RadioBanter - View Single Post

February 22nd 05, 04:06 PM

wrote in news:1109065656.859950.28030
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:

Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109009984.323422.143080
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:

snip

Yeah, for me too! 6 months of daily studying, one failed test,
and finally passing it. I think that my brain processes audio
differently than does those people with normal hearing.

I have not posted this point for a long time, as it provokes
extreme reactions from the pro code test lobby, but I can beat your
6 months. It took me 22 years.

The most extreme reactions I see are those of a few anticode
types. Not you, Alun.

Can you honestly wonder that I feel the way I do?

Why did it take 22 years?

I'm not sure I really know

I gather that it was a lot of stops and starts, not 22 years of
constant effort.

And didn't you wind up passing the 20 wpm test?

Yes, that's true. Once you get over about 11-12 wpm it's not much
harder to get to 20

Which says to me it was more a matter of training method than
of the subject matter being "hard".

If it wasn't a hazing process, then I'm a Dutchman

Don't take it personally! Some people learn Morse pretty
easily, and for some it is hard. Is it a hazing process if
it is easy? Same goes for the writtens.

Exactly!

Some people have a very hard time with math. Others with rote
memorization of things like band edges.

I can assure you that no group of Hams ever sat down and said
"Let's
give this Coslo guy a rough time and make him learn Morse code".

As a guy who can't "hear" people unless he can see the
mouth of the person speaking, I have just a little trouble
figuring out the problem with normal people for which the
test is too hard to make
it worth getting a license.

But it is! Witness all those who are dropping off the ranks
when their license expires.

I predict the next tack of the NCI's is that not allowing
the codeless Techs HF access is why they aren't renewing
their license.

Certainly that must be true of some of them. What proportion, I
couldn't say.

That would certainly be an interesting outlook for a person.
Let us say
that a person became a ham in 1994, and has a combined intense
interest in operation below 30 MHz, and deep seated conviction
against Morse code testing, leading to refusal to take the
Element 1 test.

Somehow doesn't ring true.

It was true enough of me, although I became a no-code ham in 1980
(in the UK), more or less in defeat at having tried unsuccessfully
to learn Morse code ever since 1970, and passed a code test in
1992.

Getting a no-code licence was something I only did because I was
resigned to not getting the HF access that I wanted. It was a case
of thinking it was silly to stay off the air altogether just
because I couldn't get on HF, and it took me a long time, i.e. 10
years, to grudgingly reach that conclusion.

WHat were the tesrt requirements in the UK then? Here in the USA,
the Novice
and Tech were 5 wpm in that time period.

12 wpm random groups with 96% copy

The US requirements for hams have never been anywhere near so
stringent.

The *toughest* they ever were was 1 minute solid copy out of 5 minutes
- plain language. 5, 13 and 20 wpm. That's 20% accuracy! About 20-25
years ago, fill-in-the-blank and multiple choice were added.

Eventually passing the code test was helped by software that didn't
exist back in 1970, and the help of dear friends who took turns to
send slow CW transmissions several times a week that I knew were
being done mainly just for my benefit. Sure, others tuned in, but
they stopped sending them when I passed! I owe them a great deal.

Code training software for PCs was common here in EPA by the early
1980s. I still have old copies that run on DOS 3.2..

In the 1970s and 1980s, HF was full of non-amateur Morse operation.
And the now-changed treaty required code tests.

Here's another interesting fact. I was teaching ham radio classes
for years before I passed the bleeping code!

If none of this rings true, I can assure that every word is the
truth.

But why did it take you so long, Alun?

What study methods did you use?

Early on, mainly just listening to slow Morse transmissions

And then what?

And if the test were only 5 wpm, and you had a choice of
1 minute solid copy or fill-in-the-blank with 70% being the
passing grade, how long would it have taken you to learn
enough to pass the test?

And note that here in the USA, full privileges have been available
with just a 5 wpm code test *since 1990*. Of course a medical waiver
was needed before 2000, but all such a waiver required was a simple
letter from a medical doctor.

As I said, all of this has been posted here before, but not
recently. My own history hasn't proved as effective as an argument
as simply pointing out that none of the arguments in favour of
retaining code testing hold as much water as a leaky bucket!

Apply you anticodetest arguments to the written tests. Tell us why
most of the written tests must remain. Heck, NCVEC is already trying
to trash the writtens even more...

Is it *really* so unreasonable to require Element 1? Particularly
considering the training aids and accomodations now available?

73 de Jim, N2EY

5wpm isn't very fast, but why is it required to operate phone?

A couple of reasons:

For the same reason hams have to pass written *theory* tests to
use *manufactured* rigs with no critical tuneup adjustments.

For the same reason hams have to pass written tests on VHF/UHF to
operate HF, high-power RF exposure questions to operate QRP, etc.

And because code is a big part of amateur radio, and a ham who doesn't
know any just isn't fully qualified.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I think we can agree to differ on that last point.

As a matter of fact, even directly after passing the US 20wpm test I
couldn't have passed the UK 12wpm test.

5wpm is not too difficult, especially the way it is tested in the US, but
until recently it only gave access to the 'novice' subbands in the US, all
of which except for 10m didn't allow phone. From my PoV, it would only have
given me 10m at that time. I never took 5.

I probably could have passed 5 when I came to the US, but I simply didn't
realise how much easier the tests were here. Thinking it would have been as
hard as a UK test I didn't bother to take it. I was operating above 30MHz
on a 610A permit, and when the 'no code' licence was introduced I decided
to get a US call. Having 'aced' the Novice and I think dropped one question
in the Tech paper, I was given the General paper, for which I hadn't looked
at the syllabus or question pool atall, and I passed that. Ditto the
Advanced, but they didn't have a spare Extra paper. None of this really
surprised me, as the UK B licence had the same theory as the A licence, and
I have an EE degree anyway, but it surprised the VEs.

This gave me 12 months to pass 13wpm if I didn't want to have to take the
General and Advanced theory again. With the help of computer software and
slow Morse transmissions I did it in six months. Note that Mike got there
in that amount of time from scratch even with hearing problems, and it took
me that long when I wasn't starting from the beginning, and there's no
problem with my hearing. Also, I had a relay of all the VEs sending code on
2m five nights a week. They saw it a a challenge to teach me code. I almost
passed 20, but I had to come back a couple of months later.

To get up to 13wpm meant copying whole characters instead of dits and dahs,
no matter how easy the type of test. OK, so that's gone, but that means the
remaining Element 1 doesn't test the ability to copy complete characters,
so on the one hand it's relatively easy, but on the other hand it's
pointless. Why preserve a test that doesn't test an adequate level of a
skill as a requirement for access to a particular part of the spectrum,
when there's no requirement to use that skill anyway? Tradition? That's a
weak reason, but it seems to be the only one. Sure, 40% of HF may be CW,
but I can (and do) operate 100% phone .

73 de Alun