On 10 Aug 2006 15:47:00 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

earth is the only earthlike planet with a heavyside layer effect

Is that a statement or a question?

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 00:31:26 GMT, Cecil Moore
wrote:

Slow Code wrote:
It was still Hokey. The aliens could do everything but provide their own
communications globally.

They also couldn't provide a decent firewall for their computers.

Or a force field that could contain an atomic bomb.

Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 15:47:00 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

earth is the only earthlike planet with a heavyside layer effect

Is that a statement or a question?
yes it is a stament and yes it is a question
happy now kleinmind

Al Klein wrote:
On 9 Aug 2006 19:18:06 -0700, wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge.

Then why isn't knowledge of Morse code and the CW mode
sufficient? Why must someone be forced to memorize
the individual characters?

We aren't made to memorize every value of resistor and capacitor, or
every offset for the six meter repeater subband.

And anyone copying CW character by character is never going to get any
further than someone talking letter by letter. Those who don't
understand it denigrate it.

You denigrate the resistor code.

Al Klein wrote:
On 9 Aug 2006 19:14:54 -0700, wrote:

You couldn't be more wrong. If there were practical exams for SSB, FM,
AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc,
then it would be CRYSTAL clear that a Morse Code exam is valid.

However, there are no such practical exams for the other modes. So
there need be no exam for Morse Code, either.

That's my point - there's no test any longer. For anything more than
the ability to memorize answers.

Lots of memorization was required in your day. It's only a bad thing
in 1992 to present. I think I get your drift...

That is not true. You wish to change the written exams, not add
practical exams for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY (which is pretty
darned old), packet, PSK, etc.

Add SSB, FM, etc., to the nothing there is today.

Ummm? There's no Morse Code test anymore?

So all ham radio is is Morse Code on HF? Or is it more than that?

It's a lot more.

Prove it. Show me the exams for all the other modes.

The question isn't what ham radio is, it's whether
one should be required to pass a realistic test to get a license.

Yes!!! A realistic test.

No, I'm not addressing *where* the test is held at all - I'm
addressing *whether* there's any real test, which there isn't, except
for CW right now. Spitting out something you memorized is only a test
of memory.

Sounds like the Conditional License to me.

The Conditional was whatever class was being tested for, but not at an
FCC office. It had nothing to do with the class, only with the
location.

Had everything to do with authenticity. You're asking for "real"
exams, right?

I don't remember after almost 50 years - but I could still draw them
today, and it's not a test of remembering what's on the test, it's a
test of knowing what's in a radio.

Then advocate passing the current exam at every license renewal.

What current exam? Memorizing answers and writing them down isn't a
test.

So what is it that you fear?

You'd probably be weeded out pretty quickly.

I doubt it - if I couldn't pass an Extra theory exam - a real one, not
the nonsense that passes for one these days - I'd lose my job in a
second.

Mmmm. I see. You are a careerist in the electronics industry and it
****es you off that hobbyists have equal "status" as you in amatuer
radio. I've run across a lot of that in the past 20 years...

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.

You should self-modify your license and cease amateur operation until
you remember.

Why? Testing isn't about memory, it's about knowledge.

What if you forgot your band edges?

What if you addressed what I said when you answer me? Your dishonest
tactics are transparent.

You're the one that forgot the circuit, not me. Get ****ed at your own
self.

The amateur is self-policing, and you no longer meet your own standard.

Sure I do. The test wasn't to remember what circuits to draw, it was
to draw them. And I can draw them any time.

Then do so. Quit complaining to me that you can't remember what it was
that you were supposed to draw.

Quit putting words in my mouth. I wasn't complaining to anyone, and
we weren't discussing remembering 50 year old tests.

Correct. "WE" weren't discussing it. YOU were. YOU were discussing
how you can't draw what you can't remember.

They're still as relevant today as they were 50 years ago.

Other things are relevant today that weren't even known 50 years ago.

So let's have them on the test.

But if a practical exam is necessary for Morse Code, why isn't it
necessary for other modes?

Maybe we should have one - show the ability to put a clean PSK signal
on the air. Show the ability to interpret a waterfall display. Show
the ability to tell the difference between various digital modes. The
bands would be pretty QRM-free.

YES!!!

If you are ever going to save your beloved Morse Code test, this is the
only way you're going to do it.

If all radio is merely plug and play, why do the services still have radio schools

That's my point, not yours.

No. It's MY point.

Or don't you understand what you just said?

I think it is you who don't know where you're going with this
discussion. It's gone beyond your having grief over your favorite mode
to actually having to think about the future of the service.
Conggrats. Another couple of years of RRAP tutoring and you just might
become a rational being.

Oops, that's right - no more relevant testing, isn't that what people
are asking for? Just give me the answers so I can memorize them and
pick them out on the test.

Who said that? We absolutely NEED relevant exams. That is my whole
argument!

So you're in favor of exams that test knowledge of theory? "Draw the
schematic of ..."? "Explain why long path 2400 bps is impossible on
14 MHz"? That kind of relevance?

Sure. But you have to ask yourself one question. Can the average VE
administer such an exam? If not, can your average GS-7 FCC employee
administer such an exam? If you set up an exam that only an engineer
can administer, then your government isn't going to accept it. So be
realistic in your zeal.

Or the "pick the answer with the resistor like we showed you in the
example" kind of relevance?

The exam can be anything your VEC wants it to be. We learned this when
the ARRL went from administering a Morse Code Exam at 5WPM to
administering a Farnsworth Exam at 13-15WPM.

But you had to actually *know* a little theory to use one legally.

No you didn't.

Yes, you did - you had to pass a test to show that you did.

There has never been a practical test to show that you could operate a
radio. Ever.

Do you understand what the word "theory" means?

You got me there.

And today's exams still provide that "theory" though they don't prepare
you to actually operate a radio - never did.

All you
have to do now is memorize a few answers.

That's all you had to do then.

How do you draw a schematic

Memorization.

and explain the functions of parts by
memorizing answers?

Memorization.

You can't explain phase shift by memorizing "10k"
or "coil".

You can't memorize the def of phase shift?

C'mon, aren't you supposed to be in the industry?

I used radios in the military. I never used a CW key in the military.
I never jammed another operator, although Brandywine asked me to reduce
power once.

But you had to learn how to use the radios.

I did?

They just gave you a radio and said "use it"?

On/Off and PTT. What else is there???

Oh, yeh, a magnetic compass and a chart where the satellite is.

Hams today don't - they
memorize a few answers, buy equipment and get on the air - with no
understanding of what they're doing, and no desire to learn.

Then it hasn't changed much since you were first licensed.

When I was licensed you had to show an understanding of theory, by
answering questions that were more than just multiple choice from a
published answer pool.

Yes, you had to memorize paragraphs instead of multiple choices. Big
deal.

You may, but I can see from many of the comments that have been posted
here that a lot of people don't. They don't want to learn, they want
to get on the air. Period.

W3RV didn't wait to get a ham license before operating! He just wanted
to get on the air. Period.

Point?

All you wonderful OF's taking trips down memory lane forget that some
of your brother hams were bootleggers.

It's only the unwashed No-code Techs that operate illegally. Hi!!!
What a stinking load.

And you mistakenly believe that most hams today want to learn how to
operate properly. Listen to 75 some evenings.

Lots of OFs on there who should know better. That's why I hold the
opinions that I hold. Your generation doesn't have a lock on decency,
respect, or apatite for knowledge. Far from it.

Very few of "my" generation there.

Explain.

I've listened to emergency responders on a scanner before. They don't
use Morse Code, they don't use CW. They use FM/Voice. Somehow they
are effective at it, not having taken a Morse Code test. How can this
be?

They were trained.

Not in Morse Code.

You must be sitting on oil. Can't you stick to a topic long enough to
be coherent? You were discussing how someone can be efficient at
voice commo, not in Morse.

Effective.

If you must retain a Morse Code Exam, then you must
also administer practical exams for SSB, FM, AM, FSTV, SSTV, RTTY
(which is pretty darned old), packet, PSK, etc.

I have no problem with that.

Then go for it.

It is the ONLY legitimate recourse you have for retaining the Morse
Code exam.

Best of luck.

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.

Please diagram that radio from "Scratch."

Any time. Filter or phasing? BFO receive or quadrature detection?
I've designed them, built them and used them, and still could.

What is/was your profession?

Trained as an EE. Spent years designing RF circuitry, then went into
digital design. "Is", not yet "was" - I'm still alive.

Are you drawing a pension from it? "Was."

Are you drawing a paycheck from it? "Is."

And it's so typical for Old Timers to forget that not everyone in the
ARS are CAREERIST PROFESSIONALS. Bitching and Moaning about how
everyone else doesn't know as much as them.

What next? DXCC awards for those who *want* to work 100 countries?

You seem to be confused. DXCC is an award offered by the ARRL, not the
FCC. It has nothing to do with licensing.

But an award for wanting has to do with "I want it so it's my right to
have it", which is what I'm talking about. No one has any "right" to
get on the air.

Correct. And no one has a right to force their favorite mode on
everyone else.

I'm advocating real testing for whatever mode.

Finally!!! I hope you won't hold it against me for badgering you into
such a position.

Right now the only
test is "do you have the fee, can you get to the testing place, and
have you memorized enough answers to pass".

Welp, other than "can you get to the FCC office" things sure haven't
changed much in 50 plus years.

Let's have a test that
shows whether the testee knows anything.

Remember that you are handsomely compensated for your professional
knowledge. Amateur Radio is a non-compensated hobby.

CW, APRS, AX25, PSK - all of
it. Or separate the licenses. You want to operate FM, you take a
test on FM and, if you pass, you get an FM license.

Endorsement. Remember - your VE has to be smart enough to administer
the exam.

Want to operate
SSB, you take a different test.

Not "want to get on the air? memorize some answers and pay your fee".

And get a vanity license plate.

You are awesome. You're finally catching on.

Who say an old dog can't learn new tricks?

On 10 Aug 2006 18:53:36 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

Al Klein wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 15:47:00 -0700, "an old friend"
wrote:

earth is the only earthlike planet with a heavyside layer effect

Is that a statement or a question?

yes it is a stament and yes it is a question

And on what do you base your statement? Your extensive familiarity
with dozens of Earth-like planets?

Cecil Moore wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
The Conditional was whatever class was being tested for, but not at an
FCC office. It had nothing to do with the class, only with the
location.

On the contrary, the Conditional was the General Class
license given away from an FCC office.

To clarify, the test was given at a distance from an FCC office.

The license was not "given away."

At the time I got
mine, the distance from an FCC office was set at 75 miles.
Quoting the 1957 ARRL License Manual: "The Conditional
Class license conveys privileges identical to those of
the General Class ..." which incidentally at the time,
was all amateur frequency operating privileges.

General/Conditional Class = "All amateur priveleges," as in AMATEUR
EXTRA priveleges.

73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

Hey Cecil, how've you been?

wrote:
On 10 Aug 2006 21:00:36 -0700, wrote:
The license was not "given away."

but if you did not sit for the FCC it was a give away

One of the definitions of "away" is "distant". The
Conditional exam was given "away from" the FCC office.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

wrote:

: Lots of memorization was required in your day. It's only a bad thing
: in 1992 to present. I think I get your drift...

You are failing (or choosing) to understand/acknowledge the difference
between understanding the principles and simply rote memorising the
answers. It used to be that there weren't a set of questions with
corresponding answers - there was a syllabus from which the questions
were set. It took understanding of the syllabus to apply the formulae
that had been learnt to calculate the answer.

--
73 Chris Cox, N0UK, G4JEC

wrote in message
...
wrote:

: Lots of memorization was required in your day. It's only a bad thing
: in 1992 to present. I think I get your drift...

You are failing (or choosing) to understand/acknowledge the difference
between understanding the principles and simply rote memorising the
answers. It used to be that there weren't a set of questions with
corresponding answers - there was a syllabus from which the questions
were set. It took understanding of the syllabus to apply the formulae
that had been learnt to calculate the answer.

--
73 Chris Cox, N0UK, G4JEC

Even TODAY'S tests are not the same ie; Answer A in your study guide will
coorespond to Answer A on the exam. ANYONE "memorizing" those answers is
nothing short of a FOOL. It is far better to read that book for what little
it is worth - for what it will "TEACH" you to understand - thereby making
passing the exam almost a done deal. UNDERSTANDING AND REMEMBERING
(Memorizing if you will) the BASE material is what gets you through.

As the man said, at one time - there were no SET of exams. If you had no
clue of electronics or rules and regulations where it came to Ham radio -
you were "guranteed" to fail in front of the FCC. Often - that meant a long
trip. Even at that - tests today - most VEs have at least 3 - 5 sets of
exams per class. OR you could be given a test via computer which is randomly
generated. So, to "memorize" ABCD just isn't going to cut it.

As I said before - ya got to memorize many things to get through life - your
SS number, your birthdate, your name, how to spell, read, write, add,
subtract, driving a vehicle, etc......... the list goes on - SURELY you
didn't "memorize" a simple ABCD answer for MOST of that! Memorizing your SS
number, name and birthdate may equivalate to the ABCD method, but - when you
were tested in school for subjects - you had NO clue what was to be asked.
If you didn't pay attention to what was being taught - you most likely
bombed the test.

Again - we're splitting hairs here on the word "memorize". You can "try" to
memorize ABCD to pass a test without studying (and hope the test conforms to
the pattern you "memorized") OR you can MEMORIZE IT BY STUDYING it -
(committ it to memory for life) -therby understanding the principles and
being able to "honestly" answer the questions based on "knowledge" of the
subject.

I seriously do NOT understand the hang up on this issue. Maybe "I" am
missing something - but it seems to me, I had to memorize (LEARN) a whole
list of **** to be able to function in a meaningful life. Your mind is like
a computer - you have to program it (study) - to learn things TO MEMORIZE
FOR LIFE. Simply trying to recall ABCD on a test without understanding the
concepts - you're still going to be dumb as **** even if you do pass.
Wouldn't you rather "know" what you're supposed to know? Sure makes one look
a bit more inteliigent.
Maybe that is why so many people are so goofy on the highways - they
"memorized" answers to the test instead of actually "learning" what the
principle were/are. Makes sense to me! For those of you who parachute or do
other "life endangering" tasks - I'd sure hate to be you - depending on
someone who simply "memorized" ABCD on a test as opposed to "learning" the
requirements to fulfill the task.

No wonder this world is so screwed up............. TOO LAZY TO "LEARN".

L.