I am an Extra and what I think might be a good way to differentiate them
is something more useful than code. We as a community have become a
bunch of "appliance operators" When I joined the group in 1958 much of
our stuff was home brew. In those days I could not afford the Collins
S-Line that I now operate. I had a BC348 driven by a home brew
converter and the transmitter was a hodge poge of military surplus that
was rewired and one home brew transmitter. In my car I had a commercial
6 meter transmitter (Harristahl Labs NE-6) and a home brew converter
running the 1955 Fords AM radio on 6 meters The transmitter power was
from a salvaged dynamotor. Wish I could find an NE-6 today.
Since the number of applicants for Extra would be small in compairison
to the number for the lower levels, we could have a test that might be a
bit harder to grade. Something that demonstrated the ability of the
applicant to build his own gear. Maybe an apprentice program. The only
way to Extra would be through an existing Extra and building something
to show that skill. This is just brainstorming, and maybe some easier
way of accomplishing it could be thought of, but it seems that showing
the ability to home brew is more useful AND HARDER than learning code.
You would never teach ANY chimp to build a linear.
Tommye & Jim Wilhite wrote:
Jim:
I am not completely persuaded that elimination of code is the proper way to
go, but am also not persuaded keeping it is the best thing. As I stated
(please don't read this as combative), maybe replace the code with a 10
question test over modes and how they operate (bandwidth, composition, etc..
To me, that would keep the integrity of the Extra above the General and
somewhat meet the standards that are in place today. It seems this would
placate all those of us who want that higher plane.
I realize it won't be long that code requirement will be gone for good, but
let's be sure the Extra test meets high standards.
73 Jim
de W5JO
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Isbell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <amradio@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 3:27 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] The PROPOSED ARRL Suggestions to FCC
Geoff Edmonson wrote:
In fact I would be willing to bet that a chimpanzee could be taught
code at 5
WPM!!! And I would be just as willing to bet that you could NOT teach a
chimp to read a single schematic and build a circuit.
at least not the SAME chimp...
which, to me, speaks volumes for the NEED for a Morse Code
requirement.
So what you are saying is that we need to keep intelligent operators out
but allow chimps in???????
_______________________________________________
AMRadio mailing list
AMRadio@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
_______________________________________________
AMRadio mailing list
AMRadio@mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
