|
No Code Arrives!
|
No Code Arrives!
|
No Code Arrives!
Finally, some sanity.
BDK Amen to that! Rich |
No Code Arrives!
He'sDoneItAgain wrote in news:DUIgh.524$QU1.447
@newssvr22.news.prodigy.net: Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf Why I find the "no code" licensing troublesome. I first experienced ham radio at the age of 7. Now at two weeks short of 52 I find the whole cw experience satisfying from a competitive perspective. Learning the code wasn't hard. Increasing my speed was the difficult part as most have also discovered. Did I whine or cry, did I hold my breath, did I toss a fit in front of the examiners? No, no and no! I practiced hard and when I thought I was ready I took the test and flunked! Boo! Hoo! So what? Not passing a test is not the worse thing that could happen. It told me something. Its failure said I was only one word short of passing. Through the encouragement of the examiners I took a re-test and passed later that day. WOO! HOO! I understand that some people lack the ability to pass a 5wpm test much less 13 or higher. I'm one who can not go higher than 13. If I try my brain turns into that "other" white meat. grin My belief is that all operators should be able to pass at the very least 3-5 wpm. Why, not simply because it's a time honored method of communications, but because when digital and voice systems go dead or satellites won't function properly, in a real emergency cw, even at a greatly reduced power level can get a message through. I want to be a pilot or a surgeon but the testing is to difficult. (Waving the magic wand, whoosh!) Ok, now the testing for a pilot or surgeon has been made easier. Does that make them safer or anymore proficient? Obviously we kicked professionalism down a notch or two. Ham radio is more than only a hobby. As operators we assist our local communities and law enforcement agencies. When others couldn't get a message through, we did. During times of war before the Internet and personal computers amateur radio operators assisted the government in passing messages to families and loved ones.M.A.R.S., ever hear of it? As far as I know it's still around today. Making it easier to have some things like the Internet to keep phone cost down and famlies closer together is great. You shouldn't have to be an Einstein to use that mode of communications. On the other hand, ham radio is a wee bit more complicated and the operations of any station should only be performed by a licensed operator who can show proficiency not only in voice or data communications, but in a backup method such as cw too. |
No Code Arrives!
He'sDoneItAgain wrote:
Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf maybe mr davies can check in the great liberty net now |
No Code Arrives!
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. |
No Code Arrives!
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. dxAce Michigan USA |
No Code Arrives!
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. |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
I think the ARES groups use Pactor 3 on 80 meters rather than CW to handle
emergency traffic. Steve |
No Code Arrives!
Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the
most illogical thing, they eliminated the code. Same reason our schools now place in the 2nd 50 places in the world since 1964. You can **** and moan and say it's not politically correct, but sometimes truth hurts. 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 |
No Code Arrives!
Brenda Ann wrote: They already do that with what was once the First Class Radiotelephone Operator License (now the Radiotelephone Operator Permit). This is a wallet sized card that literally anyone who can sign their name (or an X) can have. This is not the same thing as a General Radiotelephone Operator License, which all First and Second Class Radiotelephone Operator License holders were issued when the former licenses were abolished. As far as I know, the GROL has also now been abolished. I can't even get a new copy of my GROL, as the FCC tells me they no longer issue them. So much for spending the time and effort to study and receive a First Phone.... About ?20? years ago GROL were given a one time oppertunity to get a life time license, on the yuckiest cheap paper you can imagine. When I asked the FCC engineer I knew he told me if I lost it it wouldn't be replaced. Last time I asked he told me he thought they (FCC) no longer had any records as to who held what commercial license. He retired about 5 years ago and died soon after from a massive stroke. I am sure you could find an image on the web, clean it up and insert your data and no one would ever know, or really no one would even care. Terry |
No Code Arrives!
cbx wrote:
Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the most illogical thing, they eliminated the code. Same reason our schools now place in the 2nd 50 places in the world since 1964. You can **** and moan and say it's not politically correct, but sometimes truth hurts. It's not so much politically incorrect as it is hearsay that feeds racism - as I am sure you are aware. PLONK -- www.wymsey.co.uk |
No Code Arrives!
Brenda Ann wrote:
... This is not the same thing as a General Radiotelephone Operator License, ... You might find this interesting: http://wireless.fcc.gov/commoperators/pg.html Regards, JS |
No Code Arrives!
cbx wrote:
Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the ... Frankly, it was my experience that certain ethnic groups were unable to handle code was not the problem. Rather, once members of certain ethnic groups obtained licenses, they were made to "feel uncomfortable" by certain members of the amateur community. Being white myself, I was ashamed for some of these operators ... Regards, JS |
No Code Arrives!
"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 |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
"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 |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
"John Smith" wrote in message ... 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 You may be right. I'm just expressing the pro code viewpoint and your not going to change their mind on it no matter how much you argue the point. BH |
No Code Arrives!
You are confused about the First Class Radiotelephone Operator License now
being the Radiotelephone Operator Permit. The wallet card you refer to was probably the Restricted Radio Telephone Operator Permit. However, there was a wallet card called a license verification card that come along with the First and Second Class licenses. Here's a link to the straight scoop on all the commercial operator licenses: http://wireless.fcc.gov/commoperators/ GROL certainly still exists and the FCC very much has records. Duplicates should be available but it won't be the blue certificate you were originally issued. They are no longer issue the nice certificates but are printed on paper similar to the amateur licenses. ---------------------- Lost, Stolen, Mutilated, or Destroyed Licenses You may apply for a duplicate license by submitting FCC Forms 159 (Fee Processing Form) and 605 according to the instructions printed on the 605 application. A fee is required. Current information on the fee amount and filing location can be found in the Wireless Telecommunications Bureau Fee Filing Guide, FCC Form 1070Y, or by calling the FCC's Consumer Center toll free at 1-888-CALL-FCC (225-5322). The WTB Fee Filing Guide and FCC Form 1070Y are also available from the fax-on-demand system by dialing (202) 418-0177 from the handset of a fax machine. ----------------------------- When the rules changed some time back, all holders of First and Second Class Commercial Radiotelephone Licenses were issued lifetime General Radio Operator Licenses. You can still get a commercial radiotelegraph operator license.! wrote in message oups.com... Brenda Ann wrote: They already do that with what was once the First Class Radiotelephone Operator License (now the Radiotelephone Operator Permit). This is a wallet sized card that literally anyone who can sign their name (or an X) can have. This is not the same thing as a General Radiotelephone Operator License, which all First and Second Class Radiotelephone Operator License holders were issued when the former licenses were abolished. As far as I know, the GROL has also now been abolished. I can't even get a new copy of my GROL, as the FCC tells me they no longer issue them. So much for spending the time and effort to study and receive a First Phone.... About ?20? years ago GROL were given a one time oppertunity to get a life time license, on the yuckiest cheap paper you can imagine. When I asked the FCC engineer I knew he told me if I lost it it wouldn't be replaced. Last time I asked he told me he thought they (FCC) no longer had any records as to who held what commercial license. He retired about 5 years ago and died soon after from a massive stroke. I am sure you could find an image on the web, clean it up and insert your data and no one would ever know, or really no one would even care. Terry |
No Code Arrives!
"Meat Plow" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 09:39:20 -0600, Brian Hill Has Frothed: "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 You ever listen to some of the licensed imbeciles on the phone portion of 80 meters? I swear to ****ing god it's like listening to a CB. -- Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004 COOSN-266-06-25794 Oh yea! Plow what the heck are you doing over here? I didn't know you were a radio buff. BH |
No Code Arrives!
|
No Code Arrives!
He'sDoneItAgain wrote: Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. |
No Code Arrives!
cbx wrote: Yeah, certain ethnic groups could not cut the code, so the FCC did the most illogical thing, they eliminated the code. Which groups are those. Please provide an independent source. Same reason our schools now place in the 2nd 50 places in the world since 1964. Nonsense. You can **** and moan and say it's not politically correct, but sometimes truth hurts. 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 |
No Code Arrives!
On 16 Dec 2006 10:45:27 -0800, wrote:
This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. I agree with all the above, including the time frame for when this change should probably have been made to begin with. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. This approach would produce one class of license, one test, all or nothing. I'm not sure that's in the best interests of the ARS. There is something to be said for having an entry-level license and letting people work their way up as their skills and experience increase. Put another way, while there are 8-year olds who have made Extra, they're the exception rather than the norm. We need to attract young people to ham radio. Hitting 'em with a written test like the one for Amateur Extra right out of the starting gate probably isn't going to accomplish that. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. So you're going to hand Extra privileges to everyone who currently has a Novice, Technician, General, or Advanced? Well...I currently hold a General class ticket, and would stand to gain significant additional band segments on which to operate if I were to be grandfathered in at Extra-level privileges. Nevertheless, I have to disagree with that. The fact that the code test is being dropped does not affect the other technical qualifications for holding a ticket. John D. Kasupski, KC2HMZ Tonawanda, New York http://kc2hmz.net |
No Code Arrives!
On 2006-12-16 06:05:14 -0500, helmsman said:
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. Nahhh, they STILL couldn't pass the written! |
No Code Arrives!
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. |
No Code Arrives!
On 2006-12-16 13:45:27 -0500, said:
He'sDoneItAgain wrote: Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. There ARE more relevent modes today than morse. Then again, there will ALWAYS be folks doing morse on the air so what's the problem???? |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
In article . com,
wrote: He'sDoneItAgain wrote: Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. No way. What is the point of raising the bar if you let a bunch of non-compliant people on the bands. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
No Code Arrives!
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. Amateur Electronic Supply (AES) will be opening up shops in every truck stop across the country. dxAce Michigan USA |
No Code Arrives!
John Kasupski wrote: On 16 Dec 2006 10:45:27 -0800, wrote: This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. I agree with all the above, including the time frame for when this change should probably have been made to begin with. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. This approach would produce one class of license, one test, all or nothing. I'm not sure that's in the best interests of the ARS. There is something to be said for having an entry-level license and letting people work their way up as their skills and experience increase. It appears to be just another silly purposeless impediment. Once you have proven that you can set up a station safely and operate courteously how do the skills needed differ between one portion of a band and another. Or, which are the skills that improve with time and how does the current test gauge them. Put another way, while there are 8-year olds who have made Extra, they're the exception rather than the norm. We need to attract young people to ham radio. Hitting 'em with a written test like the one for Amateur Extra right out of the starting gate probably isn't going to accomplish that. I suspect that if we took a zero-based approach to the question of testing we might come up with something very different than the current design. Which specific bits of information about radio theory and operational skills are needed to give some level of assurance that the proposed ham can operate successfully and safely. The days of guys building a shack from scratch using surplus radio equipment and components from the electrical supply house are largely over. My sense is that the technical testing is geared in some manner to that world. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. So you're going to hand Extra privileges to everyone who currently has a Novice, Technician, General, or Advanced? Well...I currently hold a General class ticket, and would stand to gain significant additional band segments on which to operate if I were to be grandfathered in at Extra-level privileges. Nevertheless, I have to disagree with that. The fact that the code test is being dropped does not affect the other technical qualifications for holding a ticket. Not sure I understand your last point. But that may be from a lack of caffeine on my part too.... John D. Kasupski, KC2HMZ Tonawanda, New York http://kc2hmz.net |
No Code Arrives!
Telamon wrote: In article . com, wrote: He'sDoneItAgain wrote: Looks like "no-code" is finally here... http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_publi...C-269012A1.pdf This sentence summarizes it very well: This change eliminates an unnecessary regulatory burden that may discourage current amateur radio operators from advancing their skills and participating more fully in the benefits of amateur radio. It's about 30 years too late, but a start in the right direction. Next we have to eliminate the current test and replace it with something that actually tests for skills that are important. A test that combines knowlege of theory with the skills to safely setup and courteously operate a station. Once potential ham passes that single test he is granted full operating privileges on all amateur bands. Currently licensed hams would be grandfathered in with full operating privileges. No way. What is the point of raising the bar if you let a bunch of non-compliant people on the bands. Non-compliant with what exactly. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
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 |
No Code Arrives!
"Meat Plow" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 11:15:57 -0600, Brian Hill Has Frothed: "Meat Plow" wrote in message ... On Sat, 16 Dec 2006 09:39:20 -0600, Brian Hill Has Frothed: "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 You ever listen to some of the licensed imbeciles on the phone portion of 80 meters? I swear to ****ing god it's like listening to a CB. -- Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004 COOSN-266-06-25794 Oh yea! Plow what the heck are you doing over here? I didn't know you were a radio buff. BH Been a licensed ham for 17 years. :p -- Pierre Salinger Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, June 2004 COOSN-266-06-25794 Well you old ham! BH |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:13 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com