ARRL Meeting

Has anyone read the minutes of the recent ARRL meeting?

To give credit where it is due, there were two people in attendance who motioned to make all current technicians who have not passed element 1 to be demoted to novice, make all current advanced class demoted to general, and to retain element 1 for general and extra... Of course the motion failed but at least there was some discussion and now we know who the good guys are.

I believe these two members were K5UR and W0EJ....

[K6UEY]

While I can appreciate the two gentlemen bucking the tide, it would appear they were not to well informed. The situation for the Technician was one of not being tested and totally unprepared to assume the position of General class. Where as in the case of the ADVANCED class it was just the opposite, they were over tested and far exceeded the requirements of Extra Class, evaluated by the present day standards the ADVANCED class would be equivalent to an EXTRA-PLUS Class.You think what happened threw up a stink ,if the ADVANCED were DEMOTED to General class there would be smoke in the air, and some empty directors chairs.

ORV
K6UEY
ARRL Life Member

At least all of the ARRL board members are not blithering idiots . My 2 cents .

[K3UD]

Hey Orv,

I like the Extra-Plus idea http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

The merging of Advanced and Extra was about the only way it could have been done short of just letting the class remain orphan. The only major problem IMO is the upgrade of the no code tech to General, which can be fixed very quickly in the proposal with no one loosing any privileges, but then it would look like somebody was taking something that had been "promised" away from somebody else. We are now in the area of political correctness when it concerns this issue.

73
George
K3UD

While it could be said that moving advanced licensees into the general class would be a demotion, I don't really feel it would be in fact a demotion as they would lose no priveleges (keeping in mind the general portions would be expanded anyway) as far as band space goes. The way I see it, generals would in fact be asuming advanced priveleges... The only difference is the name of the class... If instead they moved ALL generals up to advanced class and eliminated the general class, you end up at the same place, only the names would be changed...

Of course there will be smoke no matter what they do, I think most of us are on the same page with respects to making licensing and upgrades easier... I do feel that no one should be upgraded through "grandfathering".

[K9STH]

NJ1K:

You obviously do not know the history of the Advanced Class license.

Originally, starting in 1951, the old Class "A" amateur radio operators, which had been the highest possible classification of license were renamed "Advanced" and the "new" Extra Class license, which had no additional privileges, was established. No new Advanced Class licenses were issued until 1967 when incentive licensing took effect. Then, effective 22 November 1967 (with an effective date of 22 November 1968) these people who had previously held the highest class of license were "downgraded" through incentive licensing and lost privileges, along with those who held Conditional Class and General Class licneses. All of these classes of licenses lost a considerable portion of their HF privileges through FCC action, with the explicit approval of the ARRL!

Most amateurs were in favor of incentive licensing. However, it had been presented in such a manner as that everyone believed that they would lose no privileges. Instead, the new license structure would take effect on those who were coming into the service. Instead, the FCC removed all sorts of privileges. Also, shortly after implementing incentive licensing the FCC realized that they had made a serious "blunder" and offered to rescind virtually all of the privilege reductions. This fact was NOT made known to the membership of the ARRL. In fact, the ARRL petitioned the FCC not to rescind the privilege reduction. However, the FCC did not implement the 2nd round of privilege reductions that were to happen on 22 November 1969.

After the FCC revoked its offer to rescind the privilege reductions the ARRL, in the very small print in the back of QST, in a single paragraph, "mentioned" that the FCC had decided not to rescind the privilege reductions AND took credit for this! Since very few people ever read this small print, the "word" never got out that the ARRL had taken this action. In fact, I never knew about this until less than a year ago when I was looking through some old QST magazines and just "happened" to read some of the small print!

Several petitions were sent to the FCC over the years to correct this reduction of privileges. The FCC's "excuse" was that to restore these privileges to those who had them removed would not be "fair" to those who had achieved the Extra Class license. At the time, there were less than 20,000 Extra Class licensees but there had been around 150,000 people who had been adversely affected by incentive licensing! So, it wouldn't be "fair" to less than 20,000 amateur radio operators (a significant number who had also been affected by incentive licensing) to correct a wrong that had been done to over 7 times as many people!

Anyway, the Advanced Class operators have been adversely affected several times over the past 50+ years. In fact, most Advanced Class operators have actually taken a written examination that was considerably more difficult than the present Extra Class examination. They definitely have passed a more comprehensive CW examination than is now required. Yet you propose that they be downgraded again even though the General Class would, in your proposal, have the same privileges as the Advanced now have. Thus, you are proposing that the General be "upgraded" to Advanced without having to do anything yet those who have definitely achieved a higher level not be recognized!

Glen, K9STH

[W5HTW]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (K9STH @ Jan. 29 2004,09:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Also, shortly after implementing incentive licensing the FCC realized that they had made a serious &quot;blunder&quot; and offered to rescind virtually all of the privilege reductions. This fact was NOT made known to the membership of the ARRL. In fact, the ARRL petitioned the FCC not to rescind the privilege reduction. However, the FCC did not implement the 2nd round of privilege reductions that were to happen on 22 November 1969.

After the FCC revoked its offer to rescind the privilege reductions the ARRL, in the very small print in the back of QST, in a single paragraph, &quot;mentioned&quot; that the FCC had decided not to rescind the privilege reductions AND took credit for this! Since very few people ever read this small print, the &quot;word&quot; never got out that the ARRL had taken this action. In fact, I never knew about this until less than a year ago when I was looking through some old QST magazines and just &quot;happened&quot; to read some of the small print!

![/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
That's something new to me, Glen! I never knew either of the proposed rescinding of the privilege reductions until you just mentioned it.

During that period of time I was not too politically qualified in ham radio and figured &quot;what was to be, was to be.&quot; My own approach to incentive licensing was to simply take the tests and get to the top. Took the Advanced in early 69 and the Extra near the end of that year. It was simply a hurdle, and I did not really awaken to the mishandling of it until the last few years as new restructuring came up. But it was definitely not the way to practice incentive, by removing privileges and then making you work harder to gain them back. There should have been some other carrot but unfortunately there wasn't anything available. Today I view it much like having been promoted to 8th grade and then suddenly kicked back to 6th grade and told to study harder and take more tests to get back through 7th to 8th grade. I had been a General for some 13 years or so when incentive licensing came along, but to be honest I probably didn't use the frequencies I lost anyway.

I agree, the Advanced test I took in 1968 or 1969 (not really sure which) was not in any way a breeze. Some likened it to the 2nd Class Phone, and since I took that license around that same time, I'd say that was a fair statement. The Extra was a shorter exam and by that simple fact alone, a bit easier than the Advanced, but it was not easy, and was said to be similar to the First Phone. I did not take the First until some ten years later, so can't say how accurate that might have been.

The Advanced was exactly that -- &quot;advanced&quot; in theory. It went well beyond General theory. I know many Advanced holders of that era received considerable respect from the ham community as having achieved quite a bit.

Even now, in retrospect, I was for incentive licensing. At the time I didn't really consider the loss of privileges, but simply that it meant new rungs were on the ladder and had to be climbed. While most of my ham friends agreed, I do recall a few who were bitter about the loss.

Over the years we have retained a mixed breed of incentive licensing, but in recent decades, with the &quot;lifetime&quot; Novice ticket, and removal of the two year time-in-grade requirement to test for Extra, we took away some of the brightness of all of the classes. In fact the entire licensing structure began to fall apart in the 1980s, in my opinion. To me the most critical error came in the Novice structure.

Milk under the bridge. I think the FCC will modify the ARRL's proposal for further simplicity, resulting in further disincentive. And I suspect somewhere in our not-distant future lies a single class of amateur radio license.

Ed

[N7CPC]

Extra pluss what? There ain't nutn' left.

[ky5u]

While we're naming names, Frank Butler voted FOR the ARRL proposal.

He is an extremely nice fellow but I don't agree with this stance. There was no poll in my Division. I spoke to him briefly well before the vote (last November)at a tail-gater and my impression was that his mind was made up already.

This should not detract from the fact that Frank is an excellent Amateur and an experienced elmer to many people. My only complaint is as stated above.

Please post the name of your Division Director and how he/she voted.

[AG3Y]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In fact, most Advanced Class operators have actually taken a written examination that was considerably more difficult than the present Extra Class examination. They definitely have passed a more comprehensive CW examination than is now required. [/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>

I will definately back what Glen is saying here. When I upgraded back 25 years ago, I found the Advanced Test the hardest written test of the lot! If there had been no further code requirements for Extra, and if you could have passed the written test prior to taking the code test for each level, I would have had all the written tests out of the way close to a year before I finally achieved my Extra!

Interestingly, I found the same thing true about the 1st RadioTelephone commercial license. By the time I had sat through the 2nd class test, I was so wiped out emotionally and mentally that I could hardly look at the 1st phone test. However, the next time I went in to take it, I found it so easy to take on its own, that I couldn't understand why I had been so flummoxed by it the first time. Not until I remembered how hard that 2nd phone test had been!

Well, thanks for stirring up the memories, Glen !

73 from Jim

[K9STH]

YO:

How do you know for sure that he voted for the proposal? There was no official recording of how anyone voted on this particular proposal. That way, depending on how the general membership reacted, no one had to &quot;own up&quot; to voting for or against the proposal. As such, if the feeling was negative (which I detect is the feeling from many members) an individual director could always say that he/she voted against the proposal, it was &quot;them other guys&quot; who approved it!

Glen, K9STH

Glen,

Maybe you can answer this, I was very busy at the time and can't recall. The Advanced was supposed to be for people who's primary interest was theory, phone operation and not CW. So the test was to be technically harder than the extra but no additional code test to pass. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but I seem to recall that you did NOT have to pass the Advanced in order to get the Extra. Just like you did not have to be a novice, just go in and take the General test &amp; do 13 wpm. In other words you could go general to advanced or general to extra. (the difference being one had harder theory the other easier theory but a code exam).

Did I remember this wrong, or was this proposed and not implimented exactly this way or what.


Thanks
Marty WB2RJR/7

P.S. I am talking about right after incentive licensing took effect, I know how it is now.

[AG3Y]

Marty, before you make Glen write up an Epistle, are you asking about the current ARRL proposal, or the situation as it was back in the late 60s or so? Just interested in a clarification of your question.

As for when I took the tests about 25 years ago, we had to pass the CW element for each level before we could take the written. 5WPM then Novice, 13 WPM then General , then Advanced written , 20 WPM and then Extra. Also, we had to have a lower class license for a period of 1 year ( I believe that was total licensed time ) before we could try for the 20 WPM and the Extra class tests. At least, that is the way I remember it being.

73 from Jim

[K0RGR]

Boy, there's some atomic powered baloney slicers at work here.

Prior to 1942, both ham tests consisted of 10 questions from a very small question pool, according to the ARRL website. My Dad was a 'Class A' from 1935 on, and he
talked about how easy the written test was back then, so I suspect that's accurate.

We must not have taken the same Advanced test in the late 60's (it would have been 68, I think). The test I took only had two topics that weren't on the General - SWR and SSB modulation envelopes, and I think the SSB questions were on my General, too. I studied for about 30 minutes and flunked the test the first. Next time, I studied about an hour and passed it easily.

I would say it was about the same as the difference between Element 2 and Element 3 today, based on what my students experience has been with both. Much ado over nothing!

I studied for months to get my Extra. Of course, the 20 WPM test was a big part of that effort - I stayed up into the wee hours every morning so I could copy UPI news at 25 WPM for practice.

I didn't like incentive licensing, either, and neither did my Dad. But in the long run, I am very glad that I had to bust my buns to prepare for the Extra (which I easily passed after all that study). It really laid the foundation for my whole career. On the strength of the license alone, with no formal education in the field, I was hired as a technician by TRW, and that opened up doors to the education I needed from that point on.

But, yes, I referred to ARRL as &quot;A-Double Cross L&quot; for a long time. Sometimes, I still do. But I'm a card-carrying member, and intend to stay that way, even if I disagree with them.

I guess when you went through your licensing upgrades determines how tough the various tests were... As for me, I went through all my upgrades in 1986... The code took me some time to get to 20 wpm but as for the technical exams, I thought the general and advanced were the easiest. I took the advanced one week after I becaome a general and aced that test... A month after that I went for the extra not expecting to pass the 20 wpm code but was very confident about the written... Low &amp; behold, I passed the code but flunked the written... I managed to pass the extra written about a month later.... So for what it's worth, to me the extra written at that time was the toughest... The advanced seemed not much more difficult than the general, just more detailed.....

RGR,

What kind of test is easier to take, an essay test, fill in the blank, multiple choice where you don't know the questions, or multiple choice where you get to see the questions and answers ahead of time?

I wonder why the medical boards, the bar exam, and the Professional Engineers exam doesn't follow the ARS model. Oh, I know, they're testing for competency, we're testing for the ARRL membership drive.(sure wish they did I could then be all three in no time)

Here's a sampling of the 1954 general test topics( these are not the exact questions but cover similar areas). Decide for yourself.

1954 General Class questions:
26. What is the purpose of a Faraday (electrostatic) shield between the output circuit of an rf power amplifier and antenna coupling system?
30. what are the advantages of a push-pull rf power amplifier output stage as compared to a single ended stage of the same power?
31. A 2000-kc low-drift crystal having a negative temperature coefficient of 5 cycles per megacycle per degreee Centigrade is started in operation at 40 degrees Centigrad. If the temperature-frequency characteristic is linear, what will the oscillation frequency be at a temperature of 60 degrees Centigrade?
44. Using a frequency meter with a possible error of 0.75%, on what whole-number kilocycle frequency nearest the high-frequency end of the 3500-4000-kc amateur band could a transmitter safely be set?
46. Draw a schematic diagram of a pentode audio power-amplifier stage with an output coupling transformer and load resistor, showing suitable instruments connected in the secondary for measurement of the audio frequency voltage and current,and naming each component part?
47. Draw a schematic diagram of a filter for reducing amateur interference to a broadcast reception consisting of (1) a series tuned circuit connected in shunt with the B.C. receiver input to by-pass the interfering signal and (2) a parallel-tuned (trap) circuit in series with the receiver input to reject the interfering signal.
64. How would the short circuited turn of the coil affect the resonant frequency of a tuned circuit and why?
33. In the circuit diagram below, what is the value of the bias voltage? What is the value of the bleeder resistance, R2?
36. Draw a schematic diagram of a fullwave single-phase power supply using a center-tapped high-voltage secondary with a filter circuit for best regulation, shaowing a bleeder resistor providing two different output voltages and a method of suppressing &quot;hash&quot; interference from the mercury-vapor rectifier tubes. Give the names of the component parts and approximate values of filter components suitable for either amateur radiotelephone of raqdio telegraph operation?
39. Draw a simple schematic of a plate-neutralized final r.f. stage using a triode tube coupled to a Hertzian antenna, showing the antenna system and a Fraday screen to reduce harmonic radiation.
42. Draw a simple schematic diagram of a piezoelectric crystal-controlled oscillator using a pentode vacuum tube, indicating polarity of electrode supply voltages where externally connected.
67. What circuit condition will minimize the harmonic components in the output circuit of a given radio-frequency amplifier stage?
68. Give the meanings of the following &quot;Q&quot; signals: QRK, QRM, QRT, QRX, QSA, QSY, QSZ

73, Marty WB2RJR/7

BTW,
The amount of knowledge required for an extra class license falls far short of even a one year certificate in EET at a community college. Usually these are 27-30 cr hours, for good grades maybe you study 2 hours for each in class. So 90 hours of studying electronics and you would be above an extra.

73, Marty WB2RJR/7

[K9STH]

RJR:

Since I have been licensed (since 1959), with the exception of the Novice examination, you had to take and pass all of the various examinations in order starting with the the 5 words per minute CW examination (if you already held a Novice Class you didn't have to do this) and then the 13 words per minute CW examination and then you were allowed to take the General theory (the Technician Class was only given by mail at this time and the theory was the same as for General). If you held a Technician or Conditional Class of license you had to retake the General theory before the FCC examiner. However, prior to 1967 you started at the 13 words per minute examination because only the General and Extra examinations were given by the FCC.

At that time, you had to have held a General or Advanced Class (no new Advanced Class licenses were being issued at that time) for at least 2 years before you could take the Extra. For the Extra you had to take the 20 words per minute CW exam and pass before they would allow you to take the written exam.

Starting in 1967, when the Advanced Class was reinstated, you had to take and pass the Advanced Class examination before you were allowed to take the 20 words per minute code examination when upgrading from General. Then, if you passed the 20 wpm code you were allowed to take the Extra written exam. If you were a Technician Class you had to take the General written examination unless you were one of the very few who had gotten their licenses in the 1951 - 1952 time frame when the FCC was giving the Technician exam (and could prove that you took it before an FCC examiner!).

Around this time the 2 year requirement for holding a General or higher class license was rescinded for the Extra.

When the VE program was started, at first you still had to pass the CW portion, next you no longer had to pass any CW examination before you could take your written exam. However, there was a definite time-limit in which you had to pass the CW portion before your written credit expired. You were not issued a license until you passed the code.

With the inception of no-code Technician you could fail the CW examination and still take the theory. To get to Extra you had to pass the 5 words per minute code, then the 13 wpm, and finally the 20 wpm. If you did not have a license, then you started with the Technician exam, then the General exam, then the Advanced Exam, and finally the Extra exam. When the FCC eliminated the Advanced except for &quot;grandfathering&quot; you then had to take the Technican exam (if you were not already licensed), the General exam (if you didn't already hold a General or Advanced Class license), and then the Extra. At this same time, the CW requirement was dropped to 5 wpm and if you had already passed this requirement (within 1 year if all that you had was a certificate of completion) you didn't have to take another CW examination.

As for the Advanced being for people who mainly wanted to work SSB, etc., this was not true. It was just a &quot;stepping stone&quot; that the FCC added to allow more privileges. Besides, they knew that if they downgraded all of the old Class &quot;A&quot; licensees to General with the greatly reduced privileges that the incentive licensing &quot;uproar&quot; would have been too great (letters to Congressmen, etc.) back in 1967. There were enough problems anyway although Viet Nam was getting going pretty good and Congress seemed not to be that interested in the Amateur Radio Service. As such, the FCC didn't pay any attention to the relatively few inquiries that they got from Congress about incentive licensing.

Glen, K9STH

Glen,

I could make an entire exam out of that. Thanks I probably got that idea from something I had read in the QST arguments to the editor section in the late 60's.

TNX
Marty WB2RJR/7

[ki4bgo]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (NJ1K @ Jan. 29 2004,09:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Has anyone read the minutes of the recent ARRL meeting?

To give credit where it is due, there were two people in attendance who motioned to make all current technicians who have not passed element 1 to be demoted to novice....[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
...And the day they try a stunt like that, I'll mail the #@#$ license back to the FCC! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif The ONLY thing wrong with the proposal as I see it, is the Techs should take element 3 to become Generals.

[K0RGR]

Where did you find the 1954 License Manual?

I can't speak for 1954. A couple of those were in the 1965 General test I took. That's about the level of Extra Exam I took in the early 70's - and yes I had to draw schematics on that one, unlike the General or Advanced which were 'multiple guess'. I remember the Faraday shield question, and I had to ID different rectifier schematics on the General test. That was easy to memorize. I remember a lot of questions on rectifiers and filters that I don't see now, either.

If that was really from the General, and not the Extra question pool, then the General was severely 'dumbed down' between 1954 and 1965. All of us Baby-boomers should be busted back to Novice because we obviously didn't earn our licenses. All those who took the tests prior to WWII, should be too, because it was only 10 questions and there was a lot less to know then.

Yeah, I have a couple of those degree thingys, and I think it took me longer over 4 years to earn it than it did to study for the Extra, but the Extra seemed like a lot more work.

Clearly, the technology has changed drastically. There were questions on Pulse modulation on my Extra exam.
Are they still there?

I will also concede that the language on the modern tests is much simpler. That's because the rules and regulations were rewritten decades ago to be in 'plain English' instead of radio-lawyer-ese. Part of a larger government program. ARRL helped in the effort but was not running the show.

With published questions and answers, the student is really compelled to study/memorize the correct answers for the questions, whether they actually understand why the correct answer is correct or not. Why? Because there are too many questions on the test where there is really no other convenient source for the answers. I was just looking at the Extra question pool. One of the questions asks about what actions the FCC might take in a certain situation. You might be able to find the answer in Part 97 someplace, but it would not be easy, and without studying the questions, you would not know what level of detail to expect. I wish they'd go back to the old format - it was much easier to study, and would eliminate a lot of the 'dumbing down' arguments.

Anyone who has passed an Amateur exam at any point in time has a right to be proud of their accomplishment. Comparing tests from different eras is obviously not reasonable.

[ky5u]

Hi Glen,

Yes, I asked Frank how he voted and he told me. Give him credit for his honesty. Now I am getting the silent treatment when I asked more questions...

[K9STH]

RGR:

When I took my General Class exam in November of 1959 at the old Federal Courthouse in Chicago, it was primarily fill in the blank, draw schematics, etc. There was one small section that was multiple-guess. Also, at that time there were no handheld calculators. You could use a slide-rule IF you showed it to the examiners before the test. They gave you &quot;scratch paper&quot; and you were expected to use this and turn it in after the exam was over. Also, you had to &quot;show&quot; your work (you know, like they made you do on your college math exams - at least during the early to mid 1960s at Georgia Tech we had to!) when you worked out the value of a component, frequency, etc.

When I took my Advanced at the old Federal Building in Dallas (1968) it was multiple choice. However, you still had to calculate all sorts of things. Also, I tried working a couple of the problems &quot;wrong&quot; just to see if there was an answer if you got part of the formula backwards, etc. Yep, the other answers were there if you just happened to get something backward, put an unknown on the wrong side of the equation, etc. Thus, you definitely had to know what you were doing.

There also were schematics that were missing some components. You had to indicate at which points the individual componets should be located. This wasn't quite &quot;drawing the schematic&quot;, but was as close as they could come with the &quot;multiple guess&quot; format.

When I took my commercial exams in August 1962 (between my senior year in high school and freshman year in college) they were just starting to really use the multiple guess format. However, over half of the examination was still fill in the blank and draw the schematic.

Since applicants for licenses were not given the questions and answers until well after I took all of my exams, you had to pretty much know what you were doing. The questions could be asked in all sorts of ways and you had to know what element was missing, how to calculate the particular value of the component, the particular frequency, the particular time-constant, etc. You had to know how to draw quite a number of circuits because you had no idea as to which one (actually there were several on the exams that I took) you had to draw, etc.

The fact that both the questions and answers are given today does make it a lot easier to take the examination. This goes so far as the exact values of the mathematical problems. Also, unlike the school systems of the past (at least at those schools that I attended), many schools today put a lot more emphasis on memorization rather than analytical ability. Yes, when I was in school you memorized math tables, parts of speech, etc., but you were taught how to &quot;think for yourself&quot; and not what is politically correct, etc.! Today it is easier for someone to memorize a large amount of data (like cramming for an examination in college) because it is much like what they are taught in school. Of course when you &quot;cram&quot; for an exam, your retention of that information is usually &quot;short lived&quot;.

Anyway, many newcomers don't want to know how it was in the &quot;goode olde tymes&quot;. There is definitely some justification to this because they have a whole different set of circumstances to circumvent to get their license today. But, they also should not &quot;sell short&quot; those people who have gone before. It is because of these &quot;olde tymers&quot; that amateur radio still exists and it is because of these &quot;olde tymers&quot; that things are easier today.

You know, like your grandfather telling you how he walked 5 miles to school uphill both ways, through 3 feet of snow, when it was either 30 degrees below zero (F) or 110 degrees (F) in the shade. Actually, I did have to walk to school in at least 2 feet of snow (sometimes more!) but it was fairly flat land and it was just about 3/4 mile. I am from the &quot;snow capital&quot; of Indiana and there was a lot of snow on the ground during the winter months! But, when you are in elementary school even 2 feet seems like a lot!

Anyway, comparing today's examinations with those from the 1950s into the early 1960s, those examinations did require a definite knowledge of the subject. Since today you can memorize the exact test before you take it, I definitely believe that the older tests were more difficult. But, the testing procedures have changed (by the way, don't discount the &quot;fear factor&quot; from being watched by a Federal employee as you take the test!) as well as the knowledge required. Thus, those who are taking the examinations today are confronted with an entirely different situation.

However, for those who think that the &quot;olde tymers&quot; should be downgraded, etc., I say &quot;think again&quot;! I would bet that the majority of amateurs who have been licensed in the past 15 years, or so, if they had to take the &quot;fill in the blank, draw schematics, etc.,&quot; type of examinations that they would not be licensed today! Too many people take their examinations having never really learned that much about the service and then promptly forget everything that they have learned. The very simple questions that are often asked on this site show that. Too many questions about regulations, frequencies allowed for operation by their license class, simple antennas, etc., are asked. In years past you had to know this information frontwards and backwards to be able to pass your examinations.

As for the code / no-code situation: Frankly, I judge someone on how he/she conducts themselves on the air, by their technical know-how, etc., and not whether or not they know the International Morse code. Sure, if I had my way every amateur would still have to prove that they have a working knowledge of the International Morse code. But, that hasn't been required of all amateurs for some time. Thus, I have to make my judgements based on other facts. Frankly, I personally am acquainted with some no-code Technicians that are &quot;top notch&quot; operators, really know their &quot;stuff&quot; technical wise, etc. Then I also know some higher class licensees who don't know a certain portion of their anatomy from a place from which soil has been removed! Unfortunately, there are many more no-code operators who fit this description than I wish existed. But, I leave my judgement for the general conduct of the operator and not by whether or not he/she has mastered the International Morse code.

Glen, K9STH

[N7VQM]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (WB2RJR @ Jan. 29 2004,12:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The amount of knowledge required for an extra class license falls far short of even a one year certificate in EET at a community college.[/QUOTE]<span id='postcolor'>
Having a BSEET, I can completely agree with that.

Tom Wheeler, N0GSG was my instructor for AC circuit analysis in 2nd semester. #When I had him again for Communications Systems in 7th semester, he said, &quot;You're not an Extra yet?! #Slacker! #It would be SO easy!&quot;

[KC8QMU]

ki4bgo Posted on Jan. 29 2004,13:25
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote (NJ1K @ Jan. 29 2004,09:23)
Has anyone read the minutes of the recent ARRL meeting?

To give credit where it is due, there were two people in attendance who motioned to make all current technicians who have not passed element 1 to be demoted to novice....

...And the day they try a stunt like that, I'll mail the #@#$ license back to the FCC! The ONLY thing wrong with the proposal as I see it, is the Techs should take element 3 to become Generals.



I find that you feel this way very interesting. If the proposal would go through, the Technician Class would be abolished. If techs were lumped in with the nocices, it would still give you no-code HF. You would have frequency and power limits on VHF/UHF, but nothing too drastic and those limits probably wouldn't interfere too much with what you are doing now (unless you run QRO or 900 Mhz and above). For most practical purposes, you would be gaining priviledges! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

Some people just don't get it George... You could take any class and give 'em DC to daylight, no band restrictions and no power limit, but call 'em a novice, and they'll yip about it.... On the other side of the coin, you could take away half of their priveleges, limit their power to 5 watts, and require type accepted equipment, but give 'em a fancy name like &quot;Super Duper Smart Turbocharged Brainy Extra Plus Plus PLus&quot; and they'll be happy....

Go figure......