| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#131
June 21st 05, 12:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
#133
June 21st 05, 02:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
bb wrote: wrote: From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 22:46 "Jim Hampton" wrote in message ... Some folks back then wanted the General but settled for a tech license when they couldn't pass muster at 13. Unfortunately, if you got on the air (back when, 2 meters was the novice voice band to try and get more activity on 2 meters!) it was possible to *never* work on the code and you were stuck as a tech. Most likely 6 meters was the band of choice as the best front ends might have had a 4.5 dB noise figure on 440 MHz. Even 2 meters wasn't all that busy; Heathkit sixers and twoers were the rigs of the day. I really wan't familiar with any territory above 30 MHz back then. When is "back then?" And how can an LOS path be "busy" in a non-urban area? Picture sitting around waiting for ducting or temperature inversion to reach out beyond 30 to 40 miles... The twoers and sixers were rock-bound. Anyway, he said that he wasn't familiar with VHF. The other choice was to work on your code. The novice license was issued for one year and was not renewable. I took this choice and it took me a while to get my code speed up. When I did take the test and pass 13, I was good for about 18 (which helps when you're nervous and travel 60 miles to take the test administered by the FCC, not a VEC). So? I traveled 90 miles by train to the Chicago FCC office for my First 'Phone test. No snow and I kept my shoes on all the way. Aha! Gotcha! You forgot to mention the changes in elevation over changes in distance!!! I like train rides! - Mikey - Extra lite extraordinaire |
|
#134
June 21st 05, 03:09 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#136
June 22nd 05, 12:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Louis Tyler" Nospam@anon wrote in message ... wrote in message oups.com... From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 22:53 wrote in message roups.com... From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 00:07 "bb" wrote in message You sir, are nothing but a agitator and a disgrace to ham radio in general, assuming you have a license that is. Godwin invoked. [ :-) ] Attitude-wise, Dan = Stebie. ALL shall march to the same drummer, in ranks, with one voice counting cadence as taught in the Church of St. Hiram. NONE shall speak against the Elite, the PCTA Extras. ONE "service," all wearing the same "uniform." Totalitarian. Hey Lennie....did that beating you took with the lye soap leave any permanent scars? No "beating," no "lye soap," no "scars," you southern-fried dumbass dip****. I never ever suffered something that YOU must have gone through. I've figured this guy out folks. He was a barracks lawyer that got caught up in several barracks parties. A total loser. "Loser?" In what? I was in Signal, not Judge Advocate Corps. A long time ago. Radio communications for a major area command. Began that as an E-2 no-striper, ended it as an E-5 with three up and one down after three years in last assignment. Half a century ago. Lennie's angry tirade snipped... My, my, Lennie. You are obviously, as evidenced by your tantrum, much more capable of handing out insults than you are at receiving them. What ever is the matter, Lennie? Did big, mean and nasty old Southern Fried Dan, as you put it, hit a soft spot on Poor Lennie's overly inflated cranium? Three up and one down? An E-5?? In whose Army? My, my. That big, nasty old Dan sure got you riled! WAY TO GO, DAN!!!! Thank you, thank you. It is obvious that I was not the ONLY one to make note of that extra Chevron. Oh Lennie.....Chevron is a stripe. Dan/W4NTI |
|
#137
June 22nd 05, 01:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "Dip**** Dumbass Dan/W4NTI" on Jun 20, 7:40 pm
Yep......he had his ass beat in a barracks party, more than one I am sure. Never happened. However, because of your insistence on that "subject" we can guess that it happened to YOU at least once. Is that how you got your military "disability?" Enjoy the hell you've made for yourself... |
|
#138
June 22nd 05, 01:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "bb" on Tues 21 Jun 2005 03:15
wrote: From: "Dan/W4NTI" on Sun 19 Jun 2005 22:46 "Jim Hampton" wrote in message Some folks back then wanted the General but settled for a tech license when they couldn't pass muster at 13. Unfortunately, if you got on the air back when, 2 meters was the novice voice band to try and get more activity on 2 meters!) it was possible to *never* work on the code and you were stuck as a tech. Most likely 6 meters was the band of choice as the best front ends might have had a 4.5 dB noise figure on 440 MHz. Even 2 meters wasn't all that busy; Heathkit sixers and twoers were the rigs of the day. I really wan't familiar with any territory above 30 MHz back then. When is "back then?" And how can an LOS path be "busy" in a non-urban area? Picture sitting around waiting for ducting or temperature inversion to reach out beyond 30 to 40 miles... The twoers and sixers were rock-bound. Anyway, he said that he wasn't familiar with VHF. "Familiarity with VHF" wasn't needed. ALL that counted was getting the morse code speed UP...that yielded absolute knowledge of all theory thus guaranteeing rank-status-privilege. I designed and built an external VFO for a few Sixers. Worked fine. One of the recipients was showing an olde-fahrt extra how it operated and olde-fahrt said "Nice, did you build it?" "No," said my friend and, pointing to me, "He did." "THAT'S ILLEGAL!" shouted the olde-fahrt. Heh heh heh...the same anal attitudes existed four decades ago as they do now. The other choice was to work on your code. The novice license was issued for one year and was not renewable. I took this choice and it took me a while to get my code speed up. When I did take the test and pass 13, I was good for about 18 (which helps when you're nervous and travel 60 miles to take the test administered by the FCC, not a VEC). So? I traveled 90 miles by train to the Chicago FCC office for my First 'Phone test. No snow and I kept my shoes on all the way. Aha! Gotcha! You forgot to mention the changes in elevation over changes in distance!!! Heh heh heh. In northern Illinois the elevation changes amount to +/- a yard. Not even close to bragging rights... :-) However, to kill time waiting for the return train, I saw a matinee of "Oklahoma." Sat in the balcony, undisturbed. That was good for a change of a couple stories in height! :-) Too bad it was a sunny day in Chicago. No snow to brag to anyone ("uphill both ways through"). Passed no problem, even with the interruption of a fire drill in the Federal Building halfway through the test. [a lot of the anony-mousies won't know what we're talking about on this subject...they weren't here to see some of the astounding bragging going on by the late Dick Carroll and others in here] |
|
#139
June 22nd 05, 01:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: "bb" on Tues 21 Jun 2005 03:33
wrote: Dee Flint wrote: All the licensing requirements are arbitrary. Every single one of them. I would use the phrase "only based on FCC's judgement and experience" rather than "arbitrary", but that's a minor point. Otherwise agree 100%. Not only that, but many if not most of the rules are only based on FCC's judgement and experience too. Well there you have it. Right. The FCC has all the "judgement and EXPERIENCE" even though not a single staffer or Commissioner is required to have an amateur radio license! But here's an interesting point. If the FCC rules in favor of something about morse code, Jimmie will say it was due to the league or other amateur's comments...no credit is given to the FCC. If the FCC rules against morse code in any form, then it is the FCC's "fault" and they are to "blame." :-) For example, the maximum power an amateur station may use in the USA is 1500 W peak output. Why 1500 W - why not 1000 W, or 2000 W, or something else? Why not any power level that an amateur can put on the air and still meet RF exposure and spurious emission rules? Why are you telling us this, and not the FCC? Jimmie IS amateur radio! He is the Lawgiver... :-) Tthere are several radio services for which no testing is required. So if some services do not need testing, then it is arbitrary for those that do. However the goals and purposes of amateur radio make it desireable to test candidates for these licenses. And those goals and purposes are based on FCC's judgement and experience as well. FCC could, if they wanted, simply define amateur radio as "hobby radio", but they haven't done so. There we have it. Amateur radio is a HOBBY activity...but it isn't a hobby activity. :-) There's no such thing as "ham" radio in Part 97 but hams like to use that term almost to a man. Gotta love some of this "reasoning." :-) There's always the possibility that some new idea, argument, or information will result from a discussion. Even the passage of time gives new insights. Ther's not if you continually avoid such discussions. Avoidance and misdirection are a standard ploy of the PCTA extras. They seem to figure that stalling for time will be to their advantage. Like WRC-03 and the rewrite of S25 endorsed and promulgated by the IARU and opposed to by the ARRL. With more stalling of time and some adroit spin by the league the league will say that they no longer oppose that international change. :-) For example, the 2000 restructuring that reduced both code and written testing did not result in sustained growth of the number of US hams. We saw a small rise for a few years, but since April 2003 or so the numbers have been in a slow decline. This data clearly indicates that the license test requirements aren't the limiting factor to longterm growth. Were the sunspots in decline during this period? Jimmie seems to suffer "sunspots" of thinking. He gets his neurons ionized by all of us free radicals...! :-) The NUMBERS are unmistakable. Without the creation of the no-code-test Technician class in 1991, the total number of amateur radio licenses would have continued to DECLINE, "restructuring" or not. The number of Technician class licenses have kept on growing until no-code-test Techs are now 40+% of all U.S. amateur licensees! If there is a "slight decline" in ham numbers (there is), but the no-code-test Tech is markedly INCREASING (it is), then, arithmetically, the total of other classes are DECLINING (they are). Jimmie will probably, as he has in the past, go into some creative rationalizing of DENIAL on that, say "I'm wrong!" and the usual spin (trying to disguise the denial). :-) [that's very predictable] I'm not a part of either growth or decline, just observing the numbers as they change...and he will say I am "wrong," "mistaken," or other equivalent phrases. Jimmie will look around at his immediate "ham neighborhood" and see little change...he gets his ham magazines regularly, hears the beep-beeping every time he turns on his ham receiver...and sees "no change," his little ham world is still intact, no problem. Regretably for the hobby, the ARRL is only RECENTLY starting to realize all those NUMBERS! They aren't attracting the (now) 40% of all licensees as they once expected they would. ARRL membership has declined. Olde-fahrt morsemen hams don't much seem to give a ****. [Hans Brakob seems a rare exception] They strut around, posturing and preening, babbling about "good old days" and emptying their mental chamber pots on the "lesser classes." Sooner or later the FCC will rule and we'll all have to live with the consequences good or bad. Yep. But until they do, we can refine and develop our arguments on both sides. Showing disdain for Technicians who cannot or choose not to learn The Code certainly tells a lot. It tells a very BAD tale. But, they ARE the self-righteous, self-promoted "superiors" who seem to feel they "control" it all and have some "qualifications" for disdaining those "lesser" folk. But, they cannot be convinced they are hurting the hobby. They RULE it in their minds. As for it being unhealthy to discuss, I'd say that as long as the discussion remains at a civil level, without misquotes and personal attacks, it's healthy. Don't worry, be healthy. Jimmie gonna HAVE to concede that he is NOT the voice of amateur radio. In here. He be only ONE individual licensee. If the result is as the NCTA state that it will be, i.e. a big wave of new hams plus a big wave of hams upgrading and getting on HF, just watch the DX stations, especially the rare ones, hide down on CW even more than they are now. That's one big reason we have subbands-by-mode. Wow, I never realized that. We have subbands-by-mode so that DX can hide from us. Jim is right. Civil discourse leads to new insights on arbitrarines and prejudices. Well, adding new fresh blood to the hobby will just upset the hell out of the Elite RF Territory of these extra homies. Their "work DX with CW on HF" sandbox is going to be invaded? If you exclude Japan, the US has more amateur radio operators than the rest of the world combined. If the bands get as busy as the NCTAs imply they will from this rush of new and upgrading hams, a lot of us will be drifting even more to CW just to find some room. Or the data modes. No CW skill required for that. Operating ANYWHERE below 30 MHz REQUIRES morse code testing! That's the LAW!!! On the other hand, if the PCTAs are correct, i.e. the impact will be insignificant just as other changes of the recent past have been, then there is NO reason to change the requirements. Changes that have little to no noticeable impact aren't worth the bother of implementing. That's true. But there are other factors: - Reducing the license requirements still further may have negative effects. As it already has, right? The HF sandbox is in DANGER, Will Robinson! - If there's no real effect, the solution obviously lies elsewhere. But some may not want to accept that fact. There may be a number of problems which must be addressed by a number of solutions. Damn, Brian, you're getting GOOD at this Truthspeak! :-) Careful, you are beginning to phrase just like them PCTA extras! - Once the requirements are reduced, it may be near-impossible to get them raised back up. 73 de Jim, N2EY Arbitrariness should be easy enough to increase. That's what makes it arbitrary. FCC needs to hire an Arbitrator? :-) |
|
#140
June 22nd 05, 10:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Policy discussion? | Policy | |||
| Any one recommend a group where they discuss policy? | Policy | |||
Linear Mode
