"Ralph Mowery" wrote in message
ink.net...

I would guess a fair amount dont really care about the technical side or
would want to build their own radio and linear. You would have to be
pretty
dedicated for that. I would also guess at most Amateurs are happy just
talking legally with a licence and a stock bought radio and antenna. Not
that theres anything wrong with that, it just depends on how serious you
take the hobby. Like the M3 foundation licence. It suits a lot of people
who
are.. disillusioned with CB and want to go Amateur but not really
wishing
to
get so involved with the whole technical side of things. There are some
good
M3 people out there whatever the old school say, but i agree they will
never
be on a par with a full licence holder but is that such a terrible
thing.


I don't have any problem with the ones that just want to talk. There are
many good hams in public service providing communications for emergencies.
I know one ham that got his license many years ago so he could fly his
radio
controled airplane and use 6 meters where there were few others using that
frequency.

I do wish that the test could be hands on for a few simple things such as
installing a coax connector and and using a simple SWR meter. Also it
should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack.
Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok.
Not
that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions.

I quite agree. I also personally think to obtain a CB licence (UK im talking
here) there should be a small test.. nothing complicated, just wiring on a
PL259 correctly and how to use a SWR meter (as you say for Amateur too).
Thats two basic things ive seen either ignored or very badly done.. ie.
someone twisting the inner and outer of the co-ax together and shoving it
through the hole in the PL.... then they wonder why the radio they just
bought off you wont get out.... or someone say..swred an antenna?? whats
that then?? sheesh..
Exceedingly unlikely now as to all intents and purposes the CB band isnt of
interest to the authorities that be.
Oh well...............

"PowerHouse Communications" wrote in message
...

"The Magnum" wrote in message
...

"PowerHouse Communications" wrote in message
...

"The Magnum" wrote in message
...
I wonder where the law stands as far as CB radio's go. Are CB's
allowed
to
be repaired by the average CB'er who has the knowledge or are they
only
repairable by a qualified technician of some kind. I ask along the
lines
of
the UK but would find the answer for America just as interesting.


I'm not sure why this thread is even being cross-posted into a CB
group,
but

Because its a question about CB's ??????????


No, not your question, the whole thread, which was a rant about "Ham
Radio".
Had nothing to do with CB, except for a brief reference.


Oh right.... mind you theres that much Ham stuff on the website is it a
problem? I just read it with some interest and ask points that i think might
be relevent. Theres more stuff about liars and army service on this group
though for some reason. That i dont get.
Regards,
Graham

"Spike" wrote in message
...

Ralph Mowery wrote:

Also it
should be required to have a ARRL handbook or equivilent in the shack.
Would not even have to be a new one, but one 10 years old would be ok.
Not
that many would really read it but it could answer some simple questions.

My Handbook (not ARRL) is much older, but I wasn't aware of any change
in the physics in the interim. Why choose ten years? The Admiralty
handbook is still relevant - and can answer questions - even if the
units have changed. You appear to be a newcomer.

from
Aero Spike

The 10 year number for the book was just one out of the air. Older would
have been just fine. My first ARRL hand book was bought in 1966. I did
not get a ham license untuil about 1972. Had a 1 st class radiotelephone
license around the same time. I have only used RTTY with an old mechanical
unit, been keeping up a repeater for close to 30 years, I did write a rtty
program for an old 8080 processor when I got tired of hearing the noise,
used a few of the newer digital modes with the computer, worked a few of the
OSCARs, active on 144 and 432 ssb. I do work some of the low bands also.
Guess that still makes me a newcomer to many.

Ralph Mowery wrote:


"Spike" wrote:

My Handbook (not ARRL) is much older, but I wasn't aware of any change
in the physics in the interim. Why choose ten years? The Admiralty
handbook is still relevant - and can answer questions - even if the
units have changed. You appear to be a newcomer.

The 10 year number for the book was just one out of the air.

The problem with that is it essentially means that every now and then,
in order to keep within the licence terms, one has to purchase a book.

Here in the UK we have problems with an organisation that has put
itself in the position of 'representing all UK amateurs', and which
sells books. It clearly does not do the former, and merely to add to
its coffers as part of the licencing conditions is a battle which it
has recently fought and looks like losing heavily.

Older would have been just fine.
My first ARRL hand book was bought in 1966.

Then why specify a time limit? Or even to have such a book in the
first place?

I did
not get a ham license untuil about 1972. Had a 1 st class radiotelephone
license around the same time. I have only used RTTY with an old mechanical
unit, been keeping up a repeater for close to 30 years, I did write a rtty
program for an old 8080 processor when I got tired of hearing the noise,
used a few of the newer digital modes with the computer, worked a few of the
OSCARs, active on 144 and 432 ssb. I do work some of the low bands also.
Guess that still makes me a newcomer to many.

There is nothing wrong with your Amateur CV. The issue - at least for
us in the UK - is the grasping self-interest of the 'national
society', which has been so clearly revealed by recent events, and to
which your proposal would add succour; that was really the point of my
post.

from
Aero Spike

How come all the self-proclaimed "real amateurs" huffing and puffing on
this thread sign their postings only with a "handle" and not a call
sign? Are they really amateurs at all?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

OK, if you want to get technical, a "license" per-say is not needed,
though
they still need to be "certified as technically qualified to perform
transmitter maintenance and repair duties in the private land mobile
services and fixed services by an organization or committee representative
of users in those services." - Reference FCC Part 95, Section 95.424
subsection "b".

And as the question that was asked, in relation to the US:
"Are CB's allowed to be repaired by the average CB'er who has the
knowledge
or are they only repairable by a qualified technician of some kind[?]"
The answer to the first part of the question is still NO, and the second
part is still, YES. The "average CB'er who has the knowledge" can NOT
service their own CB, legally. They would need to be "certified" to do so
"by an organization or committee representative of users in [the CB
service]."


Don't leave out the word "should". It does not say MUST.

There are two extremely legitimate reason for using a nym on the net,
even if one is a ham: privacy and safety. Need I say more?

wrote:
There are two extremely legitimate reason for using a nym on the net,
even if one is a ham: privacy and safety. Need I say more?

Shame and embarrassment are two others.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and
wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and
lots of Guiness.

But enough about Brits, who are otherwise creators of fine cars, time
traveler shows, absurdist sitcoms, and who invented the art of sarcasm.

The Eternal Squire

wrote in message
oups.com...
But there is no such thing as true UK cuisine, it is all bangers and
wellingtons and steak and kidney pie washed down with lots and lots and
lots of Guiness.

But enough about Brits, who are otherwise creators of fine cars, time
traveler shows, absurdist sitcoms, and who invented the art of sarcasm.

The Eternal Squire

I thought Guinness was the drink of the Irish... I personally cant stand the
stuff, surely its a "nice cup of tea"... Steak and Kidney is Rank...Much
better mince beef and onion, or chicken and mushroom where it comes to
pies... As for fine cars?? that surely is sarcasm ;o) .... "you have learned
well young Jedi"...
Regards,
Graham