| Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Ham Radio Licenses
"LLongiii" wrote
Why continue to complain about something you can't change? It started out to be 5 wpm for novice, 13 wpm for General and 21 wpm for Extra. It is now 5 wpm for ALL. Until they drop the REQUIREMENT, it is still there. Because we CAN change it. The 13 and 21 WPM requirements went away when enough people complained. The current 5 wpm will also go away, but only if we complain long and hard enough. 73, K3DWW |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug Dotson" wrote in message
... Just a cop-out. I suspect that folks learn alot more useless (and incorrect) things in school than having to learn the code. The requirement is there, deal with it! Whining isn't going to make the requirement go away nor will it get a license. Oh yes it will - just like it made the 13 & 21 wpm requirements go away. There will be no Morse requirement in five years. Nor can I imagine anything more useless than Morse code. Those who want to keep the requirement are usually selfish snivelers who think everybody should suffer the same hardships as they did. Unable to justify their position on technical, moral or logical grounds they perforce resort to name calling and referring to facts they cannot refute as whining. I participate in my wife's VE team. I recommend that people learn code too - for now. But if they wait a year or two, they won't have to. 73, K3DWW |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Vito" wrote in message ... "Doug Dotson" wrote in message ... Just a cop-out. I suspect that folks learn alot more useless (and incorrect) things in school than having to learn the code. The requirement is there, deal with it! Whining isn't going to make the requirement go away nor will it get a license. Oh yes it will - just like it made the 13 & 21 wpm requirements go away. When was there ever a 21 WPM requirement? It was 20 WPM when I tried it. Incidently I was never able to pass the 20 WPM. Not because I was learning disabled but rather because I didn't really give a damn enough to keep studying. I got my Extra class when the requirements changed. 5 WPM is hardly a substantial barrier, just a psychological one. A good teacher can get folks past it. I have done it dozens of time. There will be no Morse requirement in five years. I trust this will be the case. So you want cruising sailors to be deprived of the utility and safety of a ham license for 5 years? Most cruisers don't cruise that long. Nor can I imagine anything more useless than Morse code. You have a poor imagination. I communicate quite efficiently using CW. Very good for DX in poor conditions. Clearly not useless. Those who want to keep the requirement are usually selfish snivelers who think everybody should suffer the same hardships as they did. That's a different issue. On one hand you claim it should be abolished because it is obsolete, on the other you are saying that hard core CW buffs want to keep it because other should suffer the agony (which is a myth) of learning it. Which is it? Obsolete or or a Rite Of Passage? Unable to justify their position on technical, moral or logical grounds they perforce resort to name calling and referring to facts they cannot refute as whining. Technically, CW is a sound means of communications. More so than some others. Morally, I fail to see any moral aspects to this. Logically, I also see no issue. The problem is international law which has lagged behind the technology. Hopefully that will sort itself out soon. I participate in my wife's VE team. I recommend that people learn code too - for now. But if they wait a year or two, they won't have to. Good advise based upon the realities now in place. That is where you need to be. Stick to the reality rather than the politics. Or tell her perspective examinees to keep their desires of becoming a ham on hold until a simple code test goes away. 73, K3DWW |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug Dotson" wrote in
: Comments below. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Terry King" wrote in message I believe that 20 years from now, the 'credentialing' that hidebound 'trades' use for self-job-protection will fade even more, and "just-in- time" Education will supercede the 4-year college model. I suspect that is true. The First Class Commercial Radiotelephone license I worked so hard on in High School is no longer required to fix broadcast transmitters. And the world has not come to an end. People who can do the job get hired to do it, and those who can't get fired. Used to be they BOTH had licenses... I believe that the GROL is required now isn't it? Nope. No license is required to operate or maintain any radio transmitter EXCEPT marine or aviation, now. I have a 1st Phone (now expired, dammit) on my wall I worked very hard to get. I keep the damned GROL giveaway hidden in a drawer, just because they say I have to have it to work on marine radios. The old 1st Phone MEANT something to the employers and your peers. It was a badge of accomplishment. It put you in a fraternity of technicians with proven skills. GROL is a joke. Just like the Volunteer Examiner ham licenses, it wouldn't surprise me if you could buy one for $500 under the table. By the way, the GMDSS operator and servicer tests are a pain in the ass....(c; I passed.... Larry |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug" wrote in
hlink.net: I too got my license in 1957 and hated the code. I am in favor of abolishing it for HF except in the code only portion of the bands. A code endorsement could be added for those frequencies. The question/answer pools are a joke, but I think federal policy regarding them goes beyond the FCC as the FAA has similar stuff for aviation exams now. Lets bring back the 2 year as a General Class or better before being eligible to take the Extra Exam. Experience is needed before getting a 1 X 2 vanity call! I keep running into those guys (especially boaters) who have less than 6 months as a ham and think they know it all. Isn't it also time we abolished this ARRL nonsense of segregated ham bands, leaving 50 Khz virtually "US FREE" from 14.100 to 14.150? 160 meters works just fine without ARRL flexing FCC muscles on subbands no longer of use. Let the MARKET and the hams set what is acceptable and what is wasted. If we're going to keep it segregated like this stupidity, let's CONFINE CW to the bottom 25 or 50 Khz of the bands, to keep old farts from using it as a JAMMING DEVICE up in the phone bands. I've been hearing the CW jamming for 40 years. CW has no place in the phone bands....EVER. Larry, since you brought up the NNNN at the end of a TTY message, I must point out it served an autostop function on TTY machines such as the Model 28 (I admit to being a model 12, 14, 15, 19, 28 TTYer years ago) that were equipped with a "stunt box". Do you recall what ZCZCZRJ did? My mom got ****ed and threw me and my Model 15 out into the garage, back in the early 60's. Something about teletype noise keeping her from sleeping at 2AM.....??? I never could afford a Model 28 until much later. By then, I was running a Micrologic into a TV. Remember them?...(c; I think ZCZCRJ turned the teletype machine motor on in systems with dead time. Did you ever see a Burpee reperf machine? Something like 650 wpm in a parallel interface (not Baudot serial data). The tape just FLEW out of them and their motors only ran intermittently. I think they were remotely addressable, somehow. Ah, it's all gone, now. Only noise in Radio Central on the ships is cooling fans. Pity..... I remember those "Secret" messages: Mrs. Jones, wife of Admiral Jones, requests the presence of Mrs. Johnson, wife of Admiral Johnson, at a tea given in her honor on Saturday, June 18th at 4PM. RSVP NNNN Wonder how much paper this crap used to waste, NAVYWIDE? Probably lots more than the paper I printed 24/7 back in the Cal Lab (Shop 67B) on board USS Everglades (AD-24) on the Reuters Press broadcast on 10 Mhz band...(c; Larry |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Vito" wrote in
: "Larry W4CSC" wrote ARRL wants code dropped? My, my that IS a switch. ARRL has always wanted to take ham radio back to 1935 any time I've seen them. .... Like any org, ARRL is people. Uncle Sam made a lot of people learn 20+ wpm Morse before and during WW2 and so many of them became hams that they controlled ARRL and set policies for their own benefit - policies that used Morse proficiency to keep others out. But, as more and more of them retire or go SK things change. New blood understands that the more active hams join ARRL the more CQ magazines get sold. I know. I waited 20 years for them to die off so I wouldn't have to learn 20 wpm....(c; I won. Larry W4CSC aka KN4IM aka WB4THE aka WN2IWH I riled an ARRL bureaucrat from HQ at a hamfest a few years back. Man he was mad. He threatened to have my ham license revoked. I told him when the damned ARRL could cause my ham license to be revoked, I'd deliver my ham license to the FCC, personally, at FCC HQ in Washington. Until that time, ARRL could KISS MY ASS..... I'm still licensed.... |
Ham Radio Licenses
Examiner ham licenses, it wouldn't surprise me if you could buy one for
$500 under the table. I've heard of some getting one for free. By the way, the GMDSS operator and servicer tests are a pain in the ass....(c; I passed.... Agreed. I didn't bother with the Op license, just the Maint. Larry |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug Dotson" wrote in
: I think CW is still more reliable than phone, but certainly not more effiecient nor is it more practical. I've been listening to this crap since SSB came out..... In 1949, it may have been true. But, I tell you what.....Go download WinWarbler: http://www.qsl.net/winwarbler/download.htm for free. Install it, then simply plug your soundcard's audio input to the headphone jack on any SSB radio set to USB on 14.070. Pick the faintest PSK31 trace you can find on that display and click on the trace. Winwarbler will print perfectly on a signal NO CW OPERATOR COULD EVEN HEAR. Most PSK31 operators never run over 10 watts. PSK31, by the way, is NARROWER IN BANDWIDTH than 15 wpm CW! Winwarbler, just to show off, will copy THREE SIMULTANEOUS frequencies inside the SSB rig's 3 Khz bandwidth this way. That old CW-in-a-pinch nonsense IS really nonsense, now. Anyone in their boat's SSB that wants to see what's going on can download Winwarbler to their boat laptop and tune the Boat SSB radio to USB on 14.070 Mhz, where 90% of the PSK31 traffic occurs. On Lionheart, I don't even have to connect the M802 to the notebook! The notebook's built-in microphone can hear the radio's PSK31 warbling tones and prints them perfectly if there's not too much conversation going on around it! PSK31 is the most uncanny form of HF communications ever invented....and it was invented BY HAMS FOR HAMS. Sorry you're stuck on SITOR clicking and clacking away. Larry W4CSC and other fine old calls since 1957 |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... "Doug" wrote in hlink.net: Larry, since you brought up the NNNN at the end of a TTY message, I must point out it served an autostop function on TTY machines such as the Model 28 (I admit to being a model 12, 14, 15, 19, 28 TTYer years ago) that were equipped with a "stunt box". Do you recall what ZCZCZRJ did? My mom got ****ed and threw me and my Model 15 out into the garage, back in the early 60's. Something about teletype noise keeping her from sleeping at 2AM.....??? I never could afford a Model 28 until much later. By then, I was running a Micrologic into a TV. Remember them?...(c; Larry, I was cleaning the garage and found a UGC-20, TT-192A, and a TT-187 under the bottom of a pile right next to a model 33-ASR. It seems like our garage was the local repository for TTY gear. At one time we had an SB-1210 capable of running 6 loops off one supply. We had 4 loops with a tty demod on each and then a wide section of equipment that could be patched in. AND then came computers............. Leanne |
Ham Radio Licenses
There you go again Larry. My comparision was between
CW and phone and you bring up PSK31 :) Now that I think of it, I have tuned into CW signals that I could hardly hear and was able to get the computer to pull it out pretty sucessfully. Doug, k3qt s/v CAllista "Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... "Doug Dotson" wrote in : I think CW is still more reliable than phone, but certainly not more effiecient nor is it more practical. I've been listening to this crap since SSB came out..... In 1949, it may have been true. But, I tell you what.....Go download WinWarbler: http://www.qsl.net/winwarbler/download.htm for free. Install it, then simply plug your soundcard's audio input to the headphone jack on any SSB radio set to USB on 14.070. Pick the faintest PSK31 trace you can find on that display and click on the trace. Winwarbler will perfectly on a signal NO CW OPERATOR COULD EVEN HEAR. Most PSK31 operators never run over 10 watts. PSK31, by the way, is NARROWER IN BANDWIDTH than 15 wpm CW! Winwarbler, just to show off, will copy THREE SIMULTANEOUS frequencies inside the SSB rig's 3 Khz bandwidth this way. That old CW-in-a-pinch nonsense IS really nonsense, now. Anyone in their boat's SSB that wants to see what's going on can download Winwarbler to their boat laptop and tune the Boat SSB radio to USB on 14.070 Mhz, where 90% of the PSK31 traffic occurs. On Lionheart, I don't even have to connect the M802 to the notebook! The notebook's built-in microphone can hear the radio's PSK31 warbling tones and prints them perfectly if there's not too much conversation going on around it! PSK31 is the most uncanny form of HF communications ever invented....and it was invented BY HAMS FOR HAMS. Sorry you're stuck on SITOR clicking and clacking away. Larry W4CSC and other fine old calls since 1957 |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Larry W4CSC" wrote in message ... "Doug" wrote in hlink.net: I think ZCZCRJ turned the teletype machine motor on in systems with dead time. Yes it was to turn on the machine clutchs. Did you ever see a Burpee reperf machine? Something like 650 wpm in a parallel interface (not Baudot serial data). The tape just FLEW out of them and their motors only ran intermittently. I think they were remotely addressable, somehow. Unfortunately, I had to work on those BRPE reperfs. Our computer used to spit out 8 bit ASCII format tape. Our reader had reel to reel but the ops used trash cans the tape moved to fast....one trash can for supply and one for takeup tape. Incidentally, the weird plug in bulb in the tape reader which we could never get through navy sources turned out to be a Volkswagen dome light. I loved stealing them out of the ops chief's beetle when he wasn't looking. I remember those super secret messages like Admiral to CO...such and such officers wife is playing around on him...give him leave to return home ASAP. Doug K7ABX |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug Dotson" wrote in
: There you go again Larry. My comparision was between CW and phone and you bring up PSK31 :) Now that I think of it, I have tuned into CW signals that I could hardly hear and was able to get the computer to pull it out pretty sucessfully. Doug, k3qt s/v CAllista The computer isn't anywhere near as good copying CW in noise as it is the phase-shift (FM?) keying of PSK31. Simply amazing how it can copy signals too faint to even make out with your ears.... 73, Larry W4CSC |
Ham Radio Licenses
Anybody who has worked in the training or educational fields knows of the
problems that "test anxiety" can cause. They also know that people learn in a variety of manners and have various strengths and weaknesses. And don't stereotype everyone in a category based on the experience of a few. You sound like someone for which morse code came relatively easy when compared to others' experiences. I worked religiously for one and half hours a day, every single day without exception for over three months and the best I could do was 4 1/2 WPM, not enough to pass the exam. I am a visual learner, those who do well on the code tests are probably auditory learners. My brain is just not wired the way to make the learning the code possible in any reasonable fashion. After that failed attempt work and family demands stepped in to prevent me from spending that kind of time for several years. By then I was moving into the programming field and haven't had the desire (or time) to make another attempt like that. JJ On Sun, 30 May 2004 21:34:25 -0400, "Doug Dotson" wrote: And if you have a bonifide learning or physical disability, you can get an exemption from the FCC. My experience has been that most that cry foul about learnig code do so because they failed to learn it after two or three evenings of trying. It takes work, some more than others. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "LLongiii" wrote in message ... If you ASK the Volunteer Examiner at the time of testing, they can and will arrange for lights, bells or ANY other device to take the code test. I had the same problem, but eventually passed the 13 wpm test. The people administering the test will bend over backwards to help. Leonard, KJ5DL Advanced Class Accredited Volunteer Examiner (ARRL & W5YI-VEC) "KJ5DL @ N34 38.253 W092 07.177" "Do illiterate people get the full value of Alphabet Soup?" James Johnson remove the "dot" from after sail in email address to reply |
Ham Radio Licenses
Comments below.
Doug s/v Callista "James Johnson" wrote in message ... Anybody who has worked in the training or educational fields knows of the problems that "test anxiety" can cause. They also know that people learn in a variety of manners and have various strengths and weaknesses. And don't stereotype everyone in a category based on the experience of a few. You sound like someone for which morse code came relatively easy when compared to others' experiences. Actually, code did not come to me easily at all. It took weeks of practice to barely get up to 13 WPM. I was never ever to get to 20 WPM. Peaked out at maybe 18. I worked religiously for one and half hours a day, every single day without exception for over three months and the best I could do was 4 1/2 WPM, not enough to pass the exam. As you said earlier, people learn things in different ways. It sounds like the way you were trying to learn was not appropriate for the way your brain is wired. I was an educator for many years. I have found that in most instances when a student is having trouble with a concept, presenting it in a different manner does the trick. Perhaps finding someone to work with may help. I am a visual learner, those who do well on the code tests are probably auditory learners. My brain is just not wired the way to make the learning the code possible in any reasonable fashion. After that failed attempt work and family demands stepped in to prevent me from spending that kind of time for several years. By then I was moving into the programming field and haven't had the desire (or time) to make another attempt like that. I had the same problem. I am mostly a visual learner as well. JJ On Sun, 30 May 2004 21:34:25 -0400, "Doug Dotson" wrote: And if you have a bonifide learning or physical disability, you can get an exemption from the FCC. My experience has been that most that cry foul about learnig code do so because they failed to learn it after two or three evenings of trying. It takes work, some more than others. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "LLongiii" wrote in message ... If you ASK the Volunteer Examiner at the time of testing, they can and will arrange for lights, bells or ANY other device to take the code test. I had the same problem, but eventually passed the 13 wpm test. The people administering the test will bend over backwards to help. Leonard, KJ5DL Advanced Class Accredited Volunteer Examiner (ARRL & W5YI-VEC) "KJ5DL @ N34 38.253 W092 07.177" "Do illiterate people get the full value of Alphabet Soup?" James Johnson remove the "dot" from after sail in email address to reply |
Ham Radio Licenses
|
Ham Radio Licenses
Yeah Larry,
Aint much worth it any more. I worked hard to get my 1st Phone w/Radar and My Extra (20). Now I have a GROL, and a ham license that any one with a decent memory can get. Todays license is not a test of understanding it's just a memory test, short term at that. CW does offer a respite from the empty babble cluttering up the phone bands. Cheers es 73, Scott W7GSM Larry W4CSC wrote: "Doug Dotson" wrote in : Comments below. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Terry King" wrote in message I believe that 20 years from now, the 'credentialing' that hidebound 'trades' use for self-job-protection will fade even more, and "just-in- time" Education will supercede the 4-year college model. I suspect that is true. The First Class Commercial Radiotelephone license I worked so hard on in High School is no longer required to fix broadcast transmitters. And the world has not come to an end. People who can do the job get hired to do it, and those who can't get fired. Used to be they BOTH had licenses... I believe that the GROL is required now isn't it? Nope. No license is required to operate or maintain any radio transmitter EXCEPT marine or aviation, now. I have a 1st Phone (now expired, dammit) on my wall I worked very hard to get. I keep the damned GROL giveaway hidden in a drawer, just because they say I have to have it to work on marine radios. The old 1st Phone MEANT something to the employers and your peers. It was a badge of accomplishment. It put you in a fraternity of technicians with proven skills. GROL is a joke. Just like the Volunteer Examiner ham licenses, it wouldn't surprise me if you could buy one for $500 under the table. By the way, the GMDSS operator and servicer tests are a pain in the ass....(c; I passed.... Larry |
Ham Radio Licenses
Doug Dotson wrote:
I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Jack Erbes" wrote in message
... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) 5WPM serves no purpose. Any operator in an emergency using Morse will be doing so because they know Morse very well, everyone else will be talking to get the largest possible target audience. If Morse is being sent, they will be sending much faster than 5WPM, so all these people who learnt 5WPM for their licence (and then promptly forgot it) will be no better off. Even the people whose lives regularly depend on good commmunications have dropped or are dropping the requirement for Morse. None of the recent "Amateur Saves Somebody" stories seem to have used Morse either. Morse is like RTTY. Something, for anyone who wants to do it, that should be encouraged. However, if others don't care to do it, there is no big deal. Mark |
Ham Radio Licenses
That sure hits the nail on the head. I'll probably learn it then promptly
forget it through non-use. Same as I did for my old merit badge in Boy Scouts years ago. I still think it's just a hurdle to keep too many people from getting access to those frequencies. Whether that's a good idea or not, I can't say. -- Keith __ Always remember you're unique. Just like everyone else. "Mark Little" wrote in message ... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) 5WPM serves no purpose. Any operator in an emergency using Morse will be doing so because they know Morse very well, everyone else will be talking to get the largest possible target audience. If Morse is being sent, they will be sending much faster than 5WPM, so all these people who learnt 5WPM for their licence (and then promptly forgot it) will be no better off. Even the people whose lives regularly depend on good commmunications have dropped or are dropping the requirement for Morse. None of the recent "Amateur Saves Somebody" stories seem to have used Morse either. Morse is like RTTY. Something, for anyone who wants to do it, that should be encouraged. However, if others don't care to do it, there is no big deal. Mark |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Keith" wrote in message ... That sure hits the nail on the head. I'll probably learn it then promptly forget it through non-use. Same as I did for my old merit badge in Boy Scouts years ago. I still think it's just a hurdle to keep too many people from getting access to those frequencies. Whether that's a good idea or not, I can't say. At one time it was necessary to know Morse code, but in the last 50 years, equipment and techniques have changed so much that Morse is no longer the primary mode of usage. I was, for years, a fan of rtty art. How much of that do you see anymore? It seems now that I just have a few phone contacts on 40 meters and although we have all of the exotic digital modes in the shack, It is just not used much. I guess I have reached a 50 year burnout or maybe, heaven forbid, maturity. Leanne s/v Fundy |
Ham Radio Licenses
I suspect that repeater IDs in morse will be dropped as
when if the code requirement completely goes away. In any case, I believe the ID is sent at 13WPM. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
"L." wrote in message
rio.net... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Rules are rules until they are dropped.... But "I" nor my team will not allow nor ANY team should or be expect to allow ourselves to be subject to any punishment as may be handed down to allow a "cheater" to get away with it. Don't place the exam teams in jeapardy just because you don't like to follow rules. 5 WPM is NOT that hard. In 2 weeks at about 15 minutes a day, you can learn code sufficiently to pass that exam.... To not, is pure laziness. Bitch about 13/20 all you want, but 5 is as easy as it gets..... L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
L. wrote:
A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Calm down, I thought maybe it was okay to have one. They seemed to give a lot of latitude when I took mine about 3-4 years ago. I was told I could answer some questions and "gist" the QSO if I could not or did not want to copy it all down. As it was, I probably had the best Morse skills in the room (including the volunteers giving the test) when I took mine. The volunteers running the test were having a lot of trouble getting the playback system to work (about 10 headsets ganged up to a cassette player) and in getting the tape rewound and staged to where they wanted it. And their Morse skills were either poor or very rusty. So they said, this is the test, get ready, go! But wound up starting the test with the last quarter or so of the final practice QSO still going on and none of the volunteers had a headset on at that point. I did not want to raise a disturbance for the other (5-6?) testees so I simply started copying down everything I heard and turned it in at the end. After I took the written test they said I had passed the theory and code tests and I was a Technician with Code. It is another issue but I am a real bone head on theory and have some trouble recalling tabular data that pretty much has to be memorized so I did not pass high enough for the General. But I didn't whine about how hard that was for me. Maybe after we get done throwing away the Morse requirement we can throw away all the info in the test that is not needed by people who buy radios instead of building them. What about that? And how about not having to memorize all the things that I would normally and prudently look up on a wall chart or a handy reference? I'm getting my first social Security check this month and it seems to be affecting my memory. :) But the bottom line is that when you have a structured group of people that have learned something "the hard way" they expect everyone else to go through the same hoops to join the group. And they are not always wrong. I love the code and think everyone should know some. Maybe my 26 years as a Navy cryptologist, with a good part of that involving the copying of Morse code, is affecting my thinking. I still enjoy hearing "bens best bent wire" sent in morse. Heaven forbid I should stumble off band and hear a crusty old Radioman at NPL calling NPM with a "banana boat swing" to his fist. I'd probably cry. Cheers! -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Jack Erbes" wrote in message
... L. wrote: A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Calm down, I thought maybe it was okay to have one. Calm down? First of all, I'm not "upset". But - you are kidding, right? You "thought" it was ok to have one? Cheat sheets are NEVER allowed. You weren't allowed them in school, you surely aren't now either. IF any team EVER let anyone use one, then it was a fraudulent exam session - pure and simple. ANY "honest"' VEC and the FCC would stand by that. They seemed to give a lot of latitude when I took mine about 3-4 years ago. I was told I could answer some questions and "gist" the QSO if I could not or did not want to copy it all down. See my comments above...... regarding the cheat sheets - if you were given "latitude"..... Be careful what you admit to, the FCC could make you RETEST. AND if they find you failed, then you and the VEs are also subject to punishment. The CW tests USED to be either Fill in the blanks OR Multiple choice or whatever the team chose to use. FIB and MC were the two most widely used. NOW they are ONLY "Fill in the blanks". You needed then AND NOW, to pass 7 out of 10 in answers to pass the exam. IF you failed the code exam written, they could look at your code copy and IF you had the prescribed number of characters "straight"' in a row with NO MISTAKES, they could pass you on that. THAT is how it is SUPPOSED to be done. As it was, I probably had the best Morse skills in the room (including the volunteers giving the test) when I took mine. The volunteers running the test were having a lot of trouble getting the playback system to work (about 10 headsets ganged up to a cassette player) and in getting the tape rewound and staged to where they wanted it. Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet". THEY should have been General class or above. I don't know.... faulty equipment still doesn't give "latittude" towards "answers". WE would have started it over - PERIOD. What you had copied would have been passed off as a "warm up". And their Morse skills were either poor or very rusty. So they said, this is the test, get ready, go! But wound up starting the test with the last quarter or so of the final practice QSO still going on and none of the volunteers had a headset on at that point. I did not want to raise a disturbance for the other (5-6?) testees so I simply started copying down everything I heard and turned it in at the end. Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started over. That was not a good example of testing..... After I took the written test they said I had passed the theory and code tests and I was a Technician with Code. Congradulations - if you did it "honestly". It is another issue but I am a real bone head on theory and have some trouble recalling tabular data that pretty much has to be memorized so I did not pass high enough for the General. But I didn't whine about how hard that was for me. ALL exams have ALL the answers in books widely available. If you had trouble, then you need to study more. Memorizing answers A, B, C, D - just doesn't cut it. One does NOT get the proper understanding of it. If you KNOW the stuff, then the test will come easier. The only thing is, when you read one of the "widely available" study guides, though the answers are the same, the alignment - IE; A, B, C, D - may not be. I know a guy who tried memorizing that way once and failed. The book was shown to us after, and the answers were in a different order. Maybe after we get done throwing away the Morse requirement we can throw away all the info in the test that is not needed by people who buy radios instead of building them. What about that? WHY? Then when all the electronics goes to hell, who then goes on in interest to become those who design and manufacture your stereos, tvs, play stations, computers, etc. ? MANY who get licensed as hams, go on to be broadcast engineers, etc. Especially if they're young with the hobby at heart. The old farts, well, that is another story. SOMEONE has to "learn" electronics. HAM is usually a stepping stone. Man, they once said this is the dumbing down of America..... IT SURE IS. With the "I don't want to learn it" attitude, in a few years, this country won't be worth a good ****. ANY country who strives for excellence will beat us hands down then........ We'll have a bunch of dumb asses who won't know how to do anything. And how about not having to memorize all the things that I would normally and prudently look up on a wall chart or a handy reference? I'm getting my first social Security check this month and it seems to be affecting my memory. :) MAN, that is PURE LAZINESS. For Christs sakes, they're not asking to recite the Bill of rights! Just a "few" formulas. Why bother reading a "driver's license manual" to learn how to drive, to pass the exams which require you to know all the signs of the roads? WHY DO ANY STUDYING???? Why not just all of us end up a bunch of morons because of laziness? Ohms law is one of the most basic formulas you can be called on to remember and how to do it. When I had trouble with it in school in shop class, I was made to write it 100 times. Believe me, I learned it fast. It was tough then - as a teen who was rebellious against "hard work", doing all that writing, but ya know what???? I'm glad as hell it was drilled into me. Electronics became not only a great hobby but my business. But the bottom line is that when you have a structured group of people that have learned something "the hard way" they expect everyone else to go through the same hoops to join the group. And they are not always wrong. It is only as hard as you make it. ANY THING with work or hard earned money put into it, makes it worth more. When you have something given to you, you're more apt to abuse it. Had you not went to school to learn, you wouldn't be anywhere near as far ahead. I love the code and think everyone should know some. Maybe my 26 years as a Navy cryptologist, with a good part of that involving the copying of Morse code, is affecting my thinking. I still enjoy hearing "bens best bent wire" sent in morse. Heaven forbid I should stumble off band and hear a crusty old Radioman at NPL calling NPM with a "banana boat swing" to his fist. I'd probably cry. I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in the service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it there, you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET. If you were to use a cheat sheet in the Navy to receive a message of a pending attack, by the time you got done decoding using a cheat sheet, the message of a Bomb is headed your way... the bomb has probably HIT. Look, this isn't "personal".... but I DO disagree with you or that you've experienced....... Any reference I've made as to a dumb ass and so on, is not to you - personally. It is in general if things do end up going as you seem to suggest. Cheers! -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
Hooah!! I remember a friend that took his 5WPM by writing down the
dots and dashes. Then in the "think-time" after the test he was able to remember the code. VEs outlawed that practice pretty quick! Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "L." wrote in message io.net... "L." wrote in message rio.net... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Rules are rules until they are dropped.... But "I" nor my team will not allow nor ANY team should or be expect to allow ourselves to be subject to any punishment as may be handed down to allow a "cheater" to get away with it. Don't place the exam teams in jeapardy just because you don't like to follow rules. 5 WPM is NOT that hard. In 2 weeks at about 15 minutes a day, you can learn code sufficiently to pass that exam.... To not, is pure laziness. Bitch about 13/20 all you want, but 5 is as easy as it gets..... L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
Lines: 25
Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: X-Abuse-Info: Please forward a copy of all headers for proper handling X-Trace: ldjgbllpbapjglppdbdpiflmbcekedmfhojhikkbagflhcbobg iiddancopfppnphboeneagdmedomkfhgjfjiklkmnnojcmihbi hliohechmkebafjffeobjmmidimdmnkmcjnfolkihdbfopgkhf bmgdpmhfjg NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 13:52:23 EDT Organization: BellSouth Internet Group Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2004 17:52:23 GMT Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com rec.boats.electronics:56754 On 2004-08-08 AMcom said: as a Navy cryptologist, with a good part of that involving the copying of Morse code, is affecting my thinking. I still enjoy hearing "bens best bent wire" sent in morse. Heaven forbid I should stumble off band and hear a crusty old Radioman at NPL calling NPM with a "banana boat swing" to his fist. I'd probably cry. OK, whatever all that means :) LIked that one, won a qlf contest sending that phrase years ago. Another similar one I used ot hear was "bens best beer bet." 73 Richard Webb, amateur radio callsign nf5b active on the Maritime Mobile service network, 14.300 mhz REplace anything before the @ symbol with elspider for real email -- "So she said it was either her or ham radio....OVER" |
Ham Radio Licenses
COmments below.
Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... L. wrote: A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Calm down, I thought maybe it was okay to have one. I guess the term "CHEAT SHEET" still has the conatations of CHEATING. They seemed to give a lot of latitude when I took mine about 3-4 years ago. I was told I could answer some questions and "gist" the QSO if I could not or did not want to copy it all down. Those are the rules, not a "gist". You can have good copy, or in the absense of good copy (perfect I recall), you can pass if you can pull out the important pieces of info from the QSO. As it was, I probably had the best Morse skills in the room (including the volunteers giving the test) when I took mine. Doubtful. The volunteers running the test were having a lot of trouble getting the playback system to work (about 10 headsets ganged up to a cassette player) and in getting the tape rewound and staged to where they wanted it. Has not much to do with their competence in Morse code. :) And their Morse skills were either poor or very rusty. So they said, this is the test, get ready, go! But wound up starting the test with the last quarter or so of the final practice QSO still going on and none of the volunteers had a headset on at that point. I did not want to raise a disturbance for the other (5-6?) testees so I simply started copying down everything I heard and turned it in at the end. Seems like their competence at running a cassette player it the issue. After I took the written test they said I had passed the theory and code tests and I was a Technician with Code. Congratulations! Now keep studying and get a real license. It is another issue but I am a real bone head on theory and have some trouble recalling tabular data that pretty much has to be memorized so I did not pass high enough for the General. But I didn't whine about how hard that was for me. You are a man with character. Just keep at it. If getting a ham license was easy they would call it CB. Maybe after we get done throwing away the Morse requirement we can throw away all the info in the test that is not needed by people who buy radios instead of building them. What about that? Bad idea. Most of the theory remaining on the tests deals with being able to determine if you are operating legally and safely. Off the shelf rigs don;t come along with someone to install the rig properly and with someone standing behind you to tell you if you are radiating legally. Antennas and feed systems are not totally off the shelf and your neighbors are not required to put up with interference from you. You have to be able to determine that yourself. Also, homebuilding is still legal and thank goodness still practiced. And how about not having to memorize all the things that I would normally and prudently look up on a wall chart or a handy reference? Same reason you had to take english, history, math, etc in school. You have to know a bit about things to understand what the chart on he wall is saying. I'm getting my first social Security check this month and it seems to be affecting my memory. :) I hope I live so long :) But the bottom line is that when you have a structured group of people that have learned something "the hard way" they expect everyone else to go through the same hoops to join the group. And they are not always wrong. I seem to recall having to take a driver's test to get a drivers licence. And an FAA test to get a pilots license. I love the code and think everyone should know some. Then then 5 WPM requirement should sit well with you. That is pretty much what it accomplishes. Maybe my 26 years as a Navy cryptologist, with a good part of that involving the copying of Morse code, is affecting my thinking. I still enjoy hearing "bens best bent wire" sent in morse. Heaven forbid I should stumble off band and hear a crusty old Radioman at NPL calling NPM with a "banana boat swing" to his fist. I'd probably cry. OK, whatever all that means :) Cheers! -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Doug Dotson" wrote in message
... Hooah!! I remember a friend that took his 5WPM by writing down the dots and dashes. Then in the "think-time" after the test he was able to remember the code. VEs outlawed that practice pretty quick! Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "L." wrote in message io.net... "L." wrote in message rio.net... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. Rules are rules until they are dropped.... But "I" nor my team will not allow nor ANY team should or be expect to allow ourselves to be subject to any punishment as may be handed down to allow a "cheater" to get away with it. Don't place the exam teams in jeapardy just because you don't like to follow rules. 5 WPM is NOT that hard. In 2 weeks at about 15 minutes a day, you can learn code sufficiently to pass that exam.... To not, is pure laziness. Bitch about 13/20 all you want, but 5 is as easy as it gets..... L. This in reply to the thread, not to Doug Dotson - personally...... At 5 WPM, if you have enough time to write down the dits and dahs, you sure in hell have enough time to decipher it in your head. It doesn't take much longer to write down the letter K for example when you hear -.- as it would for you to go back and recall it later. So, why not save yourself the aggrivation and frustration and do it right the FIRST time....? It's plain and simple... Either you know the code OR YOU DON'T. And if you know it even reasonably well, you'll do fine..... WITHOUT the crap. To take a sheet in to the exam with you with all the letters, numerals and characters and Q signals and such which shows them in dits and dahs - is the same as taking in with you a cheat sheet with all the Ohms Law formulas, Frequency Charts, Part 97 rules which you are supposed to know off the top of your head and so on..... Call it gray if you like, somehow I don't think the FCC would allow it, if they were still testing. They expect you to know what you're being tested on, just as your school teachers did. Just before the FCC quit giving exams, they were in most cases, down to once a month and quite a drive if you didn't live near a city. IF you didn't know your stuff, you failed. AND then you wasted a trip and had to wait 30 days to try again. Cheat sheets? Man they probably would have strung you up, if they caught you. Actually, the VEs are supposed to check calculators too, to erase ANY/ALL saved formulas you may have in there, so you "have" to recall them mentally. The only thing there is, you are allowed to write them down on your scratch paper from memory - but all scratch papers are to be turned in with the exams. Writing them on your scratch paper is NOT the same as taking in a sheet with them already listed. Read the Rules, you'll see (about the calculators) . Unless they changed and I"m not aware of it, that still stands. So if that is the case, then WHY would you be allowed a "cheat sheet"????? If you got to cheat to get by in life, then what value does your life or any goals you've achieved - hold????? The gentleman now ready for his Social Security check surprised the hell out of me... Folks in that age bracket - I thought - knew what it was to put in some effort, a hard days' work and get some value out of life. Having served time in the Navy, which I'm not condeming him of in anyway, I'm surprised he seems to have taken the attitude he has. To have been trained hard, to put in effort to get the job done.... I AM SURPRISED. NOTHING in life worth having - comes free or easy. There is NO free lunch....... We ALL live by rules... Rules of the road, the bible if you so choose to do that, the community, FCC and so on. With no rules, man this world would run amuck and be a hell of a lot worse off than it is becoming daily. Furthermore, maybe "my" examples of why the theory are needed weren't good, but if you don't test at all, then why bother? The ham bands just handed out like the CB band.... Then what? I'm not condemning CBers either. I know many good ones. It is the bad apples of the bunch causing the harm. And yes even the bad apples among the hams that are making Ham radio to become a cess pool. Giving away a license surely will not clean it up. It can only get worse. What sir, would you propose if no theory or code, should be done to get you there? I eagerly await your answer. As Doug points out, there are STILL things which can be done by hams, and I TOO am proud of it. I've built equipment from scratch which has saved me hours of labor in my hobby and business. I continue to learn something new every day. Were it not for hams, many of the advances made may still be in the imagination stages. Hams aren't the saviors of the world, but they've brought this world a good ways into the present. You're still able to make and install your own antennas which does take "some" knowledge, especially to tune them if need be. OR if building - to know the formulas to get them to resonate. Many who get on a radio (CB for example) don't know the first thing of what goes on when they key the mic. Isn't it nice to know HOW things work or to be able to improve your system - even if you can't repair the radio due to today's technology????? There is STILL much to do there.... LEARN IT, USE IT, ENJOY IT. ONLY THEN - will the fruits of your labor come to pass and you'll then "APPRECIATE" your time and efforts. When we WANT to stop learning, to stop trying, succeeding - what will we have come to? What good will we be to ourselves and/or to others? Why, we won't even amount to a droid. One can only wonder how terrible things really will be then. I don't want to take that trip into the twilight zone...... It's ugly enough to think it, let alone experience. L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
BTW, I went to the web site to find an examiner for my test. Sent an e-mail
but never got a reply. Anyone know where I can find an examiner for the Houston, TX area? -- Keith __ Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. "L." wrote in message rio.net... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
FWIW I bought a 13 WM Morse ID'r because it was cheaper and satisfied FCC
rules & wont replace it til FCC makes me. Howard, K3DWW "Doug Dotson" wrote in message ... I suspect that repeater IDs in morse will be dropped as when if the code requirement completely goes away. In any case, I believe the ID is sent at 13WPM. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista |
Ham Radio Licenses
FCC IDers used to be set for 20wpm.... "I" personally don't know if that has
changed or not. But if it is listed as FCC Compliant, then I wouldn't worry about it. Actually, some commercial Iders do sound a bit slower now days! I've not checked the rules lately OR the market to see what is out there. If you're using the IDer for Ham use, I don't know that the FCC will bother you. For commercial, maybe! L. "Vito" wrote in message ... FWIW I bought a 13 WM Morse ID'r because it was cheaper and satisfied FCC rules & wont replace it til FCC makes me. Howard, K3DWW "Doug Dotson" wrote in message ... I suspect that repeater IDs in morse will be dropped as when if the code requirement completely goes away. In any case, I believe the ID is sent at 13WPM. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista |
Ham Radio Licenses
IF there are any Ham groups near you, stop by a meeting... OR go to a
hamfest near you if you happen to hear of one being held. There are usually walk in sessions held. I don't know where you got the address from, but W5YI keeps a list of theirs. IF it was "their" list, then contact them directly via e-mail or phone since you're in Texas (if it is a local call for you) - let them know you got no response, maybe they can refer you to another. L. "Keith" wrote in message ... BTW, I went to the web site to find an examiner for my test. Sent an but never got a reply. Anyone know where I can find an examiner for the Houston, TX area? -- Keith __ Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again. "L." wrote in message rio.net... "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... Doug Dotson wrote: I guess I'm a little behind as well. If I recall correctly, when the last rule change happened that made 5WPM the speed for General and Advanced, it was stated that the ITU requirement was the reason that it could not be dropped entirely. Once the ITU dropped the requirement, the FCC would iniate action to follow suit. Personally, I think the code should stay. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista I agree with keeping the 5 WPM requirement. Being able to read an SOS, read a repeater ID, etc., etc., is a good thing. And it does not hurt anyone at 5 WPM. At that speed you can take a cheat sheet with you and look the longer, harder to remember ones as they are sent. Of course, I suppose there is someone that will have trouble as soon as they got to those really tough ones with both dits and dahs... :) -.- .---- .--- .... . -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com A CHEAT SHEET??????????????? Buddy, if you're not ready for an exam, you're going to fail. Come to my exams and be caught and the exam is OVER and YOU FAIL. And that is the least you can expect. Being turned into the FCC for any possible action will be up to them. L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
|
Ham Radio Licenses
All the repeaters I use ID in voice now. The CW ID is still there thoughI
suppose to comply with the rules. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Vito" wrote in message ... FWIW I bought a 13 WM Morse ID'r because it was cheaper and satisfied FCC rules & wont replace it til FCC makes me. Howard, K3DWW "Doug Dotson" wrote in message ... I suspect that repeater IDs in morse will be dropped as when if the code requirement completely goes away. In any case, I believe the ID is sent at 13WPM. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com Nice to see a downeaster on here from Ellsworth. I was stationed at Winter Harbor in 1974-79 and again 1981-84. Moonlighted as a service tech for the old County Communications near Ellsworth. We had commercial, 20 wpm IDs on Bald Mountain between Ellsworth and Bangor, also CAP and Ham repeaters running as high as 35 wpm. Doug, K7ABX, CTMCS (USN Retired) |
Ham Radio Licenses
L. wrote:
Calm down? First of all, I'm not "upset". But - you are kidding, right? You "thought" it was ok to have one? Cheat sheets are NEVER allowed. You weren't allowed them in school, you surely aren't now either. IF any team EVER let anyone use one, then it was a fraudulent exam session - pure and simple. ANY "honest"' VEC and the FCC would stand by that. Yes, as a matter of fact I was kidding. It was a sarcastic comment, not based on fact, not a recommendation, just a comment. Don't take it too seriously please. See my comments above...... regarding the cheat sheets - if you were given "latitude"..... The latitude I was referring to was in in the way the code test was (or should have been?) administered and graded. That there were some options for passing it other than to just copy the code on paper and hand it in. When the FCC was giving the tests in the mid 60's it was quite different than it is now. You copied the code and handed it in and it spoke for itself as I recall it. Be careful what you admit to... snip Admit to? Am I on trial here? Do you want to read me my rights? I passed the tests, code and theory, fair and square in a venue that was a little disorganized maybe. And I guess my memory is still haunting me. I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember. Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet". I didn't have a cheat sheet. And I didn't need one, I knew the code. Again, I said that sarcastically, it was a throw away remark. Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started over. That was not a good example of testing..... You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test and being able to pass it. Congradulations - if you did it "honestly". Your suggestion that I might not have done it honestly ****es me off. But for the record, I did. I copied the code, all of it (and maybe answered some questions too?). Then I took the written theory test, and got a license. snip lecture I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in the service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it there, you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET. Yeah, it did. The taxpayers got their money's worth out of me. And I am not bitching about learning the code. I was on the "leave the code in the test" side of the argument. I like the code, remember. Try rereading my post maybe. ..- .-. -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com |
Ham Radio Licenses
"Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... L. wrote: Be careful what you admit to... snip Admit to? Am I on trial here? Do you want to read me my rights? I passed the tests, code and theory, fair and square in a venue that was a little disorganized maybe. And I guess my memory is still haunting me. I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember. NO you are not "on trial". "Some" could have taken your words of the testing as it having been done improperly. Whether it was your fault or not. That could result in a retest. Then if you were that good, you shouldn't have needed a "cheat sheet". I didn't have a cheat sheet. And I didn't need one, I knew the code. Again, I said that sarcastically, it was a throw away remark. Good..... but we're not all mind readers to know where you were going with that remark. Then they should have stopped the test and got the tape qued and started over. That was not a good example of testing..... You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test and being able to pass it. Congradulations - if you did it "honestly". Your suggestion that I might not have done it honestly ****es me off. But for the record, I did. I copied the code, all of it (and maybe answered some questions too?). Then I took the written theory test, and got a license. No, I'm not suggesting "YOU" didn't do it honestly. The whole thing the way you wrote about it, just didn't sound good. If you earned it, YOU EARNED IT.... Who am I to judge? You alluded to improper testing procedures, cheat sheets be they off the wall remarks or whatever.... None of it sounded up front. You lead to the conclusion of improprieties, not us. But I went over the procedures as they are supposed to be. That is how we do it. We go by the book, not someone's idea of what they "think" it should be. snip lecture I bet the Navy made you study SOMETHING. And, if you had to do Morse in the service, then why are you bitching about it now? Surely if you did it there, you can do it here WITHOUT A CHEAT SHEET. Yeah, it did. The taxpayers got their money's worth out of me. And I am not bitching about learning the code. I was on the "leave the code in the test" side of the argument. I like the code, remember. Try rereading my post maybe. .- .-. -- Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jacker at midmaine dot com And I'm damned sure the country, or at least some of us are glad you were part of the service to the country. To that, I say thank you. No, basically all I'm saying is it is all in how it was presented...... L. |
Ham Radio Licenses
I think the discussion on code has been pretty much beat to death on
every forum I know of. Comments below. Doug, k3qt s/v Callista "Jack Erbes" wrote in message ... L. wrote: The latitude I was referring to was in in the way the code test was (or should have been?) administered and graded. That there were some options for passing it other than to just copy the code on paper and hand it in. When the FCC was giving the tests in the mid 60's it was quite different than it is now. You copied the code and handed it in and it spoke for itself as I recall it. Traditionally, code was graded based upon accuracy of copy. That is because one was generally copying code that was then sent to the intended recipient. The FCC finally realized that in ham radio, the only thing that was important was that the information contained in the message was all that was important. If one could extract the information based upon context then that was sufficient. Thus a quiz about the copied info was given. The quiz was bypassed in the event that perfect copy was achieved. I remember taking the code test and then taking the written theory test. You're saying there should be a written test on the stuff sent in the code test? Maybe there was, I don't remember. There has been a test on the stuff in the code test for at least the last 20 years or so. That is unless you got perfect copy. You're right. But I didn't want to get up and stop it. I thought it might bother the other people who were already copying it thinking the test had started. Some of them were pretty apprehensive about the test and being able to pass it. I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you were taking the test not administering it. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:16 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com