wrote:
From: on Dec 10, 3:48 pm,
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

Face it, Jimmie, all those classes GREW in order to
satisfy some POLITICAL reasons within the amateur
community.

Such as? Back up your claim - if you can.

Tsk, your little political heart have a malfunction?
[need a "valve" replacement?]

What were the POLITICAL reasons, Len?

The "back-up" is the NON-ARRL history of amateur radio
regulations, indeed ALL the radio regulations since
1912.

How is a non-ARRL history of amateur radio regulations any
different from an ARRL history of amateur radio regulations, Len?

Can you cite specific things that are different in the two histories?

POLITICS, little Jimmie. It's been pervasive
in the very being of the league since 1914.

Even if true, is that a bad thing?

And how do you know? You weren't there in 1914, Len.

A "one-
party" system more or less in between the World Wars
and on to the immediate post-WW2 era.

Nonsense, Len. The ARRL doesn't elect government officials.
Nor does it make regulations. One of its roles is as an advocacy
group for amateur radio, just like the NRA is an advocacy group
for those who believe in citizens' rights to firearms, and the AARP
is an advocacy group for senior citizens (even though the "R"
originally
meant "retired", one doesn't have to retire to belong to AARP).

By the 1970s
other groups were being heard from and the league's
virtual oligarchy was beginning to dwindle.

What other groups? And why the 1970s?

There were "other groups" back in the 1940s, Len. I don't think
you can name two of the largest.

Just the
beginning of their influence, but it IS dwindling to
the REAL law-makers.

You're not one of them, Len.

In the beginning there was only ONE license.

In the beginning there were no licenses at all.

The time of one-amateur-radio-license-class ended
more than 70 years ago, Len.

U.S. amateur radio licensing began in 1912 92 years
ago. [historical fact]

93 years, actually. ;-) Can't you get anyhting right? ;-)

The FCC has been in existance for 71 years. [law of
the land as of the Communications Act of 1934]

"existence", Len.

Yes. Amateur radio licenses are earned by passing the
required tests.

Strange, the FCC says it GRANTS them.

Only after they are EARNED.

As far as the federal government is concerned, it is a NON-PAYING
radio activity that is expressly forbidden to broadcast or engage
in common-carrier communications.

That's true.

Whoa...if you agree to what I said, how can you say you
"earned" your license?

One earns things other than money, Len. Look it up.

How did stamp collecting help with hurricane relief?

Amateur radio provided shelter, food, clothing for hurricane
victims?

It helped to provide those things.

Geez, here I thought all they were doing was
relaying health and welfare messages...some of the time.

Well, you're wrong.

Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY.

But that's not all it is, Len. Grow up and accept that shouting the
same old tired lines doesn't convince anyone.

Hello? See the word "basically" in my quoted sentence?

Yes. So what?

Individuals engaged in that HOBBY are licensed because the FCC,
the federal agency regulating all civil radio, think that
licensing is a tool of regulation.

That's partly true.

Entirely true. FCC is NOT an academic organization, "grading"
amateurs on their radio skills.

Actually, it *does* grade them. That's why there are different levels
of amateur radio license.

You're taking the experience of a few people and a few transmitters
and demanding that it apply to everyone and all transmitters. That's
just nonsense.

Tsk, I thought it was an example. An example that I lived
through. An example that you did NOT live through.

And what does that example prove, Len? What does your one
example prove about *amateur* radio in 2005?

Besides, you've already contradicted yourself. The "very ordinary young men"
all had some form of technical training, and had been selected for the task.

"Selected for the task:" Personnel requirements were for N number
of warm bodies within X number of MOS ranges. :-)

So they were selected for the task and trained for it.

Tsk. Jimmie, you just don't understand how the military works.

I understand well enough, Len. You go on at length here about
things you're not involved in - why can't others do the same?

If you were a "warm body" in the area and came even close to the
requirements of filling a TO&E (Table of Organization and Equipment)
then you "got selected."

See? There you go!

The transmitters they adjusted were already set up, operating, and the
procedures to use them completely worked out. Those "very ordinary young men"
all had more-experienced supervision to teach them the tasks and make
sure they did it right.

Did you expect that everyone had to build everything themselves?!?

Not at all. But radio amateurs sometimes do. You wouldn't know about
that
since you've never done it.

Do you expect sailors to all get sheet steel and torches and
build the ship they are going to serve on?

Not at all. But radio amateurs sometimes build their equipment from
the most basic parts - including sheet metal work. You wouldn't know
about that
since you've never done it.

Do you expect airmen to all get aluminum and engines and build
the aircraft they are going to serve on?

Of course not.

Do you expect choo-choo drivers to build their locomotives
themselves? :-)

"Choo-choo drivers"? The "drivers" on a steam locomotive are
the wheels that are powered, Len. Do try to keep up.

And yet it took *days* of on-the-job instruction before they could be left to
do the job on their own!

Yes, ONE TO THREE DAYS, the latter for the slow-learners and goof-
offs. :-)

1 to 3 *days* of instruction....

Even then, the more-experienced supervision was
always on-call if a problem arose.

That's usually the situation with EVERY military or civilian
organization. :-)

But not in amateur radio.

After some experience, the formerly-inexperienced BECAME the
"experienced supervision" people.

Sure. So what?

Len, you don't seem to be able to understand the concept of "amateur
radio station", let alone "operating".

Jimmie, YOU don't understand that every other radio service
does NOT define either "station" or "operating" by amateur
radio "rules." :-)

Which means your example isn't valid, Len.

UNLICENSED people by the thousands every day in the
USA are OPERATING TRANSCEIVERS.

Not operating in the amateur radio sense.

Oh, you want PLMRS mobiles to send QSLs on "contacts?"

Not at all. Do you?

Do you want "radiosport contests" among aviation radio or
maritime radio services?

Why should I?

Do you think policemen carrying neat little two-way radios
subscribe to QST? :-)

Some of them do.

"Morse code operation in amateur radio" does NOT
involve ALL "skilled operators."

Yes, it does. Those operators have skills that you do not
have, and I think that bothers the heck out of you.

No bother at all to me, Jimmie.

Then why are you so upset over K0HB's stories?

I just disregarded any
NEED to learn morse code since I was never, ever
required to use it in the military or in the much longer
civilian life career I still have.

In other words, since there was no money in it for you...

It seems to really bother you that I'm better than you
at Morse Code.

Har! No.

Yes. It sure seems that way.

So? It's a test of Morse Code skill at a very basic level. Entry-
level, nothing more. It nevertheless requires that the operator
have the skills.

That's the current law, Jimmie. It's just a political thing.

It's a good thing.

Since no higher deity commanded that morse code testing be
done for amateur radio licenses, ordinary humans must have
done it. Whatever humans have done, humans can UNDO.

Not necessarily. Humans seem to have trouble undoing certain
types of messes, such as pollution.

The radios they USE are either owned by their employers
(businesses, public safety agences as examples) or
themselves (private boat or aircraft owners as an
example). Some of those radios DO require a licensed
person to oversee their operation and technical details,
but some do NOT. Depends on the particular radio service.

In amateur radio, a licensed amateur radio operator is required.

You have a macro for that sentence? :-)

Yes, Jimmie, I'm well aware of Title 47 C.F.R.'s Part 97.

You sure don't seem to be, Len. Like when you told us that
all amateurs with expired-but-in-the-grace-period licenses
could still operate their amateur radio stations legally....

That's what I've been telling you all along.

Well, there you go again with the posturing arrogance...

Is it posturing arrogance to tell you the truth?

Tsk, tsk, ADJUSTMENT can be done by anyone in a non-radiating
test. Takes NO "license" to perform a test-alignment-calibration
such as done by factory folks on ham equipment.

But that's not "operating", Len.

Radar isn't for communications. And the SGC2020 is dirt simple
compared to most amateur radio HF transceivers - even the Southgate
series are much more complex to operate.

Oh, dear, here it comes with posturing arrogance again...

From you? Certainly not from me.

On top of all that, the radio users cited above may not be
FCC licensed, but they are trained, tested and often certified in
proper radio procedures for the radios they use.

"Certified?" They get neat little certificates (suitable
for framing)? Wow!

Yes - did you ever see an FAA pilot's license?

No, couldn't afford to continue.

Poor baby!

I did pass the written
test and have the confirmation document digitized. Need
to see it? :-)

Why would I? You're the one hung up on certifications....

Yeah, they pay by plastic, perhaps follow the maker's
instructions and fumble around until things sound right.

Is there something wrong with using a credit/debit card?

Or following manufacturer's instructions?

Besides - it's something *you* haven't done.

Tsk, tsk, tsk...something I HAVE done, sweetums. Years ago
a bunch of us got together to give a friend his retirement
and birthday gift, an HF transceiver.

That's nice.

I had the "plastic"
higher level and paid for it, another with a station wagon
transported the boxes, yet another provided the Bird
Wattmeter and dummy load and we all went through the
instruction manual to make sure it worked. NON-radiating
test, Jimmie. Perfectly legal.

Of course - because you are not qualified to do it on-the-air.

There are more than a few of us radio amateurs who design
and build our own amateur stations. You haven't done any
of that, Len, yet you pass judgement on us as if you are
somehow superior.

"Modern" amateur band transceivers, transmitters, receivers, etc.
are ready-to-play right out of the box. Those are aligned,
tested, calibrated, ready-to-go. Sort of like the SGC 2020
private marine version SSB transceiver. :-)

The modern amateur radio transceivers I use didn't come that way.

Yes, yes, Jimmie, whatever YOU use applies to all other
700+ thousand U.S. amateur radio licensees. :-)

None of the others USE anything but what you've USED?

Not the point, Len. You said that "MODERN" equipment is a certain
way, yet that's not true for all amateur radio equipment.

Six months of microwave school, a transmitter that was all set up
and ready to go, an experienced instructor, and it still took you
an *hour* of instruction?

Yes. :-)

By the way, part of that Signal Schooling was radar fundamentals.
That was because of the close similarity of radar electronics
to the electronics used in radio relay equipments coming after
WW2. Absolutely NONE of it prepared us for operating ANY of the
HF transmitters (36 of them at first) at station ADA in 1953.

That's bull. No power supply theory? No electron tube theory?

NONE of it prepared anyone for teletypewriter operation, for
operation of the VHF and UHF radio relay equipment, for operation
of the "carrier" bays. NONE of it involved learning of the
General Electric commercial microwave radio relay equipment that
ADA would use for primary communication link of transmitters to
the rest of the station...we got a two-week "course" by two GE
tech-reps to "prepare" us for that in late 1954.

No basic electricty or electronics?

And just what is
YOUR experience at ham bands of 220 MHz and up?

More than yours, Len!

I've only listened to the predecessor of the Condor Net in
Newbury Park, CA, demonstrated by one of the ham-licensed
employees there. At Teledyne Electronics, my employer
during the late 70s. It was the first state-long network
to use all tone switching for routing without using any
microprocessor control.


Gosh, you *listened*! I've done a lot more than that!

Who is sneering? Not me. The Technician failed in its original purpose.
That's a fact.

That's only an OPINION, Jimmie. Tsk, better learn some acting
skills, redirect that sneer. You can do it with practice.

Right now the combined numbers of no-code-Technician and Technician
Plus classes make up a bit more that 48% of ALL U.S. amateur radio
licenses granted. Almost HALF, Jimmie.

48.1% - 318,462 out of 661,800 as of December 9.

Tsk, tsk, tsk. That doesn't agree with www.hamdata.com figures.

I didn't use those figures.

Oh, yes, you are quoting NON-grace-period figures derived
from elsewhere as "official." Heavens, I have to keep
taking THAT into account, don't I? :-)

You should.

But that percentage is *down* from what it was 5 years ago, right after
the rules changes.

Well now, www.hamdata.com figures also show the totals of
EXPIRATIONS versus NEW (never before licensed) licensees.
Expirations still exceed the NEW licensees and have for the
last year.


And for more than 5-1/2 years, the only choice new hams have had for
their first license class is the Technician, General, or Extra.

Duuhhhhh...stating the obvious again, aren't you?

Oh, my, you DO have to try NOT to talk down to everyone. It
help you lose your posturing arrogance of superiority...


So you let a *name* - a single *word* - stop you from getting
an Amateur Radio license.

A long time ago another called me a "sunnuvabitch." I put
him down with a bleeding nose and lip.

Is that a threat, Len? You're not even a novice at amateur radio.

Certain words DO have an effect on people, Jimmie.

A word of advice: Avoid street fighting...you ain't good at it.

Are you?

You mean like somebody who thinks the zoning ideas of
1960 should still apply 30-40-45 years later?

In most cases, absolutely YES. :-)

Does local residence zoning affect radio of any kind? I
think not.

Residences are for LIVING in, Jimmie. It is HOME.

SO why shouldn't it change?


on entering military service

No. The ONLY aptitude test given in regards to radio was
a morse code cognition test given to all recruits.

Ah - and you didn't make the grade on that one, eh?
Explains a lot.

I'm glad I didn't make a good aptitude there. Would have wound
up in Field Radio and had to go through the remainder out in
the boonies somewhere. :-)

Now it's clear. You weren't top of the form in Morse Code, so the
code must be a bad thing....
tsk, tsk.