Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Slow Code wrote:
Big Ten-Four on that Good Buddy. It sounds like you run a lot of 11m, not surprising considering how much you whine, and it's not alternator whine. I only typed like because I knew you would understand that style of communicating. So, after your license came in the mail what I appliance did you decide to buy? MFJ? Alinco? Cobra? While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Chuck Harris wrote in
: Slow Code wrote: Big Ten-Four on that Good Buddy. It sounds like you run a lot of 11m, not surprising considering how much you whine, and it's not alternator whine. I only typed like because I knew you would understand that style of communicating. So, after your license came in the mail what I appliance did you decide to buy? MFJ? Alinco? Cobra? While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. SC |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Slow Code wrote:
Chuck Harris wrote in While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Oh, easily. 25 years ago, technical conversations were dominated by such earth shatteringly important stuff as having a ham down at the repeater site helping other hams tune their transmitters to be on frequency. Other wonderkind were hitting the repeater with a full quieting signal, and turning their power up to try and get a better signal to that DX mobile that breaking up. If it wasn't that, it was an endless sea of autopatches calling the xyl to tell her that traffic was bad, could she start dinner... or ordering pizza. Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. I heard the same things 25 years ago from Generals that got their licenses at the offices of the FCC. Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Chuck Harris wrote in
: Slow Code wrote: Chuck Harris wrote in While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Oh, easily. 25 years ago, technical conversations were dominated by such earth shatteringly important stuff as having a ham down at the repeater site helping other hams tune their transmitters to be on frequency. Other wonderkind were hitting the repeater with a full quieting signal, and turning their power up to try and get a better signal to that DX mobile that breaking up. If it wasn't that, it was an endless sea of autopatches calling the xyl to tell her that traffic was bad, could she start dinner... or ordering pizza. Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. I heard the same things 25 years ago from Generals that got their licenses at the offices of the FCC. Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? SC |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Slow Code wrote:
Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? Oh, I agree, but if you do too, then I have trouble understanding why you are ragging on folks that are using store bought radios. -Chuck |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
"Chuck Harris" wrote in message ... Slow Code wrote: Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? Oh, I agree, but if you do too, then I have trouble understanding why you are ragging on folks that are using store bought radios. Slow Mind does not know that a Real Ham only uses a radio he built himself. A Real Ham would not use one of those crappy store-bought things. -Chuck |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
"Slow Code" wrote in message link.net... Chuck Harris wrote in : Slow Code wrote: Chuck Harris wrote in While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Oh, easily. 25 years ago, technical conversations were dominated by such earth shatteringly important stuff as having a ham down at the repeater site helping other hams tune their transmitters to be on frequency. Other wonderkind were hitting the repeater with a full quieting signal, and turning their power up to try and get a better signal to that DX mobile that breaking up. If it wasn't that, it was an endless sea of autopatches calling the xyl to tell her that traffic was bad, could she start dinner... or ordering pizza. Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. I heard the same things 25 years ago from Generals that got their licenses at the offices of the FCC. Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? SC SC, tell us all, and don't lie. Do you not agree that a LOT of hams today were CB'ers in the '70's and chose to advance their radio skills by advancing to ham radio? If you disagree, then 1) you're a liar, and 2) did this not help the service? And thusly, if you disagree I suspect you fit into this mold, and choose to deny your past. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
"U-Know-Who" wrote in
: "Slow Code" wrote in message link.net... Chuck Harris wrote in : Slow Code wrote: Chuck Harris wrote in While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. -Chuck Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Oh, easily. 25 years ago, technical conversations were dominated by such earth shatteringly important stuff as having a ham down at the repeater site helping other hams tune their transmitters to be on frequency. Other wonderkind were hitting the repeater with a full quieting signal, and turning their power up to try and get a better signal to that DX mobile that breaking up. If it wasn't that, it was an endless sea of autopatches calling the xyl to tell her that traffic was bad, could she start dinner... or ordering pizza. Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. I heard the same things 25 years ago from Generals that got their licenses at the offices of the FCC. Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. -Chuck Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? SC SC, tell us all, and don't lie. Do you not agree that a LOT of hams today were CB'ers in the '70's and chose to advance their radio skills by advancing to ham radio? If you disagree, then 1) you're a liar, and 2) did this not help the service? And thusly, if you disagree I suspect you fit into this mold, and choose to deny your past. I'm sure a lot of hams migrated from citizens band, but up until about the last 16 years, they had to pass a real ham test to get in. Not dumbed down tests like we have today. SC |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
Slow Code wrote:
Chuck Harris wrote in : Slow Code wrote: Chuck Harris wrote in While you are being all holier than thou, what did you design and build for your main rig? I'm hoping to be impressed, but expecting to be disappointed. Did the code help you with the design? I took my Advanced class test down at 1919 M street 36 years ago. I had to sit at the desk and copy one solid minute out of five error free at 13WPM. I passed it on the first try. I almost failed the sending test, as I had never spent much time doing that. I had never made a code contact before my test, and I have only made a couple since. The thing about code contacts is they never seem to want to say anything beyond: WA3XXX DE W6XX RST 5NN WX FB 73 W6XX SK That's not the case when I operate Morse Code. How does that help the cause of amateur radio? I have designed and built numerous rf receivers and transmitters, many are employed by the US Army for various uses. I have fixed many different radios from tube stuff through DSP driven affairs. How exactly did the code help me to do this? For me code was a means to an end. I wanted my license, so I learned the code. There were plenty of rude, profane, and generally unpleasant hams on the air back when all had to pass the test in the offices of the FCC. I don't remember that at all. I haven't noticed that things are any worse now. About the only real difference is in the quality of the gear folks are running. It is much better than the crappy stuff that was on the air back in the early 70's. There were good and bad rigs then as well as now. Are conversations on repeaters as technical as they were twenty-five years ago? Oh, easily. 25 years ago, technical conversations were dominated by such earth shatteringly important stuff as having a ham down at the repeater site helping other hams tune their transmitters to be on frequency. Other wonderkind were hitting the repeater with a full quieting signal, and turning their power up to try and get a better signal to that DX mobile that breaking up. If it wasn't that, it was an endless sea of autopatches calling the xyl to tell her that traffic was bad, could she start dinner... or ordering pizza. Me? I hear no-codes and nickle extras arguing how long a half wave dipole should be. I heard the same things 25 years ago from Generals that got their licenses at the offices of the FCC. Even 34 years ago, there were study guides that had questions from the pool used by the FCC. If you could memorize the answers to those questions, you were virtually assured of passing. I used the ARRL handbook as my guide. Do you mean the License Manual? It did not have the exact questions and answers in it. You didn't answer my questions about the home brew rig you are using. Construction projects you or I have done aren't important. Yes they are! Working to insure ham radio doesn't turn into CB is important. Agreed? *BOTH* are important. If you're not running a homebrew or at least home-assembled rig, who are you to call someone else an appliance operator? What good are technical *discussions* if they don't translate into actual working radio systems? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams.
|
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams. | Boatanchors | |||
Question for the group. Mainly new hams. | Homebrew | |||
FYI - Shortwave Radio Listener (SWL) Groups on YAHOO ! | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newslin(tm) Report 1385 – February 27, 2004 | Policy | |||
Response to "21st Century" Part One (Code Test) | Policy |