Thread
:
South Africa!
View Single Post
#
53
February 22nd 05, 09:18 PM
Alun L. Palmer
Posts: n/a
wrote in news:1109088706.576066.237160
@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109065656.859950.28030
@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:
Alun L. Palmer wrote:
wrote in news:1109009984.323422.143080
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:
snip
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.
Perhaps.
Do you agree that Morse code is a big part of amateur radio? Not that
it needs a test, but just that it is a big part of today's amateur
radio, particularly on HF?
As a matter of fact, even directly after passing the US 20wpm test I
couldn't have passed the UK 12wpm test.
Perhaps. But I thought we were discussing *US* code test requirements.
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.
Since 1990 it has been possible to get an Extra (or any other
HF-privileges amateur radio license) with just the 5 wpm code test and
a waiver. 15 years - hardly "recently".
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.
The test procedures here aren't secret. Never were.
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.
Why should it? The US writtens were *never* very hard - if you knew a
little radio and some regs.
Back in 1968 I went for General at the FCC office in early summer. Did
not pass 13 wpm code because the examiner couldn't read my longhand.
Got credit for 5 wpm, took the written (which was same as General back
then), walked out with a Tech. Could not use the new privs until the
actual license arrived in the mail, though.
Went home, taught myself Signal-Corps-method block printing and more
practice until I could do 18 wpm W1AW bulletins solid. Went back and
passed 13 wpm code easily, sending and receiving.
Then the examiner says "why not try Advanced while you're here?". Now
in those days the Advanced was supposedly the toughest of the writtens,
with all sorts of math and circuits and such. But one did not say No to
The Man, so I tried, with zero preparation. Passed easily and wound up
with Advanced instead of General.
That was back before question pools, Bash books and computerized
practice tests. Didn't have an EE back then either - I was 14 years old
and it was the summer between 8th and 9th grades.
Two years later I went back to get the Extra. Would have been sooner
but in those days you had to have two years experience as General or
Advanced to even *try* the Extra.
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.
Bingo.
How long do you think it would have taken to get to 5 wpm, tested the
way the USA does?
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.
Not at all.
If the code uses Farnsworth spacing, you copy characters, not dits and
dahs. This isn't anything new - W1AW has been sending code practice
that way since at least 1966 (first time I heard it, anyway).
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?
Same reason for written tests. Do the writtens guarantee that all who
pass can design/build/modify/repair/operate all amateur equipment they
are authorized to use? Or do they test basic knowledge?
5 wpm is basic Morse skill, that's all.
Why is it too much to ask?
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 .
And my HF operation is 99% CW on 80/40/20, with 100 watts or less
output, yet I had to learn all kinds of stuff about high power, 'phone
modes, RTTY, SSTV, other HF bands, VHF/UHF, etc. Most of that knowledge
I've never needed, and some of it (like band edges) has changed since I
took the test. So why did I have to learn all that in the first place,
just to operate a QRP rig on 7015 CW?
73 de Jim, N2EY
I'm not sure this is getting us anywhere. This is all old ground.
73 de Alun, N3KIP
Reply With Quote