"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

And there you have one of the more interesting
dilemmas to the ARS.

Is a brand new Extra, who has never been on HF,
even accept Elmering?
Or will they insist that the conventions that
have been developed over
the years are not applicable to them.

That depends on how many existing Hams on HF take
a crappy attitude towards the upgraded newcomers
on the bands. After seeing the poor attitudes
shown by several of the more frequent posters on
this news group over restructuring etc., I
wouldn't let them near a radio, with or with out a
code key. They are a perfect example of what Ham
Radio is not all about. On the other hand the only
good thing about them is many are old timers, who
if we wait long enough will be SK's, then we can
get on with things without the name calling etc.
The only choices they have is either go with the
flow, get out of the way, or get run over by the
changes. Rolling back the clock is not an option.


--
Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

ARRL Member
NCI Member

Charter member of the
Lawrence Technological University
Wireless Society W8LTU

(Vshah101) wrote in message ...
From: ospam (Larry Roll K3LT)

So, we'll change the debate over
to whether or not the ARS is a "technical" service

The ARS will not be a "technical" service with the current Ham radio culture.
Most homebrewing is for show or to boost the image of the ARS. They are too
snobby to include someone that is interested in Homebrewing. Or its some EE
that usually doesn't attend meetings.

Ahhhhh geeze-oh whiz....With the same snotty kid rantings again.
Same silly, unfounded and baseless stuff.

The clubs and Hamfests focus on antennas, contesting, and CW. With the
exception of antennas, ARS is primarily an appliance operator hobby. One
example is people coming from scanner or CB to ARS. Another example is the
comparison that "without CW, its just CB". Note that CW is an operator skill.

Yes...One you do not have, and thankfully with current events are
not likely to have...So we can talk about you all day long and you
won't know it.

ARS is not a technical service because Hams have "voted" by their actions to
not do these things. Furthermore, they discourage other amateurs from doing
other than what they like to do. They also strongly encourage others to learn
CW. At several antenna setups, club meetings, ham gatherings, I have
participated in, often Hams try to persuade me to learn CW.

No one "discourages" any other Ham from doing any thing he or she
likes.

and whether the testing
should be changed into something more dumbed-down than it already is.

After that, the next bone of contention will be whether or not a prospective
ham should be required to know how to spell his name correctly on the
application!

To you, taking away one requirement (the CW test) is dumbing down because its
one less requirement. If more people focus on the written material, ARS could
be more than an operator's hobby and more of a technical hobby. That's not
dumbing down of the hobby.

And which "one less requirement" WILL be "dumbing down", Vippy?

We've castrated the written tests and now the last vestige of
operator competencey has taken it's final breaths.

It is only required 5 wpm CW speed, yet many Hams take pride in increasing
their code speed. The easy written test is not the problem.

The "ease" of written tests is subjective, Vippy. If the present
tests were sequestered, like they should be, the tests wouldn't be as
easy as they are now.

Steve, K4YZ

"Leland C. Scott" wrote in part ...

That depends on how many existing Hams on HF take a crappy attitude towards
the upgraded newcomers on the bands. After seeing the poor attitudes shown
by several of the more frequent posters on this news group over
restructuring etc., I wouldn't let them near a radio, with or with out a
code key.
__________________________________________________ ________________________

What's a "code key" -- Could that possibly be something like a straight key?
Or maybe it is a secret way of learning CW? Please enlighten us, Leland.

Arnie -
KT4ST
FISTS 2940 CC 337

member of "Know Code" International

Steve Robeson, K4CAP wrote:
(Vshah101) wrote in message ...

From: "Jim Hampton"


The
only hold up now is that the FCC has to figure out a way to package the
license in a box of Cheerios.


Fill out the questions on the back of the box (the written test). Then, you
just need 2 UPC codes from 2 boxes. Mail 2 UPC codes with written test and you
will get your license..

Now Lennie and Vippy wil start an argument about how unjust the
two UPC requirement is.....


I simply *refuse* to buy a box of Cheerios just to get a Ham license.
Although my interest in the ARS is boundless, It IS unfair to make a
person buy a box of Cheerio's! it is keeping thousands of Technically
competent Cheerio's haters off the air!

I never intend to eat Cheerio's, and I know I never will. So why should
I have to buy a box of Cheerio's just so I can get a Ham license?

Unfair, Unfair, Unfair!!!! It's just another ham cult hazing ritual.....


- Mike KB3EIA -

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
Existing technicians may choose to utilize their
new privileges

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there've been any "new
privivleges" confered yet.

but the dropping of morse code completely is not going to
bring up our numbers any more than where we are at right now from a month
to
month basis.

Probably correct.

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article ,

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes:

Once the official FCC changes are made, by whatever method, I wonder
how long it will take the unlicensed to become licensed...Now that
there's NO excuse remaining?

There's always an excuse, Steve.

Here's and interesting query...and probabbly a tad trollish, but I wonder...

How long (or short, actually) will it take for many of the No-code Techs
that used to proclaim that their VHF and up allocation was all they wanted
because it completely satisfied their "technical" needs to suddenly become
Generals and Extras. I seem to remember reading how they could pass Element
1 if they wanted to but it would gain them nothing. I wonder if that's
changed?

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote:

Hmmm...lemme see...we're faced with the possibility of having a lot of
newcomers with little or no practical experience WRT radio wave
propagation on the HF bands, and thus little knowledge on which to
base selection of a frequency band on which to begin making contacts
at any particular time.

Back in the early days of my HF career, I figured that if the band seems
empty, well either
propagation is out or everyone's asleep or at work or such. In any
event, there's nobody
to qso with, so check other bands.

After a while, one figures out that on say ten meters, you can (when the
sunspots are in)
talk to Texas from NJ, but not Ohio. That the coverage looks more like
a ring instead
of a disc. Which also means that the ham in Texas can hear a ham in
Ohio that you
cannot hear. Thus you could QRM a Ohio to Texas QSO while doing a QSO from
NJ to California. Thus you should realize that the Texan isn't talking
to himself, but
to someone you cannot hear. And QSY up or down a little. But say
you're using
a kilowatt linear to QSO from NJ to California, and the Texan is only
using 50 watts
and is S1 on your receiver and thus you don't know that he's there. BUt
things like this
happen, and it is understood that it is not malicious.

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote in message . ..
On 07 Jul 2003 11:11:10 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

Here are some predictions for ya:

Hmmm...hang on, lemme wipe the dust off the crystal ball for ya
first....okay, go ahead.

Thanks!

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the written exams.

In the short term, probably not. In the long term, as the written
tests go through their normal revision and updating processes, I'd
expect and hope that the question pool committee members would begin
to include questions on practical operating knowledge in addition to
the questions on theory that are already part of the tests.

The current writtens are a mixture of rules and regs, theory,
operating practices, and RF safety. They have been in constant
revision and development for over 20 years. I don't see them changing
all that much.

What sort of "practical operating knowledge" questions would you have
the QPC add? (Anyone can submit questions for review, btw).

I've long
felt that it was time for the CW testing requirement to go, but the
fact remains that it has indeed been the only practical skill (as
opposed to theoretical knowledge) tested, and I think that this does
need to change.

One of the problems with skill testing is that the test has to
actually include the skill - it can't be a purely paper test and
actually mean anything. (You can't judge my bicycle-riding or
stick-shift skills with a written test). And such testing means a
separate test element and the same problems that come with the code
test.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant,
sustained increase in growth rate of the ARS. There may be a short term
surge,
and lots of upgrades, but total numbers will not skyrocket.

Seems to me that the outcome, in this regard, is up to us. We have an
opportunity to start a significant influx of good operators into the
ARS provided we're willing to identify them and elmer them and welcome
them into the ranks, so to speak.

Those of us who go out of our way to meet these people and convince
them to get into the club meetings and the VE sessions, and who answer
questions and provide the guidance the newcomers will need and then
accept and respect them as fellow hams should, will be taking good
advantage of the opportunity.

I agree with all of the that - but a lot of it comes down to publicity
for the ARS, and the simple fact that most people are not interested
in radio as an end in itself. There's a limit to how much we can
"sell" amateur radio. The trick is to identify those who are really
interested, and help them out.

Those of us who spend our time coming up with witty and derogatory
names like Extra Lite and insist on distinguishing between No-Code and
Know-Code and go out of their way to make people feel like
second-class citizens will be letting the opportunity just slide on by
and will be doing a disservice to the ARS.

Agreed - and I challenge you to find any postings of mine where I have
done any of that.

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a significant change
in the modes and technologies used by hams. There will not be a
technorevolution, nor big increases in experimentation or homebrewing. Just
more of the same of what has been going on.

Again, this depends on us.

To a certain extent. There are not many hams who will homebrew
themselves a multiband multimode transceiver from scratch. Even if
someone has the time and tools, it's usually not cost-effective.

Hmmm...lemme see...we're faced with the possibility of having a lot of
newcomers with little or no practical experience WRT radio wave
propagation on the HF bands, and thus little knowledge on which to
base selection of a frequency band on which to begin making contacts
at any particular time. Isn't this exactly what ALE is supposed to do?

Sure.

Yet, how many hams do you know of who have even heard of ALE, outisde
of those in this forum where I know the subject has come up
previously? How many hams in your local club know what ALE is? How
many would be willing to accept and use it if they did?

Many of us know what ALE is, and even how it could be used on the
amateur bands.

The bigger question is - why would hams want to use ALE for normal
amateur operation? The whole point of ALE is to reduce/eliminate the
need for a knowledgeable operator. In fact, if you look at most
nonamateur radio equipment design philosophies, one of the driving
forces behind them is to replace the skilled "radio operator" with a
relatively unskilled "user", who doesn't really know what's going on -
and doesn't have to. Consider the nearly-ubiquitous cell phone - none
of the radio-specific functions are controlled by the user at all! In
fact, far too many people don't even realize a cell phone is a radio
transceiver. (I recall an indignant fellow airline passenger telling
me "I can use this while we take off! It's a TELEPHONE, not a
RADIO!!")

Let's see what happens in the UK. RSGB and RA have been pushing to drop the
code test for a long time. Maybe they won't be disappointed.

Just wondering.

Don't hold yer breath. The usual bureaucratic delay will slow things down here
in the USA. And remember, those who get the licenses after the change will be
raw, inexperienced newcomers, who will need our help and guidance as they are
welcomed into the ARS.

To use the British term: Bloody Well Right!

Fair dinkum, mate!

Especially since there
will undoubtedly be those who will not welcome them at all, and in
fact do quite the opposite.

A few. That's not a new thing - ever hear of the fellow who used to
call CQ on 75 AM and add "no kids, no lids, no space cadets, Class A
operators only"?

Those of us who wish to take advantage of
this opportunity will have to work doubly hard in order to overcome
the harm done by the minority that will attempt to ostracize and chase
away the newcomers, forgetting that they were newcomers themselves
once upon a time.

All true. Actually, it doesn't seem like that long ago that I was a
newcomer.

But there is also the reverse problem: Newcomers who do not want
advice or elmering from the "old f@#$S", no matter how it is offered.
I've been on the receiving end of that more than a few times. What's
the right approach - just ignore them?


73 de Jim, N2EY

"Arnie Macy" wrote in message
...
What's a "code key" -- Could that possibly be
something like a straight key?
Or maybe it is a secret way of learning CW?
Please enlighten us, Leland.

Are you really that "dense" Arnie where you can't
figure it out on your own?

73's de,

Leland C. Scott
KC8LDO

ARRL member
NCI member

"You ask what Morse Code is good for? I'll tell
you. Morse
Code is used exclusively by Electronics Based life
forms to
communicate amongst themselves using advanced
Organic
Digital Signal Processors, running state of the
art Artificial
Intelligence Software, to perform the highly
complex
transmit encryption, receive decryption and error
correction
functions."

(N2EY) wrote in
om:

Radio Amateur KC2HMZ wrote in message
. ..
On 07 Jul 2003 11:11:10 GMT, (N2EY) wrote:

Here are some predictions for ya:

Hmmm...hang on, lemme wipe the dust off the crystal ball for ya
first....okay, go ahead.

Thanks!

The dropping of the code test will not be accompanied by a
significant change in the written exams.

In the short term, probably not. In the long term, as the written
tests go through their normal revision and updating processes, I'd
expect and hope that the question pool committee members would begin
to include questions on practical operating knowledge in addition to
the questions on theory that are already part of the tests.

The current writtens are a mixture of rules and regs, theory,
operating practices, and RF safety. They have been in constant
revision and development for over 20 years. I don't see them changing
all that much.

snip

As a matter of fact the question pools may well change as a result of WRC
2003. The new s25.6 incorporates by reference a document called M.1544,
which is a syllabus for theory tests! This is a new requirement!

73 de Alun, N3KIP

On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 13:38:15 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

I simply *refuse* to buy a box of Cheerios just to get a Ham license.
Although my interest in the ARS is boundless, It IS unfair to make a
person buy a box of Cheerio's! it is keeping thousands of Technically
competent Cheerio's haters off the air!

I never intend to eat Cheerio's, and I know I never will. So why should
I have to buy a box of Cheerio's just so I can get a Ham license?

WE eat Cheerios (or a reasonable facsimile) as a regular staple (we
don't eat staples, we have enough iron in our diet).

If we send you two UPCs, is that the equivalent of a Dick Bash
examination "consultation" ?? ggg

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon