Has Ham Radio become too easy?

[vagrant]

Originally Posted by zz0468

Any benefit would be hard to measure, but the cost of implementing it would be easy to figure out. It's not likely to ever come about because it's not an important enough issue, and it's not really solving any particular existing problem. Why penalize an 80 year old extra who happened to be bright enough to develop some key piece of radar technology in the 50's, because he's too old to remember (or learn?) exactly how DDS synthesizers work?

You bring up an interesting point. Why penalize someone from operating at a particular operating privilege, if they cannot remember, nor able to learn exactly how DDS synthesizers work.

[LtDoc]

No difference between testing under the VE system and at the FCC Field Office? Oh mercy, you must never have been to the little green room in Dallas! Did that 'green room' testing three times, twice for the ham test and once for a commercial. Passed the CW just fine both times, got the commercial too. Failed miserably with the General written. Lived too close to take the Conditional, so that was it.
Later, got back into the hobby and glad I did.
There was a 'huge' difference between the Dallas FCC office and VE exams. Same written and code, but much less stressful. It was all that crew cut, grey haired, bow tie and suspendered guy's fault down there in that green room! I blame him anyway...
- 'Doc

[KS4VT]

I know the current General pool is more difficult than it previously was. I have heard some of the local techs complain that it is now harder than the previous pool. The exam committee, who ask the amateur license population for questions to provide to the FCC, actually listened and put in harder questions.

I haven't looked at the Tech pool lately and can't comment on those, but what I personally don't like are the groups (e.g. CERT) that directs an inidividual to get their license as they were "chosen" to be the comms guy, yet they have no interest in radio at all (license by assignment). That artificially inflates the numbers, yet the person never gets on the air so they are not really active.

[perrybucsdad]

I have taken sample tests of both the General (after passing my Tech) and the Extra (online sample test only) and I was impressed with the difficulty of the questions. Now granted, I almost passed the general on my first try, but I chalk that up to nothing more that pure luck and some educated guesses. I know one general license holder who told me he had to take the general exam I believe he said 5 times. That seems like a lot to me for General, but maybe he just doesn't test well.

I guess the thing is how difficult do we want to make it vs how difficult do we need to make it. I think the question above of "what bands can I transmit on" is one extreme, and thankfully, I think that is the minority of people who have their tech license. I may not know off the top of my head all the frequencies that I can transmit on, but I do know where to go find the band plan chart on the ARRL site and other sites. In reading many of the comments above, I can see that making the Tech easy enough to pass by most people with some studying is a good idea, but also limit what bands you can operate on. I think that is accomplished by keeping the VHF & UHF frequencies fairly open to the tech and a very small window of AM SSB for 10 Meter. If you want more than that, then study up, and it will be granted.

I want to get on HF badly, but for now I am satisfied with just the VHF & UHF bands and will put my time in to learn the requirements for the next step.

[W2NJS]

In New York City years ago we had to trek to the FCC office on Christopher Street, 'way down in the West Village, which was a cold walk from the subway on a winter day. The FCC office was a sparsely furnished place, with all wooden furniture and a crew of older gentlemen who always treated us kids with respect and, believe it or not, some humor at times. They were also very fair, and when I first failed my 13WPM test they let me retake it immediately, but I failed the second time, too, so they told me to go home and practice some more. At this time ALL FCC exams were given at the FCC's office, and it was only later that the offsite testing programs began. By now Mr. Howell and his FCC crew have all gone to that great hamfest in the sky but I'll always remember the excitement, and the extreme case of nerves, one got when going to Manhattan for FCC exams.

[sloop]

In answer to the question...yes and no...as a VE I think that the questions have not necessarily become harder, they just cover a wider range of material than they did when I was first licensed. The problem I feel is that in an effort to "attract" new amateurs we have "dumb down" the procedure to the point that anyone with a good memory can memorize the test questions and pass the test (including extra) without knowing how the radio (or antenna) actually works. Because of this we have more and more "appliance operators" and fewer 'true' amateurs that at least could tell a resistor from a capacitor! I think that this is evident from some of the post that appear on this site. How can anyone pass a test and not know what frequency to operate on or who can use their station (license)? How many of the newer hams can use a VTVM, a dummy load, an oscilloscope, a grid dip meter, or even an swr meter much less know what they are. Maybe I lead a sheltered life but I doubt that many of the new hams can pick up a copy of QST and understand anything in it other than the ads. Now, before I have anyone jumping up and down having a fit please note that I said in my opinion and the word many (NOT ALL) when referring to the 'new generation' of HAMS.

[elk2370bruce]

Originally Posted by LtDoc

No difference between testing under the VE system and at the FCC Field Office? Oh mercy, you must never have been to the little green room in Dallas! Did that 'green room' testing three times, twice for the ham test and once for a commercial. Passed the CW just fine both times, got the commercial too. Failed miserably with the General written. Lived too close to take the Conditional, so that was it.
Later, got back into the hobby and glad I did.
There was a 'huge' difference between the Dallas FCC office and VE exams. Same written and code, but much less stressful. It was all that crew cut, grey haired, bow tie and suspendered guy's fault down there in that green room! I blame him anyway...
- 'Doc

I remember my first visit to the NYC field office vividly! Went to take my cw test and was given the hairy evil eye by the FCC examiner with his massive lit stogy in his mouth. Totally intimidating to a 14 year old!

[vagrant]

Originally Posted by elk2370bruce

I remember my first visit to the NYC field office vividly! Went to take my cw test and was given the hairy evil eye by the FCC examiner with his massive lit stogy in his mouth. Totally intimidating to a 14 year old!

You misunderstood his look. It was of bewilderment and envy.

[profiledescent]

Originally Posted by bearcat012

but they should have kept the CW for the Extra. Something to work for, rather than just give it away. Flame away.............

No flames, just questions.

Why is CW still seen at the separator of the men from the boys? Why not ATV? D-STAR? PACTOR? EME?

I know HAMs who passed CW, and some who did not, who are all competent operators and very knowledgable in various scopes of the hobby. If one must pass a CW test to get the license, why shouldn't they also be required to demonstrate assembly and operation of an ATV station? Some other mode/device?

We are a diverse hobby. We have everyone from PhDs to GEDs, CW wizards to kids who can make a computer run an RF circuit, the microwave oven, and print their homework simultaneously. So why should the kid be forced to learn CW if he has no use or interest? Why should the CW wizard be forced to learn ATV, D-STAR, or DMR if he has no interest. I only see this need to grade, exclude, or control other operators coming from those who insist that CW is some golden standard. (Maybe an occasional P25 guy :-) )

We can only grow the hobby if we broaden our knowledge, and include knowledge brought by all who are interested, not just those who are interested in our personal operating preferences and knowledge. Otherwise, we'd still be using spark gap.

73

[VE3CRO]

profile, you do have a point however the fact remains that your license authorizes you to use CW on the relevent band segments. The modes you mention don't require nearly the skill/learning curve that that CW does. To carry your arguement to the nth degree one could put forth the view that because one is only interested in PK31 (or any one of more than a dozen other modes) there should be a special license authorizing that mode only. Impossible to implement and police.

[Sccafire]

I am one of the newer-bees. I have had my Tech license since 2010. I studied by taking the on-line practice exams. I then went to an informal class. This is where I learned why the answer is the answer. I just didn’t want to memorize everything and just pass. I passed the Tech test and was given a chance to take the General test. I politely told them “no.” Again, I didn’t want to pass not knowing “why.” Plus I would have failed miserably.

As far as usage, I rarely use my radio. I am involved in a local Jeep club. We sponsor an annual event and using HAM for communications is a lot better than using a CB. The HAM is for the members (event staff) to stay in contact between main camp and the trail. On the trail CB is used by the participants. The CB will actually not work at all due to the distance and terrain to be able to talk to main camp. Also, a very popular 4WD trail local to me has a 70cm repeater located on it. That repeater is linked to a 2m repeater. A lot of Licensed users use the HAM radio to “check in” while out on the trail with either a friend or family member. The 70cm repeater will also let you be able to talk from one end of the trail to the other. A CB would not be able to do that. We also use HAM on our own club functions. We also participate every year and volunteer for a MS Walk as HAM radio operators.

Guess what I am trying to say is there are or could be a lot of people getting their Tech license and not fully using the license to its full potential. I know me personally, I am happy with a Tech license and at this point do not plan to further pursue the hobby to its full potential. That could change down the road and if/when I am ready to progress further into amateur radio I will.

[Fuzy_GSXR1000]

After reading this thread I need to start studying again for my general ticket.

[bearcat012]

Originally Posted by profiledescent

No flames, just questions.

Why is CW still seen at the separator of the men from the boys? Why not ATV? D-STAR? PACTOR? EME? 73

CW did separate the men from the boys, It took dedication, study, and hard work to learn CW. There were those that spent as much time making excuses on why they couldn't learn CW. "I can't" "I can't" "Waaaaah". BS, I call lazy for most. As I stated earlier, I am not a big fan of CW, I don't use it. My point is there should be a demonstration of proficiency for the top class license other that memorizing multiple choice questions.

[elk2370bruce]

Originally Posted by VE3CRO

profile, you do have a point however the fact remains that your license authorizes you to use CW on the relevent band segments. The modes you mention don't require nearly the skill/learning curve that that CW does. To carry your arguement to the nth degree one could put forth the view that because one is only interested in PK31 (or any one of more than a dozen other modes) there should be a special license authorizing that mode only. Impossible to implement and police.

I know of a great many "no-code" licensees who discovered cw as a chalenging and fun aspect of the hobby. I also know a number of curmodgeons who may know the code but can't tell the difference between a diode and a "sel-en-um rectal-flyer. There is room for all of us - whether the casual repeater user, to the true experimenter that was the original intent of the licensing all the way back to the H. Percy Maxim who invented the machine gun. So long as you do your thing, learn as you go, and do it right, our avocation will continue to prosper.

[Robinsmark]

Do you remember if the FCC moved or not? I took my test at Varick St.

[Robinsmark]

No I have never been to Dallas. I passed all my FCC tests on the 1st try. That is WHY I see little difference between test sites other than the inconvenience of parking in NY. Both were proctored. However I met my match when I tried Law School... WOW!

[VE3CRO]

Originally Posted by elk2370bruce

I know of a great many "no-code" licensees who discovered cw as a chalenging and fun aspect of the hobby. I also know a number of curmodgeons who may know the code but can't tell the difference between a diode and a "sel-en-um rectal-flyer. There is room for all of us - whether the casual repeater user, to the true experimenter that was the original intent of the licensing all the way back to the H. Percy Maxim who invented the machine gun. So long as you do your thing, learn as you go, and do it right, our avocation will continue to prosper.

Agreed

[TheSpaceMan]

Both the Tech and the General tests are quite easy, and almost anyone who studies and memorizes the practice exams can pass. Ham radio is a hobby, not a career where one should be expected or required to know vast amounts of technical knowledge in order to perform in their jobs.

[n9mxq]

My thoughts are that it's too easy to come on a forum, such as this one, and ask how to operate something. I've hardly ever read a manual on one of my rigs. I enjoy the "figuring out" process too much.


Sent from my iPhone using that Tapatalk thingamabobber.

[MTS2000des]

Well, I qualified for QCWA membership a couple years ago, in two years, I will have been a licensed active ham for 30 years of my 38 year old life, so here's my take:

I do see a definite "dumbing down" of some new licensees, but I don't attribute this to the exams- I think it's more indicative of the "internet age" where a Google search and quick gratification are the norm. In the past, you had to study book(s), or get with others and take a class- today we have "ham crams- get your license in a day" sessions, where one day an 8-hour marathon class, exam the next. It's just simple NOT possible for the average person to retain the vast amount of information in such a short amount of time.

The result are many new folks who make some real blunders and "lid like" behavior. Recently, a new ham was heard on a local repeater "handing out" a second radio to his friend, allowing his "friend" to transmit "third party traffic" from another location. I kindly informed him he should check the rules, that such third party traffic is pretty cut and dry- you are either at the control point or you aren't- he seemed kind of taken back. I almost wanted to ask "wasn't that question on your test?" Furthermore, this same operator was heard overkeying another ham making comments- again he was called on his behavior- and became very upset about being corrected (politely) by a fellow ham on air. I tried to explain the amateur radio service is self-policing to a degree, that we look out for each other, and that we are here to help and guide. But it is clear that this person, like many I have heard, clearly do NOT have a solid foundation for what the very basis and purpose of amateur radio is.

What we must do is make it a point to guide these many new folks to better understand the rules, the community, and the spirit that is amateur radio. It's easier said than done, but in this modern age of one-click gratification, it's a challenge for us who have "been around the block" not to get frustrated and drive away new hams who DO have a desire to learn, and improve their skills and abilities.