At 08:08 PM 3/3/97 -0500, you wrote:
>What you say about sending speed is true -- the issue, though, is how well
>can we send. The purpose of the original sending test was so you could
>demonstrate to the examiner that you could send recognizable code. The FCC
>examiners used to give you a page from a book or magazine and have you start
>sending. If you were competent you never had to send much more than 20 or
>30 seconds. I doubt if it will burden the VE teams much and it just might
>improve what we hear on the air.
>
>
I would be curious as to what grounds you would fail a sender?
too slow? Inaccurate? sloppy style?
The first two are pretty cut and dry like the receiving tests and
written exams.
But sloppy style is subjective and I can see VE's spending a lot of time
arguing with those he or she failed.
As far as the argument that if you can pass the receiving test you can
pass the sending test..we have a few , what I call 'no code' extras in
the area who couldn't have possibly passed the written part of the code
test based on the what was on their copy sheets but managed to guess 80
per cent of the exam questions right.
How's that for middle of the road commentary?
Brian AE9K
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
The day antennas are oultawed only outlaws will have antennas!
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]