QRZ! Ham Radio 4/QRZ Ham Radio Callsign Database - Volume 4.iso/digests/policy/940522.txt

Internet Message Format | 1994-11-13 | 8.3 KB

Date: Mon,  7 Nov 94 04:30:30 PST
From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup <[e-mail]>
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: List
Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #522
To: Ham-Policy


Ham-Policy Digest           Mon,  7 Nov 94       Volume 94 : Issue  522

Today's Topics:
                 5wpm in 5days (or your money back!)
                   Operating Privileges in Ireland
           Re: Even a blind pig finds an acorn now and then
                    Re: Questions on this and that

Send Replies or notes for publication to: <[e-mail]>
Send subscription requests to: <[e-mail]>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to [e-mail].

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: Sun, 6 Nov 1994 11:21:45 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman)
Subject: 5wpm in 5days (or your money back!)

Erich Franz Stocker <[e-mail]> writes:

>[e-mail] writes:

>> Five days to get to 5wpm? I guess that just about kills the ``It's
>> too difficult'' argument!

>Jeff don't think you have been following that argument well.  The
>ease or difficulty of learning code and getting up to speed are
>solely individual dependent not some constant value.

Well Erich, for over two years I have placed myself in the middle
of the argument, and many in the nocode camp have shown they don't
want to learn code because it's too difficult.
But, *no one* is lacking the ability to learn 5wpm
(the dots and dashes can be written down at that speed then decoded)
and the `5wpm in 5days' gives a lower bound (but not necessarily the
GLB!) on the amount of time needed.

I've said that while I was attending USCG Radioman's school those
unable to pass the 22wpm speed were a tiny fraction of those who
passed. The students were folks off the street with no particular
love nor hate of Morse.

>Some people learn code and rhythmic things very well and others don't.
>Had a member of my signal company who had been a morse intercept
>operator, he was able to learn code in a few hours and was up above
>15wpm within a week.  Everything was easy for him.  On the other hand
>you have already heard from people who have been plugging away at code
>consistently for years and still don't have 13 wpm.

And I'm wondering if these people are using their Novice 5wpm on
the air having fun building their speed, or sitting in front of
a computer terminal boringly trying to build their speed. I believe
we can mentally program ourselves not to achieve certain goals just
to `prove' to others those goals are unreachable. Learning code as
with learning mathematics has everything to do with one's frame of
mind.


>Regardless of what some people think, everyone has a different
>learning curve for different things.  So for some its easy and for
>some its too difficult.  The issue still rests on whether the code is
>really required to be an efficient, technologically advanced, highly
>skilled amateur communicator who fulfills public service
>responsibilities.

And for those wishing to carry out public service duties they
can now get on the air without knowing the code.


Jeff NH6IL

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 6 Nov 1994 05:31:11 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman)
Subject: Operating Privileges in Ireland

I always find it interesting what other countries require in the
way of licensing and operating.  Enclosed is a brief description of
Ireland's methods:

>Here in EI land us new "A" liciencee's are restricted to 40,20
>15 and 10 mtrs, cw only, 25wts max. (this is after passing the 12 wpm test).
>The choice then is to either wait a year on vhf and get the full gallon
>by default or complete 250 CW HF QSO's with 25 QSL's and get it then.
>Hopefully I will knock off the remaining 95 QSO's the next weedend that I
>get back home.

This appeared in the QRP email newsgroup.

Jeff NH6IL

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 01 Nov 1994 09:56:00 EST
From: [e-mail] (Dan Pickersgill)
Subject: Re: Even a blind pig finds an acorn now and then

Earl=Morse%EMC=Srvc%Eng=[e-mail] writes:

>
>
>>In article <38honm$[e-mail]>,
>>gregory brown <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>Dan Pickersgill ([e-mail]) wrote:
>>>
>>>stuff deleted
>>>
>>>: Or is your point to ELIMINATE the 5 WPM and 13 WPM test and require yearly
>>>: recertificitation of the 20 WPM test for HF access. I will support this
>>>: idea, so long as it includes yearly or bi-yearly retesting.
>>>
>>>: Dan N8PKV
>>>: --
>>>
>>>Sounds good to me, Dan.  Glad you are willing to go along with it.
>>>Oh, by the way, if this ever comes to pass I'll be sure to drop in on
>>>the Novice sub-bands once in a while and help you with your code, as
>>>any polite ham would.  _KB8PKV_ DE WB0RTK 73
>>
>>Wow Dan, something else we agree upon! I second the motion. Call for votes?
>
>
>Can't believe Dan supports that.  Must be part of a "If I can't have it, nobody can"
>mentality.    For once I can agree with Dan.
>
>Earl Morse
>KZ8E
>[e-mail]
>

If you think you can sell retesting to the amateur community at large, you
are free to waste your time trying. But I hate to tell you that it "ain't
gonna happen".

Either manual morse is so poor a mode that it needs government
intervention (like welfare) to support it. Or is is a valid mode that can
stand on its own. You can't have it both ways.

Personally I oppose welfare style support of anything, perfering the free
market place to allow those things that are the most effective to flourish
and those that are not, to wither on the vine.

73,

Dan N8PKV
--
Not one single person has been prosecuted as a result of the Brady Law.
- Asst. Atty. Gen. Jo Ann Harris
No decline in crime has been noted. - BATF Assoc. Dir. Charles Thompson
  7 Months and Counting.......... (Stay tuned for "The Big Lie - Part II")

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 2 Nov 1994 04:50:46 GMT
From: [e-mail] (Jeffrey Herman)
Subject: Re: Questions on this and that

Earl=Morse%EMC=Srvc%Eng=[e-mail] writes:

>>Bill Sohl  Budd Lake <[e-mail]> wrote:

>>>This (the shave & a haircut story) sounds like pure myth to me.
>>>Anyone have any actual references (i.e. QST articles/story) to
>>>back up this claim?  Not meant as a flame, just want to
>>>validate this story.

>>Hi Bill, I can tell it like it was in the early 50's when I was a Novice
>>(WN5DXP). The shave-and-a-haircut...six-bits thing was not used in place
>>of a CQ. It was used only at the very end of a CW QSO after both stations
>>had signed their 73's. It went like this:
>>
>>Station#1: ... 73 73 shave-and-a-haircut
>>
>>Station#2: six-bits  shave-and-a-haircut
>>
>>Station#1: six-bits
>>
>>Over the years the shave-and-a-haircut part has been dropped and only the
>>six-bits part remains. But in the early 50's, the majority of Novices signed
>>as Stations 1 & 2 above. I've never heard shave-and-a-haircut used in place
>>of CQ but I was inactive on CW from the mid-50's to the mid-80's.

>Sounds right to me.  We were doing this in the novice bands in the late 70's
>and early 80s.

Alright - I'll ask Chuck Adams K5FO to QSY to here to confirm this
story; he's the one who originally mentioned it over on the QRP
emailgroup.

Jeff NH6IL

------------------------------

Date: 6 Nov 1994 14:44:44 GMT
From: [e-mail] (William J Turner)

References<[e-mail]> <39dksh$[e-mail]>, <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: 5wpm in 5days (or your money back!)

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Well Erich, for over two years I have placed myself in the middle
>of the argument, and many in the nocode camp have shown they don't
>want to learn code because it's too difficult.


And many of the pro-testing camp have shown they are unwilling to give
or listen to rational arguments...

------------------------------

End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #522
******************************