[CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License

Wed May 22 22:47:41 EDT 2013

Hans K0HB wrote:

I hold in low esteem, nay in high disdain, anyone who depends on 
published answers to achieve recognition for their ?skills?...
I would be ashamed if my appointment came 
from memorization of a published set of answers.

 I wondered how long it would take for the insults to start - this is to be expected on any internet forum or email mailing list.  Fortunately I couldn't care less about your disdain for me - I know my method of study has merit and caused me to learn new things.  And learning was my main goal - getting "an appointment" as you put it was only a secondary result. 

I would suggest to you that using the FCC question pool as a guide to the topics one needs to study is nothing to be ashamed of.  My method of study was work my way through the question list, research any questions that covered topics that were unfamiliar to me.  It is then necessary to have the list of the answers the FCC is expecting - my 37 years of experience and my research sometimes produced an answer that did not match the FCC's choice.  A significant number of th FCC answers are incorrect in the real world - if you want to pass the test and get the license then you have to work within their limitations. 

Have you looked at my notes on the question pool document?  If you do you'll see what I'm talking about.

Steve 

sbjohnston at aol.com
http://www.wd8das.net/
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Radio is your best entertainment value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: cw-request <cw-request at mailman.qth.net>
To: cw <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wed, May 22, 2013 1:15 am
Subject: CW Digest, Vol 109, Issue 20

Send CW mailing list submissions to
	cw at mailman.qth.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	cw-request at mailman.qth.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
	cw-owner at mailman.qth.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of CW digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: New RadioTelegraph Operator License (Radio K0HB)
   2. Re: New RadioTelegraph Operator License (D.J.J. Ring, Jr.)
   3. Re: New RadioTelegraph Operator License (Kate Hutton)

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

Message: 1
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 04:57:14 -0000
From: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb at gmail.com>
To: "CW Reflector" <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License
Message-ID: <B81DC8C38D66441BB8BEFADADCC88CF9 at PICKETPOST>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Used to be that the reason for a test was to determine the knowledge level of 
the applicant.  I hold in low esteem, nay in high disdain, anyone who depends on 
published answers to achieve recognition for their ?skills?.

I went through 8 levels of written tests and many levels of ?practical skills? 
testing to be appointed a Master Chief Radioman in the US Navy.  I would be 
ashamed if my appointment came from memorization of a published set of answers.

I certainly would not lavish high praise on a public official who made those 
answers public.

Old fashioned, I guess.

72, de Hans, K0HB

From: D.J.J. Ring, Jr. 
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 4:31 AM
To: CW Reflector 
Subject: Re: [CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License
I misunderstood Rolfe when he spoke about the answers were in the back in the 
W5YI / NRE booklet as meaning that the FCC didn't have the answers on the web 
page. 

It seems that also my words about Ghassan Khalek of the FCC were wrong also, 
contrary to what I wrote, he did get the answers to Element 6 up on the FCC 
site.  Thanks Khassan, you are a man of your word - and that is something that I 
hold in great esteem and that I find to be regrettably uncommon these days.  You 
are what you say you are and did what you say you did.  My faith in you should 
have never wavered, you are steadfast and loyal.

Incidentally, Ghassan is a supporter of marine radiotelegraphy saying to me and 
others that if it is allowed in FCC rules, it will continue to be allowed and he 
has resisted efforts to eliminate that mode from marine communications 
authorizations!  As they say in Maine (and elsewhere!) "Finest Kind".

73
DR

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
______________________________________________________________
CW mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/

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

=30=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20130522/0a1e008c/attachment-0001.html>

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

Message: 2
Date: Wed, 22 May 2013 01:11:15 -0400
From: "D.J.J. Ring, Jr." <n1ea at arrl.net>
To: CW Reflector <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License
Message-ID:
	<CADO5Rbj3WCMQTY6jBjBUEHsOkQY+YfREdg01vQK3HjH4oWZ38Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The FCC is REQUIRED to make both the examination questions and answers
public.  With a quick search, all I could find was a reference to 8 FCC Rcd
at 1048-49 ? 14. which mentions COLEM (Commercial Examiners should give the
FCC input about the question pools, but it is the FCC itself who maintains
the question and answer pools for commercial exams unlike the amateur radio
service where this is done by the VEC's.

Sorry Hans, I agree with you, but it isn't the way it is anymore, sad to
say.

73

DR

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 12:57 AM, Radio K0HB <kzerohb at gmail.com> wrote:

>   Used to be that the reason for a test was to determine the knowledge
> level of the applicant.  I hold in low esteem, nay in high disdain, anyone
> who depends on published answers to achieve recognition for their ?skills?.
>
> I went through 8 levels of written tests and many levels of ?practical
> skills? testing to be appointed a Master Chief Radioman in the US Navy.  I
> would be ashamed if my appointment came from memorization of a published
> set of answers.
>
> I certainly would not lavish high praise on a public official who made
> those answers public.
>
> Old fashioned, I guess.
>
> 72, de Hans, K0HB
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20130522/ea9378c3/attachment-0001.html>

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

Message: 3
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 23:14:56 -0700
From: Kate Hutton <katehutton at gmail.com>
To: CW Reflector <cw at mailman.qth.net>
Subject: Re: [CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License
Message-ID:
	<CAJQ90SQ8+hh9KXCif5ckCvEWq-qwr89BR6uWPCS=hqd16ZB2Bg at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

I have been considering doing this ... for what reason?  Because it's
there, I guess. I have even talked about it with the guy who administers
the exams in my area.  He's waiting for me to tell him that I'm ready.

However, I'm a new enough ham that I will have to take the code test.  I
move NTS traffic routinely at 20 - 22 WPM, but I make mistakes under
pressure, so the test could be interesting.  My understanding is that,
unlike the amateur code exams, they test both sending & receiving.

I'm not sure if I have all the relevant written material.  I have the
booklet from W5YI that covers Radiotelegraph elements 5 & 6.  I also have
Gordon West's GROL + Radar book, which has its own element on radio law.
 Does that cover it all?

My main impediment is that I am on too many traffic nets & don't have much
time to study.

73 Kate K6HTN

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:31 AM, <sbjohnston at aol.com> wrote:

>   I'm proud to announce that the FCC granted my new RadioTelegraph
> Operator License yesterday.  It is number T000000001, so I am the very
> first to receive the new type of radiotelegraph ticket.  There doesn't
> seem to be a T000000002 yet, so apparently I am the *only* holder as
> well.  -grin-   That and $5 will buy me lunch at McDonalds.
>
> When the FCC announced the new radiotelegraph license structure in January(see 
below), I asked
> the FCC's helpdesk what elements would be needed for me to get the new
> ticket.  They confirmed that applicants for the new Radiotelegraph
> Operator License would be required to pass written elements 1 and 6, and
> telegraphy elements 1 and 2.  I hold an Amateur Extra class license issued
> before April 15, 2000, so my passing of that 20 wpm code test would
> substitute for Telegraphy Elements 1 and 2.  I also hold a General
> Radiotelephone Operator License (was originally a First-Phone), so that
> would cover written element 1.  That left me only needing to take the
> exam for written element 6.
>
> ETA was the only COLEM (the commercial equivalent of volunteer examiners) that
> responded to my email inquiries - none of the others even bothered to
> reply.  It took me three months to work out with ETA how to take the
> exam. Their examiners based at a nearby college apparently vanished
> without notice, and thus there was a lot of dead-end emailing and
> back-n-forth discussion. ETA finally offered the option to have a local
> library proctor the exam.  I made all the library arrangements and took
> the exam a couple weeks ago.  In just a few days ETA let me know I'd
> passed.  Then last week they told me they needed two signed passport photos
> for the application.  Fortunately I got their message when I was having lunch
> next door to a Walgreens that takes such photos, near a post office where
> I could mail them to ETA, all done in a half-hour or so.  ETA apparently
> received the pictures in time to submit my application on the first day
> the Commission was able to accept them, May 20.
>
> With the demise of commercial maritime CW, there is little practical use
> for a radiotelegraph ticket.  Except for museum-ships and historical club
> shore stations, there is little commercial Morse to be heard on the 
"ship-to-shore"
> bands.  Why bother with a new version of an antique license?  I appreciated
> the challenge of studying for a serious exam covering technology from a
> very wide time range - 1920s to 2000s, and I'd like to be able to operate
> one of the restored maritime stations some day.
>
> "Why do you want to climb Mount Everest?" George Mallory is famously
> quoted as having replied, "Because it's there".   It is unlikely I will climb
> Mount Everest, but I can always learn more about radio and electronics.
>
> 73   Steve WD8DAS
>
> sbjohnston at aol.com
> http://www.wd8das.net/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> Radio is your best entertainment value.
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Changes to FCC Radiotelegraph Operator Licenses Coming May 20
>
> *Effective May 20, 2013*<http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0419/DA-13-798A1.pdf>,
> the FCC will no longer accept applications for First (T1), Second (T2) or
> Third Class (T3) Radiotelegraph Operator Certificates. In addition, the FCC
> has consolidated the T1 and T2 Radiotelegraph Operator Certificates into a
> new license class called the Radiotelegraph Operator License (T). According
> to the FCC, this change takes effect upon renewal: T1s and T2s that are
> renewed on or after May 20, 2013 will be renewed as Ts, but existing T1s
> and T2s will retain their current license class for the duration of the
> current license term. The Commission also consolidated the T3 with Marine
> Radio Operator Permits (MP); T3s renewed on or after May 20, 2013 will be
> renewed as MPs, but existing T3s will retain their current license class
> for the duration of the current license term. These new rules were first
> announced in a *Report and Order* (*WT Docket No. 10-177*<http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022100656>),
> issued January 8, 2013.
>  - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> =30=
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20130521/18758593/attachment.html>

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

_______________________________________________
CW mailing list
CW at mailman.qth.net
http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw

End of CW Digest, Vol 109, Issue 20
***********************************

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20130522/c2a995a6/attachment-0001.html>