[Lowfer] Alternate Morse code test

Sun, 03 Aug 2003 10:13:40 -0400

Mike

Nice shot of your Dad's airplanes.

I've got a small amount of time in Ercoupes. We used to have a couple on the
field here. That was supposed to be the plane for the masses - was supposed to
replace the automobile. Imagine most of todays drivers flying an airplane. Very
scary thought.

I guess if the Feds feel the need to lower standards to accomodate the "dumbed
down" society I rather see amateur radio go down the tubes than aviation - the
outcome will be a whole lot safer.

Jay

WE0H wrote:

> Dang, could you imagine less than up to par pilots in fast experimentals
> flying at whatever altitude or heading they desired. It's bad enough with
> newspapers and autopilots these days.
>
> Mike Reid
> http://www.we0h.us/airplanes
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]
> On Behalf Of Jay Rusgrove
> Sent: Sunday, August 03, 2003 6:31 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [Lowfer] Alternate Morse code test
>
> Bill
>
> What other reason could there be? Just for the record I'm not an ARRL hater
> (worked there for 6 years) - I just disagree with their thought process.
>
> It's also interesting to note that there are fewer young people getting into
> flying - another activity that requires a federal license. Thank God that
> the
> Feds have not relaxed the requirements there!
>
> As Homer Simpson said a number of years ago, "If it's difficult to do, it's
> just
> not worth doing." Unfortuanely that has become the prevailing attitude.
>
> Jay
>
> Bill Ashlock wrote:
>
> > Jay, others:
> >
> > >Nice idea but it'll never happen. This is the membership boon the ARRL
> has
> > >been
> > >praying for. If you get a chance check out a 60's ARRL license manual.
> That
> > >will give you a
> > >good appreciation for how far we've gone downhill. The current theory
> part
> > >of
> > >the test is a complete joke by comparison. Now that the cw requirement is
> > >gone
> > >we are fully "dumbed down" and the "Good Buddy" floodgates are wide open.
> > >Breaker, breaker 14 200.
> >
> > I'm intrigued with all the comments about code speed and reduction of
> > technical understanding needed to pass the written portion of the exam as
> > the years increase.  Is the real motivation for making these changes an
> > effort to counteract the decreasing interest in Ham radio or some other
> > reason?  I suppose any discussion on the successes and/or failures of the
> > ARRL could REALLY swamp this reflector? I would hope the ARRL is having
> the
> > same internal discussion as we are having tonight, or is the current
> > leadership from a different persuasion? I find very minimal desire amongst
> > the younger set in this town (30k pop) to get into Ham radio, even though
> > the number of Hams here is at least 200. Not sure how many are active,
> > however.
> >
> > Bill A
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> >From the Lowfer mailing list
> Send messages to: [email protected]
> To sub/unsub visit: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/lowfer