Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
I agree that the code is definitely no longer a reasonable requirement but
you are right that there needs to be some major changes to the exam process and more serious enforcement of the rules by the FCC to prevent the "CB syndrome". Out of curiosity I tried the Technician and General online practice tests last night. I got my General in 1961 and have not even thought about the technical side in 40 years but scored 97 on the Tech and 91 on the General. If I can do that without even thinking hard any dodo can pass with a couple of hours of preparation. The FCC doesn't even seem to be able to stop those self appointed SSB disk jockeys now. I would hate to see the bedlam if CB became intercontinental. -- Glenn Ashmore I'm building a 45' cutter in strip/composite. Watch my progress (or lack there of) at: http://www.rutuonline.com Shameless Commercial Division: http://www.spade-anchor-us.com "Gene Kearns" wrote in message ... On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 08:06:01 -0400, "Gerald" wrote: "Lew Hodgett" wrote in message ink.net... jds wrote: well, call me an old fart then. if someone is too damn lazy to learn code, let em be limited to a technician. i use cw 99% of the time. I don't agree with the code argument, though there needs to be some form of rite of passage to prevent the airwaves from becoming like 1976 CB radio. Sounds like a merit badge you have to learn to enter the club. And that is it's only semi-useful purpose. Seriously, if you choose to use code, so be it. And it should be a *choice* not a requirement. I have better things to do with my time than learning to use a totally dead language. Good point. At the advent of Ham Radio, CW was of paramount importance. Today it is a small side interest, primarily, I suspect, for DXers.... personally, I have interest in that. If you aren't interested in HAM radio as a hobby, then why should the hobby have to change to accommodate you? First of all, "CW" does not equal "HAM." The hobby has already changed... so has the equipment and most frequently employed modes of operation. Why not catch up? Why not expect the licensing test to drop all the electronics requirements since you don't expect to build / design / modify any radios. Electronics requirements are requisites.... code is not. Want another potentially usefull communications option? If you do much offshore work, you should consider getting a hand held Aviation VHF radio with a AA battery pack to put in your "ditch bag". Legal to own? yes. Legal to operate? Not with out an appropriate license. Technically, not legal to operate, period.... but in distress. you will surely get away with it. Anybody that expects to rely on that sort of emergency com equipment should stay on shore. But, if you just stepped up from your boat into your life raft, it might be nice to talk with commercial airline pilots overhead while the rescue people figure out who the unregistred EPIRB you activated belongs to. --- ILLEGAL ??? COME ARREST ME --- PLEASE ---- NOW!!!! I'm not betting that you'll actually talk to an airplane with that screwy set-up... as for reliability, I've never seen an aviation unit I'd trust around water/humidity... Then there is that damn USCG Master License test. You need to know inland river rules when you only operate in the atlantic coast. You need to know that to get an OUPV.... because most of us expect to pass through some form of inland water to enter COLREGS water. This seems to be some reference to one's inability to communicate via radio without knowing code.... I can talk and I can type. Bear in mind that the USCG hasn't used any Morse radiotelegraphy services in over 10 years... You need to know how many bolts on a 6 inch fire hose coupling when you only operate a 50 foot motor vessel. Only if you seek a master's rating.... if one has no interest in carrying more than 6 people for hire, why would one bother? If one only wants to communicate via voice or digital, why would one learn to use code? Is your 50 foot motor vessel "Inspected?" If not, what's the point? They actually expect you to know how to navigate with a chart, dividers, parallel ruler and a pencil --- how archaic is that? They know that an understanding of TVMDC, tides, winds, and the likelihood that equipment can fail is important. CW is not the *basis* for any electrical/electronic knowledge.... in the present day, it is a poor language for communication. In CWs day, it made sense, it doesn't any longer. Your argument should be that learning crystals and tubes is necessary to understanding solid state technology... Not, learning pig-latin make you part of the Ham Club.... Everyone uses GPSs now. .They really need to dumb that test down too to accomodate those too dumb, lazy or uninterested enough to be bothered to learn. You need to concentrate on that GMDSS and GROL license to go with that Master's License.... The GMDSS will help you not rely on CW as such a crutch..... :-) -- _ ___c \ _| \_ __\_| oooo \_____ ~~~~|______________/ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ }((((o ~~~~~~ }{{{{o ~~~~~~~ Grady-White Gulfstream, out of Southport, NC. http://myworkshop.idleplay.net/ Homepage* http://www.thebayguide.com/rec.boats Rec.boats at Lee Yeaton's Bayguide |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Ham Radio Licenses | Electronics | |||
Code Flags | ASA | |||
Ignorant Dupes | ASA |