I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools.

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. Which is it? What am I missing?

Another question. Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with?


notbob... fearless geezer

On Mar 11, 8:12*am, notbob wrote:
I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. *I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools. *

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. *Which is it? *What am I missing?

Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

notbob... fearless geezer *

Hi, notbob - I am not really up on amateur radio regs just now, but I
can tell you, you've caught this newsgroup at a relatively stable and
noise-free time. It is usually 90% wackos. I would love to see it
stay this way, but no guarantees.

Bruce Jensen

On 3/11/10 10:16 , bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 11, 8:12 am, wrote:
I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools.

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. Which is it? What am I missing?

Another question. Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with?

notbob... fearless geezer

Hi, notbob - I am not really up on amateur radio regs just now, but I
can tell you, you've caught this newsgroup at a relatively stable and
noise-free time. It is usually 90% wackos. I would love to see it
stay this way, but no guarantees.

Bruce Jensen




Now, now, Bruce. This group is 85% whackos. Max.

::::now, where's my Transoceanic Telescopic Xenoboom VHF Hat
Detector::::


Oops, hold on...trapezoid on the Pocketscope. Gotta go.

notbob wrote:
I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools.

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. Which is it? What am I missing?

Another question. Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with?


notbob... fearless geezer

Different question pools have different expiration dates.

Here are the dates for current question pools:

Technician class (Element 2) Pool is effective July 1, 2006 and is valid
until June 30, 2010.

General class (Element 3) Pool is effective July 1, 2007 and is valid
until June 30, 2011.

Extra class (Element 4) Pool is effective July 1, 2008 and is valid
until June 30, 2012.

You need to pass the Tech test before you can take the General.

You need to pass General before you can take Extra.

If you pass one test, you can take the next test immediately. I took
Tech and General on the same day. If I'd had time to prepare ahead of
time, I could have taken Extra too.

This web site has some good practice tests:

http://www.qrz.com/testing.html

It is worth looking for a local ham radio club as often they'll be able
to help you find testing sessions.

bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 11, 8:12 am, notbob wrote:
I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools.

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. Which is it? What am I missing?

Another question. Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with?

notbob... fearless geezer

Hi, notbob - I am not really up on amateur radio regs just now, but I
can tell you, you've caught this newsgroup at a relatively stable and
noise-free time. It is usually 90% wackos. I would love to see it
stay this way, but no guarantees.

Bruce Jensen

Anyone say "RHF"? When he departed noise dropped significantly.

On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:

Another question. Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with?

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. "Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. Besides. amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

Michael

On Mar 11, 8:45*am, BobS wrote:
bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 11, 8:12 am, notbob wrote:
I'm new to these newsgroups and amateur radio. *I would like to study
for my ticket but am confused on the dates of the question pools. *

In the Mar '09 issue of CQ magazine, an article on A Beginner's Guide
To Becoming a Ham Radio Operator, element 3 dates are given as,
"Element 3 (General) pool between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2011".
Yet, two study guides I've dwnlded (pdf) from the web, both give the
ending year for General as 2010. *Which is it? *What am I missing?

Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

notbob... fearless geezer *

Hi, notbob - I am not really up on amateur radio regs just now, but I
can tell you, you've caught this newsgroup at a relatively stable and
noise-free time. *It is usually 90% wackos. *I would love to see it
stay this way, but no guarantees.

Bruce Jensen

Anyone say "RHF"? *When he departed noise dropped significantly.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

SSSHHHH - it's nice and quiet now ;-)

On Mar 11, 9:09*am, Michael Black wrote:
On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:
Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here.
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. *There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. *They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. *"Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. *It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). *The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. *Besides. *amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

* * Michael

My thanks to both Mark H. and Michael for their reponses. Both
informative, and this one philosophically worthy as well.

I am currently thinking of getting an amateur license actually, even
if I never get on the air. Not sure why - I used to have one decades
ago (WB1GAL), and never got it off the ground due to inherent
limitations in manual dexterity (back then, code was de rigueur; now
it is optional for most all classes)...the theory and regs were more
or less a snap, even though I am not an electronics guy...

Maybe just for the cachet - we Californians are all about superficial
appearance and keeping up, after all ;-) SWL is still my first love
when it comes to radio.

Bruce

On Mar 11, 12:26*pm, bpnjensen wrote:
On Mar 11, 9:09*am, Michael Black wrote:



On Thu, 11 Mar 2010, notbob wrote:
Another question. *Being a big usenet user, but new to amateur radio,
I've been looking at all the groups available. *This one appeared to
have the least noise for a general discussion group, so I posted here..
Is this type of question ok, here, or is there a more appropriate
group for rank newbie questions I'm sure to be pestering the ham
community with? *

Well you're really confused, because this newsgroup has nothing to do with
amateur radio. *There's a whole hierarchy, rec.radio.amateur.* that's
intended for that. *They cover a wide variety of topics, and there's even
a moderated one.

This newsgroup is about listening. *"Shortwave" is in the title since it
sort of defined what the newsgroup was supposed to be about, the same way
that back forty years "SWL" meant "shortwave listening" but often the same
people also did BCB DXing and monitoring the public service bands. *It's a
description of the type of person, not the spectrum to be covered.

That confuses a lot of people, they think this is for amateur radio
because it's "shortwave". But it was never meant to be a place to discuss
amateur radio, beyond discussing monitoring the ham bands (which has
always had some followers). *The charter defines that, and the fact that
there is a whole hierarchy intended for amateur radio should also
reinforce that. *Besides. *amateur radio isn't just about shortwave,
indeed while once you couldn't really get a ham license without starting
out on the shortwave bands, now I suspect there are a good percentage,
maybe even a small majority, who have never operated on the shortwave
bands.

* * Michael

My thanks to both Mark H. and Michael for their reponses. *Both
informative, and this one philosophically worthy as well.

I am currently thinking of getting an amateur license actually, even
if I never get on the air. *Not sure why - I used to have one decades
ago (WB1GAL), and never got it off the ground due to inherent
limitations in manual dexterity (back then, code was de rigueur; now
it is optional for most all classes)...the theory and regs were more
or less a snap, even though I am not an electronics guy...

Maybe just for the cachet - we Californians are all about superficial
appearance and keeping up, after all ;-) *SWL is still my first love
when it comes to radio.

Bruce

I hope you won't give up on code. It doesn't require a lot of manual
dexterity to send code at a reasonable rate. You might not become a
speed demon sending/copying code at 50 wpm, but who cares? You can
have a ton of fun on the CW portions of the bands.

When I first got my license I had no intention of learning code. I
figured I'd stay mostly on the voice portion of the bands, but my
interests in the hobby kept expanding. Soon I was active in digital
modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.

Steve

Steve wrote:
I hope you won't give up on code. It doesn't require a lot of manual
dexterity to send code at a reasonable rate. You might not become a
speed demon sending/copying code at 50 wpm, but who cares? You can
have a ton of fun on the CW portions of the bands.

When I first got my license I had no intention of learning code. I
figured I'd stay mostly on the voice portion of the bands, but my
interests in the hobby kept expanding. Soon I was active in digital
modes like RTTY and PSK-31. Now I spend 99% of my time operating in CW
mode with a paddle and keyer, and it's about a thousand times more
addictive than any other part of the hobby I've encountered thus far.
Well worth the initial investment of time and energy to learn code.


Steve, I want to present a different direction. IMHO he should study for and
take the technician exam as soon as possible. (assuming he is in the US).
Then he should get a 2m HT and get on the local repeaters.

Being on the air is a good way to meet other hams, and find an elmer
(ham lingo for a mentor). Then he can move up in class, branch out into
other things, such as learning morse code, etc.

No matter what method you choose to learn morse code, it's a lot easier and
more fun with someone to help you and communicate with.

I highly recommend Code Quick, by Dr Gerry Wheeler.

http://www.cq2k.com/

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the situation.
i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in the Wikipedia.