ARRL licensing proposal

[w0der]

I recently sent an e-mail to David Sumner, ARRL CEO, regarding the new proposal on licensing that ARRL is making to the FCC:

-------------------------------------
Mr. David Sumner, K1ZZ
CEO, American Radio Relay League

David,

I read with interest about the new licensing proposal from the ARRL. While I applaud the reservation of the Morse Code requirement for the Extra Class license, and I understand the reality of dropping the code requirement for an entry-level HF (and above) license, the blanket upgrade of Technician and Tech-plus licensees to General Class bothers me somewhat. Being a General Class licensee myself, and struggling to study for the Extra Class license, I have to remember when I had to work that much harder to pass the General Class license exam. #Isn't the league doing a disservice to all the General Class licensees by making this proposal? After all, most people see the Technician license today as entry-level and Techs would get an automatic upgrade to HF priveleges under the new "Novice" license anyway. #If the term "Novice" is an issue for Techs who might see it as a step backward, change the name!

I propose the new entry-level license class be called the "Basic Communicator". #There is no stigma in the term "Basic". It usually implies a mastering of fundamentals, and entry-level abilities, such as "Basic Training" in the military; BASIC, a simple to learn computer language (Beginners All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code); Airman Basic, the entry-level enlisted rank in the US Air Force, etc. And with the addition of the term "Communicator", "Basic Communicator" can be seen as what it should be, a license that shows that the licensee has mastered the basics of radio communications and is entitled to a basic level of priveleges.

Please consider retainig the requirement for Techs to pass the General Class license exam instead of simply being given General tickets!

Thanks!

Don Reader
KC0JBJ and ARRL member
St. Charles, MO

----------------------------

What do you think?

[k6pme]

Hey thats a great start. Now if we can just get a few hundred thousand more sent to him it might work out ok. While I'm not positive about how this works, you might want to save it for the FCC at a later date. With appropriate changes of course.

As for using 'communicator', I'm not sure I would have. Maybe just basic class license. So then they could merge novice, tech and tech+ into a new license called basic.

Hmm......Basic, General and Extra. I like it.

[KC9ETP]

Well I wasn't going to jump in the fire but... #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

From your letter it seems the sole reason you do not like the proposed movement from tech to general is simply "Because it was hard for me".

To me that really is not a compelling argument. Your current General license was granted in 2000 you wouldn't happen to be a 5 wpm General? People were saying the same thing about your "Freebie".

The ARRL responce about the "dumbing down" issue addresses it nicely IMHO.

From http://www.arrl.org/news/restructuring2/faq.html

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Change is a scary thing, and a lot of current amateurs feel threatened by it. Many believe it's somehow unfair if newcomers don't have to clear the same hurdles they did to get licensed. The fact is that the examination bar has never been at a uniform height over ham radio's nearly 100-year history. Current license holders do often perceive, however, that it was harder to get a ham ticket in the &quot;good old days&quot; than it is today. But a review of license manual material over the years will show that not much has changed in terms of examination complexity, although technology has.

Passing any amateur examination does not magically result in a good operator. It's just the key to the kingdom, so to speak. Experience and good mentoring create skillful and knowledgeable operators, not the relative difficulty or ease of the test. From late 1933 until 1942, for example, the tests for the Amateur Radio license classes then in existence (essentially two) required answering 10 questions out of a very small question pool![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

As far as the Novice title. It's just a suggested title for the new entry level license.

Moving Techs to this class however is even more unfair to Techs than the &quot;free upgrade&quot; the to the current Generals and above. I know I sure would not like being told that I will lose privileges past 440MHz, or can not run more than 50 watts VHF/UHF, even if I have been tested on (and passed) the RF safety rules.

I don't think the ARRL's plan is perfect, but I think it's pretty good compromise between current hams and future hams.

Me? I'm too impatient to wait for something to happen.. I want it now. So I'll be getting my General this spring no matter what the rules are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[KC0OFZ]

Don Reader (KC0JBJ)

I like the idea you have and could not agree more. The code issue I can let go but by pass element 3? No sir, that I don't care for. Great idea and I hope this sticks a little
73
KCØOFZ

[kb9lor]

Doesn't really matter to me what they do, I am happy where I am at. If I want hf I will get the element 1, am still working on cw, either way I AM gonna learn the cw, may or may not use it, but by heck I will know it! won't be the best at it but as they say, practice makes perfect!
am just sick and tired of all the bickering and crying on BOTH sides! #But hey it is your right to do the above!

Cheers!

[n5tjd]

Why not just give Techs limited allocations in a few HF bands for various modes at limited power, and full privilages above 30mhz, like it is now. Sounds way more logical... and why only 25 questions? 35 questions wasn't a problem, for all the thousands of us that did it that way... at the least, it gives them a little more lee way in the amount of questions they can miss... at the most, they may learn something important for their and their neighbors safety.

Then, to upgrade to General would only require the written test, and Extra would take both Element 1 and the written... or they could keep element 1 as a requirement for General since a no code license with HF privilages will be available.

I think the proposal is a start... maybe they will revise it to be more fair to everyone. I don't really see the reason a change is neccissary anyhow, but I'm not going to yell and argue about it, however, if anyone wants my take on it, I'll gladly tell them.

[KC8QMU]

JBJ,


That is a very well written letter and I agree with it 100%. I am starting to think that maybe instead of just giving up our ARRL memberships we should bombard them with email and snail mail so that maybe they will get a hint of how many people they stand to lose on this issue. Nice work! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[ae4fa]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am starting to think that maybe instead of just giving up our ARRL memberships we should bombard them with email and snail mail so that maybe they will get a hint of how many people they stand to lose on this issue.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
A most excellent suggestion!

I believe you're right on-- the General exam manual wasn't much different from the Tech one (most of the same subject material, except more in depth), BUT there was a whole lot more info in the General manual that is directly applicable to safe and proper HF operations. I do not support an automatic upgrade to General from Tech unless Techs take the Element 3 exam, if for no other reason than the upgraded Techs will be getting cheated out of some much-needed information that will help them to get on HF.

[KC0OFZ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC8QMU @ Jan. 25 2004,14:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">


That is a very well written letter and I agree with it 100%. #I am starting to think that maybe instead of just giving up our ARRL memberships we should bombard them with email and snail mail so that maybe they will get a hint of how many people they stand to lose on this issue. #Nice work! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I have alredy started that as it is a great idea. #I have received a few &quot;cookie cutter&quot; replys from a few of the persons at the league who had the guts (few did) to reply. #They go on to lament how much thought they put into this one (at least 5 minutes) and all the happy sunshine that follows. #Expect an empty answer from them as they are above reproach in their eyes and have done the perfect thing.

[ae4fa]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">received a few &quot;cookie cutter&quot; replys from a few of the persons at the league[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Seems that's all they're capable of . . .

[ka5s]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC8QMU @ Jan. 25 2004,14:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...we should bombard them with email and snail mail so that maybe they will get a hint of how many people they stand to lose on this issue. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
It seems to me that the League already knows how the membership feels. # I don't know what the other Divisions did, but the Pacific Division surveyed over 5,000 members on this matter. I quote here part of a follow-up message I received the other day:

&quot; ...significant number of survey responders favor an entry-level license without a Morse code testing requirement, but with limited power and limited HF band privileges -- 52.7%. A number answered in opposition of this effort with comments that the existing Technician class handles this if the code requirement is simply removed. &quot;
(emphasis added)

Cortland

[K3STX]

I think the FCC wants to have ONLY three classes of license. I think that is the thought behind the auto-upgrade. If the FCC could deal with FOUR classes; well I think we all know what we would do.

But I have been informed that the number is THREE. That is what we have to deal with. (Don't ask me why it is three.)

paul

[ae4fa]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I have been informed that the number is THREE[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Three. Cool. Novice/Tech/Basic/or what have you - General - Extra.

That's simple enough, isn't it?

Yeah, the FCC made it clear they wanted 3 classes a couple of years ago. At the same time, they set up three-and-a-half classes: Tech, Tech w/HF, General, Extra.

Hmmmm . . .

Yep, sounds like the best and brightest to me . . .

[KC8QMU]

I don't see what is so bad about giving the techs the novice priviledges, automatically, either. That gives them some automatic HF access! Even though some might not like to be called a novice, they are still gaining more priviledges than what they have with their tech licenses!

[K3STX]

QMU,

No, no, no, no.

While they are gaining HF priveleges, they are LOSING VHF priveleges. The &quot;Novice&quot; will have limited power on UHF/VHF. That is the whole problem with the THREE!

paul

[w3sy]

Okay, so Advanced gets bumped up to Extra... Tech gets bumped up to General...

Why not bump CB up to Tech?

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

Hoo Haa!!

&quot;Why not bump CB up to Tech?&quot; W3SY

Didn't they already do that in '91?

73, Marty

[ky5u]

You know, we're missing the simpliest solution to the problem.... #The FCC wants three classes, then give them Novice, General and Extra as the ARRL suggests.

Don't do ANYTHING with Technicians. #When they pass Element 3 they become Generals. #Until they do, their current privledges apply. #They don't want reduced privledges, then this answers the requirement. #

This is the simplest thing and requires the FCC to do NOTHING. #It is alot more fair to General ops too.

[k9kjm]

YES! # A great answer by AG4YO! # #
Simply leave the present no code tech license
alone (But make it non-renewable)
And when a no code tech passes the general
written exam, He/she becomes a general.
If they never take an exam, At renewal time,
they will become a novice class.............. #
SIMPLE! # And in a few short years, All that will
be left is the three classes of license. Novice,
General, and Extra.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[ae4fa]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">While they are gaining HF priveleges, they are LOSING VHF priveleges. The &quot;Novice&quot; will have limited power on UHF/VHF. That is the whole problem with the THREE![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

No problem. ARRL could modify their plan to maintain VHF privileges. Course, the test would have to remain at 35Qs to assure these folks are at least cognizant of RF Safety issues.

Amazing the League wants to steer them around that issue . . .

[KC8QMU]

STX,

That is true about the restrictions on VHF and UHF. But when you look at it, they are still allowed more than enough power for what most beginning techs do above 50Mhz... heck I myself have a ball with 2M and 440 FM, and I'm usually well under those power limits!

Also, and it's just my opinion, but I think even in light of those restrictions, having no-code access on HF would drastically outweigh the drawbacks of the VHF/UHF power and frequency limits than would be imposed. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[K3UD]

This can be put right with an ammended proposal. The FCC can and has changed requirements for licensing over the years. What's wrong with giving existing Tech classes and Novice all amateur privileges above 50mhz as well as the new Novice privileges as proposed on HF? There have been concerns posted that the allocations above 70cm might turn into ghost towns anyway as the those who get HF privileges migrate to the low bands.

The problem, as I understand it is in the RF exposure and microwave operating techniques testing. However, some of this was on the Novice exam before it was discontinued, existing Novices did not have to be tested on it and were allowed to use 200W PEP output on 10, most existing technicians were never tested on some of this but never had to be retested in order to keep KW level output privileges.

I don't remember much, if anything on the General/Tech written exam (which were the same) when I took it, (1965) that even mentioned opertating techniques on the microwave bands even though we had privileges for them back then. Somehow, I was able to convert a surplus APX-6 in order to get to 1.2 gigs and had success with it.

Likewise there was not very much on the Novice test concerning operating procedure, antennas, feedlines, matching, tuning a final etc. But somehow we learned what we needed to know about it.

A new 13 year old Technician or General of the time period could legally put together a kilowatt 6 or 2 meter station and operate it without any experience or testing of operating technique. Some did, and many of those teenagers went on to become very accomplished hams.

I guess what I am saying that these things can be learned, and anyone in the beginner class or whatever it is called has the ability to learn how to use the privileges conferred by the license they have, just as we did.

In the last restructure proposal in the late 90s the ARRL proposed, in it's filing with the FCC, that existing Novices and Tech+ holders be grandfathered into the General class by virtue of having passed a 5-wpm code test and the theory tests that at least included safety and operational questions.

What has changed?

I still do not see it as an insurmountable problem to equalize Tech - Tech+ and Novice as to privileges which includes all present privileges the Technician has above 50mhz, and add the prospective HF privileges. These are for the most part, experienced hams who will learn techniques they don't know, as we all had to do at one time or another.

Make sure that NEW applicants to the beginner class (or whatever it is called) have questions on the test which cover RF exposure and microwave operating techniques. Instead of a 25 question exam, make it 35 or 50 in order to cover the material.

I believe that all the controversy being generated over the ARRL's proposal has more to do with giving the General to no code Techs than it does with giving HF access privileges via a no code license. The ARRL can go a long way to quiet this down by making a small change in the proposal, even if it may be difficult to face up to it.

I still think something can be crafted where nothing someone had is lost, (other than the 50khz of exclusive Extra phone band privileges, but almost no one is really screaming about that) and everyone else gains something without giving away the General Class license.


73
George
K3UD

[ae4fa]

Dead on, George! That would make for a MUCH better proposal.

[K3STX]

I agree with you 100%. I have never been on VHF/UHF, but from what I understand alot of it is relatively low power stuff anyway. Sure there are the guys doing EME and other fancy stuff using 1 kW, but those guys, if they are really serious, can simply take elements 1 and 3.

I also agree that being &quot;demoted&quot; to the new Novice is a pretty good deal for most Techs. VHF AND HF without even frying a neuron, pretty easy. I also agree that at renewal time the no-code Techs could have a choice :Novice or upgrade. But I think the FCC wants this to happen all at once, and not fazed in. But George's proposal sounds good. ONE no-code HF Beginner license, the General, and the Extra. It has worked for decades, and with the new no-code there should be alot more blood.

paul

[N9CHZ]

Quote:

“Editor, QST:
I feel that the ranks of amateur radio are being over-run by too many incompetent operators. This is due to the fact that the present General class examination is over-simplified. Surely the examination could be revised, so that no person could possibly pass, as they sometimes do, without knowing the fundamentals of radio theory and operation. The present examination of the FCC is an extremely-simplified version of the fundamentals put forth in the License Manual....
Perhaps if FCC would tighten up, we would be free from a few lids and some of the unnecessary QRM.
End quote.

The above quote was taken from the Correspondence From Members column in the May 1956 issue of QST.... That’s right 1956, that was the month and year I was born 47 years ago.... they were complaining then and they are still complaining today....When will this ever end.

73
N9CHZ

[k9kjm]

There have been many good ideas presented here
on how to do a good transition for the no code tech
class up to general class. And it really makes no
difference to me which one is chosen in the end.
As long as the &quot;give away&quot; without the written general
exam as proposed by the ARRL is NOT done!
I have talked to many no code tech class operators,
and read many posts on the web about this whole
thing. All the no code techs ever asked for was to
get HF operating privileges without needing to pass
the CW test..... NONE of them even asked for the
ARRL &quot;giveaway&quot; idea! # ALL of them said they would
be happy to take the written general exam to upgrade!
In communicating with ARRL directors, I am really not
happy with the way some of them are not listening to
the wishes of members on this single issue.
They seem to want it &quot;their way or the highway&quot;

might have been said but with soooo many distractions in today's world the ham radio is in serious trouble... i am 35 and i have a 14 year old son and he does not understand why i even bother with a radio, the internet is his out and i do not know any one his age in this area who plays radio or even cares about it... i am sure there are young people all over the world who do but what i am saying is there is too much competition for the ham radio to survive and it only gets worse every day... go to the mall and 12 year olds are sending pictures to people thru their very own cell phone to some one they just met last night on yahoo instant messenger that lives in russia... i actually do not think if you opened the whole frequency spectrum to anyone who wants to use it that ham radio is going gain momentum in the next 50 years... sure you will have some die hards but what percentage vs. the population... i bet the percentage of licensed ham operators vs. the population will drop in 50 years...bottom line? should they change the rules to keep ham alive?? i do not think it will matter...so sue me for thinking....

John
KD4KXJ

dont get me wrong.... i love radio!!

[WA3KYY]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (k9kjm @ Jan. 26 2004,01:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">YES! # A great answer by AG4YO! # #
Simply leave the present no code tech license
alone (But make it non-renewable)
And when a no code tech passes the general
written exam, He/she becomes a general.
If they never take an exam, At renewal time,
they will become a novice class.............. #
SIMPLE! # And in a few short years, All that will
be left is the three classes of license. Novice,
General, and Extra.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I suggested something like this to my Division Director and will do so to the FCC when the proposal is opened for comment. But that &quot;few short years&quot; will be ten for all the Techs licensed just before the changes take effect. To counter that I proposed no Tech renewals, revert to Novice if you do not upgrade, two year grace period to upgrade or revert to Novice and lose privleges if your license expires more than two years after the changes go into effect.

[KF4ZHL]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (AG4YO @ Jan. 25 2004,22:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You know, we're missing the simpliest solution to the problem.... #The FCC wants three classes, then give them Novice, General and Extra as the ARRL suggests.

Don't do ANYTHING with Technicians. #When they pass Element 3 they become Generals. #Until they do, their current privledges apply. #They don't want reduced privledges, then this answers the requirement. #

This is the simplest thing and requires the FCC to do NOTHING. #It is alot more fair to General ops too.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
My thoughts exactly, and I'm a tech!

I can't say I'd refuse if someone handed me a general ticket without the bother of the written, but then again I'm not scared to take the general written either. I can also understand where current generals would be peeved at the free ride given to techs.


I think perhaps they want to cut back on the number of lic. upgrades in the near-future. An auto-upgrade cuts out a lot of paperwork for them. You know there will be a flood.

[KD7WHQ]

And, again, I say the same.
But then, I have all along..

And, I'm a tech as well..

[ky5u]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">CHZ says:&quot;This is due to the fact that the present General class examination is over-simplified...&quot; That’s right 1956, that was the month and year I was born 47 years ago.... they were complaining then and they are still complaining today....When will this ever end?[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe when they stop dumbing it down? Duh!

[w5alt]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (N9CHZ @ Jan. 28 2004,1000)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The above quote was taken from the Correspondence From Members column in the May 1956 issue of QST.... That’s right 1956, that was the month and year I was born 47 years ago.... they were complaining then and they are still complaining today....When will this ever end. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
So, tell us, since you have a license higher than Novice, can you pass the 1950's or 1960's Novice test?

The questions from 1967 are here: 1967 Novice Questions (http://www.spar-hams.org/forum/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=94)

Why don't you post the answers to show us that the complaints are unwarranted, then we'll see if you want to tackle the 1967 Technician exam.

73,

[N8VB]

If I were going to write a proposal to the FCC the following would be a summary of what I would propose:

(feel free to flame or critisize away)

N8VB
----------------------------------------------------------
Main Points:

• Reduction of license classes to 2, CLASS A and CLASS B
• Retention of 5 wpm CW testing for CLASS A
• No CW testing for CLASS B
• Restricted HF access for CLASS B, 200 W PEP
• CLASS B HF access on 17, 15, 12, 10 meters
• Existing Novice, Tech, Tech+ moved to CLASS B
• Existing General, Advanced, Extra moved to CLASS A

160 METERS

CLASS A: 1800-2000 kHz CW, RTTY, data, phone, image
CLASS B: NONE

80 METERS

CLASS A: 3500-3750 kHz CW, RTTY, data
3750-4000 kHz CW, phone, image
CLASS B: NONE

60 METERS

CLASS A: USB, 5330.5, 5346.5, 5366.5, 5371.5, 5403.5
CLASS B: NONE

40 METERS

CLASS A: 7000-7150 kHz CW, RTTY, data
7150-7300 kHz CW, phone, image
CLASS B: NONE

30 METERS

CLASS A: 10,100–10,150 kHz CW, RTTY, data
CLASS B: NONE

20 METERS

CLASS A: 14,000-14,150 kHz CW, RTTY, data
14,150-14,350 kHz CW, phone, image
CLASS B: NONE

17 METERS

CLASS A, B: 18,068-18,110 kHz CW, RTTY, data
18,110-18,168 kHz CW, phone, image

15 METERS

CLASS A, B: 21,000-21,200 kHz CW, RTTY, data
21,200-21,450 kHz CW, phone, image

12 METERS

CLASS A, B: 24,890-24,930 kHz CW, RTTY, data
24,930-24,990 kHz CW, phone, image

10 METERS

CLASS A, B: 28,000-28,300 kHz CW, RTTY, data
28,300-29,700 kHz CW, phone, image

6 Meters and Up:
CLASS A,B: Full Privileges, 1500W PEP

PEP limits 160 to 10 Meters:
CLASS A 1500W PEP, excluding 60 meters and 30 meters
CLASS B 200W PEP


CLASS A: Retains existing Extra Class 5 wpm CW testing requirement
Written test 50 questions

CLASS B: No CW testing requirement
Written test 30 questions

Existing Novice, Technician, Tech+ classes moved to CLASS B

Existing General, Advanced, Extra moved to CLASS A

Note that CLASS B is allowed access the CW, RTTY, and data portions of 17, 15, 12, and 10 meters even though they were not tested for CW proficiency. This will allow CLASS B operators to operate CW on the air as practice for upgrading to CLASS A if they wish. CLASS B operators are not restricted from operating the data modes on 17, 15, 12, and 10 meters. The incentive for CLASS B operator to upgrade to CLASS A is access to 160, 80, 60, 40, 30, and 20 meters, as well as the 1500 W PEP limit.

--------------------------------------------------

[kb5zcr]

Actually, that &quot;class A and Class B&quot; plan doesn't look bad. #I think that the ARRL and FCC can do whatever they want with the license requirements but it still won't bring more people into the hobby. I am 39 years old. I passed the 13wpm cw test to get my general lic. #I listen 99% more than I talk. The last 3 years or so I have only worked cw. #I fade in and out of the hobby. I have a dual band in the pickup that I havent turned on in 6 months. I don't even have an outdoor antenna right now (stupid home owner association rules)

I know that a lot of people on here don't agree but I think that this hobby is kinda like the old steam engine hobbyist that are still around. There are still guys that get into steam engines and old iron. (see this page #http://www.north-texas-antique-tractor-and-engine-club.org/) but there are not many getting INTO the hobby. I think that it's kinda the same for ham radio. #Tim

[n6hle]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC9ETP @ Jan. 25 2004,00:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't think the ARRL's plan is perfect, but I think it's pretty good compromise between current hams and future hams.

Me? I'm too impatient to wait for something to happen.. I want it now. So I'll be getting my General this spring no matter what the rules are. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Summed up my feelings. I don't agree with everything the ARRL proposes either, but I do see it as a decent compromise. Seeing as how every class of hams are going to be t'd off no matter how things eventually do go, this proposal seems to keep the eventual anger fairly equal among everybody.

I also agree with John in that I will be upgrading this spring no matter what. And if I don't pass element 1 or 3 this spring, I will this summer.

Then I can get down on HF and start having a hell of a lot more fun and continue to ignore all of these code/no code, license structuring and any other complaints or debates out there.

[KA4DPO]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (KC0JBJ @ Jan. 24 2004,23:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I propose the new entry-level license class be called the &quot;Basic Communicator&quot;. #[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That already exists, it's called Citizens Band.

[ai4ep]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif ...why do you think there is such a rush among certain GENERAL class operators to UPGRADE to the EXTRA class ? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[N2MAQ]

Hm, Seems to be a lot of people who would move those of us who used to be Tech +'s down but not up ? Also seems to be no one complaining about the free move upwards for the Advanced class that has been proposed. No one thinks about us low lifes Tech +'s that used to have 2 classes of lic. under us, then we were wmerged with regular Tech. Now we should be moved to the bottom class called basic or entry ? I think maybe it's about the old boy network than it is about whats fair and good for ham radio. Anyway, even if I was given a free upgrade from my Tech + to a General I think I'll stay off HF. Seems like much to do about nothing to me. So dont worry people us stupid Techs wont ruin your bands. Oh wait there already ruined aren't they ? I mean if your not in with a group or a click you are ignored or harrassed. Now my proposal, change it all back like it was Novice, Tech, General, Advanced, Extra. now my new propasl Make everyone be retested on new a nd current rules and the new modes of operation every 5 years. Those of you who want to keep the bands to yourselves would then have to stay on top of things and prove yourself worthy as us lowly Tech's must prove our worthyness. Just one persons humble idea. You all have a good day

First of all, if you were merged into the entry level as proposed, you would in fact be gaining priveleges, not losing any... So if the new enttry level should be called &quot;Super Human Engineer&quot; instead of &quot;Novice&quot;, you would still complain?? Probably....


Secondly, what makes you think that all existing licensees would not be able to pass a retest?? Something tells me if that did come to pass, you would be eating lots of crow..... I believe well over 90% of all currently licensed generals, advanced, and extras would have no problem passing any of the current exams....

[N2MAQ]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (NJ1K @ Feb. 29 2004,12:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">First of all, if you were merged into the entry level as proposed, you would in fact be gaining priveleges, not losing any... So if the new enttry level should be called &quot;Super Human Engineer&quot; instead of &quot;Novice&quot;, you would still complain?? #Probably....


Secondly, what makes you think that all existing licensees would not be able to pass a retest?? #Something tells me if that did come to pass, you would be eating lots of crow..... I believe well over 90% of all currently licensed generals, advanced, and extras would have no problem passing any of the current exams....[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
I dont seem to remember pointing my finger at any one person but since you take it so personal and seem to think I am crying lets do it ! Your right I dont think half could pass a retest. I hear so called extras and advanced on local repeaters that say things like &quot; I can hardly hear you, I don't understand it because I have the repeater full scale&quot; now does that sound like they even know how a repeater works ? Now my Quote. &quot; put the struture back to the old way and make all the real cry babies happy. It wont bother me a bit.&quot; But remember one thing people, times change and you may call it dumbing down. I think you wish you had changed jsut a little with the times one day when the bands are gone and the only thing we have left is the internet and thats really dumbing down isnt it ?

PS, I still dont seem to recall complaining in the first place I merely respondd to all you whiners that say ' I had to do it so you should do it &quot; and crow aint so bad if its cooked proper and not just boiled.

[kc8yhk]

about all this new licensing crap....

im a tech and im happy where im at and im proud to hold a tech ticket. would i like to upgrade? SURE I WOULD.... i would love to but im a truck driver and if the wheels aint rollin' im sleeping, that kind of cuts into &quot;study time&quot; when i get to go home i have my &quot;wife time&quot; doing chores and spending time with her ect.

for the tech test i studied once maybe twice a day for a week then tested and missed ONE QUESTION. was it hard to pass?? NO WAY!

the other problem is that i spent about $500 for a dual band rig setup in my truck and that broke the bank.... it would be quite a long time before i could get any HF equip. if i was single it wouldnt be a problem....

so to wrap things up. im happy where i stand, dont upgrade me or downgrade me. i need to earn that general ticket.

73
Mike

kc8yhk It doesn't sound like you're whining Mike... If you're a tech and happy there, nothing wrong with staying there... The whiners are those who cry &amp; whine about code being too hard, or out dated, or some other reason they don't want to put forth the effort to advance themselves.... It's really too bad but these people are hurting themselves in the long run.... I laugh at em all the time because I know that they will likely not stay involved in ham radio very long anyway.... They're wasting their time and resources away thinking they're going to change humanity for the good when in reality they are only destroying their own futures....

Go figure eh??