....is simply this:

Know code = Know ham
No code = No ham

The eternal truth, proven every day.

...is simply this:

Know code = Know ham
No code = No ham

The eternal truth, proven every day.


So TRUE

(WA8ULX) wrote in message ...
...is simply this:

Know code = Know ham
No code = No ham

The eternal truth, proven every day.


So TRUE

If "So TRUE," why did you wait to take the code-free upgrade to Extra?

Are you saying that you're "No ham?"

If "So TRUE," why did you wait to take the code-free upgrade to Extra?

You know why I took it, and it still bugs you to think you cant do the same. By
the way Bryan, I still havent used the EXTRA Privilages.

(WA8ULX) wrote in message ...
If "So TRUE," why did you wait to take the code-free upgrade to Extra?

You know why I took it,

Yup. Because you couldn't pass 20wpm, so you waited on your chalky
butt till the FCC gave you a "gimme!"

Yup. Because you couldn't pass 20wpm, so you waited on your chalky
butt till the FCC gave you a "gimme!"


You know thats a LIE, I never wanted the Extra. But I guess I need to explain
to you again.
A Bunch of No-Code Knuckle Draggers bet me $250.00 I couldnt pass the TEST.
Well I not only passed with a score of 100%, with no study at all, I got to
collect $250.00 From the Knuckle Draggers.
As I remember you still are not able to pass it.

In article , says...
...is simply this:

Know code = Know ham
No code = No ham

The eternal truth, proven every day.

I have a feeling that this issue about the code will never be resolved,
at least not while the "old guard" of CW loyalists are still around.
I've been a ham since I got my Novice ticket in 1986 -- before the
Novice Enhancement started -- so I did my 5wpm test back then.
Unfortunately, I've not had the need to use it much. At one point, I
felt as you do, that Morse skills were necessary in order to be
qualified to operate HF. However, technology has pretty much removed
Morse skills from the list of skills needed to operate properly in the
Amateur Service.

I do intend to refresh my Morse skills and operate more using that mode,
especially since I am doing more operating while camping and traveling,
plus operating at QRP power levels from home and on the road. That's a
matter of personal choice, though. I also plan to get onto PSK31, RTTY
and even SSTV and ATV as opportunities present themselves. But as
things stand now, the ability to operate CW is no longer a necessity.
It's still a valid mode, CW sub-bands should still be set aside for
operating in that mode, and it's still a skill that should be cultivated
among the Amateur ranks, but it has outlived its usefulness as a
requirement and should be eliminated as such.

Morse skills were once considered to be a "filter" by which those
operators who were going to screw around on the air would be eliminated
-- the theory was that if someone was a goof-off, (s)he would be
deterred from getting a ham license by having to study for the Morse
exam. As I've stated elsewhere, that theory has been disproven by the
antics of licensed Amateur operators in places like 14.313 MHz, the
"Animal House" repeater in Los Angeles, and the jammers that disrupt
communications during the Rose Parade, among others. A lot of these
bozos hold amateur licenses, Tech Plus and up, so they have taken the
Morse exam and still are irritants. So much for the "filter" theory....

And no, I don't consider a no-code Tech to be any less of a ham than a
Novice or a Tech Plus or anyone else. Everyone with an interest in
amateur radio should be able to participate without having to
demonstrate knowledge of a mode that they will probably never use.

It was suggested in a reply to a related thread on another newsgroup
that the whole exam structure should be tossed as well, if Morse is
eliminated. Not true, nor do I even consider suggesting it. If we as
amateurs are going to be responsible for the emissions coming from our
stations, we must be able to prove that we know what we are doing, we
understand our responsibilities under Part 97, and that we have the
necessary skills to recognize and correct problems as they arise, or to
prevent them from happening at all.

So yes, passing the written exams are a valid entry requirement. In
fact, they should probably be even more of a test of our knowledge and
skills than they are at present. I'd go along with an increase in the
number of questions in the exams, especially in the areas of what is
permitted and prohibited in the operation of our stations. For one
thing, it gives the FCC additional ammunition in prosecution of
operators who violate the regulations -- Mr. Hollingsworth can point to
the exam taken by "Joe Ham, KA6XYZ" and say, "See, this person answered
the questions correctly, demonstrating that he knew that such-and-such
was illegal, then went ahead and did it anyway."

--

-- //Steve//

Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS
Fountain Valley, CA
Email:

Steve Silverwood wrote:

In article , says...


...is simply this:

Know code = Know ham
No code = No ham

The eternal truth, proven every day.



I have a feeling that this issue about the code will never be resolved,
at least not while the "old guard" of CW loyalists are still around.
I've been a ham since I got my Novice ticket in 1986 -- before the
Novice Enhancement started -- so I did my 5wpm test back then.
Unfortunately, I've not had the need to use it much. At one point, I
felt as you do, that Morse skills were necessary in order to be
qualified to operate HF. However, technology has pretty much removed
Morse skills from the list of skills needed to operate properly in the
Amateur Service.

I do intend to refresh my Morse skills and operate more using that mode,
especially since I am doing more operating while camping and traveling,
plus operating at QRP power levels from home and on the road. That's a
matter of personal choice, though. I also plan to get onto PSK31, RTTY
and even SSTV and ATV as opportunities present themselves. But as
things stand now, the ability to operate CW is no longer a necessity.
It's still a valid mode, CW sub-bands should still be set aside for
operating in that mode, and it's still a skill that should be cultivated
among the Amateur ranks, but it has outlived its usefulness as a
requirement and should be eliminated as such.

Morse skills were once considered to be a "filter" by which those
operators who were going to screw around on the air would be eliminated
-- the theory was that if someone was a goof-off, (s)he would be
deterred from getting a ham license by having to study for the Morse
exam. As I've stated elsewhere, that theory has been disproven by the
antics of licensed Amateur operators in places like 14.313 MHz, the
"Animal House" repeater in Los Angeles, and the jammers that disrupt
communications during the Rose Parade, among others. A lot of these
bozos hold amateur licenses, Tech Plus and up, so they have taken the
Morse exam and still are irritants. So much for the "filter" theory....

And no, I don't consider a no-code Tech to be any less of a ham than a
Novice or a Tech Plus or anyone else. Everyone with an interest in
amateur radio should be able to participate without having to
demonstrate knowledge of a mode that they will probably never use.

It was suggested in a reply to a related thread on another newsgroup
that the whole exam structure should be tossed as well, if Morse is
eliminated. Not true, nor do I even consider suggesting it. If we as
amateurs are going to be responsible for the emissions coming from our
stations, we must be able to prove that we know what we are doing, we
understand our responsibilities under Part 97, and that we have the
necessary skills to recognize and correct problems as they arise, or to
prevent them from happening at all.

So yes, passing the written exams are a valid entry requirement. In
fact, they should probably be even more of a test of our knowledge and
skills than they are at present. I'd go along with an increase in the
number of questions in the exams, especially in the areas of what is
permitted and prohibited in the operation of our stations. For one
thing, it gives the FCC additional ammunition in prosecution of
operators who violate the regulations -- Mr. Hollingsworth can point to
the exam taken by "Joe Ham, KA6XYZ" and say, "See, this person answered
the questions correctly, demonstrating that he knew that such-and-such
was illegal, then went ahead and did it anyway."

Do they keep the completed exams beyond a few months? The VEs? Or the FCC?
Anyway, it would be possible to get most of the rules and regs questions
wrong and
still pass the exam. My father got his advanced back in 72 down at the
FCC field
office in NYC. The examiner told him he passed, but to reread the rules
and regs
before he goes on the air. He got most of those questions wrong. Point
is, that you
could have a rule or reg misunderstood, and still pass to get the
license. Most rules
that do get violated often and the FCC goes after are ones people should
know
better. Who would think that jamming a repeater is legal and proper?

In article ,
says...
Do they keep the completed exams beyond a few months?
The VEs? Or the FCC? Anyway, it would be possible to
get most of the rules and regs questions wrong and
still pass the exam. My father got his advanced back
in 72 down at the FCC field office in NYC. The
examiner told him he passed, but to reread the rules
and regs before he goes on the air. He got most of
those questions wrong. Point is, that you could have
a rule or reg misunderstood, and still pass to get
the license. Most rules that do get violated often
and the FCC goes after are ones people should know
better. Who would think that jamming a repeater is
legal and proper?

I don't know if they keep the exams. From what I understand, the exams
are administered and retained by the VE team rather than the FCC. But I
definitely DO feel that the number of questions should be increased for
each license, with additional weight given to the questions regarding
Part 97 and operating practices, especially for the Tech exam.

--

-- //Steve//

Steve Silverwood, KB6OJS
Fountain Valley, CA
Email:

"Steve Silverwood" wrote in message
...
I don't know if they keep the exams. From what I understand, the exams
are administered and retained by the VE team rather than the FCC. But I
definitely DO feel that the number of questions should be increased for
each license, with additional weight given to the questions regarding
Part 97 and operating practices, especially for the Tech exam.


Actually I'd like to see a new, separate element that is devoted entirely to
rules and regulations that would have to be passed before taking the
technical elements for the license classes. One should not be able to get
on the air if they miss a significant percentage of the rules. As some have
commented, right now it is quite possible to miss the majority of the
regulatory questions on an exam yet still pass the exam. The exams for the
various classes could then focus on operating procedures and technical
elements. For example, let's call the rules test Element R and then for the
various licenses we could have a system as follows:

Technician - Element R, Element 2
Technician with HF - Element R, Element 1, Element 2
General - Element R, Element 1, Element 2, Element 3
Extra - Element R, Element 1, Element 2, Element 3

Although if it is a truly comprehensive rules test, I'd would find it
acceptable to eliminate element 1 for Tech with HF thus combining the
current Tech & Tech with HF and perhaps even for General.

Too many people just gloss over the rules and are not willing to look them
up. They then rely on other people who have also glossed over the rules
when they have a question and get some really bad information.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE