MEANINGFUL ENTRY-LEVEL LICENSE PRIVILEGES

Excellent points all.

I also think part of the 'beef' some people are now having with the question pool approach to things may have a lot to do with with the multuple choice METHOD of testing on the current FCC exams.

I wholeheartedly agree with your point that the "hardness" or "easyness" of a written examination has FAR more to do with who is writing it (and to what level of comprehension the test is aimed) than the method of testing used.

As a designer of hundreds of examinations over my many years as an educator, I've personally made some multiple choice examinations extremely comprehensive ("difficult") in my time.  As I'm sure most of us who have taken tests like these already know, simply by tossing in a few "all of the aboves", "some of the aboves" and/or "none of the aboves", such tests can be made extremely difficult, if not impossible to pass.

But, then again, as you say, we still seem to have many people here and elsewhere fixated on the scenes in their rearview mirrors, whistfully wishing for a return to the way things were done "back then".  

Granted, "back then" there WAS a need for tests to be far more comprehensive than today.  Maybe that's primarily because "back then" most of us had to build our own equipment, and the government had to be sure we knew enough about how to do that properly to keep us from injuring or killing ourselves, or from becoming a nuisance to our neighbors or to other Ham operators on the bands.

But, as you say, the days when most of us built our own gear have now long since gone the way of the dinosaur.

And, finally, I would be very interested to learn how many of the "OTs" (as Rene affectionately calls them) who are now deriding the rest of us for using "plug-it-in, CB-type" equipment also have a shack full of it themselves!

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF

 

.
 


.

.


I don`t have the time at this point to "address" all of
your assertions.
The point I am trying to make is that IF the FCC
had retained the testing responsibility we would NOT be in this "mess", as there would still be "credibility" in
the system.
I know why thay gave it over(low manpower,money) etc,
etc.
Secondly,--I realize that looking at "the past" will not
fix this mess, BUT what I am saying, is that the
"seeds" for this "mess" WERE sowed years ago in
large measure due to the exam system being compromised when the FCC turned the testing process over to the ham community.IMO

                          73, K1MVP

P.S., Got to go, see ya later.

 

Fine, it all started with the FCC handing over the testing responsibility.  Whether that is the penultimate cause or not is irrelevant, that's history now.  My point is that we should not be looking for people to blame and should instead go about trying to fix things.  Asking the FCC to take over the testing is not the solution.  One reason is because it simply will not happen.  If the tests are broken it's our responsibility to fix it. Complaining about the cause of the trouble is not productive.

 

Why is it when some of us try to point out what went
wrong, or probably went wrong, due to past mistakes,--
we are labeled as "complainers"?
Ya know,at this "point" in my life,--I really do not care
anymore, what people label me.

I firmly believe that many who might share the same
opinion as me,--are "afraid" or "reluctant" to express
their opinion especially if it`s not popular, because
they might be labled as a "complainer".

Personally,--I also believe,--that the exam system,
as "broke" as it is, cannot be "fixed" to make it
what it was prior to the VEC system.
Once the "floodgates" are/will be open,--there is no
"turning back", IMO

How is that for being "negative"?--or "realistic" IMO.  
Yep,--I know,I am "doom and gloom",--I heard it
all before, by the "polyanna positive" group.
                         
                       73, K1MVP  

 

Chew on this one for a while. One Class, One License. One hundred multiple choice questions, including band privelages, rf safety, modes, propogation, antennas, transmitters, receivers, and maybe even a little history.I'm sure you get the picture. Passing grade is nothing less than 100%, license class would be " Radio Amateur 1-A " . The license would be good for 10 years, with no vanity privelages. And last, but not the least, every licensed operator would have to take re-current training through a community college, or an online accredited school. The number of hours needed to retain your license would be considered if this measure were to pass the FCC's approval.
Okay, you can all breath now. The times they are changing, and so is the beaurocracy!
Have fun, and 73,
Mike W4ABX

 

k1mvp-Ya know,at this "point" in my life,--I really do not care
anymore, what people label me sir thats just the way I see it ,the way I see it all sides are complainers so thats the way it gose, 73 Bill

 

Completely unreasonable. Never happen.

 

k1mvp-Ya know,at this "point" in my life,--I really do not care
anymore, what people label me                                                                                                                                                            sir thats just the way I see it ,the way I see it all sides are complainers so thats the way it gose, 73 Bill[/quote]
KD4MXE,
Hey Bill,
You are "AOK",--you are right, each side could view
the "other side" as a "complainer" just because they
take the opposite view.
Hey,--I hope to work you sometime when you get on
HF,--at least you have the courage to vent your opinions
even though they may be different than mine.

                            73, Rene, K1MVP

 

When will this happen? This year or next year?

 

Keith,
I have not taken a survey,--but I know there still are
a few "non-appliance" operators,--as an avid AM`er,
I and many other`s enjoy restoring "vintage' ham
equipment and we have a "ball" in the process.

Many Am`ers also DO in fact still build equipment,--
the latest being class E am transmitters(solid state)
and put out tremendous signals,(both audio quality and
RF strength) that have excellent efficiency.

I no longer run the high tech "rice boxes" as I just got
tired of the "hello goodbye", 5-9 QSO`s
.
I have recently completed a homebrew 6146 am rig
with which I excite my little SB-200 linear and have
had excellent reports on AM,--ham radio is "fun"
again now that I am restoring, building and getting
on an "old" discarded mode.

I also do get on SSB with a couple of little "old"
sideband tranceivers(heath HW-12 and 32) that I
have recently acquired and have a "blast" using these
little simple monobanders on 75 and 20 meters.

                       73, Rene, K1MVP    

P.S., My latest project I am starting is a homebrew
      813 linear for 160 meters,--looks like a real
      "fun project.
      On a final "note",--a good friend of mine just
      purchased an Icom 756 pro III, and was showing
      me what it "does", and all its options,--and I
      have absolutely no desire to acquire such a rig.

 

The arrl remains clueless----- what a joke--- give it all away---

 

It's a hobby not a profession.

 

Rene,

Sounds like you are having a great time!  And, after all, isn't that what Ham Radio is all about?

That's one of the nice things about the hobby...there are so many facets to it, that you can discard an "old" mode for something "new", only to return again to something "old" later on.  For many years, I was an avid DXer, but, like you, I eventually grew weary of all the "5-9", cookie-cutter QSOs.  That's when I got interested in satellite work, and eventually ended up as the President of AMSAT-NA.  

However, now that I'm living in Canada, I don't have room to put up big, fancy antennas for either of those pursuits.  What's more, all of the satellites currently up there are of the "hello-goodbye" variety and the launch of the next one that will allow longer QSOs is at least a half-year away. So, I, too, am now re-discovering my "roots" and having a ball using QRP with simple dipoles and verticals on the low bands.

Maybe all of us (yours truly included) need to simply stop bellyaching about what "is" or "isn't" there in the current rules and just get back on the air and enjoy what we DO have.  That is, I think we need to start having some fun again speaking WITH each other on the air rather than AT each other here.

Our lives are just too darned short to waste them worrying about issues that few (if any) of us will ever have any real control over, anyway.  

Sometimes I shudder when I think about all the precious moments each of us are now squandering while sitting in front of our stupid computers day after day, yakking about isssues that, in the final analysis, won't ever amount to anything more than the proverbial "hill of beans"!

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF

 

Keith,
Ok on your interest in qrp,--I was "heavy" into qrp
back in the mid 80`s when I built a lot of qrp equip(from
scratch) superhets, direct conversion rcvrs, and solid
state transmitters, for 80, 40 es 30 meters, and had
a lot of fun using it.
It was after the qrp bug,--that I took up restoring
old "vintage" tube equipment,(receivers and xmtrs)
Like you said there are many "facets" that can keep
one from getting bored.
And,--yep,--there is a lot out there in HR, other than
wasting time on the computer "venting" over things
beyond our control.
Got to get back to building my linear for 160.

                           73, K1MVP

P.S, Had a great QSO on the low end of 75 this evening  couple of stations, in the midwest discussing the
restructuring issue, and it was "civil",--how about that?

 

Maybe that's because the discussion was over the air vice over this silly computer thing.

Sadly, largely because the immediate, face-to-face (or voice-to-voice) feedback loop is totally missing in such communication, I've found that e-mails and participation in on-line discussion groups (like this one) gives participants an unmatched opportunity to look like absolute fools...and all at the speed of light!

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF