Jim wrote:
I don't think any of us would take even the slightest issue with the
inclusion of articles for beginners and those with less technical
education. But ham radio is NOT CB RADIO -- our licenses and privileges
are based on the premise that we have a TECHNICAL interest in radio, and
we must pass a test showing that we understand both the "rules of the
road" with respect to using the privileges granted by our license and
the TECHNICAL fundamentals of radio and electronics.
I would hardly call a few multiple-choice questions drawn from a
publicly-available question and answer pool "showing that we
understand ... the technical fundamentals of radio and
electronics." It's a bad joke, is what it is.
I'm solidly with you -- if I were in charge, to get a ham license one
would have to troubleshoot and fix (1) a modern HF transceiver, and
(2) a vacuum-tube linear amplifier, both with random faults. But we
lost that battle decades ago, and there is no use crying over spilt milk.
I doubt more than 15% of hams today could troubleshoot anything more
complicated than a blown pilot lamp, much less modify or construct
equipment from components (or even from modules). And if we required
any more than that, there wouldn't have been more than a handful of
new hams in the past 30 years.
Face it -- the vast majority of hams under 40 have no interest
whatever in the technical aspects of radio (or, for that matter, good
operating practices). That's just the way it is.
Frankly, I've never had any use for the ARRL -- I view it as the PTA
of amateur radio -- but lately it is more useless than ever.
Best regards,
Charles
|