RadioBanter - View Single Post - Type acceptance of older 23 ch radios vs. 40 channel question.

December 2nd 05, 04:43 PM posted to rec.radio.cb

From: (Michael*Herron)
And homebrewed. During the late sixties and even into the early
seventies, many ops were running rigs homebrewed in the fifties.

Yup although I never knew any in the late

60's, other than amps. I had a

home brewed 6146 x2 and built a power

supply for it from the '70 ARRL

handbook as it was just the rf deck.

I had a friend, also now a ham since '70, who

had a home built amp with 4 572b's and a 4kv

pwr supply.

Nice juice.

Gee, that was fun to run into a 5 element Cb

Longjohn!! He had a set of Drake twins back

then to drive it.

Congrats.

....Thanks

I am in support of all CB ops who want to

become hams unlike many others.

Many? Name two, just two of the "many" you purport do not support cb ops
who have expressed a desire to get licensed. You're full of biased ****.
Of course, you could always prove me wrong by illustrating two of the
farcical "many" you claim do not support cb'ers seeking to get licensed.

....You are the one full of ****! Go to QRZ.com

and check out the many threads regarding

issues related to this and see what you think!!

You made the claim, the burden of proof is one you.

I am only too aware of all the orthodox hams

out there!

Which has nothing to do with your original claim.

Soon the code will be dropped and it will be

easy to get a license.

It's easy to get a license now.

...Compared to when I got my (had them all)

licenses it sure as hell is!! Try taking them in

an FCC office when you know the engineer in

charge has had complaints in the past about

you bootlegging on CB!

Ha! That had to chap his ass.

GOOD! The more hams the better!

Being of the mindset that code prevents
cb'ers from getting licensed is your right, but it's not correct and
serves only to illustrate your own difficulty and prejudices concerning
cw.
Now, about this "many" of which you speak....

...Trust me I can copy quite well.

I believe you.

Contest speed is about 30 wpm, chit chat is

about 20-23 wpm. I prefer to use CW for

working DX or contests, but not so much for

chit chat Q's.

Well then, we have much in common regarding dx selection.

I am not by any means anti-cw. I just do not

think proficiency in it suggests you will be sort

of a "squared away ham".

The same goes for ham licensure, period.

Nor do I think CW will die away.

Nor do I.

I do not find it to be either a reliable or valid

indicator of overall proficiency in ham radio.

Well, an indicator of advancement in the hobby is most certainly code.

Perhaps you think it would be best to have a

typing test as an element for ham tests?

Nah!

No?

Why not? RTTY, various digital modes such

as PSK-31, all require typing to some degree.

Because digital modes and apparatus isn't as fascinating to the
dx-loving oldtimers compared to simply doing it yourself with nothing
but the rig, the antenna, sky, and mother nature.

Hell! If you can't type you are gonna have a

hard time competing in contests (should you

desire to)! You pretty much have to be able to

type well to log maybe 1000 Q's in a weekend

contest into a logging program. It is not that

Morse prevents CB'ers from becoming hams!

The glass is half empty from your perspective, half full from mine.
There is no argument or contention among anyone that amateur radio
declined when the nocode ticket was introduced.

Myself and several friends are sufficient proof

of that!

The increased number of actions taken by the FCC against nocodes
compared to the number of actions taken against other class of licenses
is proof of the decline, not your personal experiences.

It is clearly the mindset of the learner that

prevents them learning it and getting a

license! That is not the issue to me. My

opinion is that there are more important things
to know than Morse to get started in ham

radio.

Yet others regard it as the foundation. Considering SOS is universal,
code can get through when no other communication will, even if one must
bang on an object. Extremely helpful in dire emergencies.

"Many" only means a large number,

numerous as defined by Mr. Webster. Pretty

subjective definition don't you think?? It

doesn't mean most or an overwhelming

number, or even 51 percent, just "a lot". CUL

in KW alley! _._

Fair enough. The matter is, there have been no reg contributors to this
group who have spoken against or try and prevented a cb'er from
obtaining a license. expressing a personal opinion of why an individual
chooses not to get licensed is not the same as speaking against another
who chooses to do so.