December 2006 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[arrl-odv:14996] 05-235
by Karl Bullock 22 Dec '06

22 Dec '06

Greetings, and Merry Christmas! Like all of you, I've had my share of comments on the Morse elimination, and in our particular area of Creation, sentiment is strong against its elimination, not that it matters any more. Like many of you, as well, I took my first exams under an FCC examiner, some of who couldn't give a hoot whether you passed or not. I remember one particular examiner in Memphis who took delight in announcing the word "FAILED!" in a particularly loud voice. Needless to say it was an intimidating atmosphere. Yes, the exams today are tougher in content, but in those days, I, at least, didn't have a clue what would be on the test. Now, we're given exact wording in advance - which to me, basically puts todays exams on a par with those of yesteryear. More to the point, the thing that most are concerned about appear to fall into two categories: (1) Possible loss of CW as a mode entirely, and (2) CBerization (yep, my word) of Ham Radio. To the first point, I usually respond that CW will simply fall into line with the rest of the modes. It, like PSK, RTTY, ATV, and others, has an allure of its own, so I just don't see CW dying, though it may "fall from grace" somewhat since you don't need any particular skills to use the other modes. I've done a lot of thinking about the second point, though. Many looked at CW as the great equalizer. If you 'really' wanted to be a ham, CW was not a brick wall, and after all, humans tend to treasure that which they've had to work for. To whatever extent that may have been true, I think the written exams will serve as the filter for those who just want another CB. Loss of the CW testing requirement is not equal to loss of CW. It's still here. We just won't test people on it any more. As to the integrity of the service, hasn't that always been up to us anyway? If we really want to maintain the integrity of the service, we'll maintain it. If we compromise, we'll lose. It is no different than life in general. So, now we face a bold new future, both from a calendar perspective, and from the perspective of the future of our service in general. It is therefore incumbent upon us [licensees] to ensure that the folks we bring into the service are educated in its traditions, its rules, and its fraternity. Whatever side of the CW religious argument you were on, it has always been that way. The League must lead the way. From 5 acres on County Road 458 at the foot of Stubb's hill in Tippah County, North Mississippi, N5TBB and I wish all of you a Joyous Christmas and a Happy New Year. We'll see y'all in January. 73, Karl, WA5TMC -------------------------------------- "Of, By, and For..." - Not just words! Karl Bullock, WA5TMC ARRL Vice Director - Delta Division 321 CR 458 Ripley, MS 38663 662 512-8053

1 0

[arrl-odv:14995] Cycle 24
by Coy Day 22 Dec '06

22 Dec '06

Hi All, For those that haven't seen Dr Hathaway's prediction, here is the URL. There may be some exciting days ahead. I remember cycle 19. It was unbelievable! http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2006/21dec_cycle24.htm?list928837 Coy -- Coy Day, N5OK 20685 SW 29 Union City, OK 73090 405-483-5632

1 0

[arrl-odv:14994] Re: Airfares - Go Figure!
by dick＠pobox.com 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

21 DEC 2006 - 1430 CST Hello Andy... Now you know why bankrupt Delta Airlines is refusing twice-bankrupt U.S. Airways take-over bid. As short as Delta is on cash, etc., they don't want to be absorbed by or even partnered with (funny money) U.S. Airways. Happy Winter Solstice to all of you! I think the local papers say it happens today at 6:23 CST. 73 - Dick, W9GIG

1 0

[arrl-odv:14993] Fwd: Manassas Broadband Over Power Line Interference Complaints
by w3kd＠aol.com 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

Greetings. I have just now sent the following, with the attachment, to the FCC Enforcement Bureau, copies, as indicated, to include all commissioners. This filing was edited by President Harrison, EVP Sumner, CTO Rinaldo, and Lab Supervisor Ed Hare. We have the cooperation of the hams in Manassas on this as well. Let me konw any questions you have. I will be out of the office until the 29th of December, however. Happy Holidays to all. 73, Chris W3KD -----Original Message----- From: w3kd(a)aol.com To: Kris.Monteith(a)fcc.gov; Kathryn.Berthot(a)fcc.gov; Katherine.Power(a)fcc.gov; Riley.Hollingsworth(a)fcc.gov Cc: K4GVT(a)comcast.net; n3oh(a)arrl.net; W4HJL(a)aol.com; W1CRO(a)TheHamShack.us; wc4j(a)arrl.net; da(a)agnew.us; dsumner(a)arrl.org; w5zn(a)arrl.org; Michael.Copps(a)fcc.gov; Kevin.Martin(a)fcc.gov; Jonathan.Adelstein(a)fcc.gov; Robert.Mcdowell(a)fcc.gov; Deborah.Tate(a)fcc.gov Sent: Thu, 21 Dec 2006 12:27 PM Subject: Manassas Broadband Over Power Line Interference Complaints Greetings. Attached, on behalf of ARRL, the National Association for Amateur Radio, and on behalf of numerous individual complainants in the City of Manassas, Virginia, is a PDF copy of a letter being filed today by courier, regarding the Enforcement Bureau's December 14, 2006 dismissal of several, but not all, of the long-pending interference complaints of harmful interference to Amateur Radio Service licensees caused by the Broadband over Power Line system in Manassas, Virginia. Kindly direct any questions with respect to this to undersigned counsel. Yours very truly, Christopher D. Imlay Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more. ________________________________________________________________________ Check out the new AOL. Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.

1 0

[arrl-odv:14992] Re: Airfares - Go Figure!
by Rod Stafford W6ROD 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

If there are 110 people on the airplane and not traveling together, there's a good chance they all paid a different price for the same privilege of going from A to B. With that in mind, a few years ago I came across the attached "If Airlines Sold Paint" memo. I think I have shared it with some of you but Andy's email reminded me of it. Enjoy. 73, Rod W6ROD At 01:20 AM 12/21/2006, Andy Oppel wrote: >It seems air travel gets harder and harder to book. There are more people >flying these days, but all competing for the same number of seats. I >usually fly American through Dallas when going to Hartford, especially in >the winter. But something happened this time, and I couldn't get a decent >return routing on Sunday. I did some searching on various websites, and >found all the fares in the $350 range (even Southwest) and usually with >either 3 flights to get home or routing through a city that is risky >weather-wise in the winter. Then I found an amazing (and almost surreal) >deal on Expedia: $264 round trip (and this is from Oakland, CA, not a >red-eye, and only one change of planes in each direction). > >Now the surreal part... the tickets are issued by US Airways using code >share flight numbers. All four flights are on United or United >Express. If you go to the US Airways web site, the flights aren't >offered. If you go to United's web site, the fare on the same exact >itinerary is $353. It defies logic, but I think I can explain why US >Airways had so many financial woes... selling tickets at $90 under market >prices and then not getting any part of the business doesn't appear very >lucrative. > >73, >Andy Oppel, N6AJO >Vice Director, Pacific Division >American Radio Relay League (ARRL) >The National Association for Amateur Radio > >n6ajo(a)arrl.org >home: (510) 864-2299 >cell: (510) 851-6214

1 0

[arrl-odv:14991] Re: WT Docket 05-235
by n3kn＠comcast.net 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

The Novice theory test I took in 1982, before the era of public question pools, was 20 questions long. It had very little to do with what I was going to be allowed to do on the air in my little slivers of CW spectrum, but it was what the FCC thought I should know in order to start being a ham. Objectively speaking, the test was incredibly easy. I had gotten all nervous studying and expecting the test to be hard. I had avoided science and math in school as much as possible and was not at all sure I could do this ham radio thing. So the test itself was not hard but the circumstances surrounding it were difficult *for me*. Today's Technician test is much more demanding than the Novice test I took way back then. The syllabus is more diverse and the questions are more closely keyed to what a new ham is permitted and expected to do on the air. The entry-level test today is no easier than the one I took in 1982 and in terms of the volume of material that must be mastered, one could say that the test today is harder. My mentor in ARRL stuff was Hugh Turnbull W3ABC. Hugh had college degrees in physics and E.E., was a P.E., and got his ticket back in the 1930s. His code speed was stratospheric. He knew I was technically challenged and he knew my code speed was not so hot. But never once did he make any disrespectful or sarcastic remarks about how underwhelming my technical and Morse code qualifications were, compared to his. I never heard him make such remarks about other new hams, either. He often said that good hams were those who gave something back to the hobby. Hugh loved to complain about this and that, as you who served with him on the Board are well aware, but grade-A griper that he was -- he was not a snob towards those of us who came along later, took the modern kind of tests, pounded the brass a lot slower, and brought different kinds of knowledge and experience to give to ham radio. His self-esteem, to use the current buzzword, was not based on constantly convincing himself he was be tter than people like me. What matters is not the details of the exams we pass but what we are willing to give to ham radio and through ham radio. That was good enough for an old-time ham like W3ABC and it still sounds right to me. 73 - Kay N3KN

1 0

[arrl-odv:14990] Re: Airfares - Go Figure!
by jfenster＠pacifier.com 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

Andy, Between US Airways and the FCC, you seem to have captured the market on unexplainable and surrealistic organizations. Jim K9JF

1 0

[arrl-odv:14989] Airfares - Go Figure!
by Andy Oppel 21 Dec '06

21 Dec '06

It seems air travel gets harder and harder to book. There are more people flying these days, but all competing for the same number of seats. I usually fly American through Dallas when going to Hartford, especially in the winter. But something happened this time, and I couldn't get a decent return routing on Sunday. I did some searching on various websites, and found all the fares in the $350 range (even Southwest) and usually with either 3 flights to get home or routing through a city that is risky weather-wise in the winter. Then I found an amazing (and almost surreal) deal on Expedia: $264 round trip (and this is from Oakland, CA, not a red-eye, and only one change of planes in each direction). Now the surreal part... the tickets are issued by US Airways using code share flight numbers. All four flights are on United or United Express. If you go to the US Airways web site, the flights aren't offered. If you go to United's web site, the fare on the same exact itinerary is $353. It defies logic, but I think I can explain why US Airways had so many financial woes... selling tickets at $90 under market prices and then not getting any part of the business doesn't appear very lucrative. 73, Andy Oppel, N6AJO Vice Director, Pacific Division American Radio Relay League (ARRL) The National Association for Amateur Radio n6ajo(a)arrl.org home: (510) 864-2299 cell: (510) 851-6214

1 0

RE: [arrl-odv:14985] Thoughts on Exams
by JIM WEAVER, K8JE 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

Harold, Tnx for the insight. Jim Weaver, K8JE Director, Great Lakes Division ARRL; http://www.arrl.org/ Chairman, ARRL ad hoc Legislative Action Committee 5065 Bethany Rd., Mason, OH 45040 Tel.: 513-459-0142; E-mail: k8je(a)arrl.org ARRL: The reason Amateur Radio Is! MEMBERS: The reason ARRL Is! -----Original Message----- From: Kramer, Harold, WJ1B [mailto:wj1b@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2006 3:34 PM To: arrl-odv Cc: Green, Perry WY1O; Spencer,Mark WA8SME Subject: [arrl-odv:14985] Thoughts on Exams Hi, During the past few days, there have been a few emails on the ODV reflector about Amateur Radio examinations. As educator, of sorts, I thought that I would send along some of my comments about our exams. Warning: this is one of my pet peeves. To my thinking, amateur radio license exams have never been "subject knowledge" exams. They would be more properly classified as "barrier to entry" exams. You simply cannot test for much subject knowledge on a 35 question multiple choice exam, particularly when the questions and answers are available in advance. A barrier to entry exam often just tests the memory, desire and tenacity of the applicant. A competent instructor can overcome this and impart some real amateur radio knowledge, but it takes knowledge, effort and skill on the part of the instructor and a desire to learn beyond just passing the exam on the part of the student. As pointed out in previous discussions, the real learning takes place after the license is obtained. I agree with Joel and others that the subject matter in the question pool is excessively wide. I am currently teaching a General Class course here in HQ and the breadth of knowledge to pass the exam is extremely broad and not very deep. It would take me at least two semesters to cover that much material in the Engineering and Technology Program at the University of Hartford where I teach. Amateur Radio exam questions themselves are poorly written and constructed. There are double negatives, too many similar answers, unclear terminology, etc. To my experience, these exams are not easy for a newcomer. Unfortunately due to the nature of the QPC, we only have limited input into the exam content and the exam construction process. I believe that we have made progress with the latest question pools because of the extraordinary in-house efforts that were made by Mary Hobart and Perry Green. Much of their work was incorporated into the Technician Question Pool. Similarly, the new General Class pool has also been improved. Because of the nature of the QPC, changing the subject matter of the exams is a complex endeavor. However, one thing that we can improve is the exam itself. We could use the established processes that validate multiple choice exams. Unfortunately, Amateur Radio exams are not validated using this disciplined approach. I asked my friend, Dr. Dick Hezel, of Hezel Consulting, one of the top educational consultants in the country, <http://hezel.com/> http://hezel.com/ about this process. I offered to the QPC that the ARRL would pay for an analysis of the new General Class Question Pool before it was released. Unfortunately, the QPC refused our offer to improve these exams. In case you are curious, here's Dick Hezel's response about the type of exam validation that would be required. Dick had a Novice license when he was younger so he knows something about amateur radio: Developing a good test requires several levels of validity testing: * Face validity requires that people familiar with the subject make sure it asks the questions that it purports to ask and that there are no technical errors. * We would review the test for internal validity. We would want to make sure the questions all have only one possible answer and that all other choices are mutually exclusive. . * External validity has to do with whether the test overall does what it is supposed to do. Does it really test knowledge in the area and is that knowledge predictive of radio operator behavior? * Another issue is internal reliability. Does each question contribute to the overall test and to what extent? An item analysis of many tests taken will provide this. The one thing that all amateurs have in common is that we have passed a licensing exam. The Amateur Radio Service could create better constructed and more educationally valid examinations, but our hands are tied because of QPC politics, their lack of knowledge about educational testing and their unwillingness to have a third-party "outsider" educationally validate the exams. Sorry to get on the soapbox but I care a lot about this particular subject! 73 and Happy Holidays to everyone, Harold PS: If you have not received the new ARRL Instructor's Manual for Technician Class License Courses, it is on its way. Harold Kramer, WJ1B Chief Operating Officer ARRL - The National Association for Amateur Radio 225 Main Street Newington, CT 06111 860 594 0220 www.arrl.org/ hkramer(a)arrl.org

1 0

[arrl-odv:14987] Conflict of Interest Policy
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 20 Dec '06

20 Dec '06

In accordance with the new Conflict of Interest Policy that was added to the Bylaws by the Board in July, the ARRL President, all Vice Presidents, the Treasurer, all Directors and all Vice Directors are required annually to sign a statement that he or she: (i) has received a copy of the current conflict of interest policy, (ii) has read and understands the policy, (iii) has agreed to comply with the policy, and (iv) understands that the Association in a non-profit organization and that in order to maintain its federal tax exemption it must engage primarily in activities which accomplish one or more of its tax-exempt purposes. For your convenience, a copy of the policy is attached. I will include an affirmation form for signature with the Notice of Annual Meeting that will be sent out later this week. When you receive the form and have complied with its provisions, please sign, date and return it to me. Sincere 73, David Sumner, K1ZZ Secretary <<ARRL Board Conflict of Interest Policy.doc>>

1 0