"jakdedert" wrote:

: IMHO, requiring a code test is like requiring someone to know how to
: reupholster their car in order to get a drivers license. It's unlikely that
: they will ever use the knowledge.
please state if you have tried to learn/pass the morse test.



:
: OTOH, I've seen a number of very simplistic technical questions posted
: lately in this and in other forums, by 'hams' who should know better....
and i've seen plenty of no-coders howl and cry out loud for not being
allowed on hf , all because they were being *forced* to learn morse
code...

and at the same time kept very quiet about being *forced* to learn
ohm's law, the series resitor sum, the parallel capacitor formula, the
parallel resistor formula, and above all, the relationship between the
speed of light,frequency and wavelength

and kept very quiet about being *forced* to learn regulations about
various regulations governing what callsign letters to use when operating
on a boat in a river,,,when some of them will never ever be on a boat in
a river in their lives !!!

Jim - NN7K wrote:

: wants to avoid pedestrians, and other traffic! Lets get rid of ALL
: testing materials, and abolish the FCC -- then ANYONE can transmit
: ANYWHERE, from DC to LIGHT! No callsign required, nor power limits!
: Free speech at last ! Makes as much sense! Jim NN7K


TEN FOUR GUD BUDDY.

"Matt" wrote:

: Ahhhhhh, yes of course and the retention of CW will keep the riff raff out
: won't it!!
yes it has ..and WILL continue to do so..

it requires effort to pass.


and once you put the effort in,, you will value the licence more.

those who lose hf access have further to fall (more to lose)

"James King" wrote in message news:opsl8nwpaa2sj4v0@dad...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:34:32 -0500, Dee Flint
wrote:

I've never operated satellite and never intend to and have no interest in
ever doing so. Yet I had to answer questions on it. Do I think it
should
be taken out of the test? No, because it is something allowed by my
privileges.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Please demonstrate your knowledge of Sat - data - sctv abilities. For your
license that is. not just a passing knowledge in the topic but send and
receive a 1 minute transmission of each.

CW has its place in amateur radio... in history.

When code was the primary means of transmitting a message, demonstrating
your skill prior to getting your lic. was a great idea.

That time has passed.

As far as I know, no bandwidth has been off-limits to CW. Makes me wonder
at what your rail about.

I wasn't railing at anything. I was merely commenting that not wanting to
take a test element is not a justification for eliminating it. The argument
that you won't use it is also invalid as one cannot predict the future or
changes in interest. There are far better reasons to eliminate it than
those two arguments. Though I readily admit that I am a proponent of
keeping the test there are reasons that should at least be evaluated and
those that are pure hogwash (i.e. not wanting to or not thinking they will
use it).

Demonstrating satellite, data, or sctv abilities is not practical in a
testing environment. The test teams can't afford to have those facilities
and even in the days of the FCC testing, they did not have such facilities.

By the way, I've already operated data modes and found them utterly boring
and gave them up. Satellite and SCTV are not attractive enough to me to
invest money in them.

The question should be: is CW one of the fundamentals of amateur radio? If
so, it should be a requirement somewhere along the line. Age of the mode is
irrelevant.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"James King" wrote in message
news:opsl8nwpaa2sj4v0@dad...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 22:34:32 -0500, Dee Flint
wrote:

I've never operated satellite and never intend to and have no interest
in
ever doing so. Yet I had to answer questions on it. Do I think it
should
be taken out of the test? No, because it is something allowed by my
privileges.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


Please demonstrate your knowledge of Sat - data - sctv abilities. For
your license that is. not just a passing knowledge in the topic but send
and receive a 1 minute transmission of each.

CW has its place in amateur radio... in history.

When code was the primary means of transmitting a message, demonstrating
your skill prior to getting your lic. was a great idea.

That time has passed.

As far as I know, no bandwidth has been off-limits to CW. Makes me wonder
at what your rail about.

I wasn't railing at anything. I was merely commenting that not wanting to
take a test element is not a justification for eliminating it. The
argument that you won't use it is also invalid as one cannot predict the
future or changes in interest. There are far better reasons to eliminate
it than those two arguments. Though I readily admit that I am a proponent
of keeping the test there are reasons that should at least be evaluated
and those that are pure hogwash (i.e. not wanting to or not thinking they
will use it).

Demonstrating satellite, data, or sctv abilities is not practical in a
testing environment. The test teams can't afford to have those facilities
and even in the days of the FCC testing, they did not have such
facilities.

By the way, I've already operated data modes and found them utterly boring
and gave them up. Satellite and SCTV are not attractive enough to me to
invest money in them.

The question should be: is CW one of the fundamentals of amateur radio?
If so, it should be a requirement somewhere along the line. Age of the
mode is irrelevant.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


My humble opinion is "It would be better to drop code and up the technical".
There are more than enough amateurs who know little about radio as it is...

ZZZPK wrote:
Jim - NN7K wrote:

Hey, lets get rid of the WRITTEN test, too- too much work!
and just WHY should an obsolete agency of the Federal Government
have all the fun assigning callsigns ?? 10-4 good buddy ??
NN7K


exactly!

i have no interest in doing the pilots test..but all i want is a
liitle piece of the airspace at 5000ft to do some simple flying with
radio beside me!!!

waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..why wont they give me my pilots licence

Buy an ultralight. You won't need a license....

jak


waaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh... they say i have to do an exam or
two....


waaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

"jakdedert" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:

snip
My humble opinion is "It would be better to drop code and up the
technical". There are more than enough amateurs who know little about
radio as it is...

...or electronics in general. The other day there was a 'ham' (posting on
sci.electronics.repair) who was confused as to how much current a 12v p.s.
had to source in order to run his mobile rig at home.

They don't test on Ohm's Law....?!!

jak



Apparently he couldn't read either! RTFM and I'll bet it gives the supply
needs...

Jim wrote:

snip
My humble opinion is "It would be better to drop code and up the
technical". There are more than enough amateurs who know little about
radio as it is...

....or electronics in general. The other day there was a 'ham' (posting on
sci.electronics.repair) who was confused as to how much current a 12v p.s.
had to source in order to run his mobile rig at home.

They don't test on Ohm's Law....?!!

jak

On Wed, 16 Feb 2005 10:00:59 -0600, "jakdedert"
wrote:

...or electronics in general. The other day there was a 'ham' (posting on
sci.electronics.repair) who was confused as to how much current a 12v p.s.
had to source in order to run his mobile rig at home.

They don't test on Ohm's Law....?!!

Watt's that?

;-)

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
------------------------------------------------
at the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom