XPost: uk.radio.amateur
From: ianREMOVETHISjackson@g3ohx.demon.co.uk
In message , FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI
writes
>"Spike" wrote in message
>news:dogiseFu8t6U1@mid.individual.net...
>> On 29/04/2016 08:57, FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI wrote:
>>> "Spike" wrote in message
>>> news:doghcuFtvl4U1@mid.individual.net...
>>>> On 28/04/2016 23:32, FranK Turner-Smith G3VKI wrote:
>>>>> "Stephen Thomas Cole" wrote
>>
>>>>>> That fact hasn't come to light yet, but it is known that it took him
>>>>>> *13* years to get through the 12wpm morse test, so draw your own
>>>>>> conclusions.
>>
>>>>> I may be wrong, but I think he sat the RAE a couple of years after
>>>>>I sat
>>>>> mine. Since he's a year younger than me that would make him about
>>>>>16, so
>>>>> can't have taken many attempts if he didn't pass first time. Dunno why
>>>>> the 12wpm Morse took so long though.
>>
>>>> By Sideband's perverse logic - the only sort he seems to know - I did
>>>> the CW in negative time by taking the CW test, then some time later
>>>> sitting the RAE. Both passed first time, of course, as would be
>>>> expected from a Class A who came up via the SWL route.
>>
>>> The risk there was that the Morse Test was time limited whereas the RAE
>>> was not. Had you failed the RAE you may have had to resit the Morse.
>>> More time and, more importantly, more money.
>>
>> Fail? What is this word 'fail'? And this was at a time when the
>>modern no-fail exams (that have the answer printed below the
>>question) hadn't been invented!
>>
>Fair comment, I just took the precaution of sitting the RAE first.
I took the morse after the RAE - but before I got the RAE results
(which, in those days, took about 4 or 5 months to appear).
--
Ian
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
