In article , Leo
writes:
On 27 Oct 2003 01:30:02 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:
It could be argued that having to identify what a particular component in a
schematic actually does is at least as much an indication of knowledge about
that schematic as is simply being able to draw it.
True enough - although the exam I took centered almost exclusively on
tank circuits and calculation of resonant component values..
The ones I took 30+ years ago were as described.
snip
I've been doing it since Novice days back in 1967. Not that hard if you
start
off with simple projects and work towards more complex ones. What mode
permits
the most results from the simplest equipment? Hint: It's not SSB.
Well, the Heath SSB transceiver was the most complicated piece of
radio equipment that I've tackled so far for restoration.
Which one?
SB-400.
That's a transmitter, not a transceiver. ;-)
Cosmetically OK, but a disaster inside - corroded rotary
switches, poor solder joints, wiring errors (17 of them - including
one which shorted out the LSB crystal - somebody must have been less
than happy with this set ...) and of course a complete set of high-ESR
electrolytics. Almost 50 hours on the bench to get it up and
running....
That's probably more time than it took to build it in the first place!
If I was
going to try a 'designed by me' homebrew project, it would be a QRP
tansmitter - fairly simple to construct and
troubleshoot...comparatively, anyway!
And it would be a transmitter for which mode?
CW, most likely - I would prefer to start with something relatively
simple.
And *there's* the connection between CW skill and technological development and
self education in the ARS. Without code skill, that transmitter would be almost
useless to you. With code skill, you could use it to work the world.
For hams, code skill *is* another tool in the toolbox.
Any requirements as to experience with a Basic or can a raw newbie just walk
in
and take the Advanced exam straightaway?
No experience requirements (they were dropped years ago) - it is
possible to write the Basic and Advanced exams concurrently on the
same day.
Same thing happened to Extra 25+ years ago.
So we have almost exactly 50-50 split Basic/Advanced. Interesting to know.
And
VE amateur radio licenses total a little more than 8% of those in the USA.
(Of
course the populations are different too).
33 Million in Canada, approximately 1/10 of the US, I believe...
More like 1/8 of US, but fairly close correlation.
In addition, the total number of Canadian hams with Morse endorsements
on their licence is 31,557 - approximately 55%..
let's see - in the USA before the recent changes it was 470,000 out of
675,000
- just under 70%.
Looks like Canada may be the next to simply drop Morse testing, though.
Haven't heard much on this so far! I posted the results of the survey
condusted by the Radio Amateurs of Canada a while back - it has been
submitted to Industry Canada (the FCC equivalent), but nothing since
then. No idea how long a decision will take - we have a system of
NPRMs here as well, and we're waiting for some indication one way or
the other.
Check out the RAC website..
There was also a column in the late '40s and early '50s called "Phone Band
Phunnies" that described and decried certain bad habits some 'phone ops
tended
to acquire.
Have a look at the following web site - a humourous view of this sort
of thing gone wild....entitled "How To Sound Like A Lid"...
http://www.dxzone.com/cgi-bin/search...http://www.dxz
one.com/cgi-bin/search/jump.cgi?ID=1750&ID=1750
I'll take a look..
Some of us, however, still design and build our own rigs. Note how we are
sometimes met (not by you, Leo) with disbelief and ridicule for doing
so.......
And I really am incapable of understanding this behaviour.
Perhaps it's because I'm also in favor of code tests. You'll have to ask Len
and Brian why they do it.
The
ability to visualise, design and implement amateur radio equipment is
a gift - one that the amateur community should hold in the highest
regard.
I don't see it as a gift, just a set of skills built up over the years. There
are others much better at it than I.
Anyone could purchase and operate a modern HT, with minimal
training - it takes a great deal of skill to create something from
nothing. And, for those who enjoy the traditions of the hobby,
homebrewing harkens right back to day one!
Perhaps that's why they criticize it so much. It's old, it's traditional...
If we took out most of the theory questions from the written test, would
people still take the time to learn it?
Good question - but removal of the theoretical questions would likely
have a much more dramatic effect on the overall technical competence
level within the hobby than the removal of code testing would.
Is that really true?
Is there a dramatic difference in the overall technical competence of
Advanced
vs. Basic hams in Canada?
Is there a dramatic difference in the overall technical competence of the
various license classes in the USA?
Not as much as there was years ago, I suspect - testing has become
very much simplified over the last 40 years...
Same down here.
The Advanced level, like the Extra, does require a fair amount of
additional radio knowledge to pass. Is it enough? It depends - I'm
not aware of a study that would indicate whether the goals of the
testing were being met!
Exactly
Without an understanding of radio theory, operators would be limited
in their potential to grow into new areas of the hobby!
Sure - but is it the function of the license exams to force that
understanding on everyone?
In the Canadian system, if I understand it correctly, a ham who wants to
homebrew has to learn more theory, and a ham who only wants to use
manufactured
gear can stick with the Basic. Or are there more privileges than the ability
to
homebrew granted with the Advanced?
In the USA, every ham can homebrew, but to get access to more HF spectrum,
one
must jump through the hoop of additional written testing, even if one has no
intention of building anything.
Here, an amateur with a Basic licence has access to all bands above 30
MHz. Add on a Morse Code test, and full access to the bands under 30
MHz is granted.
That was necessary because of old S25.5.
The Advanced kicence, aside from providing the ability to homebrew
transmitting equipment, provides a couple of other perks - high power
TX operation, the ability to operate a repeater, and the ability to
apply to become a volunteer examiner. There are a couple of other
minor ones as well, but I don't recall them at the moment!
OK - thanks
No annual renewal fees are due (these were dropped in 2000).
Annual fees? Wow!
Amateur license fees here were dropped in the '70s. VE fees are for testing
only. One fee can, in principle, be used to go from no license to Extra.
Those with a Basic licence are encouraged to homebrew as well - only
transmitters are legally excluded from that licence class. Modems,
receivers, antennas - no problem.
Interesting concept!
I suppose a Basic could homebrew a transmitter, but not use it until the
Advanced license was in hand...
I suppose that a basic requirement for entry into this hobby is, and
always has been, an interest in the technical aspects of radio
communications.
For some, yes, but for others the public service and communications aspects are
dominant. Should someone be excluded from amateur radio because they're more
interested in what the radios can do rather than how they work?
And, for the level of freedom to experiment that this
hobby provides, I don't feel that it is unrealistic to expect new
licencees to be required to demonstrate technical competency, in the
form of written exams.
I agree - but what level of competency is reasonable?
And why isn't it reasonable to require a very basic level of Morse competency,
given how popular Morse is in amateur radio vs. how popularity homebrewing is?
I would assume that those whose desire to
become a ham is strong enough would also be the type of folks who
would want to continue to learn and grow. Perhaps I'm wrong - but the
people that I have met so far (for the most part) follow this model.
Same here.
73 de Jim, N2EY