N2EY wrote:

They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all blue

book essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in

1967-70 were "dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all
multiple choice.

Only a few things in life that are certain.

Death

Things are not as good as they once were, and never ever were.
The family is going to hell, and has been forever.

and,

When you see a wildebeest on TV, you know something really really bad
is going to happen.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ...
"Brian" wrote in message
om...
W1AW also sends Morse Code practice on VHF, if you live close enough.
But I don't think 8-land is close enough.

Definitely, maybe the supposed field organizations can get together to
rebroadcast the transmissions?? Sounds like an actual good idea.


If not, Jim can tell you how to build an Elecraft K1 out of junk box
parts, or something like that.

Nice idea, but it will be deaf, as that is the problem until I move, which
won't be happening for another 2 years. Will have to suffer till then.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
.. --. .... - . .-. ...


Restricted neighborhood? Me too.

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message ...
"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


Brian Kelly wrote:

"Ryan, KC8PMX" wrote in message
...
Yeah, that might be true if you have HF capability........

Can't argue with that. But as Jim points out it doesn't take much of a
radio and antenna to at least listen on HF. What's the show-stopper in
your case?


Desire, obviously

Yes, as in regards to listening to HF voice..... Sounds just like listening
to CB. No, it is environmental conditions. Killer RFI that would make BPL
look like nothing.

Show stopper. Got my share. Dit-dit.

w3rv

N2EY wrote:

some snippage

The old code test worked like this:

The examiner gave you a yellow lined legal pad and a #2 pencil. You put your
name at the top of the copy sheet and got ready. You put on a pair of 'phones
and when everyone at that test table was ready, the test was started. The test
was 5 minutes of plain-language code at the required speed (13 or 20 wpm - back
then only volunteer examiners gave 5 wpm tests)

Your job was to write down the code as received. When the code stopped, you had
to put the pencil down IMMEDIATELY. No going back and fixing anything up, no
filling in missed letters even if they were obvious, etc. The examiner pulled
the pads away as soon as the code stopped, sometimes resulting in a long pencil
mark down the page...

The examiner had to find at least 1 minute of solid copy for you to pass. That
meant at least 65 correct legible consecutive characters for 13 wpm or 100
correct legible consecutive characters for 20 wpm. "Legible" meant HE had to be
able to read them easily the first time - no "what's this?" from The Man. If
the examiner could not find the required 65 or 100, you failed. 64 or 99 wasn't
good enough. Go home and study for at least a month before retesting.

All sounds sensible, but the month before retesting thing seems a bit
obsessive. I can understand not retesting the same day, but not a month
wait.

If you passed receiving, then you could try sending. You sent what was written
on a laminated card that the examiner gave you. He was sole judge of your
sending skill - he could decide you were OK in a few seconds, or keep you
pounding away for a couple minutes. (It was rare for a sending test to last
more than a minute). You had to send at the required speed, too - he would tell
you if you were going too slow. If you failed the sending test, you had to go
home and study for at least a month before retesting - both sending and
receiving. I don't know anybody who failed sending, though.

Yeah, I send much better than receive.

You were allowed to bring a mill for receiving and speed key for sending, but
you'd better be well-prepared if you showed up with same.

If you got that far, they'd give you the written test. After 1960 they were all
multiple choice, but we did not know the exact Q and A, just general subject
areas. The FCC published "study guides" in essay format. These were reprinted
with permission in the ARRL License Manuals of the day. You were also expected
to know the regulations (which were not part of the study guide questions).

You had to get a certain number of questions right (74%, as I recall) on the
written to pass. Miss by even one question less than the required and you had
to go home and study for at least a month before retesting - both sending and
receiving code, and the written. No do-overs, no credit for tests already
passed. All or nothing at all.

Now here is something that seems has been improved upon. If there are
going to be different elements, it makes sense that if one element was
passed, that you don't have to be restested on it. I had to test for my
General twice because I flunked element 1 the first time. I passed the
writtens, I would have passed them again. Not muchpoint in wasting the
VE's time.

Usually they would not tell you how well you did other than "Pass" or "Fail".
They did NOT tell you which ones you got wrong. (At least not in Philly).

When I took the tests in 1968 and 1970, there was a fee of $9, IIRC. I'm not
sure - the fee was instituted in 1963 and was $4, then $9, then $4, then
eliminated. The fee was the same whether you passed or failed. Only the Novice
was free.

$9 doesn't sound like much but back in those days it was a lot of money for a
high school kid. I think minimum wage back then was $1.20 or so, which meant
the test was a days' pay BEFORE taxes for a minimum wage person. And a kid
would have been glad to get minimum. I estimate that the equivalent today would
be $50-60.

The 2 year experience requirement for Extra meant that most hams needed to make
at least two trips to the FCC office to get the top license.

For those of us near an FCC office it was mostly a matter of getting off from
school or work. The big offices held exams one or more days a week.

For those farther out it was a much bigger deal.

The VE system is a huge improvemnet over tha old system, I have to say.


What all this did was to cause prospective and upgrading hams to be extremely
well prepared before even attempting the trip to FCC. Today they would call it
"overlearning".

Was it a better system back then? You be the judge. It's not coming back any
time soon. And it wasn't hams, new or old, who changed it.

Regardless of the Morse requirements or the test contents, the testing
system was not superior at all IMO.

Interestingly enough, it would appear that matching up what was
happening in the country at the time this was happening, the FCC tester
(government) was replaced by the VE's (non-profit, but certainly private
sector. The changes in the tests might seem like a de-regultion type of
move.

I guess I'm not going to blame the liberals for this one....

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

When you see a wildebeest on TV, you know something really really bad
is going to happen.

Tsk, tsk, you've been watching too many wild animal shows on Discovery
channel again! :-)

LHA

Extremely restricted, but I CHOSE to live there, and that is a choice, in
retrospect that I wish I hadn't made. In the long run it is actually a good
thing, as I am saving monthly around 100-120 dollars towards the down
payment on a house, as well as repaying some debts of which a hole that I am
in that I still can't see any light at the top from where I am at, but
I AM making progress, and that is the best way I can look at it. On a good
note, I have almost $5,000 saved in about 3 years for this whole downpayment
thing!


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...



Restricted neighborhood? Me too.

In article , (N2EY)
writes:


In article ,

(Larry Roll K3LT) writes:

In article ,
(N2EY)
writes:

With all due respect, Larry - were you there?

Jim:

Obviously not. Point?

That the same complaints you have about today's tests can be made by some of
those who came before you.

Jim:

All that proves is that everyone's complaining about something. Nothing
new here.

Did you have to take a sending test?

No, but I could have easily passed one.

"could have" and "did" are not the same thing.

Except in this case, Jim, because if a sending test had been required,
I would have passed it with ease. This is a matter of absolute certainty,
no speculation, no doubt, no question about the outcome. End of story.

Did you have to pass all of the elements to upgrade at the same time?

No. You got me there.

Did you have to wait 2 years to even try the Extra?

No. Ditto.

See?

All I "see" is that I readily succeeded at the requirements which were
in place at the time, and those requirements were a far sight more
comprehensive and challenging than those of today, or those proposed
for the future. If MY requirements had been the same as yours, I'd
still be here today as an Extra Class radio amateur, albeit I'd also be
a QCWA member (for whatever that's worth).

Challenging licensing requirements and
uncompromising testing procedures.

They've been "compromising" forever. Back before WW2 the exam was all
blue
book essays. Before 1960 there was diagram drawing. The tests I took in
1967-70 were "dumbed down" compared to those because my tests were all
multiple choice.

Yeah, I know, and that's my point. However, the level of "dumbing-down"
that has occurred just in the last few years is way out of porportion to
that
which took place from the beginning of FCC testing and the time you and I
became licensed.

Those who had to do essays and draw diagrams might disagree.

Well, it's not the fault of those who didn't that those requirements were
reduced. As stated previously, if those had been the requirements I faced,
I would have been up to the challenge. I readily accede to the fact that
those hams who faced more challenging requirements than I did are
better hams than I am for having had that experience. All I have is
the same license class.

Of course, all that is waaaaay too
PoliticKally IncorrecKt today, since someone with a particular ethnic
origin, skin color, religion, "gender," or a hangnail might not be able
to pass the first time or two. This certainly won't do in these
enlightened times.

None of that had anything to do with the license test changes.

Oh, really? Prove it.

Just look at the records and the old regs. Nothing in there about ethnicity,
skin color, religion or gender. I dunno about hangnails.

The bit about ethnicity, skin color, religion, and gender is just a part of
the typical whining of the NCTA. Hangnails notwithstanding.

Incentive Licensing came about in LBJ's time

Dick Bash did his stuff (and got away with it) when Nixon and Ford were in
office

The change to the VE system happened under Reagan

We got medical waivers because a "king" wanted a favor from George Bush 1.

We also got a nocodeham license because of GB 1.

Etc.

Damn those Republicans! OBTW -- who was President when the
"Restructuring" took place?

That would be Slick Willy Clinton.

Ah HA!!! The ultimate dumbing-down was, as usual, presided over by
a liberal, socialist Democrat!

After all, it might "exclude" someone who is, in
reality, a nascent technical genius who just needs the ability to talk
on the HF phone bands in order to find the inspiration to create the
next fabulous new invention which will revolutionize electronic
communication for the rest of all time!

Or something like that.

Don't hold yer breath waiting for it, tho.

Trust me, I'm not.

Me neither.

So, have you commented on each of the 7 petitions now before FCC?

Just the BPL and NCVEC petitions so far, but I'm working on it.

73 de Larry, K3LT

On Tue, 16 Sep 2003 02:58:42 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:

All sounds sensible, but the month before retesting thing seems a bit
obsessive. I can understand not retesting the same day, but not a month
wait.

Made lots of sense. In SF we gave the tests once a week, on Friday,
and we were not equipped to handle the same folks week after week.
The five weeks between test-eligible days was adequate time to prepare
better.

Now here is something that seems has been improved upon. If there are
going to be different elements, it makes sense that if one element was
passed, that you don't have to be restested on it. I had to test for my
General twice because I flunked element 1 the first time. I passed the
writtens, I would have passed them again. Not muchpoint in wasting the
VE's time.

Elements 1 and 2 were simple stuff. Now if one passed the 13 WPM
code and the General written but failed the Advanced written, one
got a General license and did not have to retake the code or the
General written test to take the Advanced written test the next month.

The Extra, OTOH, was a "package". One could take the 20 WPM code,
pass it, pass the General and the Advanced writtens, and fail the
Extra written. Then, one would get an Advanced license, but would
still have to retake the 20 WPM code and the Extra written.

Usually they would not tell you how well you did other than "Pass"
or "Fail". They did NOT tell you which ones you got wrong. (At least
not in Philly).

In NY, if things were quiet, "Uncle Charlie" Finkelman would let you
watch while he graded the exam, but you could not review the
grading. In SF, you handed the paper in, and if things were slow
you would get the P/F results while you packed up your gear.
Otherwise, you went home and you were notified by mail of passing or
failing if you left a SAS postcard with the examiner.

The VE system is a huge improvemnet over tha old system, I have to say.

That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased.

Regardless of the Morse requirements or the test contents, the testing
system was not superior at all IMO.

That's your opinion. I beg to differ, but I'm biased.

Interestingly enough, it would appear that matching up what was
happening in the country at the time this was happening, the FCC tester
(government) was replaced by the VE's (non-profit, but certainly private
sector. The changes in the tests might seem like a de-regultion type of
move.

That was the era of privatizing the FCC's functions. I call it
what it is - avoiding the FCC's responsibilities traceable to
the ineptitude of leadership of the agency and of the country as a
whole. "Get rid of what you don't understand" is the easy way out,
not the smart way.

The amateur testing was but the tip off the iceberg. Within ten
years (1985 - 1995), the following responsibilities were "privatized",
i.e. spun off to the private sector.

Testing of amateur license applicants.

Testing of commercial operator license applicants.

Testing and certification of broadcast operators, now made
voluntary.

Testing and certification of land mobile repair and adjustment
technicians, now made voluntary.

Frequency coordination in the microwave, broadcast and land mobile
services.

Interference resolution in the microwave, broadcast and land
mobile services.

Bi-annual inspection and certification of compliance of broadcast
stations.

Inspection and certification of marine radio installations
required for safety by statute or treaty on passenger-carrying
and ocean-going cargo vessels.

Auctions and encouraging wireline and wireless competition are
deemed to be far more important than patrolling the ether.

And the beat goes on.

I guess I'm not going to blame the liberals for this one....

They're both guilty. Stupid is as stupid does.....

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

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

On 16 Sep 2003 00:19:14 GMT, N2EY wrote:

The old code test worked like this:

A rather accurate description of how license tests should be
run.....

You were allowed to bring a mill for receiving and speed key for sending, but
you'd better be well-prepared if you showed up with same.

No mill was allowed for amateur tests - all copy was by hand. A
mill was allowed only for the First RadioTelegraph (Commercial) 25
WPM plain language test - not even for the 20 WPM code group test.

Speed keys or later on electronic keyers were allowed only if they
could be hooked up to the straight key terminals (with about 67 V
"B+" on them). Only once in all the years did I see anyone with a
bug who used that special "spring" for connection to the body of a
J-38 type straight key.

I sadly do not expect the FCC to get back into the exam business,
but there is nothing stopping them for requiring the VEC/VEs to run
the tests like they used to be run.

All it takes is commitment.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

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

Good Grief, what does FCC do nowdays except shuffle paper???


that, and make preparations to remove CW practical testing.

Clint
KB5ZHT