[AMRadio] Comment to a comment

[Jack Dayton]

Good Morning,

I'm not included in that Filter Scheme, I never did buy that idea you are who you are
In the early 70's when my interest in Radio electronics was growing large I was always 

wondering around the neighborhoods looking for junk tv's and I built up a 1 crystal CW 

rig for 40 meter I bootlegged that thing to death..an I got lucky my Uncle on Dads side 

had a Hally sx99 and wanted to know if the family Genius wanted it...that's what he called
me. Man it was xmas in the spring of 71....LOL....I pounded more brass unlicensed  than 

I did Licensed....Imagine that...Back then it was what I liked to do...Being a Boy Scout I 

learned what I needed to know..whether it was right or wrong didn't matter I got the patch.


73
Jack
KA3ZLR



________________________________
From: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo at gmail.com>
To: Discussion of AM Radio in the Amateur Service <amradio at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Tuesday, November 1, 2011 6:43 PM
Subject: Re: [AMRadio] Comment to a comment

I disagree and here is why.  First, let me say that for some time I
was in favor of doing away with CW testing.   I changed my mind
because I realized that knowing CW is an important part of the basic
building process.   How is this?  The most elementary (legal)
transmitter is one that generates a continuous wave.  If you put a
value on what is gained by building such a  transmitter then without
CW there is no fulfilment in placing it on the air and using it to
communicate.  I believe we are better off by encouraging new hams to
experience some basic building along the lines of what was set forth
in the old How to Become a Radio Amateur book the ARRL published, but
the whole package depends on having CW as a basic skill by the time
such a rig is ready to fire up and operate.  You can say that any one
who wishes to do so can learn CW and do this now, but having it as a
requirement to get a license insures that by the time an experimenter
is ready to try out his work and get some feeling of accomplishment,
he has the basic (i.e. slow) CW skill ready to use.

Currently I think new hams are steered towards VHF FM and CB style
communications and this has led to many hams getting bored and losing
interest.  We need to go back to fostering electronics education and
building and starting new hams out on HF.   CW is an important part of
that.  No test of any time can "filter out poor character and
unethical behavior" and that was never the intent of any FCC testing
in the past as far as I know.  But an examination of some level of
rigor can serve to attract people with a passion and love of radio and
a curiosity of the science of radio.

73

Rob
K5UJ

>
> On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 4:12 PM, Kim Elmore <cw_de_n5op at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> But, the idea that we can generate a test, of any kind, that will filter out poor character and unethical behavior is fiction.
>
> Which is part of the reason the FCC chose to remove the requirement,
> as noted in their comments. Anyone who remembers listening to
> WA4Doggie, "Fuzzy Zulu" and others from decades ago who passed the 13
> or 20wpm test understand this all too well.
>
> The next project here is a 10m dipole in order to join in the fun of
> excellent band conditions. Too many equipment repairs to list!
>
> ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
______________________________________________________________
Our Main Website: http://www.amfone.net
AMRadio mailing list
Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/amradio@mailman.qth.net/
List Rules (must read!): http://w5ami.net/amradiofaq.html
List Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/amradio
Post: AMRadio at mailman.qth.net
To unsubscribe, send an email to amradio-request at mailman.qth.net with
the word unsubscribe in the message body.

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html