Changes in Amateur Radio

[KA4DPO]

It is now apparent that changes in society and technology drove the FCC to update what was seen as an anachronistic requirement and remove CW as a prerequisite for gaining a ham ticket. That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. Once the dust settles it's a good bet that this won't have a devastating impact on the hobby, just a few changes in the way we do things.

The more important issue, and one the FCC seems to ignore is how to ensure that prospective licensee's possess the requisite knowledge to operate their stations responsibly and not jeopardize our hobby by abusing or misusing their amateur privileges.

I don’t believe the current testing system accomplishes that goal since it does not require any depth of knowledge to pass. I’m not talking nuclear physics here, just a solid handle on the facts that are commensurate with the class of license. This is abundantly clear by the types of questions I often hear from newly minted amateur extra class operators.

I view the recent R&O as only half right since it failed to address a revamping of the testing structure. A testing system structured similar to the ones employed in Europe would be a good start if we really want to bring our amateur radio service into the 21st century. I firmly believe it’s time to petition the FCC for changes in the testing structure and requirements for amateur radio.

[KE5FRF]

A very relevant point, you are certainly correct, I and most others will certainly agree. Even many current Technicians will probably say that the entry level test was not very challenging.

However, I think your suggestion will fall on deaf ears. The FCC has lawyers, and their lawyers are telling them to make licensing easier, not harder. The bottom line is that amateur radio is not a professional communications medium and our communications are not critical to life and limb. Anything percieved as a barrier is becoming difficult to justify. Frankly, I never saw any criterion as barriers, but rather goals for achievement...But that sort of philosophy is in the same death throes as Morse testing. (emphasis on testing).

I sincerely hope your views are adopted, but I won't hold my breath.

[AE6IP]

There should be two classes of license in the US:

operator: full privs, tested only on regulatory matters, limited to using COTS components in their station

experimenter: full privs, tested on safety and regulatory matters, allowed to scratchbuild components for their station.

I agree, but leave the tech test as is. The entry level should be easy. Maybe add more HF related questions since techs will have limited HF privleges.

Make General somewhere between what it is now and Extra, and beef up the extra a bit. But beef both with relevant, 21st century questions based on current modes like PSK-31, building soundcard interfaces, software defined radios, creating communications software, DSP, etc. Writing/modifying code for a new or existing communications mode or a software controlled is today what cobbling surplus parts into a 40m CW transceiver was 50 years ago.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Dec. 20 2006,14:55)]There should be two classes of license in the US:

operator: full privs, tested only on regulatory matters, limited to using COTS components in their station

experimenter: full privs, tested on safety and regulatory matters, allowed to scratchbuild components for their station.
C'mon, Martin, climb down. This whole thread is BS.

You have been quite correct in your statements that amateur radio is "no longer" a particularly technical avocation. People who want to just operate a modern rig can very easily gain the skills to do that, and the current testing structure is sufficient for that. These same folks might want to learn more and homebrew or build a kit and become ever more technically involved and competent, and they can then invest time and effort in learning what is needed without making more requirements. Making some pseudo-CB license for "just operators" is dumb and would prove quickly counterproductive. If we are to encourage a deeper knowledge, that is not the way to do so.

The current license scheme is defective, and I think we are both in agreement on that. My complaint is that it does not comport with the reality that we all shall face in another month or so. The real entry level should not be the Tech, in my view, but the FCC does not agree with me. I believe we still need a Novice-type license for intro-to-HF purposes and the Tech should be more like the original Tech and concentrate on the region above 30MHz.

I think we all need to stop all of this moon-beaming and concentrate on the reality of what needs to be done to initiate the novitiate in the values and traditions of the order.

73

[ky5u]

I dunno Albert. The Tech will have all Novice CW privleges on HF as wella s phone between 28.3 and 28.5 on 10M at 200W. They will have data and RTTY provleges on 10M. With what they currently have, it seems like the FCC screwed up and made it a real entry class.

Now just change up the real General and Extra test answers so they don't EXACTLY match the study material (to stop memorization) and things would look pretty good.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Dec. 20 2006,15:56)]With what they currently have, it seems like the FCC screwed up and made it a real entry class.
I look at as more of a hermaphrodite entry class, but nothing I say or do is going to change anything.

Quote[/b] ]
Now just change up the real General and Extra test answers so they don't EXACTLY match the study material (to stop memorization) and things would look pretty good.

I agree with you here. I think all they would really have to do is keep the pool out of public view or make the pool twice the size it is.

I know a lot of folks don't agree with me, but I believe the people who want to delve deeply into the science of radio as well as its art will have ample incentive to do so. I think the day of mandating a lot of technical knowledge -- make that a lot of technical MEMORIZATION -- for a license is past. I guess I am condemned as a apostate, but I had rather see a very much heavier concentration on operating, on the Rules, on the steps to gain both entry to HF and an entre to the traditions is more important than the arcana of phase reversal or the discharge rate of a capacitor.

Ah, well. Adjustment for all of us will take some time. I think we'll make it.

73 Charlie. Merry Christmas and HNY.

[wd0ct]

dpo: " I firmly believe it’s time to petition the FCC for changes in the testing structure and requirements for amateur radio."

Decoded, this means we must get that barrier back up. I have just the solution. The multiple choice tests should be written in French for tech and general. Extra tests to be written in Icelandic.

[N2RJ]

We need a practical training course like the RSGB does with the foundation license.

Quote[/b] (W3MIV @ Dec. 20 2006,13:43)]Quote[/b] (AG4YO @ Dec. 20 2006,15:56)]With what they currently have, it seems like the FCC screwed up and made it a real entry class.
I look at as more of a hermaphrodite entry class, but nothing I say or do is going to change anything.

Quote[/b] ]
Now just change up the real General and Extra test answers so they don't EXACTLY match the study material (to stop memorization) and things would look pretty good.

I agree with you here. I think all they would really have to do is keep the pool out of public view or make the pool twice the size it is.

I know a lot of folks don't agree with me, but I believe the people who want to delve deeply into the science of radio as well as its art will have ample incentive to do so. I think the day of mandating a lot of technical knowledge -- make that a lot of technical MEMORIZATION -- for a license is past. I guess I am condemned as a apostate, but I had rather see a very much heavier concentration on operating, on the Rules, on the steps to gain both entry to HF and an entre to the traditions is more important than the arcana of phase reversal or the discharge rate of a capacitor.

Ah, well. Adjustment for all of us will take some time. I think we'll make it.

73 Charlie. Merry Christmas and HNY.
Getting rid of the queston pools would introduce just enough ambiguity into the system that you will see lawsuits against VE's when someone disagrees with how a question is worded or answered. The currents system at leasts protects the VE's in that someone being tested cannot complain the questions were in any way infair, slanted, or erronious.

What we can do, however, is double or triple the size of the pools. Doing that will make the pool large enough to make memorization virtually impossible.

[k7mh]

I think it is possible that the actual way of doing the tests is obsolete. Just off the top of my head, so here goes.
How about a mandatory class period of X hours total given by VE's that covers material from the exam questions pool and the VE's decide based on their class, what questions #are used from the pool with a minimum amount of questions from at least X number of areas.
Perhaps it won't work as those with an attention defict disorder or even restless leg syndrome (such as myself) will say it is too hard to sit in a class that long.
I think it should be a little more like mandatory drivers ed or classes for handling firearms prior to getting a hunting license. I don't care if you can solder two wires together, as long as you know how to operate the equipment, build simple antennas, tune up an amp or PA stage, and know very well the rules and regs. learning how to diagram a Colpitts oscillator never did anything for me, neither did knowing the Boolean equation!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

[KD6NIG]

If its really a major concern, I would beef up the tests a bit, sure.

But also add a timeframe into them.

Get a tech, you have to be a tech for 6 months before you can go general. Get general, another 6 months for extra.

Then people get the actual hands on experience, or they just sit on their hands for 6 months, but either way they just don't go tech-extra with a memory test.... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ac3p]

Quote[/b] ]Get a tech, you have to be a tech for 6 months before you can go general. Get general, another 6 months for extra.


I thing this idea has merit. The only things I would change is a one year waiting period between general and extra and also proof of operation via a log for those time periods.

Of course this will never fly.

Quote[/b] (k7mh @ Dec. 20 2006,14:09)]I think it is possible that the actual way of doing the tests is obsolete. Just off the top of my head, so here goes.
How about a mandatory class period of X hours total given by VE's that covers material from the exam questions pool and the VE's decide based on their class, what questions are used from the pool with a minimum amount of questions from at least X number of areas.
Perhaps it won't work as those with an attention defict disorder or even restless leg syndrome (such as myself) will say it is too hard to sit in a class that long.
I think it should be a little more like mandatory drivers ed or classes for handling firearms prior to getting a hunting license. I don't care if you can solder two wires together, as long as you know how to operate the equipment, build simple antennas, tune up an amp or PA stage, and know very well the rules and regs. learning how to diagram a Colpitts oscillator never did anything for me, neither did knowing the Boolean equation!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
Man, you can't hardly get enough experienced hams off their oversized butts and out to teach anyone now, make classes mandatory and do you think they will in any way make the effort? And forget about it if you are someone who lives in an isolated area, the nearest class may be a long way away if you can find one.

That idea may fly in urban areas where you can pull together enough hams willing to teach and reach out, but those who live out in the sticks will be screwed. Some are driving 100+ miles now just for VE testing.

[W3MIV]

Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Dec. 20 2006,17:24)]Quote[/b] ]Get a tech, you have to be a tech for 6 months before you can go general. #Get general, another 6 months for extra.


I thing this idea has merit. The only things I would change is a one year waiting period between general and extra and also proof of operation via a log for those time periods.

Of course this will never fly.
I fail to see the value of a waiting period. Do you worry that, in the heat of the moment, somebody is going to use their privileges to do mayhem?

If someone can sit down and run through all three tests in a session, more power to 'em.

[wd0ct]

Jeez, old hammies just HAVE to fix something. The new rules aren't even in effect yet but we must fix them.

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Dec. 19 2006,14:59)]What we can do, however, is double or triple the size of the pools. Doing that will make the pool large enough to make memorization virtually impossible.
Or make them tenfold bigger. That's 100 times the number of questions in the exam.

There's an important point here about increasing the size of the pool. The point is that

1) NO REGULATION NEED BE CHANGED

2) Every amateur can submit questions

So you must involve yourself in the system to see this happen. I challenge those of you who are complaining to write at least one question for every ten posts to QRZ.

It's harder than you think BTW.

And given that it makes sense to discuss questions. I'll start a thread, let's see those questions get posted and discussed. No whining about how they're too easy, or published or whatever, just a discussion on the validity of the questions.

I predict that most of you can't live up to the challenge. You would rather whine and complain than actually do something about the problems you perceive.

Prove me wrong.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KF4PEP @ Dec. 20 2006,11:56)]I agree, but leave the tech test as is. The entry level should be easy. Maybe add more HF related questions since techs will have limited HF privleges.
now there's an idea, maybe it should be like the novice test from the past. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (k7mh @ Dec. 20 2006,14:09)]I think it is possible that the actual way of doing the tests is obsolete. Just off the top of my head, so here goes.
How about a mandatory class period of X hours total given by VE's that covers material from the exam questions pool and the VE's decide based on their class, what questions #are used from the pool with a minimum amount of questions from at least X number of areas.
Perhaps it won't work as those with an attention defict disorder or even restless leg syndrome (such as myself) will say it is too hard to sit in a class that long.
I think it should be a little more like mandatory drivers ed or classes for handling firearms prior to getting a hunting license. I don't care if you can solder two wires together, as long as you know how to operate the equipment, build simple antennas, tune up an amp or PA stage, and know very well the rules and regs. learning how to diagram a Colpitts oscillator never did anything for me, neither did knowing the Boolean equation!! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif
but what happens if some of the students ''just memorize'' the answers and pass the tests that way. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

i got news for you , learning involves memorization, that's how it works. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[KA4DPO]

Quote[/b] (wd0ct @ Dec. 20 2006,13:48)]dpo: " I firmly believe it’s time to petition the FCC for changes in the testing structure and requirements for amateur radio."

Decoded, this means we must get that barrier back up. I have just the solution. The multiple choice tests should be written in French for tech and general. Extra tests to be written in Icelandic.
I disagree with French. Would be amateurs who learn French in order to pass the exam would be tempted to study the French culture leading them to a defeatist attitude and ultimately, surrender. I would prefer ancient celtic, it takes a lot more effort and they kicked A$%.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.

[KA4DPO]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 20 2006,17:37)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.
Ooops, my bad..

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 19 2006,18:37)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.
Since the United States has dropped morse, more than one half of the amateur radio operators in the world live in a country that has dropped the code.

It's simply silly to compare the actions of countries like Tunisia with 2 total stations (as of 2000) to those with much larger amateur populations.

Quoting the number of countries might make you feel better, but it's meaningless statistic. Around 180 of those 200 countries were represented at WRC-03 and the concensus at that time was that each country could drop it if it so wished.

With the FCC's action the majority of the amateurs in the world do not have to take a morse code test for HF access.

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,17:39)]Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 20 2006,17:37)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.
Ooops, my bad..
ok, but don't let it happen no more http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[KC0NBW]

Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Dec. 20 2006,17:56)]Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 19 2006,18:37)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.
Since the United States has dropped morse, more than one half of the amateur radio operators in the world live in a country that has dropped the code.

It's simply silly to compare the actions of countries like Tunisia with 2 total stations (as of 2000) to those with much larger amateur populations.

Quoting the number of countries might make you feel better, but it's meaningless statistic. Around 180 of those 200 countries were represented at WRC-03 and the concensus at that time was that each country could drop it if it so wished.

With the FCC's action the majority of the amateurs in the world do not have to take a morse code test for HF access.
but it goes on the basis of one vote per country, regardless of how many hams they have.

tunisia's vote has just as much weight as the united states does.

the fact remains that the majority of the countries have not dropped the code at this point.

i would doubt that the remaining countries will be doing it anytime soon, they probably have more important issues to be concerned about.

also, i believe the japanese have not dropped the requirement entirely , i think they have just eliminated it for some classes of licence.

i am not sure of india either.

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif It is more fun to listen to the arguing over the radio than on the computer...they move a LOT faster, too.

You can shange bands and listen to different folks argue about the same thing, sometimes acvtually hear something NEW DIFFERENT ORIGINAL thrown in.

----------------------------------
There was a dude in Alabama that apparently is having a real bad fall of 2006...

1) same governor got re-elected in politics
2) college football coach got fired with no replacement in sight
3) morse code testing stopped

---no this aint me. But THANK YOU for asking. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[ab8ro]

Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 19 2006,19:07)]Quote[/b] (ab8ro @ Dec. 20 2006,17:56)]Quote[/b] (KC0NBW @ Dec. 19 2006,18:37)]Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]#That was a ruling whose time has come since most countries no longer require CW either. .
once again, roughly 30 countries out of the 200 plus countries in the world have dropped the morse code requirement.

that can hardly be considered to be a majority.
Since the United States has dropped morse, more than one half of the amateur radio operators in the world live in a country that has dropped the code.

It's simply silly to compare the actions of countries like Tunisia with 2 total stations (as of 2000) to those with much larger amateur populations.

Quoting the number of countries might make you feel better, but it's meaningless statistic. Around 180 of those 200 countries were represented at WRC-03 and the concensus at that time was that each country could drop it if it so wished.

With the FCC's action the majority of the amateurs in the world do not have to take a morse code test for HF access.
but it goes on the basis of one vote per country, regardless of how many hams they have.

tunisia's vote has just as much weight as the united states does.

What goes as one vote per country? At WRC-03 over 170 countries participated an the result was a decision to eliminate morse as an international requirement.

Quote[/b] ]
the fact remains that the majority of the countries have not dropped the code at this point.


And the fact also remains that the countries which represent the overwhelming majority of hams in the world have. In fact, the two countries with the largest amateur populations have gone no code.

As far as individual countries there is no vote. What each country does is its own choice and it's just silly to say, "well Tunisia hasn't gone no code" becuse the fact is that any country with only two operators probably doesn't really care much about their amateur population.

Quote[/b] ]
i would doubt that the remaining countries will be doing it anytime soon, they probably have more important issues to be concerned about.


Exactly, so attempting to use those countries actions on amateur radio as a barometer of the morse code requirements is silly.

[quote]
also, i believe the japanese have not dropped the requirement entirely , #i think they have just eliminated it for some classes of licence.
[/quote

They have not. However, they have two classes which give significant access to HF with limited power that does not require morse code.

[KA2P]

Quote[/b] (KA4DPO @ Dec. 20 2006,10:48)]The more important issue, and one the FCC seems to ignore is how to ensure that prospective licensee's possess the requisite knowledge to operate their stations responsibly and not jeopardize our hobby by abusing or misusing their amateur privileges.


The next round is eliminating the sub bands, one license class with full privileges for all, and online testing by the FCC. Just like when I go hunting. The rules will be simple:

(1) don't interfere with "The Man"

(2) Don't win any Darwin Awards.

[N5PVL]

I think that making a major change soon after making another one is a really good way to screw up.

[KA4DPO]

Quote[/b] (N5PVL @ Dec. 20 2006,19:34)]I think that making a major change soon after making another one is a really good way to screw up.
True but the FCC re-shingled the roof without plugging the leak. Half a change is worse than no change at all.

[AG3Y]

Quote[/b] (ac3p @ Dec. 20 2006,17:24)]Quote[/b] ]Get a tech, you have to be a tech for 6 months before you can go general. #Get general, another 6 months for extra.


I thing this idea has merit. The only things I would change is a one year waiting period between general and extra and also proof of operation via a log for those time periods.

Of course this will never fly.


Quote[/b] ]

Jeez, old hammies just HAVE to fix something. The new rules aren't even in effect yet but we must fix them.


I think the idea has a great deal of merit. #One of the biggest gripes I have read is that a person can walk in off the street, take three written tests ( no code test in the very near future ) and walk out of the place with FULL Amateur Radio priviledges ! #There is just something seriously wrong with that situation. #And no, it is NOT because I had to "walk up hill in a blinding snowstorm. . . . ." to obtain my license. #It IS, because I DO know how to construct and erect a dipole antenna, I DO know how to tune a Linear Amplifier for proper operation, I DO know why some bands are dead for most of the time for 5 years in a row, and then come back to life again, and I DO know why some bands are dead during the daytime and come to life at night. #

And that is NOT anything super-hard to understand nor should it be beyond the realm of knowledge for anybody who posesses an Amateur Extra license. #

The point I am making is that if an operator was required to have a year's worth of experience before he/she could take the test for that upper level of license, he/she would be much more worthy of the distinction that was earned, and indeed, the License Level would be elevated once again to the level it deserves!

And in answer to the second statement quoted from a different poster above, the system has been broken for a lot longer than the time that the newest rules have been considered. #That is something us "old hammies" realize, that the third person I quoted has NOT grasped, obviously !

Jim

[KA4DPO]

What is this fixation new hams have with old timers. They really can't even define what an old timer is except someone that's been a ham longer than they have.

What is it that makes you so bitter. I wonder, if you need an operation do you only go to a very young inexperinced surgeon because you don't want no OT working on you?

This is really annoying for most of us who were licensed in the 50's and 60's. We don't make generalizations about things based on anal extraction of facts. We have simply been around a while and kind of know what works and what doesn't. It's as if you can't stand the fact that someone might know something you don't. There's no such thing as instant respect in any endevor, you have to give it in order to get it.

Some of the attitudes expressed on these boards are awful. The truth is that if these same people were as disrespectful to me in person I'd kick their butts off the planet but I doubt they would say such things in person.

Bottom line is, if can't show reasonable respect for people who have been in the hobby for a long time and have a lot to offer, you aint going to get any in return.

Got issues? E-mail me and we can discuss it.

[N8CPA]

Come on, John. I'm sure they expect us to abuse them because the Tech exam manuals
devote an entire chapter and much type to the secret subparts of 97 that require us to bash them. I think it comes just before the chapter that explains the instant expertise they attain by passing Element 2.

I'm sure future editions of the exam manuals will be revised because the secret subparts of 97 are obseleced by dropping that evil Element 1.

;)