On Sun, 23 Jul 2006 18:25:46 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

wrote:
The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the
map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio
license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means
of communicating.

Therein lies the solution to the problem. Make A1 the
only mode allowed within amateur radio - solves all
the problems, doesn't it? No more mode arguments, no
more band crowding, no more expensive equipment, ...
The list of advantages is virtually endless.

The disadvantages are too. No playing with digital modes. No
innovations. No new inventions by hams. And, I have to admit, my CW
has gotten a bit rusty - I doubt I could send readable code at much
over 15wpm these days. I can still copy faster than that, though.

Al Klein wrote:
On 23 Jul 2006 07:26:05 -0700, wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

By taking the test you're claiming that you understand the questions
and know the answers.

By releasing the Question Pools, the FCC is claiming that you must
memorize the answers.

Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent
enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a
license is to memorize the answers."
well the only way you are going to lean the rules question is to
momorize

No one is claiming any such thing.

By memorizing the answers you're not learning
enough to understand the questions.

But I wouldn't expect you to understand what "honesty" means.

Why not?

Because he's already admitted that he's dishonest.
a admission that of itself proves me more honest than you


how balanced is to to place CW over all over ham knowledge?

No one is, any more than by requiring people to know the law one is
putting the law "over all ham knowledge".

CW is pass/fail. To fail CW denies all HF privs (except for Alaska).

Theory is also pass/fail. To fail to get the required number of
correct answers denies all privs - HF, VHF, UHF ...
no sigle element of i and besides you content nobody has trouble passig
it so it not pass fail but pass/pass


How progressive is it?

How progressive is it to not require people to know ... oh, yeah,
that's progressive, since the new thing is to hand out licenses
because people have some kind of "right" to get on the air.

Then why is it with the prospect of losing the CW Exam, that you'se
guys want to "beef up" the written exams?

We don't.
liar as you go on to prove
We want to get back the level it used to be before it was
dumbed down to the point that you could almost pass it if you never
heard of the FCC, ham radio or electronics.
establish the need ofr such testing and I will support you
Just by guessing at the
answers. It used to require that you draw (was it 3?) schematics.
so what?
From scratch. Let's see how many people could do that today. A
Colpitts oscillator, a Hartley oscillator and some other circuit that
I've forgotten at the moment. They're still as relevant today as they
were 50 years ago.
and when was the last time you had to assemble one without any notes to
help you?

how loyal is it to denny the nation the benifits of allowing more
operators

What "benefits" does the country get from more people using radios who
don't know the first thing about them? (Whatever "denny" means.)

It's always been that way. You could even buy Heathkits already
assembled.

But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally.
nope you just had to pass the test
Today all you need is the time to take the test and the money for the
test and the equipment.
bull****

must you undermine the ars by insutling allnew ops?
that is not coutesous either Al
IOW, a CB "license" with a tiny bit of
annoyance up front. How does CB benefit the country?
why do you hate CB so bad? did one of pinn your coax?

no support for your postion just insults


You don't acquire knowledge (which is what's needed) by playing with a
radio.

Then the military has wasted billions of dollars over the years
"training" radio operators.

I trained operators when I was in the military. We didn't do it by
giving recruits radios and telling them to go jam each other.
I am glad to read that

neither does the ARS your point ? or were you just ranting?


how patriotic is it to keep a staion forom aquiing the skill to be
ready for service to conutry and community?

How does playing CB on the ham bands give one "the skill to be
ready for service to conutry and community"?

Who knows? That's not what Mark is talking about, is it?

That's exactly what he's talking about.
nope that isn't what I am tlaking about

Give someone a radio and a
"license" to use it and he'll "acquire the skill to be ready for
service to country and community". That's what Mark said, right up
above.
lying again
never said anything about giving a license away

what was that you said about being dishonest

How does one acquire skill by playing radio?
the only to aquire skill at using a radio is by USING a radio

Or any skill, other than
getting what you want? You don't acquire skill by doing something
that requires no skill.

So it really is all about CW. Why have a written Exam at all?

You don't acquire technical skill by doing something that doesn't
require technical skill.
meaning no need for a CW test?
You don't acquire operating skill by doing
something that requires no operating skill.
no need for writeen test either thn?
And you don't acquire
skill in CW by cursing into a mike.
who siad you did

but I for one have no interest in learning CW at all even if that were
possible for me (which I do not believe is the case bt that is another
arguement)

you OTOH seem to think it polite to disparage opertors that you likely
have never heard

But that's what Mark and his ilk want - we'll have "skilled operators"
honestly in time if we did give the license away the user would
develope skill with it
if we allow people to buy radios and put them on the air with no skill
or knowledge. By osmosis? Or by magic?
the same way the skill were devloped in the first trail and error would
still work althogh I don't advocate reling on it

And you, particularly, don't acquire
knowledge by demanding something for nothing.

The requirements for an amateur radio license have been all over the
map over the history of the service. The ORIGINAL amateur radio
license had no Morse Code Exam, even when Morse Code was the only means
of communicating.

So you'd get a license not knowing CW, build a radio (you couldn't buy
one then) and ... what? Sit and look at it. Some things are just too
obvious to need mentioning.

Get over it. Everyone else is moving on.

Evidently not, or I'd be the only one in the world advocating that a
test should actually test for something.
on here there are perhaps 3 people still advocating a Morse code test

OTOH nobody advocates ywe drop testing except occasion the frustrated
advocate of Code testing

Yes personalyI think some the thing we current test are at best
questionable I would prefer to foucs more on rules and safety question
I realy don't think any body needs to memorize thatwhat freg is white
in SSTV signal he know prehaps where to look it out but to have that
knowledge memorized no way and yet there is such a question on the
current extra pool
There are actually millions
of us who don't think lack of instant gratification is the worst thing
in the world.
what has that got to do with maintining your frat house game called
Morse Code testing?

What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries?
who cares about a DXCC award? I certianly don't realy

or does not caring about working "countries that have no people in them
and sometimes barely exist at high tide make me not a ham either

Al Klein wrote:
Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent
enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a
license is to memorize the answers."

How else one can know that the unit of resistance
is the "ohm", except by memorizing?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Cecil Moore wrote:

How else one can know that the unit of resistance
is the "ohm", except by memorizing?

More importantly, that you can only transmit on 7.000 to 7.300 mHz, with
restrictions on mode and license class. Or that you call "MAYDAY" on voice
or SOS on CW for emergencies and never, never, never call "breaker, breaker".

Going back to the orginal point of memorizing or not, is knowing the
type of oscilators and drawing their schematics anything but memorizing?

Actually, the only MORSE code you need to get help is SOS (not even run
together as one letter). If you keep sending SOS, SOS, SOS, someone will
eventually hear you and track you down.

Note that the original intent of the morse code test was that amateur
radio was to provide a pool of ready trained radio operators in case of
war. I'm in a country in the middle of a war, and I can guarentee you that
NONE of the radio communications are morse code.

In fact, until we took out the cellular towers in Lebanon, almost all of
the Hizbolah's command and control traffic was via cellular phone.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838
Visit my 'blog at http://geoffstechno.livejournal.com/

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

SNIPPED

In fact, until we took out the cellular towers in Lebanon, almost all of
the Hizbolah's command and control traffic was via cellular phone.

Geoff.


With tongue in cheek I ask: "Now that the towers are out, does that mean
Hezzbollah is changing to CW?" :-)

/s/ W1MCE

"Dave" wrote in message
news
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

SNIPPED

In fact, until we took out the cellular towers in Lebanon, almost all of
the Hizbolah's command and control traffic was via cellular phone.

Geoff.


With tongue in cheek I ask: "Now that the towers are out, does that mean
Hezzbollah is changing to CW?" :-)

/s/ W1MCE


Not knowing the "distances" involved - any chance they may be using YOUR
cell towers? IF so, that could really suck. Nothing like having your enemy
use your own equipment against you.

Lou

On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:02:51 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent
enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a
license is to memorize the answers."

How else one can know that the unit of resistance
is the "ohm", except by memorizing?

There's a difference between knowing that the unit of resistance is
the Ohm, and remembering that the answer to the question about
Kirchoff with the 3 resistors is 10,000 ohms.

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 24 Jul 2006 12:02:51 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:

Must? Where's the "must"? Or do you mean "If you aren't intelligent
enough, or motivated enough, to learn a little, the only way to get a
license is to memorize the answers."

How else one can know that the unit of resistance
is the "ohm", except by memorizing?

There's a difference between knowing that the unit of resistance is
the Ohm, and remembering that the answer to the question about
Kirchoff with the 3 resistors is 10,000 ohms.
someone could memorize that sort of detail I spuose but you nor your
friends have ever advanced any evidence that this occurs Indeed I
don't think it is possible to memorize enough to pass the test and
learn nothing in the bargan I can't prove that of course but it does
seem likely

Al Klein wrote in
:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:14:17 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

The fit get a ham license. All the rest get cell phones, CB, and
shortwave listening.

No, SC - in today's society we can't hurt people's feelings, so the
loud get anything they want.


I guess that means I got to get louder too. LOL

SC

Slow Code wrote:
Al Klein wrote in
:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2006 20:14:17 GMT, Slow Code wrote:

The fit get a ham license. All the rest get cell phones, CB, and
shortwave listening.

No, SC - in today's society we can't hurt people's feelings, so the
loud get anything they want.


I guess that means I got to get louder too. LOL
it is way too late for that SC

SC