General class is entry license to HF now

[kc7jty]

I guess the general class is the entry into HF license now. Never thought about it before. I thought a newbie who now passed the tech written & the 5 wpm exam got the old tech plus privs.
I passed the novice and tech written exams back in 1995. If I passed the 5 wpm exam now I would gain no additional privs. The whole thing seems so far out.

[KB3LIX]

Incorrect !

If you pass an element 1 morse code test, and are given a CSCE for passing the element 1 test, you are not issued a tech plus grade license by the commission, but you do get the old 'Tech Plus' privledges. The only requirement is that you keep in your posession the CSCE for the element 1 test.

The CSCE is then valid for 365 days if you would want to upgrade to general or extra and use the CSCE as proof of passing the element 1 test. If you decide to upgrade to general or extra after the 365 day period had expired, you would have to take the element 1 test again.

If you do not choose to upgrade, you can continue to operate using the old 'Tech Plus' privledges as long as your license remains valid.
The proper term for a licensee like this is now
'Tech with HF'......

Note,
there is NO indication in a callsign lookup if someone is a 'Tech with HF', the record will only indicate "Technician"

[kc7jty]

Thanks Bill. I would guess you know since you are a VE. This will let the air out of the balloon of a friend, who has been licensed since the early 70s, who told me otherwise.

[ai4ep]

...yep, some folks WILL lie to ya, in a heartbeat.

Once they lie to ME, they aint my friend no mo'.

Just ask here on qrz and git the facts reel quik. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[N2RJ]

Just remember that your Tech+/Tech w/HF privileges on HF are mostly for CW/digital. I think the only phone privs you get are on 10m.

[N5LRZ]

In Defense of your friends comments.

"Relatively Speaking" as viewed from the POV of a General Class License holder (or higher) looking at the current HF situation (comparing 10 M HF Phone Bandsvs 40 M HF Phone Bands) as it relates to the current phase of the Solar Cycle your freiend is correct. And given that the 10 M Phone Bands are dead relative to the the activity on 40 meter bands his statement was correct.


You will of course after passing the Code Certification gain access to the 10 meter phone band and the CW Novice Bands. When the Solar Cycle starts to turn more active this privledge will become very much a good thing. The 10 meter phone band will come alive with DX. HOWEVER given that the solar cycle is in the basement cycle deep right now that privledge is not exactly a ray of sunshine.

The active bands for DX at this time are those in the lower frequencies where the General Class License or higher is required for phone privledges.

HOWEVER having said this, you SHOULD study the code and pass the code requirement of 5 wpm because the FCC has stated that the deletion of the code requirement is definately not on the front burner. Ohhh it will happen. But not any time soon. Better to just go ahead and bite the code bullet and get er done.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (N5LRZ @ Sep. 27 2006,07:29)]HOWEVER having said this, you SHOULD study the code and pass the code requirement of 5 wpm because the FCC has stated that the deletion of the code requirement is definately not on the front burner. Ohhh it will happen. But not any time soon. Better to just go ahead and bite the code bullet and get er done.
You obviously haven't been around here much, have you? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 26 2006,18:50)]I passed the novice and tech written exams back in 1995. If I passed the 5 wpm exam now...
Oh please! Who are you kidding?? We all know that the Prince of Darkness will be shoveling snow the day William S. Knox takes Element 1.

Here are his own words from a posting on another topic:

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 19 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 18 2006,10:42)]If you want to get on HF anytime soon, better just study the material and pass Element 1.
I'm fully prepared to wait untill hell freezes over and I'm not alone.
And from posting on yet another subject...
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Aug. 28 2006,07:18)]I'm a tech lite and proud of it. I never touched the Morse monkey to please the forces that be. Never will either, and before you say how much I'm at a loss for, don't flatter yourself.

Seems like our Mr. Knox speak with forked tongue!

Scott NØIU

[w8cbc]

'LIX: Quote[/b] ]Note,
there is NO indication in a callsign lookup if someone is a 'Tech with HF', the record will only indicate "Technician"


I wonder how many Techs with the Element 1 CSCE get mistakenly ratted on and/or told to get off HF because the quick lookup doesn't show they're allowed in there.

10-metre 'phone can get plenty busy when there's Es happening.

[K3UD]

The same could be said for someone who earned the Tech+ designation but is now in the FCC database as a Tech. It is interesting that you can pass the code test and get a CSCE, get on HF and then get bounced off when the CSCE expires.

There is a lot of conflict as to how the FCC views things. If you EVER passed a 5 WPM code test and can prove it, you get credit for it even if you took it way back in 1951 when the 5 WPM test was first introduced for Novice and Technician testing.

You might have dropped out when your Novice expired but you still get credit for the code test (as I understand it), but if you have passed the code test but have an expired CSCE, you need to take it again.

Does this really make any sense?


73
George
K3UD

[kj3n]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 27 2006,09:20)]It is interesting that you can pass the code test and get a CSCE, get on HF and then get bounced off when the CSCE expires.
Somehow, this doesn't sound quite right. Are you absolutely sure about that, George?

I think an email to Riley is in order on this one. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[K9STH]

UD:

An Element 1 CSCE is good for life for operating on HF for the Technician Class licensee so long as he/she keeps his Technician Class license in effect. BUT, it is good only for 365 days where upgrading to General or Extra is concerned.

Glen, K9STH

[N2RJ]

We had a thread about that here recently.

Turns out that the upgrade credit is valid for 1 year.

The privileges remain with you as long as you hold your license.

[KC0W]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 27 2006,12:11)]...yep, some folks WILL lie to ya, in a heartbeat.

Once they lie to ME, they aint my friend no mo'.
Kinda reminds me of a guy who said he was at a Hamfest, but really was not. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


Tom kcØw

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (K9STH @ Sep. 27 2006,09:09)]UD:

An Element 1 CSCE is good for life for operating on HF for the Technician Class licensee so long as he/she keeps his Technician Class license in effect. BUT, it is good only for 365 days where upgrading to General or Extra is concerned.

Glen, K9STH
Thanks Glen,

I stand corrected on the situation of the HF privileges that come with the CSCE for a Tech who has it, but still think that it is remarkable that it is only good for one year in the case of upgrading to General or Extra, while someone who took the 5WPM test for a Novice or Tech license 35 years ago, and has not been licensed for 30 of those years, gets the credit. I wonder what the differention is when it comes to how the FCC views this.

73
George
K3UD

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Sep. 26 2006,06:56)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 26 2006,18:50)]I passed the novice and tech written exams back in 1995. If I passed the 5 wpm exam now...
Oh please! Who are you kidding?? We all know that the Prince of Darkness will be shoveling snow the day William S. Knox takes Element 1.

Here are his own words from a posting on another topic:

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 19 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 18 2006,10:42)]If you want to get on HF anytime soon, better just study the material and pass Element 1.
I'm fully prepared to wait untill hell freezes over and I'm not alone.
And from posting on yet another subject...
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Aug. 28 2006,07:18)]I'm a tech lite and proud of it. I never touched the Morse monkey to please the forces that be. Never will either, and before you say how much I'm at a loss for, don't flatter yourself.

Seems like our Mr. Knox speak with forked tongue!

Scott NØIU
You are amazing. How many others here fit your maniacal mindset?
Look up the word IF. I must warn you however, it's explanation is a biggie. After that look up the word hypothetical, it's something that comes in handy at times when using the language to express oneself.

"If" after all that you are not burned out, look up the slang usage of duck and quack.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 26 2006,07:20)]Does this really make any sense?
Does any of it?

When I passed my NCT exams in Mar 1995 they consisted of the novice and tech written. The HF material I learned in the novice test was of no use to me for I was not permitted HF privs.

Today the tech written (no novice test any more) does not touch on HF to speak of yet some newbie who passes it with the element 1 gets HF privs.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,12:23)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 26 2006,07:20)]Does this really make any sense?
Does any of it?
#
When I passed my NCT exams in Mar 1995 they consisted of the novice and tech written. The HF material I learned in the novice test was of no use to me for I was not permitted HF privs.

Today the tech written (no novice test any more) does not touch on HF to speak of yet some newbie who passes it with the element 1 gets HF privs.
The only HF privs you would have gotten were CW and a small segment of phone anyway. It would have been of little use to you.

[KB3LIX]

Quote[/b] (n3jja @ Sep. 27 2006,09:47)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 27 2006,09:20)]It is interesting that you can pass the code test and get a CSCE, get on HF and then get bounced off when the CSCE expires.
Somehow, this doesn't sound quite right. Are you absolutely sure about that, George?

I think an email to Riley is in order on this one. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
A CSCE for element 1 morse code credit is valid for operation as a Technician with HF as long as the license
remains valid.

ie: a person operating as a Technician with HF can operate until he/she is old and grey as long as the license remains valid.

The CSCE is valid for upgrade purposes (to General or Extra) for 365 days. After 365 days the CSCE is no longer valid to upgrade, and a new element 1 test is required to go to general or extra.

[KB3LIX]

Quote[/b] (w8cbc @ Sep. 27 2006,08:58)]'LIX: Quote[/b] ]Note,
there is NO indication in a callsign lookup if someone is a 'Tech with HF', the record will only indicate "Technician"


I wonder how many Techs with the Element 1 CSCE get mistakenly ratted on and/or told to get off HF because the quick lookup doesn't show they're allowed in there.

10-metre 'phone can get plenty busy when there's Es happening.
I have already experienced this phenom.

This past summer, during a 10 meter opening, I worked a Florida station. Long after the contact was over, I looked up his call for some stupid reason, and lo and behold, it indicated
'Technician'

My first thought was "Bootlegger", but then it hit me, he must be a Technician with HF.

That notation on a callsign lookup would not take that many more bytes, I really do not see why that little bit of information is not included in a record. Possibly that omission decreases a secretary's time to transcribe a record in the ULS database by 1mS.

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,05:14)]You are amazing.
Thank you for the compliment!

My children think I am amazing because, much to their dismay, much of what I told them when they were growing up is turning out to be true now that they are getting older.

My grandchildren think I amazing because I seem to be an endless source of candy, cookies, hugs and pony rides on my knee whenever they come over.

My mother, well she is biased anyway.

And my wife, it depends on what day you ask her!

I am very well aware of the definition of the word if and the concept of hypothetical. Apparently you don't know the definition of the word never Mr. Knox.

I was just a bit surprised that you might even remotely consider taking a code test given your "when Hell freezes over" and "Never have, never will" attitude towards it. Your attitude (at least up to this point) seems to have likened learning and using Morse code to getting a proctological examination without lubrication.

You think I am maniacal? I have been quoted here on things I have said years ago. Finding your quotes was easy since you said all of those things within the last month.

I have an old Nye Viking Master Key straight key with a large "Navy" style knob that I don't use any more. I will make this offer to you in front of all these witnesses: If you can show me a CSCE for passing Element 1 from now to the end of the year, I will give you that key. Furthermore, it must be at a publicized VE session that I can verify. (Its my key. I can make the rules) I don't have a picture of mine, but there is an identical one up for bid on eBay at <a href="http://cgi.ebay.com/EXCELLENT-CONDITION-WM-NYE-CO-TELEGRAPH-MASTER-KEY_W0QQitemZ110037671184QQihZ001QQcategory










Z48706QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem" target="_blank">http://cgi.ebay.com/EXCELLE....iewItem</a>

Good luck!

Scott NØIU

[N2RJ]

Okay looks like a another NCT argument thread is heading for the lock.

[KM5FL]

Quote[/b] (KC0W @ Sep. 27 2006,10:02)]Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 27 2006,12:11)]...yep, some folks WILL lie to ya, in a heartbeat.

Once they lie to ME, they aint my friend no mo'.
Kinda reminds me of a guy who said he was at a Hamfest, but really was not. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif


# # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #Tom kcØw
If EP cannot meet the requirements he established to be a friend of "his selves", how can he expect "his selves" to be a friend of ours???

EP:
Here's some good advice that my mother once gave me. If you always tell the truth, you'll never have to remember what you said.. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

KM5FL

[KI4PEQ]

IMHO, if you know the code and have only taken the Tech written, it's not that big of a reach to hit the books a little more and go for the General. I'm studying both the code and the General material, and I was pleasantly surprised at how much I knew already on the written question pool.

It's just a matter of developing that ear for the code that is keeping me back. It will come in time, hopefully by next Field Day.

[n7rjd]

Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Sep. 26 2006,23:56)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 26 2006,18:50)]I passed the novice and tech written exams back in 1995. If I passed the 5 wpm exam now...
Oh please! Who are you kidding?? We all know that the Prince of Darkness will be shoveling snow the day William S. Knox takes Element 1.

Here are his own words from a posting on another topic:

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 19 2006,05:40)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Sep. 18 2006,10:42)]If you want to get on HF anytime soon, better just study the material and pass Element 1.
I'm fully prepared to wait untill hell freezes over and I'm not alone.
And from posting on yet another subject...
Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Aug. 28 2006,07:18)]I'm a tech lite and proud of it. I never touched the Morse monkey to please the forces that be. Never will either, and before you say how much I'm at a loss for, don't flatter yourself.

Seems like our Mr. Knox speak with forked tongue!

Scott NØIU
Last I heard jty is still sticking to what he said in the statements you quoted.

Asking for clarification of a rule does not mean he has changed his position or that he is claiming to have done so.

[ab9lz]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 27 2006,11:54)]Okay looks like a another NCT argument thread is heading for the lock.
Betcha a five spot this one doesn't make it past page two before the 'almighty says "enuff"

73 m.

[N4AUD]

It didn't seem to me that he was even considering taking the test, he was just discussing how strange the rule is, or that's the way I understood it. I already knew he wasn't interested in learning code.

[w8cbc]

KM5FL: Quote[/b] ]Here's some good advice that my mother once gave me. If you always tell the truth, you'll never have to remember what you said..

My take on it is more that "Honesty is easier than having to mount a defence". http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[KM5FL]

Quote[/b] (w8cbc @ Sep. 27 2006,19:00)]KM5FL: Quote[/b] ]Here's some good advice that my mother once gave me. If you always tell the truth, you'll never have to remember what you said..

My take on it is more that "Honesty is easier than having to mount a defence". #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Yeah CBC, exactly. But most of the time that defense consists of more lies. You know, tell a lie to cover a lie, and then tell another one to cover that one..

One thing you gotta admit though. It's a darn good way to up one's post count. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif


KM5FL

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 26 2006,23:50)]I guess the general class is the entry into HF license now. Never thought about it before. I thought a newbie who now passed the tech written & the 5 wpm exam got the old tech plus privs.
I passed the novice and tech written exams back in 1995. If I passed the 5 wpm exam now I would gain no additional privs. The whole thing seems so far out.
if you pass element 1, you still do pick up the old novice privileges!

all you have to do is retain the exam completion certificate with your licence and you're in business! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[W4NOV]

To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)

[K9STH]

NOV:

Most VE teams will accept a Callbook listing as proof.

You might contact the ARRL directly and see if they will help.

Glen, K9STH

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 26 2006,11:54)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,12:23)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 26 2006,07:20)]Does this really make any sense?
Does any of it?
#
When I passed my NCT exams in Mar 1995 they consisted of the novice and tech written. The HF material I learned in the novice test was of no use to me for I was not permitted HF privs.

Today the tech written (no novice test any more) does not touch on HF to speak of yet some newbie who passes it with the element 1 gets HF privs.
The only HF privs you would have gotten were CW and a small segment of phone anyway. #It would have been of little use to you.
give it up

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Sep. 26 2006,12:42)]Scott NØIU
Dear Scott, I'll bet you're a great guy. There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.

You can look up all my post posts, some of them are doozies. I stand behind them all. Thank you for the gracious offer of the straight key. I know these things hold great value for some of you. I think an offer of $1k or $2k would be more alluring but I still don't think it would do the trick.

Code isn't for everyone. Even for those who love 2 way radio.

[ai4ep]

...hee hee hee

guess who is reading these posts but not saying a word ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
all you need is a copy of a callbook listing to present to the ve team before she takes the test. that is all i had to do back in 2002 to get back into radio. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[KB3LIX]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,21:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Most, if not all of the old FCC records are probably still 'on paper'. Trying to find an old paper file/record
of her license, is very likely impossible.

As Glen says, call book listings are acceptable to my VE team. There have been several instances recently where
callbook records have been used to prove previous licensing, or show age of original licensing.

Possibly your area VE teams are from a VEC other than the ARRL. Try to find an ARRL sponsored team in your area. The information on accepting the callbook records are plainly spelled out in the ARRL VE training/information manual.

A good guy to talk to at the ARRL is Perry Green (WY1O).

He helped me resolve a SNAFU when I was applying for certification as a VE.

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. As long as it was good beer anyway. Life is too short to drink bad beer.

[n7rjd]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 27 2006,14:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. As long as it was good beer anyway. Life is too short to drink bad beer.
I wouldn't "do beers" with anyone on these boards. Nothing against the people on the boards, I just do not drink. I would be happy to sit with anyone of you as you drink your beer as long as someone keeps the Diet Pepsi pouring. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Shop around for a different VE team, the one you are dealing with is being ridiculous.

Come out to AZ and we will gladly accomodate you.

Joe

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KI4PEQ @ Sep. 26 2006,15:17)]It's just a matter of developing that ear for the code that is keeping me back. It will come in time, hopefully by next Field Day.
*clink* another nickel in the bucket.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (ab9lz @ Sep. 26 2006,16:24)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 27 2006,11:54)]Okay looks like a another NCT argument thread is heading for the lock.
Betcha a five spot this one doesn't make it past page two before the 'almighty says "enuff"

73 m.
all's I gotta do is shut up and you lost the bet.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 26 2006,21:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. #As long as it was good beer anyway. #Life is too short to drink bad beer.
...now for the nut cracker....what do you like?

[W0BLH]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,20:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
My wife held a Technician ticket from 1980 and when the reqirements were relaxed to 5 WPM in April of 2000 she was upgraded to General just by appearing at a VEC testing and paying about $6. There were about 50 others getting their upgrades at the same time. The old written test was the same for General and Tech until about 1987, I think. They accepted a QRZ old lookup in some cases. QRZ still has their first disc on site. Good luck in your quest!

BLH

Novice>Technician>Extra

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,16:04)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 26 2006,21:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. As long as it was good beer anyway. Life is too short to drink bad beer.
...now for the nut cracker....what do you like?
Being from St. Louis, I know too many people who work at Anheuser Busch to drink anything else!

Scott NØIU

[kc7jty]

Now the question is: I wonder how many previous tech pluses are waiting for the Morse requirement to drop so they don't have to retest with Morse to upgrade?

Had I passed my 5 wpm back in 1995, I would have to jump through the hoop again to achieve general now. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,23:11)]Now the question is: I wonder how many previous tech pluses are waiting for the Morse requirement to drop so they don't have to retest with Morse to upgrade?

Had I passed my 5 wpm back in 1995, I would have to jump through the hoop again to achieve general now. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif
if you had passed the element 1 back then, you would not have to take it again to upgrade as long as you could show either an old licence or a callbook listing as a tech +

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Sep. 27 2006,00:14)]if you had passed the element 1 back then, you would not have to take it again to upgrade as long as you could show either an old licence or a callbook listing as a tech +
When is the cutoff date? I was told tonight it was Feb. 1991. Anyone who passed the 5 wpm after that date has to retest to upgrade from tech with HF.

[ka5piu]

Hello.

Here is the question for the pool.
What about a novice with 13 WPM credit?
The call KA5PIU was my first ham call, issued to me in 1969.
I was a military brat at Kadena air base.
I was sent out of the US due to citizenship issues
In 1971 I was brought to the city of Houston to correct the errors, I retested at the FCC office.
I was promptly sent to Canada until the end of the Vietnam
conflict, so another day in Houston was out of the question.
In 1974 the Japanese government took back the island, but recomended that I be allowed to keep my call as a goodwill gesture.
I still have the letter from the FCC.
What kept me from upgrading was the fact that I was promptly sent to Canada, where I stayed until the end of the draft, parents decided this for me, so the visit to the city of Houston was very brief indeed.

[n0iu]

KA5PIU,

Why worry about getting any sort of credit for passing the 13 WPM test? You hold a current Novice license which gives you LIFETIME credit for the 5 WPM code test and that is all that is required for upgrading to General and Extra. All you need to do now is leave the 70's behind you and take the Technician, General and Extra written tests and you never have to worry about it ever again!

Scott NØIU

[KM5FL]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 27 2006,21:45)]...hee hee hee

guess who is reading these posts but not saying a word ? # # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
ROTFLMAO!! Good move.

More Of my Mother's wisdom:

It's better to be safe than sorry.. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

KM5FL

[W4NOV]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 27 2006,20:34)]Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Shop around for a different VE team, the one you are dealing with is being ridiculous.

Come out to AZ and we will gladly accomodate you.

Joe
Sure would, but long way from NW GA Mountains.. :-) - Anyone know of a VE with a better grasp on Callbook being OK (and hopefully having and old one! )

BTW: Someone said they have old CD's or listings accessible here on QRZ - Do they go back to the 70's and earlier, and where doth they live here?? :-) )

Anyhooo, she's almost at the point of "let it go.." BECAUSE the local VE says "We VE's can't accept Callbook info - must be in writing from the FCC" (or words to that effect) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif We've tried twice to get a confirmation from said VE, but NADA. I'd rather not name him, OK?

Now, it IS correct, is it not, THAT she CAN get automatic Upgrade to General if licensed since pre-1978?? Let me SURE we have THAT right, at least! :-)

Our son is on HF down in FL, and she has always wanted to use 80 or 40 to sked with him, as I do now and then, from the mobile rig and from the home rig..

73 es G'Bless..

Tom
W4NOV (ex WN1VBZ, W1WJR, A1WJR, O1AK/mm) :-)
XYL WA1LUT
Son KB4OMO
Dad (SK) K1EEL
Uncle (SK) W1FWK
GrandDad (SK) 1TM (Spark)

[ac3p]

Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank

[W0BLH]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 28 2006,11:22)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 27 2006,20:34)]Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Shop around for a different VE team, the one you are dealing with is being ridiculous.

Come out to AZ and we will gladly accomodate you.

Joe
Sure would, but long way from NW GA Mountains.. :-) - Anyone know of a VE with a better grasp on Callbook being OK (and hopefully having and old one! )

BTW: Someone said they have old CD's or listings accessible here on QRZ - Do they go back to the 70's and earlier, and where doth they live here?? :-) )

Anyhooo, she's almost at the point of "let it go.." BECAUSE the local VE says "We VE's can't accept Callbook info - must be in writing from the FCC" (or words to that effect) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #We've tried twice to get a confirmation from said VE, but NADA. I'd rather not name him, OK?

Now, it IS correct, is it not, THAT she CAN get automatic Upgrade to General if licensed since pre-1978?? Let me SURE we have THAT right, at least! :-)

Our son is on HF down in FL, and she has always wanted to use 80 or 40 to sked with him, as I do now and then, from the mobile rig and from the home rig..

73 es G'Bless..

Tom
W4NOV (ex WN1VBZ, W1WJR, A1WJR, O1AK/mm) #:-)
XYL WA1LUT
Son KB4OMO
Dad (SK) K1EEL
Uncle (SK) W1FWK
GrandDad (SK) 1TM (Spark)
It is pre 1987, not 1978. Look up call on QRZ under Old Call Signs on left banner. The tickets were good for 10 years and her number is listed as assigned the last renewal as 1986 in the 1991 call sign. She is good to go for General.

BLH

[k4kyv]

I passed my Extra in 1963, so have never bothered to keep up with the minute details of the licence requirements today.

I thought the Technician licence was the same as the General, except that the code requirement was 5 wpm instead of 13. When they cut the code requirement down to 5 wpm for all, didn't that make the old Technician licence (with code) the same as the General? I thought to-day's Tech exam was basically the General without a code test, which was eliminated sometime in the 1990's.

I seem to recall that the upgrade to General did not come automatically with the code speed reduction, but that all you had to do to upgrade was submit an application, with no further testing requirements.

So how is the no-code Tech different from General other than the 5 wpm code requirement?

[ab9lz]

Quote[/b] (k4kyv @ Sep. 28 2006,14:50)]So how is the no-code Tech different from General other #than the 5 wpm code requirement?
They made the question pools on all of the tests much easier, A moderately technical but uninitiated to ham radio person can pretty much guess thier way though most of the questions in any of the pools. My 10 year old son succesfully guessed his way through the tech pool. Finds morse code to be easy, but thinks the whole ham radio thing is for fat dorks.... I have to work on that part.

73 Mark.

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 28 2006,09:22)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 27 2006,20:34)]Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Shop around for a different VE team, the one you are dealing with is being ridiculous.

Come out to AZ and we will gladly accomodate you.

Joe
Sure would, but long way from NW GA Mountains.. :-) - Anyone know of a VE with a better grasp on Callbook being OK (and hopefully having and old one! )

BTW: Someone said they have old CD's or listings accessible here on QRZ - Do they go back to the 70's and earlier, and where doth they live here?? :-) )

Anyhooo, she's almost at the point of "let it go.." BECAUSE the local VE says "We VE's can't accept Callbook info - must be in writing from the FCC" (or words to that effect) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #We've tried twice to get a confirmation from said VE, but NADA. I'd rather not name him, OK?

Now, it IS correct, is it not, THAT she CAN get automatic Upgrade to General if licensed since pre-1978?? Let me SURE we have THAT right, at least! :-)

Our son is on HF down in FL, and she has always wanted to use 80 or 40 to sked with him, as I do now and then, from the mobile rig and from the home rig..

73 es G'Bless..

Tom
W4NOV (ex WN1VBZ, W1WJR, A1WJR, O1AK/mm) #:-)
XYL WA1LUT
Son KB4OMO
Dad (SK) K1EEL
Uncle (SK) W1FWK
GrandDad (SK) 1TM (Spark)
She can get an automatic upgrade to general, just by filling out the forms, paying the fee, and submitting that to the VE for filing, along with proof that she was a licensed tech prior to 1987. VE teams are given a lot of leeway in determining how people pass tests, or what documents are suitable. Some will demand an old license, most will take callbook info.

Here is a link to all the documentation that should be necessary to prove pre-1987 license status:

Linky (http://www.qrz.com/p/1993.pl?callsign=WA1LUT)

Find another VE in your area, they can't all be this way.

Joe

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 28 2006,00:04)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 26 2006,21:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. #As long as it was good beer anyway. #Life is too short to drink bad beer.
...now for the nut cracker....what do you like?
Heineken. Corona. XX. Urquel. Rolling Rock (not the damn li'l bottles, though; waste of time).

No ales, thanks just the same; raw beer, leave it in the laager. Nothing from Coors, especially the water in the silver can.

And no Budweiser, which is what they extract from those Clydesdales when nobody is watching.

Get out this way, I'll set ye up.

[W4NOV]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 28 2006,16:26)]Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 28 2006,09:22)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 27 2006,20:34)]Quote[/b] (W4NOV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:48)]To further muddy the H2O, my XYL has continuously held her WA1LUT Tech call since the mid-60's, and we understand that upon proof of being licensed pre-1978(?), she can get an automatic upgrade from her current TECH-PLUS to General..

Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)

We have pestered FCC for 2-3 months, and have had good e-mails with one of the Inspectors(?) there, but they have not delivered ANYTHING, except friendly/kind responses, sans any help or proof whatsoever.

She is stone-walled, and nobody at The Friendly Candy Company seems to be able to look back beyond a few years (which we can do on-line)..

anyone help??? :-(

Tom, W4NOV (ex W1WJR, WN1VBZ)
Shop around for a different VE team, the one you are dealing with is being ridiculous.

Come out to AZ and we will gladly accomodate you.

Joe
Sure would, but long way from NW GA Mountains.. :-) - Anyone know of a VE with a better grasp on Callbook being OK (and hopefully having and old one! )

BTW: Someone said they have old CD's or listings accessible here on QRZ - Do they go back to the 70's and earlier, and where doth they live here?? :-) )

Anyhooo, she's almost at the point of "let it go.." BECAUSE the local VE says "We VE's can't accept Callbook info - must be in writing from the FCC" (or words to that effect) http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #We've tried twice to get a confirmation from said VE, but NADA. I'd rather not name him, OK?

Now, it IS correct, is it not, THAT she CAN get automatic Upgrade to General if licensed since pre-1978?? Let me SURE we have THAT right, at least! :-)

Our son is on HF down in FL, and she has always wanted to use 80 or 40 to sked with him, as I do now and then, from the mobile rig and from the home rig..

73 es G'Bless..

Tom
W4NOV (ex WN1VBZ, W1WJR, A1WJR, O1AK/mm) #:-)
XYL WA1LUT
Son KB4OMO
Dad (SK) K1EEL
Uncle (SK) W1FWK
GrandDad (SK) 1TM (Spark)
She can get an automatic upgrade to general, just by filling out the forms, paying the fee, and submitting that to the VE for filing, along with proof that she was a licensed tech prior to 1987. VE teams are given a lot of leeway in determining how people pass tests, or what documents are suitable. Some will demand an old license, most will take callbook info.

Here is a link to all the documentation that should be necessary to prove pre-1987 license status:

Linky (http://www.qrz.com/p/1993.pl?callsign=WA1LUT)

Find another VE in your area, they can't all be this way.

Joe
TNX!! Good Info - And printed it out.. If you will look at HER effective date and MY effective date, you will note they are the same date.

That was after our Maritime Mobile (#2 time) sailing jaunt (http://w32.org), when we swallowed the anchor after she got REAL sick in the Islands and was medevac'ed out to Boston, where I joined her after sailing back to the USA with my young son as crew and dead-storing SYRINX in Cape Canaveral. (our current home QTH).

FWIW: It was around that 1986 period that we moved to NH and changed the address to NH just as we renewed.
But still can't get an earlier proof.

HEY: anyone got an old Callbook that could send us a copy of that page to the address in our QRZ listing (POB 73) - Maybe even find my W1WJR listing somewhere. ? (switched to W4NOV somewhere in 70's i think - when they said NO MORE 2 CALLSIGNS, OM!!) To find my original 1951-1953 [forget which year] Novice listing would probably be impossible, but cool :-) )

BUT: Back to upgrades to General: Local VE says "uh-uh" to Callbook "proof", and with the PPS thing and her Insulin-pump diabetes, we don't drive much, so why is it impossible, with these proofs accepted widely elsewhere, and a fee that can be paid easily, can she not go through the wickets with a VE by Mail/FTP/etc. without having to search for an up-to-date VE?? (Or ingratiate onself to Mr. Local VE?) (With a Wouffhong!) ;-)

Seeing as it is a no-testing upgrade, required proofs are in place, ID and VE-Fee Payment is no problem, can anyone answer: Why Not?? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

Feel free to answer here, or in a PM or to me at tom@w4nov.us if desired. :-)

Tom, Whiskey 4 Nautical Old Varmint.. :-)

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:39)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 28 2006,00:04)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 26 2006,21:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. #As long as it was good beer anyway. #Life is too short to drink bad beer.
...now for the nut cracker....what do you like?
Heineken. Corona. XX. Urquel. Rolling Rock (not the damn li'l bottles, though; waste of time).

No ales, thanks just the same; raw beer, leave it in the laager. Nothing from Coors, especially the water in the silver can.

And no Budweiser, which is what they extract from those Clydesdales when nobody is watching.

Get out this way, I'll set ye up.
Urquell is the only thing mentioned that rings my bell. Czechvar (the ORIGINAL Budweiser) is even better, and if you can get it fresh from a just tapped keg.....EEYUMMY!!

[KC9ECI]

I guess if you guys aren't going to drink beer, I'm not going to either.

[K7JBQ]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 28 2006,20:06)]Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Sep. 27 2006,18:39)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 28 2006,00:04)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 26 2006,21:12)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 27 2006,21:34)]There is not (with the exception of one who is a moderator on hamsexy) one person on this board I wouldn't like to meet and maybe do some beers with.
I wouldn't have a problem doing beers with anyone one this board. #As long as it was good beer anyway. #Life is too short to drink bad beer.
...now for the nut cracker....what do you like?
Heineken. Corona. XX. Urquel. Rolling Rock (not the damn li'l bottles, though; waste of time).

No ales, thanks just the same; raw beer, leave it in the laager. Nothing from Coors, especially the water in the silver can.

And no Budweiser, which is what they extract from those Clydesdales when nobody is watching.

Get out this way, I'll set ye up.
Urquell is the only thing mentioned that rings my bell. Czechvar (the ORIGINAL Budweiser) is even better, and if you can get it fresh from a just tapped keg.....EEYUMMY!!
I have only one thing to say:

1664.

73,
Bill

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 27 2006,21:30)]I guess if you guys aren't going to drink beer, I'm not going to either.
Urquell & Czechvar are beer all right. Would you care to elaborate?

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Sep. 28 2006,00:20)]1664.

73,
Bill
What the heck is that? Did you mean 1554?

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 29 2006,01:40)]Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Sep. 28 2006,00:20)]1664.

73,
Bill
What the heck is that? Did you mean 1554?
I'd drink Kronenberg. Nothing like a fresh pulled pint in the pub.

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Sep. 28 2006,14:54)]Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank
Its too bad that different VEs have differing requirements as to what constitutes proof of having passed the code test. The callbook has been the defacto means of proof, assuming you can prove who you are.

That some VEs will not accept the callbook as proof creates a bi level system of verification which results in confusion and denial of credit by some VEs but acceptance of others. This results in something like the luck of the draw. There should be an enforcable standard for VEs as to what constitutes proof. I wonder if anyone has ever petition the VECs about this.

73
George
K3UD

[N2RJ]

Many VEs do not understand all of the rules and regulations.

For example, when I did not have a SSN, I was refused at a VE session. I was a newly arrived immigrant and didn't have a SSN yet, but I wanted to do the right thing and get a US FCC ham license. However they said I must have a SSN in order to fill out the TIN portion of the 605.

What a load of crap! I know people overseas who are doing VE sessions and they do not have SSN's. All you need is ID and a US address. The FCC will issue a license to anyone no matter what their citizenship status is, as long as they have a US address for the license to go to.

Anyway, I came back when I got my SSN and did my exams. Ironically enough I now serve on the VE team at that same club. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ab9lz]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 29 2006,03:28)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 29 2006,01:40)]Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Sep. 28 2006,00:20)]1664.

73,
Bill
What the heck is that? Did you mean 1554?
I'd drink Kronenberg. #Nothing like a fresh pulled pint in the pub.
You can get Kronenebourg on tap, but you can't get one "pulled".... gotta be a real ale like ESB or my fave, Theakstons to do that.

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 28 2006,20:30)]I guess if you guys aren't going to drink beer, I'm not going to either.
Drink? I was thinking of starting a beer IV.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 28 2006,04:28)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 29 2006,01:40)]Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Sep. 28 2006,00:20)]1664.

73,
Bill
What the heck is that? Did you mean 1554?
I'd drink Kronenberg. #Nothing like a fresh pulled pint in the pub.
You must have spelled it wrong. I can't find it on the beer site.

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,07:16)]Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Sep. 28 2006,14:54)]Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank
Its too bad that different VEs have differing requirements as to what constitutes proof of having passed the code test. The callbook has been the defacto means of proof, assuming you can prove who you are.

That some VEs will not accept the callbook as proof creates a bi level system of verification which results in confusion and denial of credit by some VEs but acceptance of others. This results in something like the luck of the draw. There should be an enforcable standard for VEs as to what constitutes proof. I wonder if anyone has ever petition the VECs about this.

73
George
K3UD
In the VE sessions I've served at, we usually require a license copy.

In fact that has to be submitted along with the 605 and CSCEs/test papers (if any).

I have never seen an old call book being used.

[kc7jty]

I found it. It sure doesn't rate very highly.

http://ratebeer.com/Beer/kronenbourg-1664/4459/

[KC9ECI]

There's no accounting for taste.

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 29 2006,11:43)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,07:16)]Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Sep. 28 2006,14:54)]Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank
Its too bad that different VEs have differing requirements as to what constitutes proof of having passed the code test. The callbook has been the defacto means of proof, assuming you can prove who you are.

That some VEs will not accept the callbook as proof creates a bi level system of verification which results in confusion and denial of credit by some VEs but acceptance of others. This results in something like the luck of the draw. There should be an enforcable standard for VEs as to what constitutes proof. I wonder if anyone has ever petition the VECs about this.

73
George
K3UD
In the VE sessions I've served at, we usually require a license copy.

In fact that has to be submitted along with the 605 and CSCEs/test papers (if any).

I have never seen an old call book being used.
Many hams who were licensed long ago do not have a copy of the license and the FCC has lost all its licensing data prior to 1970. The callbook is usually accepted because it is known to be accurate. Over the last 3 years I have sent out scanned copies of callbook pages and covers to a number of ex hams who needed verification that they were in deed a ham who had passed a code test or had been a Tech before 1987. All of them were able to present this as proof to the VE teams.

There is something seriously wrong with the system when varying VE teams can also vary the requirements.

73
George
K3UD

[N2RJ]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,12:36)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 29 2006,11:43)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,07:16)]Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Sep. 28 2006,14:54)]Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank
Its too bad that different VEs have differing requirements as to what constitutes proof of having passed the code test. The callbook has been the defacto means of proof, assuming you can prove who you are.

That some VEs will not accept the callbook as proof creates a bi level system of verification which results in confusion and denial of credit by some VEs but acceptance of others. This results in something like the luck of the draw. There should be an enforcable standard for VEs as to what constitutes proof. I wonder if anyone has ever petition the VECs about this.

73
George
K3UD
In the VE sessions I've served at, we usually require a license copy.

In fact that has to be submitted along with the 605 and CSCEs/test papers (if any).

I have never seen an old call book being used.
Many hams who were licensed long ago do not have a copy of the license and the FCC has lost all its licensing data prior to 1970. The callbook is usually accepted because it is known to be accurate. Over the last 3 years I have sent out scanned copies of callbook pages and covers to a number of ex hams who needed verification that they were in deed a ham who had passed a code test or had been a Tech before 1987. All of them were able to present this as proof to the VE teams.

There is something seriously wrong with the system when varying VE teams can also vary the requirements.

73
George
K3UD
Well to be quite honest I did not see that many people using novice credit anyway. In fact most of the people who came there were either going for their first license or upgrading a Tech or General.

[ai4ep]

:rock: Well, now we have a dilemma...

Two amateur radio families are about the be joined by --
The son is an Extra, all in his family are EXTRA class , been that way for years.

The young lady, whose entire family is also EXTRA class except for her youngest brother, who is a TECHNICIAN, and also uses and operates a cb radio station in his house trailer.

The young MAN s family sees a problem in the marriage idea.

What would " Dear ABBY " say ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,10:36)]Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Sep. 29 2006,11:43)]Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,07:16)]Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Sep. 28 2006,14:54)]Quote[/b] ]Local VE says she **MUST** have a copy of earlier license, OR a Proof of early-licensing from the FCC (Despite her being in callbooks all the way back to the 60's)


Some VEC will accept callbook entries. Others do not.

My VE team does. We have "Grandfathered" or "Grandmothered" several old Techs to General with no repercussions from the ARRL VEC or the FCC.

73

Frank
Its too bad that different VEs have differing requirements as to what constitutes proof of having passed the code test. The callbook has been the defacto means of proof, assuming you can prove who you are.

That some VEs will not accept the callbook as proof creates a bi level system of verification which results in confusion and denial of credit by some VEs but acceptance of others. This results in something like the luck of the draw. There should be an enforcable standard for VEs as to what constitutes proof. I wonder if anyone has ever petition the VECs about this.

73
George
K3UD
In the VE sessions I've served at, we usually require a license copy.

In fact that has to be submitted along with the 605 and CSCEs/test papers (if any). #

I have never seen an old call book being used.
Many hams who were licensed long ago do not have a copy of the license and the FCC has lost all its licensing data prior to 1970. The callbook is usually accepted because it is known to be accurate. Over the last 3 years I have sent out scanned copies of callbook pages and covers to a number of ex hams who needed verification that they were in deed a ham who had passed a code test or had been a Tech before 1987. All of them were able to present this as proof to the VE teams.

There is something seriously wrong with the system when varying VE teams can also vary the requirements.

73
George
K3UD
Absolutely. You shouldn't have to "shop around" for a VE team to do something that is considered legal. Here is an exerpt from what William Cross of the FCC said at Dayton, 2000, just after the restructuring:

"A Tech Plus license renewed as a Tech license has a statement on it that, in essence, tells VEs that the person previously held a Tech + Class operator license and therefore is eligible for credit for the telegraphy exam. Or the VEs can use an old license, a CSCE within that past 365 days, a Callbook magazine entry, or some other documentation. The FCC’s rules do not limit the documentation the VEs can use to satisfy themselves that you held a particular operator license in the past."


That seems pretty clear to me. If it's good enough for the FCC, it ought to be good enough for the VE team. A callbook entry would be better proof to me that someone had held a previous license, as opposed to a copy of an old license. With today's computer technology, it would be easy to fake a copy of an old license. You couldn't do that with an old database or callbook. The only question for VE's would be to satisfy themselves that the person there is actually the person in the database.

In this case, the ham has held her callsign for over 25 years, and still holds it- there is no question that she is the holder of that callsign, just when it was issued. The QRZ database shows that the license was obtained or renewed in 1986, which is several months before the 1987 cutoff for credit. Therefore, any VE team should take that into account, and not "punish" someone because they can't produce an old license.

Joe

[ai4ep]

IMHO---

1) gather up all the information you have

2) go some where else besides where you already have ( another city , county or even state ) and let THEM see the information that you have , in a relaxed situation with open minds...and see what happens.

DO NOT try this just before a testing session, or directly after one when they are busy with the evenings tests, other folks needing to get their situations finished...but let the VE know that you will need their undivided attention 15 - 30 minutes AFTER all the others have left....THEN put your information out on the table ( large or small pile ) and let each of the VE go over it individually and see what their final decision is. ( 9 times out of 10 they SHOULD let the paperwork speak for itself in what ever manner it is ) .

Then whether you agree or disagree with their decision, offer to buy each and every one a meal to compensake for their individual time. ( do not offer money )Remember these are volunteers, and they may need to make a couple of cell phone calls to others who may need to come by and assist.

You may have to make more than one trip, VE do have other things going on in their lives, and you may have to make a special trip or two.

**be sure that the individual who name is on the paperwork is there IN PERSON to answer any and all questions from the V E .

*** MAKE COPIES of any and all documents

*** do not just rely on one copy from 19xx

*** make copies of EVERY THING, even what does not seem important ***

**be polite and patient to any one involved in the decision making process, even their wives & kids if they are around

* Do not " badmouth " another VE session you may have seen before, this makes YOU look like you have something to hide/fraud / guilty .

++ PRAY ++

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 29 2006,05:47)]:rock: # Well, now we have a dilemma...

Two amateur radio families are about the be joined by --
The son is an Extra, all in his family are EXTRA class , been that way for years. #

The young lady, whose entire family is also EXTRA class except for her youngest brother, who is a TECHNICIAN, and also uses and operates a cb radio station in his house trailer.

The young MAN s family sees a problem in the marriage idea.

What would " Dear ABBY " say ? # # # http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif # # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
Reminds me of the story about the Yagi that married the Dipole. The wedding wasn't that great, but the reception was fabulous!

[ac3p]

Lots of different interpretations here.

Here is the low down :

Grandfather Credit (http://www.arrl.org/arrlvec/grandfather.html)


When someone come to our test sessions looking to get credit for the code test or to grandgather to General, we ask for the paperwork in advance of the session and try to clear it with the VEC ahead of time. That way things work out smoothly.

[K7JEM]

That's a very good link. If the VE is affiliated with the ARRL, it seems that they would follow these guidelines as outlined. One of the options for proof is the QRZ.com "old" database. It seems to me that if you show the VE team the website from the ARRL, and the QRZ.com database, then you have met the obligation that the ARRL has set forth. I don't know how they could refuse to accept something that is OK by the FCC and the ARRL, which is where they derive their authority to conduct VE exams.

Joe

[WA9SVD]

Quote[/b] (N5LRZ @ Sep. 27 2006,05:29)]You will of course after passing the Code Certification gain access to the 10 meter phone band and the CW Novice Bands. When the Solar Cycle starts to turn more active this privledge will become very much a good thing. The 10 meter phone band will come alive with DX.
Not quite; he only gets privileges in the NOVICE portion of the 10 Meter phone band, and at the Novice power limit. He also gets all other Novice HF privileges.
But there's much more to the "Phone" portion of 10 Meters than the 28.300-28.500 MHZ slice allowed Novices (And Tech+/Tech with HF.)
But there's such a small step from Tech written to General, there's little reason NOT to upgrade. (Remember, at one time, the Tech and General written exams were identical!) Most people, having gotten over the "hurdle" of Element 1, should have little trouble upgrading to General in the 365 days allowed a CSCE, even if they have no interest or equipment in HF. They don't HAVE to operate on HF, but they WILL have the privileges when or if they wish to exercise them.

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif Does this mean that I do NOT have to talk on HF, and can just talk on 2 meter repeaters...like I used to before I passed my " oh-so-easy 5 wpm morse code test " http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

...and that, IF I still owned one, could talk on a C B radio, too ?

if the answer is yes, let us not let the FCC know about it...ok ? be our little secret.

shhh !!

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 28 2006,10:45)]There's no accounting for taste.
you're on thin ice

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif Yep...with GLOBAL WARMING going on, good solid thick ICE is getting hard to find.

This winter, when certain areas of this great nation are covered with ice & snow, tell them about GLOBAL WARMING...see if they dont throw a snowball at ya !! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[NN4RH]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 29 2006,14:49)]IMHO---

1) gather up all the information you have

2) go some where else besides where you already have ( another city , county or even state ) and let THEM see the information that you have , in a relaxed situation with open minds...and see what happens.

DO NOT try this just before a testing session, or directly after one when they are busy with the evenings tests, other folks needing to get their situations finished...but let the VE know that you will need their undivided attention 15 - 30 minutes AFTER all the others have left....THEN put your information out on the table ( large or small pile ) and let each of the VE go over it individually and see what their final decision is. ( 9 times out of 10 they SHOULD let the paperwork speak for itself in what ever manner it is ) .

Then whether you agree or disagree with their decision, offer to buy each and every one a meal to compensake for their individual time. ( do not offer money )Remember these are volunteers, and they may need to make a couple of cell phone calls to others who may need to come by and assist.

You may have to make more than one trip, VE do have other things going on in their lives, and you may have to make a special trip or two.

**be sure that the individual who name is on the paperwork is there IN PERSON to answer any and all questions from the V E .

*** MAKE COPIES of any and all documents

*** do not just rely on one copy from 19xx

*** make copies of EVERY THING, even what does not seem important ***

**be polite and patient to any one involved in the decision making process, even their wives & kids if they are around

* Do not " badmouth " another VE session you may have seen before, this makes YOU look like you have something to hide/fraud / guilty .

++ PRAY ++
Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier on everyone to just relearn the code and pass the test?

[ai4ep]

RON --- you may have a point.

IF the folks DID learn cw years ago, some of it would still be able to be remembered in the brain, and the "re-learning process " would not have to be THAT hard to do or accomplish....just like "re-learning how to ride a bicycle " or " re-learning how to type correctly on a typewriter ", or " re-learning how to fry an egg "...etc.

So, with the respect that you DO deserve, most any of us can AGREE with your idea.

Also far simplier than messing with all the paperwork from the past...the time involved, travel, getting some one elses biased opinion....it COULD be far simplier and cheaper and faster to " re-learn " ...like you suggest.

After all, how many things that you really , really LEARNED have you ever forgotten ?

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (NN4RH @ Sep. 30 2006,17:29)]Wouldn't it be a whole lot easier on everyone to just relearn the code and pass the test?
Sure, if the person wanted to use the code. If the person has no interest in it, then it is much easier to produce some sort of document to present to the VE team for verification. Which is easier, learn (or relearn) code at a proficiency, which could take weeks or months, or get someone to photocopy a page from an old callbook, or print a page from QRZ.com?

One requires a fair amount of work and study, the other might take five minutes, or a couple of e-mails to persons known to have an old callbook and a page scanner.

Joe

[NN4RH]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Oct. 01 2006,01:36)]Which is easier, learn (or relearn) code at a proficiency, which could take weeks or months, or get someone to photocopy a page from an old callbook, or print a page from QRZ.com?

One requires a fair amount of work and study, the other might take five minutes, or a couple of e-mails to persons known to have an old callbook and a page scanner.
I learned the code over 30 years ago to get a Novice license, which then i let expire after a year or two and forgot about ham radio until 2001.

It took all of about 10 minutes a day for a couple of days listening to W1AW code practice files downloaded from the ARRL, for the code to come back, not weeks or months.

Bothering someone else to send me a photocopy of a 30 year call book page so that I could wimp out of a having to copy five words in Morse code, seemed like a silly thing to do. How could I ever have any self-esteem if I did that?

[K7JEM]

Quote[/b] (NN4RH @ Sep. 30 2006,23:38)]Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Oct. 01 2006,01:36)]Which is easier, learn (or relearn) code at a proficiency, which could take weeks or months, or get someone to photocopy a page from an old callbook, or print a page from QRZ.com?

One requires a fair amount of work and study, the other might take five minutes, or a couple of e-mails to persons known to have an old callbook and a page scanner.
I learned the code over 30 years ago to get a Novice license, which then i let expire after a year or two and forgot about ham radio until 2001.

It took all of about 10 minutes a day for a couple of days listening to W1AW code practice files downloaded from the ARRL, for the code to come back, not weeks or months.

Bothering someone else to send me a photocopy of a 30 year call book page so that I could wimp out of a having to copy five words in Morse code, seemed like a silly thing to do. How could I ever have any self-esteem if I did that?
Your self esteem is not the issue. If you need to take a code test to develop self esteem, then you have more deep rooted problems than we need to get into here. The fact that you can relearn code in ten minutes is not the issue. Most people cannot, especially if they were only marginal to begin with, and many years have passed.

If a person wants to learn code and use it, then that is a way to go. If a person has no use for the code, then it is much simpler to spend the ten minutes to find someone with an old callbook, or download the QRZ.com printout. This is accepted by most VE teams, some are very anal with what they want, or will accept. That seems to be the issue here.

This is not a code/no-code issue, rather one of what should be acceptable and legal proof for someone who has taken the test, and has been continually licensed for decades. It does not seem right that a VE can pick and choose the documentation required to show that proof, but that is the way it is.

Joe

[ai4ep]

But --- IF the individual actually DID learn CW at some point in their past, they SHOULD be able to remember some of it at the least....just as you would at frying an egg, riding a bicycle, typing on a typewriter ( keyboard ), etc.

The simple ( oh-so-easy ) 5 minute morse code test would help dramitically in " weeding out the folks who are faking any thing " and give great credit to those who are telling the truth ( few & far between these days ) .

Especially the folks who say " on the air " that they will / do qsl, yet you never recieve a card from them for you to send them one back.

And, of course those who can not / will not use the correct words for their call signs, but make up some other word which is usually longer, and is not recognisable by most other amateurs ---K for kangaroo instead of K for kilo --- B for boring instead of B for bravo --- T for tomorrow instead of T for tango......etc, etc, etc. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

I dont call those folks amateurs...just say they got lucky on test day. :rock:

[K7JEM]

The question is not whether people still remember SOME code, it is whether or not they still have the PROFICIENCY to pass a code test. The FCC doesn't (any longer) require that code proficiency, once a person has passed the test, even if they just eek by, even if that was 40 years ago. Today, once a person passes the test, they are in for life. The VE's are not allowed to "test" the applicant on whether or not they "remember" any of the code to get the "grandfather" credit. The rules say nothing of the sort. The grandfather credit is not a test, but rather documentation to support the fact that they have held a license in the past. If a person still has code proficiency or not is immaterial, they still get the code credit. Also, a person that has been a tech since before 1987 will also get credit for the general written, whether or not they would be able to pass that same test today.

You make the assumption that people are somehow "faking" the fact that they took a test, years ago. This is a very dangerous road to take, since many of these people have been around ham radio much longer than you. The mere fact that anyone would accuse a fellow ham of "faking" this fact speaks volumes about your personal integrity.

Why not accuse them of showing a fake drivers license for ID? Why not accuse them of presenting a phony amateur license when they come to the VE test session? These things can just as easily be "faked", no probably easier to fake them.

I hope you are not on a VE team, or never are allowed to join one. Your lack of insight is truly amazing.

Joe

[NN4RH]

Quote[/b] ]much simpler to spend the ten minutes to find someone with an old callbook, or download the QRZ.com printout. This is accepted by most VE teams, some are very anal with what they want, or will accept. That seems to be the issue here.

This is not a code/no-code issue, rather one of what should be acceptable and legal proof for someone who has taken the test, and has been continually licensed for decades. It does not seem right that a VE can pick and choose the documentation required to show that proof, but that is the way it is.

Actually it was about the guy earlier in the thread who complained that he has had to "pester" the FCC and the local VE for "2-3 months" over this, and still has been unable to come up with documentation needed for element 1 credit. Certainly if this person had spent just a few minutes a day relearning the code, they'd have their upgrade by now instead of being stressed out butting heads with beaurocracies.

And whatever the problem is, they're going about it the wrong way.

If you look up his QTH and then check the ARRL exam session website you find out that there are several VE groups/test sites within 50 miles of him, and all of them fall under the ARRL VEC.

So go to the ARRL VEC website and look up their grandfathering criteria. It's easy to find. If this fellow can produce any of the documentation that the ARRL VEC criteria requires, but one or more of his local VE groups is not accepting it, then he needs to contact the ARRL VEC about it, not waste time "pestering" the FCC or the local VE for "2-3 months".

[K7JEM]

Exactly. The VE team is not going to budge, unless questioned about it by the ARRL. He shouldn't have to spend any time pestering the VE team when he already has the required documentation.

Joe

Joe

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Sep. 27 2006,14:42)]I have an old Nye Viking Master Key straight key with a large "Navy" style knob that I don't use any more. I will make this offer to you in front of all these witnesses: If you can show me a CSCE for passing Element 1 from now to the end of the year, I will give you that key. Furthermore, it must be at a publicized VE session that I can verify. (Its my key. I can make the rules)
Heck, a year or two ago I even volunteered to reimburse the $14 VE fee if he shows he's been issued a valid CSCE for passing Element 1. Same rules as yours and the offer still stands.

But apparently hell is still warm to the touch ...

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 30 2006,01:55)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 28 2006,10:45)]There's no accounting for taste.
you're on thin ice
If I fall through, throw me a line and a Guinness for strength!

[ai4ep]

...so wouldnt it be simplier for every one to just take the CW test again, to prove that you know morse code..than go through the hassle of attempting to prove something from the past ?

A lot less hassle on all involved. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ai4ep]

...speaking of THIN ICE... that dued that used to be a big shot here on qrz............................n4dia...sent me a PM once that said " you are on thin ice ". and I was in a chair in front of a computer, the only ICE around was in a glass of tea.

Gee...whatever happened to that fine, honest, intelligent individual anyway ?

ME ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif Sitting right here. Why ?

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (K7JEM @ Sep. 30 2006,01:34)]It does not seem right that a VE can pick and choose the documentation required to show that proof, but that is the way it is.

Joe
A plump middle aged VE has the ability to determine who is a no code slacker just by meeting and exchanging a few words with that testee. Do you want to let this valuable skill go unused?

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Sep. 30 2006,10:51)]Quote[/b] (n0iu @ Sep. 27 2006,14:42)]I have an old Nye Viking Master Key straight key with a large "Navy" style knob that I don't use any more. I will make this offer to you in front of all these witnesses: If you can show me a CSCE for passing Element 1 from now to the end of the year, I will give you that key. Furthermore, it must be at a publicized VE session that I can verify. (Its my key. I can make the rules)
Heck, a year or two ago I even volunteered to reimburse the $14 VE fee if he shows he's been issued a valid CSCE for passing Element 1. Same rules as yours and the offer still stands.

But apparently hell is still warm to the touch ...

73,
Walt, W5ALT
Walt: you also didn't believe I could pass the general written which I did 5 times on qrz without any study beforehand at 15 minutes each.

Give it up boys. Did you read my $1k-$2k payable to testee upon successful completion of element 1 test post?
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[ai4ep]

JTY---we must have missed it --- highlight it and re post your " $1k - $2k " message so we can see it again ...ok ?

It sure would be appreciated, and we know you are SUCH a nice person, and that I aint asking too much. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 30 2006,10:57)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Sep. 30 2006,01:55)]Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Sep. 28 2006,10:45)]There's no accounting for taste.
you're on thin ice
If I fall through, throw me a line and a Guinness for strength!
I have a problem with the words Guinness & strength in the same sentence. Guinness tastes good but is very very thin.

If you were here I'd hand you a bottle of Old Rasputin Russian Imperial stout from my fridge. Nothing thin/watery about that one.

[ai4ep]

jty apparently knows a little bit about bottles & their contents...which is ok.

BTW-- in spite of our disagreement here about " code / no code "...I will talk to you on the HF bands if & when the rules DO change..........I aint quite THAT narrow minded. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 30 2006,11:36)]I aint quite THAT narrow minded. # #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I see your post count is progressing along nicely.

I can talk to you on IRLP right now. What's your IRLP #? I'll give you a call.

[ai4ep]

I dont think this computer will do that...no speakers and no condenser mike.

simple system...dial up, etc.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Sep. 30 2006,11:52)]I dont think this computer will do that...no speakers and no condenser mike.

simple system...dial up, etc.
Don't you have 2 meter FM capability, and know of an IRLP node in your area?

[kc7jty]

NO SPEAKERS!!?? What da... are you being punished by someone of greater authority there?

[ai4ep]

I think the closest one is in Birmingham, and I cant reliably get to that area from my home ( 75 + miles away ).

Nope, no speakers...well, we DO have some, but they aint hooked up since they would rarely be used. No one here downloads music . etc on the internet, so no real need.

Now if qrz would / could let us use our voices on our posts...now THAT might be a hoot !! voices would help the ICONS to accent emotion on our posts. Nah, too complicated. Not this year.

[n7rjd]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Oct. 01 2006,05:17)]Now if qrz would / could let us use our voices on our posts...now THAT might be a hoot !! voices would help the ICONS to accent emotion on our posts. Nah, too complicated. Not this year.
That would just be another setting I would have to go in and turn off. I just don't think I could take actually hearing some of these guys and would be affraid of what I would hear in the background of KWW's posts. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[k0cmh]

Are the children finally getting along in the sand box?

Also: My first license was the tech with the element 1. I had a ton of fun on the old novice bands. Yes, 10 meter ssb was a little hard, but I did get a good number of out-of-country contacts. I simply had to work at it a little bit. And I had no problem with tons of CW contacts, all over. There are many Generals, Extras and Advanced who frequent the old novice bands. I had plenty of great QSOs there. I still frequent those bands often, and still have great QSOs there.

[ai4ep]

Yep...for me & doing my part to support the tradition of amateur conraderie (*sp ), I see no real need to argue with JTY or other N C T about the issue of requiring morse code knowledge on the HF frequencies. #

THAT matter will be solved with the FCC, and my own opinion aint going to change any one elses opinions here on qrz...not as an insult, but basic fact.

MY words will not change YOUR opinion.

#So, for my part, the hatchet is broken... the wooden handle has been burned and the metal part of the hatchet has been sent to the scrap yard to be melted by a foreign nation to use as a weapon against us.

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Oct. 02 2006,01:42)]While doing #some listening on amateur bands ( hf & 2 meters ) I have heard of some folks who went to the TEN TEC hamfest this past weekend , and when they tried to upgrade their license, if they mentioned that they OWNED their brand of equipment, that the odds of them PASSING the test ( but just barely ) were a lot more likely to occur.

Some one with some authority on this issue might see a need to investigate the situation for fraud...something the amateur world does not need.
Robert,

You need to be EXTREMELY careful of things you put in print!!

Ten Tec also has military and government contracts in addition to their amateur equipment line. Just like "The Big Three", they do not rely solely on amateur equipment sales as their primary source of their income.

I doubt that a company with such a stellar repuation would put their government contracts at risk by doing something as stupid as what you claim.

If YOU were not at the Ten Tec Hamfest and YOU did not actually witness this happening, your claim could get you in alot of trouble! If someone from Ten Tec were to prove that your statement on one of the most popular amateur radio web sites somehow negatively impacted their business, you can kiss everything you own goodbye.

P.S. I hope you look good in stripes!

Scott NØIU

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[K7JEM]

Maybe we need to invesigate where you get your info. Post some callsigns so that these people can be contacted. If true, this is bad news. If false, then someone's got some 'splain'n to do.

Joe

[N2RJ]

I would give Ten Tec the benefit of the doubt, since they are a well known name in the ham radio service. I don't think they'd do something that stupid. I do think that some people got that impression though. They probably overheard something that sounded like what they wanted to hear and then twisted it around and filled the blanks with their own garbage.

There have been quite a few incidents of fraud in VE sessions, however. The FCC later confirmed it, revoked their new privileges and made them re-test.

Don't know which VEC was involved. Might have been either W5YI or ARRL/VEC.

[N2RJ]

Here it is:
http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/04/0730/

FCC Special Counsel for Enforcement Riley Hollingsworth told the VECs he's
"really aggravated" to still be dealing with enforcement issues resulting
from several 1999 examination sessions in Yucaipa, California "where VEs
apparently sold licenses." The situation occurred, Hollingsworth said,
because "VEC management was asleep at the wheel."

[...]

In the Yucaipa case, he said, several volunteer examiners signed off on
250 examinations in a 26-month period. Following a 2000 FCC audit into
exam sessions in Puerto Rico, Hollingsworth said, the FCC recalled 100
applicants for retesting, and only one showed up.

[...]

[n0iu]

Quote[/b] (AB2MH @ Oct. 02 2006,09:01)]I do think that some people got that impression though. #
-----------------
Might have been either W5YI or ARRL/VEC.
What specifically gives you that impression?? Were you at the Ten Tec Hamfest? Did you actually hear someone say these things?

And while Robert might be treading on thin ice with Ten Tec by spreading potentially harmful rumors about them, you are doing no better by claiming that the ARRL or W5YI were somehow involved in this test session when you actually have no idea whatsover which VEC it was.

I am not a lawyer, but with all due respect, you guys really need to shut up about about this unless you have proof that anything out of line actually happened. Both of you are making accusations against some very VERY big organizations.

Scott NØIU

[W0BLH]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Oct. 02 2006,15:47)]http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Looks like someone may be spending some time in a crowbar hotel. I wonder if you get an internet connection there?? Some pretty bad allegations. Anyone notify Ten Tec? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

BLH

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 01 2006,13:13)]Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Sep. 30 2006,10:51)]Heck, a year or two ago I even volunteered to reimburse the $14 VE fee if he shows he's been issued a valid CSCE for passing Element 1. Same rules as yours and the offer still stands.

But apparently hell is still warm to the touch ...
Walt: you also didn't believe I could pass the general written which I did 5 times on qrz without any study beforehand at 15 minutes each.
No, I've never questioned your ability to pass any test. Lots of youngsters have passed all of the tests. I figure anyone that's been through Junior High can figure out how to study for a multiple choice test, even if it involves funny beeping sounds.

73,
Walt, W5ALT

[k4kyv]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Sep. 29 2006,10:36)]Many hams who were licensed long ago do not have a copy of the license and the FCC has lost all its licensing data prior to 1970.
How did they manage to do that?

[K7JBQ]

Something about a flood. Or maybe it was a fire. Could have been famine, pestilence or plague. That will have to do until Mr. Zook pops in to set the record straight.

73,
Bill

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Oct. 03 2006,10:19)]Something about a flood. Or maybe it was a fire. Could have been famine, pestilence or plague. That will have to do until Mr. Zook pops in to set the record straight.

73,
Bill
i thought it was the veterans administration that had the big fire and lost everyones records !

at least they tried making that claim once and got proven to be lying about the amount of records that were destroyed !

[KC9ECI]

Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Oct. 03 2006,12:19)]Something about a flood. Or maybe it was a fire. Could have been famine, pestilence or plague. That will have to do until Mr. Zook pops in to set the record straight.

73,
Bill
At the rate this thread is swirling around the bowl, it may not live that long.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Oct. 01 2006,17:57)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 01 2006,13:13)]Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Sep. 30 2006,10:51)]Heck, a year or two ago I even volunteered to reimburse the $14 VE fee if he shows he's been issued a valid CSCE for passing Element 1. Same rules as yours and the offer still stands.

But apparently hell is still warm to the touch ...
Walt: you also didn't believe I could pass the general written which I did 5 times on qrz without any study beforehand at 15 minutes each.
No, I've never questioned your ability to pass any test. Lots of youngsters have passed all of the tests. I figure anyone that's been through Junior High can figure out how to study for a multiple choice test, even if it involves funny beeping sounds.

73,
Walt, W5ALT
I'm afraid you've overestimated me.

BTW: ALT means old in German. Are you an OM?

[ky5u]

Quote[/b] (KC9ECI @ Oct. 03 2006,20:05)]Quote[/b] (K7JBQ @ Oct. 03 2006,12:19)]Something about a flood. Or maybe it was a fire. Could have been famine, pestilence or plague. That will have to do until Mr. Zook pops in to set the record straight.

73,
Bill
At the rate this thread is swirling around the bowl, it may not live that long.
ROFL! Good metaphor.

[W0BLH]

Quote[/b] (W0BLH @ Oct. 02 2006,17:11)]http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Looks like someone may be spending some time in a crowbar hotel. I wonder if you get an internet connection there?? Some pretty bad allegations. #Anyone notify Ten Tec? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

BLH
Where is EP? This appears to be his last post and his count is not going up. Is he taking a little time out in the corner and waiting for his odometer to roll over.

BLH http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[kj3n]

Quote[/b] (W0BLH @ Oct. 04 2006,14:36)]Quote[/b] (W0BLH @ Oct. 02 2006,17:11)]Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Oct. 02 2006,15:47)]http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif
Looks like someone may be spending some time in a crowbar hotel. I wonder if you get an internet connection there?? Some pretty bad allegations. #Anyone notify Ten Tec? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

BLH
Where is EP? This appears to be his last post and his count is not going up. Is he taking a little time out in the corner and waiting for his odometer to roll over.

BLH http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I'm hoping that someone gave him a time-out for shooting his mouth off........................ again.

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 04 2006,03:38)]BTW: ALT means old in German. Are you an OM?
Nah, I still feel as young as my 21 year old grandson.

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Oct. 04 2006,10:43)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 04 2006,03:38)]BTW: ALT means old in German. Are you an OM?
Nah, I still feel as young as my 21 year old grandson.
If being active with Morse does that for you maybe I should soften my position?

[w5alt]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 05 2006,13:40)]Quote[/b] (w5alt @ Oct. 04 2006,10:43)]Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Oct. 04 2006,03:38)]BTW: ALT means old in German. Are you an OM?
Nah, I still feel as young as my 21 year old grandson.
If being active with Morse does that for you maybe I should soften my position?
Couldn't hurt. Anything that challenges the mind has been proven to keep one younger.

[ai4ep]

...lots of folks in the "crowbar hotel " have internet access...and some may be reading these posts and getting a good laugh at YOUR expense.

Legally... they have computers, law books, access to all sorts of information...and it is all legal. There may be a " record - keeping system " to where those in charge know what web sites are accessed, times of day , etc YOUR taxes ( sometimes ) help pay for such items, along with government grants, etc.

They may be unable to make a post, but the reading is free.

{ edited }

[M3KCK]

Quote[/b] (ai4ep @ Oct. 01 2006,01:48)]" re-learning how to fry an egg "...etc.
You had to learn to fry an Egg http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I can fry an Egg anyway ya want it? However, I do not remember leaning how to fry the said Egg http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif
I feel bacon and egg butty coming on http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
es 73
Regards,
Andrew M3KCK (don’t forget the Smiley!)