[CW] Preparation FCC - Reduces testing terror

[Gregory W. Moore]

GE, All

David, thanks much for your (as usual) right on target observations.  As 
you (David) knows, I am an advanced
class ham, which may seem funny, because I hold a Navy Speed Key 
Certificate (CLF-23).  This is due to
a rather weird circumstance.

I started out my ham life as a Conditional, having passed the exam in 
Newfoundland, at NAVCOMMSTA
Argentia, Nfld (NWP) also the USCG Ice Patrol Station (NIK/NJN). 
Although there was no problem with either the code portion of the exam 
or the theory on my part, when I returned to the states, I had the 
feeling that I wanted to get the tickets before an FCC examiner, even 
though the Naval Officers who examined me for my conditional were above 
reproach, I didn't want anyone to claim that favoritism had been 
practiced, either in the code, or the theory.  I wanted, also, to go 
thru the whole series of licenses at the time (General, Advanced, 
Extra). Therefore, I went to the FCC in Philly, and announced my 
intentions. After some shock, they gave in, and I was allowed to take 
the Advanced class exam, and also was allowed to re-take the General 
class 13WPM code test in front of an official FCC examiner. Yes, I 
passed, hansomely..  as soon as my ticket arrived, I went back down and 
wanted to take Extra, and as David can tell you, I passed the 20 WPM 
code easily, but blew the theory.  OK, so I was an advanced.. There I stayed

I remained advanced class for many years, career, marriage, and the 
usual diversions of life getting in the way of upgrading.  When I 
finally reached the point where the license became important to me 
again, the FCC, alas had gone thru the restructuring, and was 
downgrading the CW requirement.  At that point, I saw absolutely NO 
point in testing for extra, since I felt rather unique, rather a 
chimera, being an "Advanced" something which was no more.  I felt, and 
still feel, that testing for extra at 5 wpm is meaningless for me.

Since I have suffered some severe head trauma, frankly, I'm not so sure 
I wouldn''t make a fool of myself taking the written, as I have a 
tendency to "freeze" under stress, even though the answers would be in 
my mind, they woudn't come out of my pencil properly. Again, David can 
back me up here --hi--.

Prep Time????  I think that the "old" method was better.  To truly take 
the written and pass same, I feel that one shouldn't just learn the 
answers from a test book. The only reason one should learn from a test 
book, or go to a seminar, is in many cases, the official answers are 
wrong (I.E. the real correct answer is marked "wrong" and the wrong 
answer is marked "correct"), and one has to learn the test to pass it, 
then go back and perform the real correct answers  in the real world 
(This is true in aviation testing , I can't say if it's true in the FCC 
tests) It's been some time since I took either an FAA written or an FCC 
written, so maybe I'm off base here.

The time preparing for the next class of license should and was spent 
operating, building equipment, learning by doing, and oh yes, studying, 
not just a "horse" but actual textbooks, so one did know the difference 
between a Hartley and Colpitts oscillator, what effect an open cap would 
have on plate current.  What happens in the different classes of 
amplifiers, etc..  Having it down cold shouln't be a white knuckles, 
night sweating, ordeal.  It should be an easy "Hey, I've been working 
with this, and it should take whatever amount of time it takes. Call it 
On the Job Training.  as the ad for Nike (TM) says "Just Do It".. if you 
work with electronics and radio, the tests could and will be familiar 
territory, just as David has elequently expounded below.  I don't 
believe current applicants spend the amount of time that David has 
stated whatsoever.  There are even video courses similar to the FAA 
"study for the written" courses, out there, as a matter of fact, taught 
by the same people, that teach the test.  One takes the video course, 
and presumably, can walk in to the VE and have the test cold, since they 
basically have studied all the variations to the questions and the 
answers thereto. No actual knowlege required, just stare at the tube for 
X number of hours...

Preparation and learning? What's that??

73 de Greg "GW" Moore WA3IVX/NNN0BVN

David J. Ring, Jr. wrote:

>N2EY observed:
>
>"The 2000 restructuring not only eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code tests but 
>also reduced the written testing by almost half. "
>
>Oh, I admit it.  You're right.  But if that still isn't easy enough - I'm a 
>victim - CW gives me a headache.  I spent 3 hours learning the answers for 
>Extra, but since the answers aren't given for the damn code test, I  can't 
>pass it with 3 hours study.  These type of comments I hear make me feel like 
>I'm living in "The Outer Limits" or at least "The Twilight Zone"
>
>As I've said before - the CW test is the easiest part of the exams - if you 
>don't think so - perhaps the way you took the exam is the reason.
>
>I believe the old estimate of how much effort was needed to pass the theory 
>or code was that it took about RATIO three times the number of hours of 
>study on the theory to pass as it did to pass the code test.  And remember 
>the code test of old included sending on a straight key.
>
>It took about three months of serious study to get the Novice.   Serious 
>study:  10 to 15 hours a week at least - two hours a night - plus a three 
>hour a week classroom experience".  My students I told to play the "morse 
>code translation" game while driving or taking the bus - look at a sign, 
>license plate, etc. and send it in morse!
>
>it took a total of six months of serious study to get to the General - and a 
>bit less for the Technician which didn't require the 13 wpm code.
>
>Extra required two years of experience - two years of being exposed to 
>radio - repair problems, antenna problems, discussions on the air, making 
>antennas, accessories, transmitters, receivers, etc.  The I'd imagine it 
>took an additional 3 months to "sharpen" up and prepare to test.  That is 
>make sure you could take a pen and copy 20 wpm and send it without errors, 
>and to go re-read the Handbook and "Fundamentals of Radio" books to make 
>sure you remembered the difference beween Hartley and Pierce oscillators, 
>phasing lines, heights of various ionospheric layers, RTTY, TV, etc.  So a 
>total of 2 years of independant study, 6 months needed for General plus 3 
>more months.
>
>Is this the amount of preparation that current applicants do?
>
>73
>
>David N1EA
>
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: <N2EY at aol.com>
>But after about the mid-1970s, the watering-down began. How could incentive 
>licensing succeed when, little by little, the requirements were eased?
>
>First the FCC decided not to go after the publisher of the Bash books. No 
>more experience requirement for Extra. Then they gave up giving the tests 
>and made the question pools public info. The sending test went away, the 
>General/Tech
>written was split in two, CSCEs, medical waivers, and more. The 2000 
>restructuring not only eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code tests but also 
>reduced the written testing by almost half.
>
>_______________________________________________
>CW mailing list
>CW at mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>
>  
>


-- 
GREGORY W. MOORE NNN0BVN
NCS/SHARES/ALE


nnn0bvn at navymars.org