D Peter Maus wrote:

dxAce wrote:

helmsman wrote:

On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf
All the CBer's should be happy.

They'll move on to complaining about the written test material next.

They did a LONG time ago, Steve. That's how the multiple choice with
published answers came about.

Even that will go by the wayside and they'll simply sign an 'X' at the bottom of
a form.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On 2006-12-16 08:32:48 -0500, dxAce said:

.

They did a LONG time ago, Steve. That's how the multiple choice with
published answers came about.

Even that will go by the wayside and they'll simply sign an 'X' at the
bottom of
a form.

dxAce
Michigan
USA


I seriously doubt that.

"helmsman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.


The ham bands sound like LIDville nowadays. Have you not been listening and
the most dysfunctional newsgroups on Usenet are amateur topic groups. I feel
sorry for the good hams that have to put up with the ****. They should make
the test to where anyone with a IQ of less than 120 can not apply. I
remember listening to some pretty sharp guys on the ham bands when I was a
kid. Learned a lot about propagation and antennas etc.. just listening to
them. Now days you gotta dig for a good QSO. They should set a part of the
hf bands for just CW operators and you can't operate unless you have a CW
license and they should have a test to see if your a retarded LID and if so
you get the jackoff spectrum. I mean why not?

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH



While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian Hill wrote:
...
BH

While analog communications decline in importance (and it is a stretch
defining CW as digital), digital communications are where the brains are
at. You might wish to upgrade your equipment.

JS

I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
about CW so much as it is about a bunch of guys that wish to not hang out
with a bunch of retards and yes there are some sharp people that don't know
or use code that would be welcome but the fear is that no code will bring
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH

Brian Hill wrote:
I'm not talking about equip, I'm talking about brains. The fight here isn't
...
more dorks into the mix and I understand their point.

BH



Brian:

I find the same ratio of dorks-to-brains exists in amateur radio as
exists in the "normal population." Indeed, the amateur topic newsgroups
reflect this same tendency.

A license and/or knowledge of CW has never been able to help the dorks ...

Regards,
JS

In article , "Brian Hill"
wrote:

"helmsman" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 Dec 2006 21:32:01 -0500, He'sDoneItAgain
wrote:

Looks like "no-code" is finally here...

http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf

All the CBer's should be happy.


The ham bands sound like LIDville nowadays. Have you not been
listening and the most dysfunctional newsgroups on Usenet are amateur
topic groups.

I noticed this years ago. It was my hope that I could joint the
amateur antenna news group and learn something but found it populated
with a bunch of idiots that post there everyday with threads that go
into the hundreds. I've never seen such BS in my life even coming from a
politician.

I feel sorry for the good hams that have to put up with the ****.
They should make the test to where anyone with a IQ of less than 120
can not apply. I remember listening to some pretty sharp guys on the
ham bands when I was a kid. Learned a lot about propagation and
antennas etc.. just listening to them. Now days you gotta dig for a
good QSO. They should set a part of the hf bands for just CW
operators and you can't operate unless you have a CW license and they
should have a test to see if your a retarded LID and if so you get
the jackoff spectrum. I mean why not?

Hams used to build at least some of their equipment. I think it should
be a requirement that you built your own transmitter that passes FCC
specifications to transmit. A prior requirement would be a real
electronics test where you have to solve problems on the test to show
the ability to build a compliant transmitter and antenna system to get a
license. Multiple choice questions are not enough.

Along with the electronics requirement would be test questions on
operator proficiency. There is no reason that marginal people can't be
eliminated from having a license. The bands would then be easier to
regulate and the nonsense would stop.

A person allowed a privilege should be required to show knowledge and
ability to get a license and then build the equipment to utilize a
frequency in this case. The present licensing situation is pointless in
my opinion. Most Hams can't fix their own equipment and they don't
understand how their antennas systems work so the country can't depend
on them when the chips are down.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

Hams used to build at least some of their equipment.

....and many still do. Looked at any of the construction articles in QST
lately? (like for the last 15 or 20 years)

I think it should be a requirement that you built your own
transmitter that passes FCC specifications to transmit.

Why? And do you have *any* clue as to how complex modern transceivers
are? The test equipment to verify that it "passes FCC specifications to
transmit"? (Priced any spectrum analyzers lately?) Furthermore, why
build just the transmitter? Why wouldn't you require them to build their
receiver too?

Most Hams can't fix their own equipment

You say "Most hams can't fix their own equipment". So what is your
point? Most modern equipment uses surface mount technology, which
requires 20 year old eyes and special equipment to solder/de-solder. How
many people can fix their own TVs/DVDs/VCRs? For that matter, can you
fix your own modern car? Why not? You have the privelege of having a
driver's license. Heck, to follow -your- logic, you should -build- your
own car.

and they don't understand how their antennas systems work

Again, so what? Some hams are indeed engineers but plenty are mail
delivery persons or plumbers or any number of non-engineering
occupations that enjoy radio as a hobby. I happen to believe that is one
of the strengths of ham radio.

so the country can't depend on them when the chips are down.

Well, there seemed to be a lot of good press and good buzz about the ham
radio performance during Katrina. Maybe you should do just a little
research before you tar -everyone- with the same brush.

Sorry, but you come across like a ham wannabee that couldn't cut the
mustard...(and just use a bag full of excuses as to why you never became
a ham).

Or, due to the thoughtlessness and foolishness of your statements, maybe
you are just trolling. :-(

73,
Carter
K8VT

Nuclear Bomb Almost Accidently Detonates In Texas. www.rense.com

If that is true,those people over there at Pantex better watch out,they
could have almost ''wiped out Detroit''
A few weeks ago,I saw an eyeballing the Pantex plant at
www.cryptome.org/index.html
cuhulin

Carter-k8vt wrote:
Telamon wrote:

Hams used to build at least some of their equipment.

...and many still do. Looked at any of the construction articles in QST
lately? (like for the last 15 or 20 years)

I think it should be a requirement that you built your own
transmitter that passes FCC specifications to transmit.

Why? And do you have *any* clue as to how complex modern transceivers
are? The test equipment to verify that it "passes FCC specifications to
transmit"? (Priced any spectrum analyzers lately?) Furthermore, why
build just the transmitter? Why wouldn't you require them to build their
receiver too?

Most Hams can't fix their own equipment

You say "Most hams can't fix their own equipment". So what is your
point? Most modern equipment uses surface mount technology, which
requires 20 year old eyes and special equipment to solder/de-solder. How
many people can fix their own TVs/DVDs/VCRs? For that matter, can you
fix your own modern car? Why not? You have the privelege of having a
driver's license. Heck, to follow -your- logic, you should -build- your
own car.

and they don't understand how their antennas systems work

Again, so what? Some hams are indeed engineers but plenty are mail
delivery persons or plumbers or any number of non-engineering
occupations that enjoy radio as a hobby. I happen to believe that is one
of the strengths of ham radio.

so the country can't depend on them when the chips are down.

Well, there seemed to be a lot of good press and good buzz about the ham
radio performance during Katrina. Maybe you should do just a little
research before you tar -everyone- with the same brush.

Sorry, but you come across like a ham wannabee that couldn't cut the
mustard...(and just use a bag full of excuses as to why you never became
a ham).

Or, due to the thoughtlessness and foolishness of your statements, maybe
you are just trolling. :-(

73,
Carter
K8VT


Well, I dunno...

I'm not a ham, I'm a pirate.
'We don't need no frikken license, capiche?'


But I do use aged ham equipment, and I do fix my own... and often have
to learn something new each time I do it.

The new surface-mount stuff, I couldn't have repaired even when I DID
have twenty-year old eyes because my hands were never that steady.

'Plug and play' would be nice, but I suppose one wouldn't learn much
that way, other than how to prepare equipment to be shipped to the
repair shop, or how to shop for replacement eqpt, should that painful
necessity arise...

But preferring to operate in AM mode with plate modulation, more modern
equipment just can't be had at a reasonable price, so its Johnson for
me, along with its periodic failures and necessary self-service.

For the reason that the amateur service generates necessary equipment
of direct benefit to pirate broadcasters, I would want to see the
amateur service continue to survive and even flourish... but for those
of us who prefer AM to sideband, us musical afficionados, well, there
hasn't been much efficient ham equipment manufactured suitable for that
purpose in 30-40 years.

Just my own inane ramblings, as I don't really have a dog in this hunt
at the present.

'Fifteen men on the dead man's chest
Yo Ho Ho and a bottle of rum!'

The Poet aka John Poet aka domestic terrorist aka patriot