home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Date: Mon, 8 Aug 94 04:30:11 PDT
- From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <ham-policy@ucsd.edu>
- Errors-To: Ham-Policy-Errors@UCSD.Edu
- Reply-To: Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu
- Precedence: Bulk
- Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #359
- To: Ham-Policy
-
-
- Ham-Policy Digest Mon, 8 Aug 94 Volume 94 : Issue 359
-
- Today's Topics:
- What happened in 1987? (2 msgs)
- What is wrong with ha
-
- Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu>
- Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Policy-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
- Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
-
- Archives of past issues of the Ham-Policy Digest are available
- (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy".
-
- We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
- herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
- policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
-
- Date: 8 Aug 1994 02:32:04 GMT
- From: cs.utexas.edu!news.tamu.edu!furuta@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: What happened in 1987?
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- In article <bmicales.204.2E45850A@facstaff.wisc.edu>,
- Bruce Micales <bmicales@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote:
- >reading the FCC rules. The only thing that I can say was yes there was a
- >further simplification in 1991. This is when the FCC created the
- >Technician ("no-code Tech") and therefore dropped the 5 wpm element (1A).
-
- There was no change in the written exam when the NoCode Tech license was
- created. It's self evident that 1A was no longer required (why call it NoCode
- otherwise :-) ), but the element 2 and 3a tests were unchanged, HF questions
- and all.
-
- --Rick
- KE3IV
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Sun, 7 Aug 94 23:28:18 -0500
- From: news.delphi.com!usenet@uunet.uu.net
- Subject: What happened in 1987?
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- Michael Silva <mjsilva@ted.win.net> writes:
-
- >I, among others, have been guilty of lumping the easing of the Tech
- >written (in 1987) with the creation of the no-code Tech (it's part of
- >the vernacular, guys!) in 1991. Would someone who knows the whys and
- >wherefores please explain why the Tech written was simplified? Did it
- >all happen in 1987, or was there further simplification in 1991? What
- >was the justification?
-
- As part of the "Novice Enhancement" rulemaking in 1987, in which the FCC
- revised Novice and Technician privileges, the Commission added questions to
- the Novice syllabus to reflect the new privileges and divided the single
- Technician/General syllabus into two separate exams to, in its view, have
- each exam better reflect the different privileges granted by the two
- licenses.
-
- ------------------------------
-
- Date: Wed, 3 Aug 94 22:42:00 -0800
- From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!iat.holonet.net!alley.com!john.hiatt@network.ucsd.edu
- Subject: What is wrong with ha
- To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu
-
- DZC>Hey bud! Your callsign, K0TER, sounds like "Cooter", that character
- DZC>from The Dukes Of Hazard. I think he was the policeman. Anyways, it
- DZC>made me laugh.
-
- Cooter was the gas station attendant/mechanic. You thinking of Rosco
- Pecole Train or whatever his name was.
-
- John
-
- ---
- * OLX 2.1 TD * It took an hour to bury the cat. Silly thing kept moving
-
- ------------------------------
-
- End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #359
- ******************************
-