(sorta OT) Free Ham Radio Course

[RST Engineering]

With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.

There is a free online ham radio course being offered and sponsored by RST
Engineering. It is intended to take anybody with an interest in getting a
ham radio license from zero knowledge through at least enough knowledge to
pass the written exam. There is no practical exam for a ham license; pass
the written and you am one. The site is intended to take somebody with no
prior knowledge of the subject to be ready to pass at least one class of
license within 30 days.

There are no time limits. Study at your own pace; my college class is
taking the exam(s) on the 26th of February, but the rest of the world can
take whatever time they see fit. I will suggest that total immersion is the
best way to study this subject. If you don't want to buy the study guide
books from the sources that I recommend, most college and municipal
libraries either have them or can get them temporarily for a small fee.

While I wrote this site specifically for my college electronics class
students, with it being on the web, anybody in the USA and possessions can
use the site to study for the license. There is virtually nowhere in the
USA that there are not volunteer examiners within a short distance of your
home. Jay Honeck, for example, you, Mary, and the kids could take your
exams in Davenport, Moline, Mt. Carroll, Waterloo, or Dubuque. (See
http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsearch.phtml for the location closest to
you.) There is a nominal fee between zero and $15 charged by the
organization that prints, mails, examines, and files the paperwork to cover
their costs of doing business.

There are three classes of license:

Technician has no code and an elementary theory and regulations exam. It
permits limited operation below 30 MHz., but grants all privileges from 30
MHz. on up.

General has a 5wpm code exam and a moderate theory and regulations exam. It
permits almost all operation on any amateur radio band, with little tiny
slices here and there reserved for the ...

Extra has a 5wpm code exam and a rather extensive theory and regulations
exam. It permits all operations on any amateur radio band.

This site is brought to you by RST Engineering, written by Jim (WX6RST), and
the website maintained by Gailla (KB9MII) who is also using the site to
upgrade from Technician to either General or Extra. Enjoy.

Jim

(Besides, just think of the hewmongous flame wars we could get into by
arguing whether it is or is not legal for a ham to install a ham radio in
their very own airplane {;-) )

[RST Engineering]

I suppose it would help if I posted the URL, huh?

www.rstengineering.com/hamradio

Jim


"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.

[AL Mills]

RST Engineering wrote:
> I suppose it would help if I posted the URL, huh?
>
> www.rstengineering.com/hamradio
>
> Jim
>
>
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
>>something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
>
>

Good answer...LOL!
AL

[Peter Duniho]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.

Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.

Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
about the appropriateness of your actions?

[Wayne Paul]

Jim,

Thank you for the post. I have several fellow aviators and family members
that are interested.

Respectfully,
H Wayne Paul
W7ADK
HP-14 (N990)
http://www.soaridaho.com/

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> There is a free online ham radio course being offered and sponsored by RST
> Engineering. It is intended to take anybody with an interest in getting a
> ham radio license from zero knowledge through at least enough knowledge to
> pass the written exam. There is no practical exam for a ham license; pass
> the written and you am one. The site is intended to take somebody with no
> prior knowledge of the subject to be ready to pass at least one class of
> license within 30 days.
>
> There are no time limits. Study at your own pace; my college class is
> taking the exam(s) on the 26th of February, but the rest of the world can
> take whatever time they see fit. I will suggest that total immersion is
the
> best way to study this subject. If you don't want to buy the study guide
> books from the sources that I recommend, most college and municipal
> libraries either have them or can get them temporarily for a small fee.
>
> While I wrote this site specifically for my college electronics class
> students, with it being on the web, anybody in the USA and possessions can
> use the site to study for the license. There is virtually nowhere in the
> USA that there are not volunteer examiners within a short distance of your
> home. Jay Honeck, for example, you, Mary, and the kids could take your
> exams in Davenport, Moline, Mt. Carroll, Waterloo, or Dubuque. (See
> http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsearch.phtml for the location closest to
> you.) There is a nominal fee between zero and $15 charged by the
> organization that prints, mails, examines, and files the paperwork to
cover
> their costs of doing business.
>
> There are three classes of license:
>
> Technician has no code and an elementary theory and regulations exam. It
> permits limited operation below 30 MHz., but grants all privileges from 30
> MHz. on up.
>
> General has a 5wpm code exam and a moderate theory and regulations exam.
It
> permits almost all operation on any amateur radio band, with little tiny
> slices here and there reserved for the ...
>
> Extra has a 5wpm code exam and a rather extensive theory and regulations
> exam. It permits all operations on any amateur radio band.
>
> This site is brought to you by RST Engineering, written by Jim (WX6RST),
and
> the website maintained by Gailla (KB9MII) who is also using the site to
> upgrade from Technician to either General or Extra. Enjoy.
>
> Jim
>
> (Besides, just think of the hewmongous flame wars we could get into by
> arguing whether it is or is not legal for a ham to install a ham radio in
> their very own airplane {;-) )
>
>

[Gene Seibel]

I'm one of the 25% that already has a license, but thanks for the
offer.
--
Gene Seibel KB0NNN
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because I fly, I envy no one.

[Vaughn]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators.

Really?

Vaughn (CFI) (WB4UHB)

[Ron Webb]

> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding


Well...I can tell you for a fact there is at least ONE "crossbreed" here. I
suspect you are right about the 25% thing though. At least 25% of the Hams I
know are (or were) pilots, but pilots who are also Hams are rarer.

As for whether it is on topic - there has been a thread here about how to do
an antenna on a composite aircraft. A Ham would have no trouble building a
half wave dipole with a gamma match for 120 MHz, I would outperform a
grounded quarter wave and it would cost almost nothing. But I guess a PILOT
is too good for that!?!!



Ron Webb
KA6BDM
Experimental Pacer N5158G

[tom418]

Thanks, Jim

Tom KAZ8872
"Vaughn" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> > rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you
that
> > it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators.
>
> Really?
>
> Vaughn (CFI) (WB4UHB)
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Peter Dohm]

Thanks Jim,

Apparently, things have really changed. Years ago, you needed at least 5
wpm of code for just about everything except a small part of the two meter
band; and I never managed to devote enough time to accomplish it.

It's obviously time for another look!

Peter

p.s.: I did find that a code tape at bed time cured insomnia.

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> There is a free online ham radio course being offered and sponsored by RST
> Engineering. It is intended to take anybody with an interest in getting a
> ham radio license from zero knowledge through at least enough knowledge to
> pass the written exam. There is no practical exam for a ham license; pass
> the written and you am one. The site is intended to take somebody with no
> prior knowledge of the subject to be ready to pass at least one class of
> license within 30 days.
>
> There are no time limits. Study at your own pace; my college class is
> taking the exam(s) on the 26th of February, but the rest of the world can
> take whatever time they see fit. I will suggest that total immersion is
the
> best way to study this subject. If you don't want to buy the study guide
> books from the sources that I recommend, most college and municipal
> libraries either have them or can get them temporarily for a small fee.
>
> While I wrote this site specifically for my college electronics class
> students, with it being on the web, anybody in the USA and possessions can
> use the site to study for the license. There is virtually nowhere in the
> USA that there are not volunteer examiners within a short distance of your
> home. Jay Honeck, for example, you, Mary, and the kids could take your
> exams in Davenport, Moline, Mt. Carroll, Waterloo, or Dubuque. (See
> http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/examsearch.phtml for the location closest to
> you.) There is a nominal fee between zero and $15 charged by the
> organization that prints, mails, examines, and files the paperwork to
cover
> their costs of doing business.
>
> There are three classes of license:
>
> Technician has no code and an elementary theory and regulations exam. It
> permits limited operation below 30 MHz., but grants all privileges from 30
> MHz. on up.
>
> General has a 5wpm code exam and a moderate theory and regulations exam.
It
> permits almost all operation on any amateur radio band, with little tiny
> slices here and there reserved for the ...
>
> Extra has a 5wpm code exam and a rather extensive theory and regulations
> exam. It permits all operations on any amateur radio band.
>
> This site is brought to you by RST Engineering, written by Jim (WX6RST),
and
> the website maintained by Gailla (KB9MII) who is also using the site to
> upgrade from Technician to either General or Extra. Enjoy.
>
> Jim
>
> (Besides, just think of the hewmongous flame wars we could get into by
> arguing whether it is or is not legal for a ham to install a ham radio in
> their very own airplane {;-) )
>
>

[jsmith]

Really?
What kind of code are identifiers on VOR's, ILS's and ADF's, etc sent in?
As a licensed Ham, I have no trouble discerning an identifier on the
first pass when it is drowning in the static.

Peter Duniho wrote:
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?

[Morgans]

"Peter Duniho"

wrote

> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?

Man, take a chill pill. Off topic is not a big deal, anyway.
--
Jim in NC

[Sam O'Nella]

Thanks for the timely link; I'm now studying for my ticket.

[Dave]

Ham is another one of those fun things to do when the weather is crap.

I'm one of the 25% and I know quite a few other pilots who have ham tickets.

Cheers

Dave
WD2AAF

Sam O'Nella wrote:
> Thanks for the timely link; I'm now studying for my ticket.
>
>

[Ebby]

Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally
operate two-way radio equipment? Would this course being offered by RST get
a person started on earning their radio station license? I'd be interested
in taking it. I think it would be a valuable addition to my piloting
skills.

John
CFI-USAF Aero Club

[Jessica Carlson]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> > something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?

Thanks for posting the information to this group, Jim. I earned my Private last
summer, finally wrapping it up after I graduated high school. I've always
wished I could decode the morse code identifiers manually, and getting a ham
license seems like a lot of fun, especially if I can do it before my instrument
training starts in a few months. A friend of the family already has lots of
equipment that I can use.

It's a shame that certain people are so upset at you offering this and can't do
anything but curse and swear like a drunken drill sear. My high school had a
lot of kids with that maturity level. Maybe some day they will finally grow up
a little!

Thanks,
Jess

[Matt Whiting]

jsmith wrote:

> Really?
> What kind of code are identifiers on VOR's, ILS's and ADF's, etc sent in?
> As a licensed Ham, I have no trouble discerning an identifier on the
> first pass when it is drowning in the static.

Yes, I've often thought that would be another good reason to become a
code capable Ham.

Jim, given the three classes of license you described, how does your
course run? Does it cover the material needed for each class in
succession or does completing the course prepare you for the most
advanced class?

Can you give us an idea as to roughly how much course and study time is
required for each class?

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Ebby wrote:

> Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally
> operate two-way radio equipment? Would this course being offered by RST get
> a person started on earning their radio station license? I'd be interested
> in taking it. I think it would be a valuable addition to my piloting
> skills.

Yes, they did as late as 1978 when I got my private. I still have mine
as a souvenir.


Matt

[RST Engineering]

We can only hope, Jessica. I'm not holding out a lot of hope for this guy.

I appreciate your interest. I'll do everything I can to get you your
"ticket" in the shortest time possible.

Jim

> It's a shame that certain people are so upset at you offering this and
> can't do
> anything but curse and swear like a drunken drill sear. My high school
> had a
> lot of kids with that maturity level. Maybe some day they will finally
> grow up
> a little!
>
> Thanks,
> Jess
>

[pete]

Thanks for the info, jim and I think you are conservative in your
estimates..Pete

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
>>something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
>
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?
>
>

[RST Engineering]

It is all in succession, and my best guess is 30 days between each of the
elements -- Tech, General, and Extra.

Jim



> Jim, given the three classes of license you described, how does your
> course run? Does it cover the material needed for each class in
> succession or does completing the course prepare you for the most advanced
> class?
>
> Can ou give us an idea as to roughly how much course and study time is
> required for each class?
>
> Matt

[Phil]

Well done Jim. A think lot of Aussies will also be interested to see your
site. I've posted the address up at aus.radio.amateur.misc.

73
Phil VK6AD
Grumman Tiger / Piper Tomahawk / Cessnas
Very slowly building a KR2

[Scott]

Of course it's legal. It just has to be separate from any comm radio
gear installed in the plane. Of course, this is only true in an
experimental unless a 337 is completed and approved. But, since this is
a homebuilt newsgroup, no 337 required.

Right?

On a second note, handheld radio equipment solves all the above
mentioned problems...

Scott
N0EDV

PS...Sorry. Couldn't resist starting that war...



RST Engineering wrote:

>
> (Besides, just think of the hewmongous flame wars we could get into by
> arguing whether it is or is not legal for a ham to install a ham radio in
> their very own airplane {;-) )
>
>

[Scott]

I concur (with the pill idea). The original post said that it was
(sorta) OT. How much more of a clue does Peter need to decide he
doesn't want to read it if it isn't 100% on topic (in HIS opinion)? As
a ham, I love to have ham radio aboard the old Corben. 2M, 70cm, ATV,
etc. are great fun from 1000 AGL. As a "homebuilt" I can add ANY piece
of EQUIPMENT I want, therefore, ham radio IS on topic for ME and my
(experimental) Corben.

Scott
N0EDV


Morgans wrote:

> "Peter Duniho"
>
> wrote
>
>
>>Bull****. It's 100% off-topic
>>
>>Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
>>anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
>>about the appropriateness of your actions?
>
>
> Man, take a chill pill. Off topic is not a big deal, anyway.

[Howard Eisenhauer]

Well, you may have a point, most people figure I'm actually more
"Inbred", guess it's because I Top Post :).

Howard,

VE1 EIS



On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 13:25:42 -0800, "Peter Duniho"
> wrote:

>"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
>> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
>Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
>rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you that
>it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
>it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
>Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
>anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
>about the appropriateness of your actions?
>

[B2431]

>From: "Ebby"
>Date: 1/17/2005 19:47 Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally
>operate two-way radio equipment?

I don't remember what kind of license it was, but the FCC also required
licenses for R/C and CB at one tme. I always wondered how I was supposed to
give my station identification with my R/C ticket.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

[UltraJohn]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
>> With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
>> something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you
> that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?
Just a bit strong aren't you!
I've never seen a post from you helping anyone out here.
I have seen many post from Jim helping a lot of fellow homebuilders.
And yes MAYBE his quote of 25% is off a bit, so it's really 28%!
John
KC5VB

[Ron Wanttaja]

On 18 Jan 2005 04:20:16 GMT, (B2431) wrote:

>>From: "Ebby"
>>Date: 1/17/2005 19:47 Central Standard Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
>>Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally
>>operate two-way radio equipment?
>
>I don't remember what kind of license it was, but the FCC also required
>licenses for R/C and CB at one tme. I always wondered how I was supposed to
>give my station identification with my R/C ticket.

Dunno about R/C and CB, but back when I started to fly, we were required to
obtain the FCC Radiotelephone Operators Permit. No test, but there was like a
$5 charge. Still got mine, though my 2nd Class probably covers me if I fly
outside the US.

Ron Wanttaja

[John Ammeter]

I just took the practice test and scored 28 out of 35...
Nowhere near the 90% Jim wants but, for having never taken
any Ham courses, it isn't that bad...

John

[jim rosinski]

Jessica Carlson wrote:

> It's a shame that certain people are so upset at you offering this
and can't do
> anything but curse and swear like a drunken drill sear.

My read of Pete's post was that there was some history of animosity
between himself and Mr. Weir, and the complaint about an "off-topic"
post was just an excuse to let go with a flame. Jim Weir has ripped
into me in the past for no discernable reason, so I have some sympathy.
Jim Rosinski

[Dave Stadt]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> > something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you
that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?

Thanks for the post Jim. One of the 25% here and it is totally on topic
IMO.

[Scott]

How to ID an RC transmitter? Skywriting, of course! ;)

The license that used to be required for operating an aircraft radio was
called a restricted radiotelephone operators permit. I have one (kept
for posterity), along with a General Radiotelephone License w/Ship Radar
Endorsement and a "ham" ticket as well...

Scott
N0EDV

B2431 wrote:
>>From: "Ebby"
>>Date: 1/17/2005 19:47 Central Standard Time
>>Message-id: >
>>
>>Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally
>>operate two-way radio equipment?
>
>
> I don't remember what kind of license it was, but the FCC also required
> licenses for R/C and CB at one tme. I always wondered how I was supposed to
> give my station identification with my R/C ticket.
>
> Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
>
>

[Mark Hickey]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote:

>Thanks for the post Jim. One of the 25% here and it is totally on topic
>IMO.

Ditto what he said.

Mark Hickey WB9KWY

[Corky Scott]

On Mon, 17 Jan 2005 20:58:45 -0500, Jessica Carlson
> wrote:

> I've always
>wished I could decode the morse code identifiers manually, and getting a ham
>license seems like a lot of fun, especially if I can do it before my instrument
>training starts in a few months. A friend of the family already has lots of
>equipment that I can use.

Just curious Jess, but if you feel the need to manually decode
identifiers, couldn't you just study morse code and learn it?

Of course, if you have an interest in ham radios that's fine too.

Corky Scott

[Rich S.]

"Mark Hickey" > wrote in message
...
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote:
>
>>Thanks for the post Jim. One of the 25% here and it is totally on topic
>>IMO.
>
> Ditto what he said.
>
> Mark Hickey WB9KWY

More dittos..........

Rich S. N7FXR

[Robert A. Barker]

"Ron Webb" > wrote in message
...
>
>
>> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
>> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding
>
>
> Well...I can tell you for a fact there is at least ONE "crossbreed" here.
> I
> suspect you are right about the 25% thing though. At least 25% of the Hams
> I
> know are (or were) pilots, but pilots who are also Hams are rarer.
>
> As for whether it is on topic - there has been a thread here about how to
> do
> an antenna on a composite aircraft. A Ham would have no trouble building a
> half wave dipole with a gamma match for 120 MHz, I would outperform a
> grounded quarter wave and it would cost almost nothing. But I guess a
> PILOT
> is too good for that!?!!
>
>
>
> Ron Webb
> KA6BDM
> Experimental Pacer N5158G
>
> Another cross-breed here.Thanks for the post Jim

Bob Barker N8749S
W1KXG

[[email protected]]

Ebby wrote:
> Didn't at one time a pilot require a radio station license to legally

> operate two-way radio equipment?
<snip>

I'm going from memory here, but I believe the radio station license
was required for the plane ( and still is when flying to some
countries). The pilot required a separate radiotelephone operators
permit (also still required in some countries outside the U.S.).
John Galban=====>N4BQ (PA28-180)

[Denny]

Denny - K8DO - and Fat Albert the Apache...
One of my instrument instructors from way back had a bug about
carefully decoding each VOR and marker beacon and writing them down...
Of course, he had to copy down the dots and dashes then look each
letter up... By the time he did this we were usually established on the
glide slope... He would invariably challenge me with, "I didn't see you
write it down!" <pugnacious glare>
I invariably replied, "Didn't have to. I hear the morse code just like
I hear you"
Of course he never believed me and was always dialing up some VOR,
letting the identifier run through the code once, then he would quickly
turn off the audio and ask me what the letters were... I would tell
him... Then he would turn the audio back up and laboriously copy the
dots and dashes onto paper and look them up... Then he would glare at
me and pout for the rest of the ride...

[Don Tuite]

Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.

Don, NR7X

[Dave Butler]

Don Tuite wrote:
> Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
> to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
> on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
> code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>

I disagree. I am a walking counterexample.

[Don Tuite]

On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:42:01 -0500, Dave Butler > wrote:

>Don Tuite wrote:
>> Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
>> to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
>> on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
>> code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>>
>
>I disagree. I am a walking counterexample.

Sorry. I left off the YMMV.

Don

[Matt Whiting]

Don Tuite wrote:

> Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
> to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
> on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
> code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.

What is the transmission rate of the VOR ID?

Matt

[Rich S.]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Don Tuite wrote:
>
>> Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
>> to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
>> on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
>> code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>
> What is the transmission rate of the VOR ID?
>
> Matt

Without penicillin?

Rich S.

[[email protected]]

Now Jim will have to offer a cheap HF kit so we can all practice or
relearn our keying skills.
A nice cheap and dirty 80 or 40 meters rig would work.

Dave
wd2aaf

Rich S. wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Don Tuite wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
>>>to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
>>>on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
>>>code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>>
>>What is the transmission rate of the VOR ID?
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> Without penicillin?
>
> Rich S.
>
>

[Bob Korves]

"Scott" > wrote in message
...
> Of course it's legal. It just has to be separate from any comm radio
> gear installed in the plane. Of course, this is only true in an
> experimental unless a 337 is completed and approved. But, since this is
> a homebuilt newsgroup, no 337 required.
>
> Right?
>
> On a second note, handheld radio equipment solves all the above
> mentioned problems...
>
> Scott
> N0EDV

Sailplane pilots, hang glider pilots, and paraglider pilots have all
discovered the use of 2 meter ham radios to use for chatting with others and
not congesting the air to air frequencies. They use hand held units,
including one from Vertex Standard that is VHF aircraft, VOR navigation, and
2 meter ham all in one tiny hand held package. I understand that they are
legal to use in airborne aircraft with a tech license.

One of the advantages to using the 2 meter radios is that if one lands out
in the boonies, away from cell towers and other aircraft traffic, one can
use repeaters installed on mountain tops to send their distress message to
distant receivers. I further understand that these repeaters are manned at
all times, which can be a big help in an emergency.

I am not a ham and am only posting what I know second hand. Please correct
me if I have made mistakes.

I don't think this thread is too far off topic and I, for one, appreciate
all that Jim Weir has done over the years to help keep flying less costly
for those of us not born with silver spoons in our mouths.

I'll look at the study site myself.
-Bob Korves

[Slip'er]

How timely! I purchased a Vertex Standard VXA-700 with the 2m band and have
been wanting to get my ham license so that I can use it. The Palomar
repeater covers most of San Diego county too. How nice of you, thanks!

Carl

> > With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> > something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.

[Slip'er]

There is free software that you can download. It is quite good although I
haven't spent the time needed to get past 3 characters....

It is a Koch method trainer...

http://www.g4fon.co.uk/
http://www.qsl.net/g4fon/CW%20Trainer.htm

[Wayne Paul]

Bob,

Are 2 meter rigs really common in California/Nevada base sailplane? I have
only been involved in the sport for about 10 years. I believe that I am the
only local pilot that is a Ham. Most of the hang glider pilots I know use 2
meters to keep in contact with their crews. This requires both the pilot
and chase a crew member to have a "ticket."

On occasion when flying in mountain regions of Idaho without cell phone
coverage I have carried my 2 meter hand-held.

What percentage of the sailplane pilots flying in the mountains and deserts
of California and Nevada are hams?

Please don't think that I am challenging your experience. I am simply
curious about what frequencies to use and how much traffic I will hear when
I participate in the annual trek to Austin, NV this summer.

Wayne
W7ADK
Schreder HP-14 (N990) "6F"
http://www.soaridaho.com/

"Bob Korves" <bkorves@winfirstDECIMALcom> wrote in message
...
> Sailplane pilots, hang glider pilots, and paraglider pilots have all
> discovered the use of 2 meter ham radios to use for chatting with others
and
> not congesting the air to air frequencies. They use hand held units,
> including one from Vertex Standard that is VHF aircraft, VOR navigation,
and
> 2 meter ham all in one tiny hand held package. I understand that they are
> legal to use in airborne aircraft with a tech license.
>
> One of the advantages to using the 2 meter radios is that if one lands out
> in the boonies, away from cell towers and other aircraft traffic, one can
> use repeaters installed on mountain tops to send their distress message to
> distant receivers. I further understand that these repeaters are manned
at
> all times, which can be a big help in an emergency.
>
> I am not a ham and am only posting what I know second hand. Please
correct
> me if I have made mistakes.
>
> I don't think this thread is too far off topic and I, for one, appreciate
> all that Jim Weir has done over the years to help keep flying less costly
> for those of us not born with silver spoons in our mouths.
>
> I'll look at the study site myself.
> -Bob Korves
>
>

[Matt Whiting]

Rich S. wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Don Tuite wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
>>>to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
>>>on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
>>>code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>>
>>What is the transmission rate of the VOR ID?
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> Without penicillin?

Don't quit your day job. :-)

Matt

[Bob Korves]

"Wayne Paul" > wrote in message
...
> Bob,
>
> Are 2 meter rigs really common in California/Nevada base sailplane? I
have
> only been involved in the sport for about 10 years. I believe that I am
the
> only local pilot that is a Ham. Most of the hang glider pilots I know use
2
> meters to keep in contact with their crews. This requires both the pilot
> and chase a crew member to have a "ticket."
>
> On occasion when flying in mountain regions of Idaho without cell phone
> coverage I have carried my 2 meter hand-held.
>
> What percentage of the sailplane pilots flying in the mountains and
deserts
> of California and Nevada are hams?
>
> Please don't think that I am challenging your experience. I am simply
> curious about what frequencies to use and how much traffic I will hear
when
> I participate in the annual trek to Austin, NV this summer.
>
> Wayne
> W7ADK
> Schreder HP-14 (N990) "6F"
> http://www.soaridaho.com/

Wayne,
Oops! I just noticed that we are cross posting this thread. I will only
send this to RAH.

Many of the private glider pilots at Minden, NV use the 2 meter radios due
to the extreme congestion on 123.3 and 123.5 in the Reno area. I fly out of
Truckee, CA and we chat on .3 and .5 (and catch hell, rightfully, from other
users). The people that use 2 meters say it is great for air to air use --
plenty of frequencies and little congestion. I am not aware of usage other
than gliders flying out of Minden, but there might well be...

Again, I am not a ham and am only repeating what I have heard from others.
I don't know if glider pilots elsewhere use 2 meter radios.

Now we are really getting off topic. If you want to continue this thread,
lets go to RAS.
-Bob

[B2431]

>From: "Rich S."
>Date: 1/18/2005 18:13 Central Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>
>"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
>> Don Tuite wrote:
>>
>>> Let it be said that you can fairly quickly learn the code well enough
>>> to pass the 5 wpm ham test, but you really need to spend a few months
>>> on the air working people on CW before you'll have internalized the
>>> code well enough to reliably indentify VORs under pressure.
>>
>> What is the transmission rate of the VOR ID?
>>
>> Matt
>
>Without penicillin?
>
>Rich S.

VOR ID has built up penicillin resistance.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

[Jean-Paul Roy]

Hey doggy, tight your chain a bit!!!
"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in message
> ...
> > With the crossbreeding of amateur (ham) radio operators and pilots being
> > something on the order of 25%, this is only slightly OT.
>
> Bull****. It's 100% off-topic in rec.aviation.hombuilt AND
> rec.aviation.piloting. There's no "crossbreeding", and I guarantee you
that
> it's not true that 25% of all pilots are amateur radio operators. Even if
> it were, that doesn't make your post on-topic here.
>
> Not that you'd care, of course. You always do what you want, and call
> anyone that doesn't like it an "asshole". But why would you bother lying
> about the appropriateness of your actions?
>
>
>