF, UHF, microwave radios prior to that, more afterwards including LF, VLF and microwaves on up to 4mm wavelengths. I've retired from a career in radio-electronics design engineering (but only for regular hours). I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947, something on-going. Your past professional work does not, in and of itself, qualify you for an amateur radio license. Your paragraph of professional achievements is irrelevant to obtaining an amateur ticket. again with tangential matter I don't really NEED an amateur license to fulfill my Life's Ambition. There you go. Indeed Neither do I my Life Ambition are not based on a requirement for a Ham License But then you don't get the point or is it simplier than that? just a case of Binary thinking Ham radio is his lifes ambition so that means he will not pursue it But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Was that a deliberate distortion on your part or have you just become forgetful? No a simple turth many of the Licensees esp arround DO indeed demand such before allowing comment Maybe I "should" get one? :-) "Tribal rules," ey what? :-) It looks as if you've been busy making up your mind on whether to do so for nearly the past six years. I'm betting on inertia. Have a nice lunch and catch a nap, OT. what is the hurry? Dave K8MN |
|
#5
September 19th 05, 01:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
an_old_friend wrote:
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. That's fine for you. I'm sure that you'll understand that radio amateurs don't feel bound by what is important to you. Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. The fantasy seems to be yours alone. You like to use terms like "fantasy" and "artificiality" and "last stand" when you write of morse code. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It bothers you. I can live with your being bothered. right that is of course why the Views of the advocates of Morse Code are being ignored by the FCC, ITU, IARU, and many of the nations on the planet The views are being ignored? That's preposterous. Morse code isn't being done away with. ...[the largest use of radiotelegraphy is the long pulse code of the keyless auto entry "fob" transmitter, but that is for control, not communications and does not use the Morse-Vail coding] Modernization should be the order of the day, not the odor of antiquity. Fine, let Detroit modernize those keyless fob transmitters. Start a campaign. again your ability to understand english shows it sad state It would probably be better if you left it to others to critique another's use or understanding of the language. Do "I" want a ham license? Yes and no. :-) I've had a commercial license since '56, tested for it at a real FCC field office (not a COLEM), had experience in operating HF, VHF, UHF, microwave radios prior to that, more afterwards including LF, VLF and microwaves on up to 4mm wavelengths. I've retired from a career in radio-electronics design engineering (but only for regular hours). I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947, something on-going. Your past professional work does not, in and of itself, qualify you for an amateur radio license. Your paragraph of professional achievements is irrelevant to obtaining an amateur ticket. again with tangential matter Did you find anything in my statement to be unfactual? What was the purpose for Len's outlining his "PROFESSIONAL" experience yet again? Was his material tangential? I don't really NEED an amateur license to fulfill my Life's Ambition. There you go. Indeed Neither do I my Life Ambition are not based on a requirement for a Ham License What is your singular Life Ambition, Colonel? I've had many ambitions in my life. I achieved most of them. Did you obtain an amateur radio license? You must have had an ambition to do so. Has Len stated an ambition to obtain an amateur radio license? Has he done so? But then you don't get the point or is it simplier than that? just a case of Binary thinking Ham radio is his lifes ambition so that means he will not pursue it Sure, I get the point--the fable of the fox and the grapes. Our wily old fox can't reach the grapes, so he tells others that the grapes are probably sour. Len has stated at various times that he has had a decades-long interest in amateur radio *and* that he has no interest in obtaining an amateur radio license. He is interested enough to post here for nearly ten years. One could easily gather that he has enough interest in amateur radio for that to take place. But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Was that a deliberate distortion on your part or have you just become forgetful? No a simple turth many of the Licensees esp arround DO indeed demand such before allowing comment Len has been making comments here for nearly a decade. You are confusing "allowing comment" with "giving credence to views" and that's the "turth". Maybe I "should" get one? :-) "Tribal rules," ey what? :-) It looks as if you've been busy making up your mind on whether to do so for nearly the past six years. I'm betting on inertia. Have a nice lunch and catch a nap, OT. what is the hurry? Actuarial tables. Dave K8MN |
|
#6
September 19th 05, 05:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
hmm trying again since my last reply is now 100 hours awol
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. That's fine for you. I'm sure that you'll understand that radio amateurs don't feel bound by what is important to you. Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. The fantasy seems to be yours alone. You like to use terms like "fantasy" and "artificiality" and "last stand" when you write of morse code. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It bothers you. I can live with your being bothered. Gee Alive and Well that is why the FCC, ITU, IARU, and many nations have have abandoned the notion it is vital. Even the ARRL has admitted (in practical terms) that Morse Code isn't vital ...[the largest use of radiotelegraphy is the long pulse code of the keyless auto entry "fob" transmitter, but that is for control, not communications and does not use the Morse-Vail coding] Modernization should be the order of the day, not the odor of antiquity. Fine, let Detroit modernize those keyless fob transmitters. Start a campaign. your understanding of English isn't very good as you miss the point... again Do "I" want a ham license? Yes and no. :-) I've had a commercial license since '56, tested for it at a real FCC field office (not a COLEM), had experience in operating HF, VHF, UHF, microwave radios prior to that, more afterwards including LF, VLF and microwaves on up to 4mm wavelengths. I've retired from a career in radio-electronics design engineering (but only for regular hours). I've been a hobbyist in radio-electronics since 1947, something on-going. Your past professional work does not, in and of itself, qualify you for an amateur radio license. Your paragraph of professional achievements is irrelevant to obtaining an amateur ticket. I don't really NEED an amateur license to fulfill my Life's Ambition. There you go. Indeed and by that remark would could take it that YOUR Lifes ambition does require one. My Life's ambition does not require a Ham License either, but to you it seems that only something is Vital or useless But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Was that a deliberate distortion on your part or have you just become forgetful? Niether, I guess you have not been reading the Newgroups Maybe I "should" get one? :-) "Tribal rules," ey what? :-) It looks as if you've been busy making up your mind on whether to do so for nearly the past six years. I'm betting on inertia. Have a nice lunch and catch a nap, OT. Such a hurry Dave K8MN |
|
#7
September 20th 05, 01:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: Dave Heil on Sep 18, 9:40 pm
wrote: Considering that I've been involved with communications (of many kinds, not just radio) for a half-century plus, and starting out with full exposure to HF radio communications at a professional level, the METHODS of communications are more important to me than the ABILITY for personal communications. That's fine for you. I'm sure that you'll understand that radio amateurs don't feel bound by what is important to you. Did I "promise" that in some kind of "oath" or "vow?" Try to refrain from taking text out of context, your emminent Lardship. YOU do NOT "speak" for the entirety of the "amateur community." YOU are NOT in the "leadership." [despite implications to the contrary] Telegraphy itself is 161 years old. It had become mature at 52 years when the first radio communication was demonstrated. It is primitive, simplistic in method, very slow compared to normal human speech, prone to human error at either end of a radio circuit, and requires radiotelegraphy specialists at both ends in order to communicate written words. Its efficacy is largely fantasy, an artificiality promoted by much-earlier radiotelegraphers using their own abilities as role models for all others to follow. Radiotelegraphy's last stand in radio is AMATEUR radio license testing; all other radio services have given up on using radiotelegraphy for communications. The fantasy seems to be yours alone. No. Wrong. Error. What I wrote is documented history. You like to use terms like "fantasy" and "artificiality" and "last stand" when you write of morse code. Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal. By ARRL poll morse code mode is only SECOND in popularity on ham HF bands. The argument about NPRM 05-143 is NOT about morse code USE, it is about the TEST for morse code cognition. I can live with your being bothered. Wrong. Error. You are obsessed with "getting the last word" with anyone who disagrees with you...on morse code testing or anything else. YOU are very much BOTHERED. You will try to assassinate the character of anyone writing against your sacred viewpoints...and have, repeatedly. Your past professional work does not, in and of itself, qualify you for an amateur radio license. I've never said it should. Really! :-) Does AMATEUR radio operate by "different" physical principles than all other radio services? Yes? No? Explain that. Explain how morse code testing shows "dedication and commitment to the amateur community" in lieu of written test elements. Is amateur radio "all about morse code?" NPRM 05-143, currently under Comment period under WT Docket 05-235, is solely about the elimination or retention of morse code TESTING in FCC regulations governing United States amateur radio. Instead of concentrating so much on character assassination of all who disagree with you, explain to the FCC the reasons, valid reasons, why the FCC should retain test element 1 in regulations. But other licensees DEMAND that I get one in order to comment on regulations (contrary to what the U.S. Constitution says). Was that a deliberate distortion on your part or have you just become forgetful? No "distortion." Actual fact. The first one is found on the ECFS for WT Docket 98-143, dated 25 January 1999, filed by Dudly under the surname "Robeson." [it's not in Google archives but in the FCC archives, still viewable] You have repeatedly said that I should not be commenting at all on the subject of amateur radio as a "non participant." In case you've forgotten (already), the staff and Commissioners are "non participants" in amateur radio yet the FCC very much regulates, mitigates, and enforces United States amateur radio! You have NEGLECTED all those others - IN Google archives - who have demanded that I be a licensed radio amateur in order to talk anything about it. It looks as if you've been busy making up your mind on whether to do so for nearly the past six years. Not at all. I dismissed the idea of getting a personal amateur radio license back in the 1960s for many and varied reasons. I've stated those. That you refuse to believe them is not my concern. Have a nice lunch and catch a nap, OT. I had a "working lunch" but no "nap" needed. I would suggest you see a real medical doctor about the first signs of Alzheimer's Disease. You have become forgetful and are unable to concentrate. Alzheimer's can manifest itself at any age past 40...and you DO easily qualify for that, old-timer. Serious stuff...and you are showing those first symptoms already. |
|
#8
September 20th 05, 12:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, "
wrote in .com: snip Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY. Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23), satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13). I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required- to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication -can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both) should the automatic systems fail. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal. Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue to use it. Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching (from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that? ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
|
#9
September 20th 05, 12:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, " wrote in .com: snip Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY. Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23), satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13). I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required- to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication -can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both) should the automatic systems fail. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal. Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue to use it. Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching (from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that? That genie got out of the bottle a long time ago and as with most things, once it's out, you can't put it back in. However there has been some discussion on it but the tone has been that there's now no likelihood that a changed can be made. While I earned my license under the current open question pool system, I approached my study as if the questions were not published. I chose to learn the material, memorize equations, learn how to apply the equations, etc. Then simply used the published questions as a check to see if my understanding was correct. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
|
#10
September 20th 05, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dee Flint wrote:
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On 19 Sep 2005 17:28:11 -0700, " wrote in ps.com: snip Show us by documented fact that morse code manual radiotelegraphy is IN USE by radio services other than amateur radio TODAY. Morse is required for the Public Mobile Services (Part 22), the International Fixed Public Radiocommunication Services (Part 23), satellite uplinks (ATIS, Part 25), and other services including Experimental, Special Broadcast, etc. Morse is also a requirement for a Commercial Radio Operators License (Part 13). I should also point out that every communication needs a sender, a receiver, and a message. Although manual Morse may not be -required- to send or receive the message, Morse is used so the communication -can- be done manually by either the sender or receiver (or both) should the automatic systems fail. The fact is, morse is very much alive within amateur radio. It has AGED. It will eventually become terminal. Doubtful. Morse code is the simplest and most univeral method of radio communication, but is hardly limited to radio -- don't forget that it was invented for -wire- telegraphy. It has also been used extensively with optical and other types of communication. It has existed since before radio was invented, continues to exist outside the sphere of radio, and certainly won't die if it's abandoned as a requirement for radio. But as long as Morse code exists, radio operators will continue to use it. Now that's not an argument either for or against the dropping of the code requirement. Like I said before, it's no big deal. And like I also said before, what -IS- a big deal is the dumbing down of the written test. I still don't understand why there is so much bitching (from both sides) about the code test yet almost no discussion about the 'memory' test. Anyone care to explain that? That genie got out of the bottle a long time ago and as with most things, once it's out, you can't put it back in. However there has been some discussion on it but the tone has been that there's now no likelihood that a changed can be made. The test is no more dumbed down than just about everything else in the world. I've seen testing regimens where the outcome of incompetence is possible injury or worse that also use question pools. The student buys the book, and there they go. While I earned my license under the current open question pool system, I approached my study as if the questions were not published. I chose to learn the material, memorize equations, learn how to apply the equations, etc. Then simply used the published questions as a check to see if my understanding was correct. I still think that the prospective Ham should prepare for his/her license in similar manner as a thesis defense. Come up with a new radio related research project, and do a couple years research, then defend it in front of a panel of "steely eyed" FCC experts...... 8^) Just kidding of course. I bought a study guide from 1957 or 58 at a hamfest. It looks surprisingly like what we have now, save for the mostly hollow-state emphasis. Given a few days to learn about the VT stuff, I have no doubt that I would be able to pass any of the tests - except for the Morse code tests. Some of the questions were amazingly easy. And all from "The Golden Age" of Amateur Radio! Some time I think I should post some of the questions. I have no problem with the tests as they are now. I prepared for the tests in a similar fashion to the way you did, except I took the on-line tests as a check, mostly for the questions that have to be memorized, such as the band edges - stuff like that. I used the tools at hand. The material is there. If we choose to learn it well, it is a good starting point. If we don't, we just cheat ourselves. Seems harder to memorize the entire question pool anyhow. - Mike KB3EIA - |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
