Hi.
I found the Gordon West tapes very helpful for my Extra exam. What I did
was to have the ARRL publications read to me so that I had a good
foundation, and then I used the Gordon West tapes to review and to
formulate strategies for figuring out how I would handle some of the
problems that involved complex mathematics. Since I do not have a talking
calculator (or any calculator, for that matter), I needed to figure out
ways that I could run calculations long hand, and I found that the Gordon
West tapes provided a wonderful solution for figuring out the dB gains and
losses--he gave a few decimal values that you could multiply the power by
to calculate specific gains and losses, and combined with what I already
knew, it made the whole thing simple and I remember it to this day.
As a result, when I took the exam, I knew the material so cold that I knew
I had nailed it before the examiner had even graded the exam. That's a
nice feeling.
I am not much on memorizing exam questions and answers, but I think there
is some value to learning the quick and dirty shortcuts for guesstimating
things if you don't happen to have a scientific calculator, a slide rule,
or a set of log tables handy. I have to say that the other thing that made
it easy for me was that we had four super guys in my class that made
learning the material a team effort, and giving me a hand with going over
the material helped them too. We all passed the exam on the first try.
73, de Lou K2LKK
At 09:52 AM 10/14/2006 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi Hank;
>
>I found that Gordon's tapes are presented in such a way that makes the most
>sense to me.
>
>They just seem to be very straight forward.
>
>Good Luck
>
>73 De Anthony W2AJV
>[log in to unmask]
>ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "hank smith" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 10:09 PM
>Subject: Re: [BLIND-HAMS] New Frequencies
>
>
> > it looks like I will have to start going for my general license
> > any recommendations, should I shoot for the gordon west tapes again?
> > those seem really good when I used them for my tech license
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 6:58 PM
> > Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> >
> >
> >> technically yes.
> >> but good luck finding anyone who uses it above 50MHZ.
> >> 73
> >> Colin, V A6BKX
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "hank smith" <[log in to unmask]>
> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:56 PM
> >> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> >>
> >>
> >>> can you do pSK31 with a tech license? I forget if so what equipment do I
> >>> need to join in?
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>> From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 5:41 PM
> >>> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> > it takes some doing, but you can do PSK31, digital can be worked with
> >>> > to
> >>> > work, and that's an accessible PSK31 program that is self voicing,
> >> problem
> >>> > is, the voice goes out on the air though I have played with a few
> >>> > things
> >>> > and
> >>> > made it useable. Also, the one for sighted people, digipan, you can
> >>> > work
> >>> > with that one, I've done it. the problem is, you need 2 sound cards. I
> >>> > have
> >>> > an external sound card on my radio desk computer, used to have the
> >>> > echolink
> >>> > link interface plugged in to it but I guess since that's down for now,
> >>> > I
> >>> > might use it for the digital modes for a bit. It is doable. Pactor and
> >>> > stuff
> >>> > like that you can do, I haven't tried them all but I think we can
> >>> > pretty
> >>> > much do any of them. Probably not the TV modes but so far, anything
> >>> > else
> >>> > seems possible. I'll play with it over the winter and fill people in
> >>> > as
> >> I
> >>> > work with things. I'm single this winter so have all that time I was
> >> with
> >>> > my
> >>> > gf last year, to play radio. She had every second last winter.
> >>> > ----- Original Message -----
> >>> > From: "Dan" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>> > Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 8:08 PM
> >>> > Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> Speaking of PSK31, or any digital mode like that, is most o of the
> >>> >> software
> >>> >> for that accessible? Like will screenreaders be able to read what is
> >> on
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> screen?
> >>> >>
> >>> >> -----Original Message-----
> >>> >> From: For blind ham radio operators
> >>> >> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> >>> >> On Behalf Of Colin McDonald
> >>> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 19:39
> >>> >> To: [log in to unmask]
> >>> >> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I guess that makes me a chicken bander.
> >>> >> I never new until now.
> >>> >> That attitude is what is making ham radio an antiquated, excentric
> >>> >> non-progressive hobby in many places.
> >>> >> Who wants to learn to communicate using a bunch of short and long
> >>> >> beeps
> >>> >> when
> >>> >> you can talk, or use digital modes using computers.
> >>> >> Learning CW has to be the most awcward thing imaginable at first.
> >> Until
> >>> >> you
> >>> >> become really good at it, its slow, tedious and takes much more time
> >>> >> to
> >>> >> convey a thought then simply speaking it or sending it via pSK31 or
> >> other
> >>> >> digital modes.
> >>> >> And the idea that CW is the one and only method of communication that
> >> can
> >>> >> get through when nothing else can is also a very outdated theory.
> >>> >> Any digital mode will accomplish the same task, and offen with much
> >> lower
> >>> >> error rate then a typical CW operater who is attempting to pull a
> >> signal
> >>> >> out
> >>> >> of the noise, or below the noise floor.
> >>> >> Using PSK31, you offten can't even hear the signal, but the computer
> >> can
> >>> >> and
> >>> >> puts it out to the screen as text.
> >>> >> So the idea that not learning some antiquated form of communicated
> >>> >> just
> >>> >> for
> >>> >> the sake of doing so, and therefore getting a free ride because you
> >>> >> didn't
> >>> >> have to learn it is a very narow minded and outdated point of view.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Now, all that said, i think CW is a very important aspect of amateur
> >>> >> radio
> >>> >> below 30MHZ and that it certainly has its place and usage. I don't
> >>> >> begrudge
> >>> >> anyone their decision to use any mode of communication on any amateur
> >>> >> frequency.
> >>> >> However, i really don't believe anyone mode should be chosen over all
> >> the
> >>> >> rest as one that a person must have near to absolute perficiency in
> >>> >> in
> >>> >> order to communicate below 30MHZ.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Naturally, the arguement that CW transmitters and receivers are some
> >>> >> of
> >>> >> the
> >>> >> simplest and easy to setup and operate when compared to voice or
> >> digital
> >>> >> stations always comes up. It comes up in the context of emergency
> >>> >> measures
> >>> >> or emergency communications.
> >>> >> If that arguement is made, then the argument must also be made to
> >> include
> >>> >> vastly more emergency training aspects to the general class or extra
> >>> >> class
> >>> >> licensing examinations.
> >>> >> If you are going to force someone to learn CW because there just
> >>> >> might
> >> be
> >>> >> a
> >>> >> once in a life time situation where they absolutely must use it, then
> >> it
> >>> >> should also be required for those same individuals to learn vast
> >> amounts
> >>> >> of
> >>> >> procedural knoledge regarding emergency communications and
> >>> >> procedures.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Its a great mode, but its not the most important anymore.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> 73
> >>> >> Colin, V A6BKX
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > __________ NOD32 1.1803 (20061013) Information __________
> >>> >
> >>> > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> >>> > http://www.eset.com
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>
> >> __________ NOD32 1.1803 (20061013) Information __________
> >>
> >> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> >> http://www.eset.com
> >>
> >>
> >
Louis Kim Kline
A.R.S. K2LKK
Home e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Work e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Work Telephone: (585) 697-5753
|
