A much better code test

[kl7aj]

I've been thinking about a way to make code test much more meaningful, as well as giving us a real way to "separate the men from the boys."

Back in the "olden days" you had to have perfect copy for at least one minute, as well as demonstrate that you could SEND code. For my commercial telegraph license, I had to pass both a plain text code test as well as a RANDOM GROUP code test.

A while back, the FCC decided that since hams are only supposed to send plain text, that a 10 question exam on the CONTENT of a plain text conversation would be sufficient. A minute of perfect copy was no longer necessary.

What I propose is a combination of the two, that will really reveal if you know your stuff or not. What I suggest is one minute of random groups with a 10 question test on the content!

What do you think?

eric

[WB2WIK]

I think the FCC is heading towards letting you fill in the blanks on the content without ever hearing the code...

[kj3n]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ July 22 2005,17:59)]What do you think?
*yawn*

Get over it.

[kc8yhk]

whats with all these CW post's i see?

whats wrong with the way it is now?

if it aint broke dont fix it

[kf6rdn]

Quote[/b] (kc8yhk @ July 22 2005,16:06)]whats with all these CW post's i see?

whats wrong with the way it is now?

if it aint broke dont fix it
They are coming up because:
A QRZ post on fcc topic dumping code. (http://www.qrz.com/ib-bin/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=7;t=96892)

Fcc is talking about breaking it or fixing it depending on your point of view.


Me, I'll talk/type/tap/mumble to anyone willing to carry on a conversation intelligently whether you've been licensed for 70 years or 70 minutes.... As long as things are usuable and enjoyable I'm not going to get my panties in a bunch and try to second guess what kinda riff raff is going to show up as long as they don't drop testing too bad.

[w5lda]

How are you going to keep out the riff raff off HF when they are already there?

[ai4ep]

---look in the crystal ball into the future ( 2025 )

hear 2 people talking on 2 meters..

#1... I heard some stations making " dit - dah " noises and I have no idea what it is...wonder if it is legal ?

#2... I bet it was those 2 OF over in the next state using that antiquidated CW the arrl & fcc eliminated the requirement for way back in 2006 "

#1... gee, wonder what it would be like to be able to do that...like they are doing...wouldnt it be cool ? No one else would know what we are saying to each other !

#2... that would be great !

[ae4tr]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif # Are you guys saying that anyone who does not know code is riff-raff??? #You are sure to get a lot of flaming on that one. #Just what is riff-raff any how?? #
And besides that, Are you saying that those who know code are men, and those who don't are boys??
Your priorities may need adjusting..and you are sure to get it, after statements like those. blues:

[KF0RT]

Quote[/b] (ae4tr @ July 23 2005,05:38)]And besides that, Are you saying that those who know code are men, and those who don't are boys??
Uh-oh. They're starting to catch on. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

73, Rob

[w5klb]

Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ July 22 2005,14:59)]I've been thinking about a way to make code test much more meaningful, as well as giving us a real way to "separate the men from the boys."

Back in the "olden days" you had to have perfect copy for at least one minute, as well as demonstrate that you could SEND code. #For my commercial telegraph license, I had to pass both a plain text code test as well as a RANDOM GROUP code test. #

A while back, the FCC decided that since hams are only supposed to send plain text, that a 10 question exam on the CONTENT of a plain text conversation would be sufficient. #A minute of perfect copy was no longer necessary. #

What I propose is a combination of the two, that will really reveal if you know your stuff or not. #What I suggest is one minute of random groups with a 10 question test on the content!

What do you think?

eric
I think "Uncle" has other ideas. #

Knowing code does not "separate the men from the boys". Nor will it enable you to leap tall buildings at a single bound, walk on water or bend your eyesight around corners. The only thing it proves is that you know code.

It's bitter pill to swallow for some of ya, and I understand how you feel, but ALL OF US kinda knew in our "heart of hearts" that this was going to happen.

CW is becoming a mode. Much like SSB, AM, or any of the digital mode. It's now a choice.

I don't plan to give up my bug or straight key. But I will not look down my nose at someone just because they don't like CW.

Go ahead a flame me. I got's my asbestos nickers on and a fire bottle at the ready.

[W5HTW]

For those of us who had to copy, on a mill, letter-perfect code groups at 30 wpm, it would be an easy test to ace indeed!

See? Here's what I got for content:

ghxty ldqvp runbq xotlg levad xhapl vodpp eaxbh ldgpr qvwtm adght.

And that's just the introduction!

Wait till you get to the whole story!

Ed
(Of course, I should have done it in all caps, but who wants to be screaming the story line?)

[wa9cwx]

I hope everyone has filed their comments with the FCC.
I personally did NOT ask to keep the code. I feel that 5 WPM is just silly. What I DID ask for is meanigful tests.
That they would promote testing that was relevant and not the silly and obvious tests used today.
Yes I realize that is NOT a yes/no response to the code proposal, but it IS related to the issue of dumbing down the requirements, which is what this is actually ABOUT.
In addition, they essentially illiminated the code test when they went to 5 WPM.
What a joke.
Nine year old Scouts get BADGES for THAT, not LICENSES.

[K6BBC]

IT'S A TIME-WARP POST!!!

What do you think about making 11 meters a ham band again? That sounds like a good idea too.

K6BBC

[kj5t]

Quote[/b] (w5klb @ July 23 2005,13:52)]Quote[/b] (kl7aj @ July 22 2005,14:59)]I've been thinking about a way to make code test much more meaningful, as well as giving us a real way to "separate the men from the boys."

Back in the "olden days" you had to have perfect copy for at least one minute, as well as demonstrate that you could SEND code. For my commercial telegraph license, I had to pass both a plain text code test as well as a RANDOM GROUP code test.

A while back, the FCC decided that since hams are only supposed to send plain text, that a 10 question exam on the CONTENT of a plain text conversation would be sufficient. A minute of perfect copy was no longer necessary.

What I propose is a combination of the two, that will really reveal if you know your stuff or not. What I suggest is one minute of random groups with a 10 question test on the content!

What do you think?

eric
I think "Uncle" has other ideas.

Knowing code does not "separate the men from the boys". Nor will it enable you to leap tall buildings at a single bound, walk on water or bend your eyesight around corners. The only thing it proves is that you know code.

It's bitter pill to swallow for some of ya, and I understand how you feel, but ALL OF US kinda knew in our "heart of hearts" that this was going to happen.

CW is becoming a mode. Much like SSB, AM, or any of the digital mode. It's now a choice.

I don't plan to give up my bug or straight key. But I will not look down my nose at someone just because they don't like CW.

Go ahead a flame me. I got's my asbestos nickers on and a fire bottle at the ready.
I agree 100%. If you choose to use the mode, go right ahead. For those of us who have not used the code on the air, but we enjoy other modes. We are not less of an operator. Who knows, I do have a straight key, perhaps I will get on during SKN.

[N8CPA]

Steve, if you want to tiptoe into it, here's a suggestion. Next weekend, starting at 1800 UTC, the North American Summer CW QSO Party. 3 simple element exchange, just your call sign, name and state. You can hunt and pounce. 99% of ops will QRS to your speed. Make one or two, or make a hundred dozen. A great way to get over any first use nerves well before SKN.

[KA9VQF]

Way back in the mid to late ’60’s I was told that the questions for the test was sent in Morse and you had to copy the questions then put in you answers and send them to the examiner.

Now that would be a code test.

I’m not sure if they thought I was riff raff or not but it did help keep me out of radio for a long time.

[K7JBQ]

Quote[/b] (wa9cwx @ July 29 2005,21:53)]In addition, they essentially illiminated the code test when they went to 5 WPM.
That is most certainly true, which is why a lot of new Extras fear to tread in the lower 25. With good reason.

Bottom line: We had dits and dahs; the FCC has decided to replace them with duhs.

I am hopeful that, with the "requirement" of Morse about to become history, that at least some will learn it voluntarily and thus be able to work stations when their phone brethren simply can't. But then I buy lottery tickets too, and the odds are probably comparable.

73,
Bill

[al7n]

Quote[/b] (KA9VQF @ July 30 2005,09:15)]Way back in the mid to late ’60’s I was told that the questions for the test was sent in Morse and you had to copy the questions then put in you answers and send them to the examiner.

You was told wrong...code examinations were never given that way by the FCC examiners at the District Offices.

The examiners did make sure you could copy Morse legibly
at the specified speed so they could read it, and they made sure you could send it well enough by hand to be able to use it as a communications tool.

When the whole thing went to five WPM, it was GONE.

Five WPM Morse is totally useless as a communications tool
as it is much too slow for any decent amount of throughput.

By now there are probably not enough VE's in most places to properly administer Morse code exams that would sufficiently test anyone's ability to use CW effectively anyway, and the FCC won't do it anymore. They probably don't have anyone still working that can either.

So, whether we like it or not, those of us who USE CW
will have to hope that there will be others who do not now know or use it that will expend the effort to learn it and become proficient enough in the mode so that it will remain a useful communications tool. #It takes an OPERATOR on both ends of a CW circuit to make it work.

[K4KWH]

Fellas, get over it! The only thing that is sure to stay the same is change!http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif Things have been changing since the beginning of time and that ain't gonna "change" now! I am sure the people that built the 1931 Model A I own were griping about the things that were changing about cars while they were building the 1940 models. You might as well get used to it. For what's it's worth--and some 'change'.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[w0aew]

Quote[/b] (KA9VQF @ July 30 2005,09:15)]Way back in the mid to late ’60’s I was told that the questions for the test was sent in Morse and you had to copy the questions then put in you answers and send them to the examiner.

Now that would be a code test.

I’m not sure if they thought I was riff raff or not but it did help keep me out of radio for a long time.
You're right.

And copying schematics in CW could get the sweat pouring!

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif