MEANINGFUL ENTRY-LEVEL LICENSE PRIVILEGES

[AA7BQ]

The ARRL again has urged the FCC to provide meaningful operating privileges
to entry-level Amateur Radio licensees, including access to HF, even if the
Commission doesn't want to create a new license class. Commenting in
response to the FCC's July 9 Notice of Proposed Rule Making and Order
(NPRM&O) in WT Docket 05-235, the League also stood by its stance that the
Commission retain the 5 WPM Morse code requirement for Amateur Extra
applicants, but do away with it for General applicants.

"Retaining Morse telegraphy as a requirement for only the Amateur Extra
class license, in ARRL's view, places Morse telegraphy in a proper, balanced
perspective," the League told the Commission October 31, the deadline to
comment in the proceeding. Reply comments are due November 14.

The FCC's NPRM&O proposed eliminating the 5 WPM Morse code requirement for
all Amateur Radio license classes but denied requests to create a new
entry-level license class with limited HF privileges. The League said the
FCC needs to finish the job of license restructuring it began in 1998 by
reviewing operating privileges for all classes--especially at the first rung
of the licensing ladder.

"The elimination of Morse telegraphy, absent a more thorough review of
operating privileges in the Amateur Service, will not address the
ascertained flaws in the only entry-level license class," the ARRL asserted,
referring to the Technician license. "That license class is not attracting
or keeping newcomers in its present configuration, and it needs fixing right
now."

The ARRL argued that if the FCC will not create a new Novice class license
as the League had suggested in its earlier Petition for Rule Making
(RM-10867) in the proceeding, it should modify Technician operating
privileges instead. The present licensing regime limits Technicians to VHF
bands and above, "leaving newcomers to the Amateur Service isolated from
their peers holding higher class licenses," the ARRL said. "The Technician
class is, for too many, a 'dead end' to what might otherwise be an active,
progressive interest in Amateur Radio, technical self-training and
incentive-based educational progress in the many facets of the avocation."

The ARRL reminded the FCC that its restructuring plan enjoyed the support of
the two Amateur Radio licensees in Congress--Rep Greg Walden, W7EQI (R-OR)
and Rep Mike Ross, WD5DVR (D-AR).

Eliminating the Morse requirement for General class applicants "creates an
anomaly with respect to the Technician class license," the ARRL noted. "If
the telegraphy requirement for the General class license is eliminated, the
distinction between the Technician class licensee and the Technician Plus
class licensee will have disappeared completely." Therefore, the League
contends, there is a logical basis for affording Technician licensees
entry-level HF privileges.

Under the ARRL plan, Technicians would have telegraphy and data privileges
on 3.55-3.7 MHz, 7.05-7.125 MHz and 21.05-21.20 MHz at 100 W output and on
28.05-28.3 MHz at 50 W output. The League wants the FCC to provide HF phone
and image privileges to Technicians on 3.9-4.0 MHz, 7.2-7.3 MHz and
21.35-21.45 MHz at 100 W output, and on 28.3-28.5 MHz at 50 W.

These recommended privileges take into account the FCC's proposal to adopt
the ARRL's so-called "Novice refarming" plan in WT Docket 04-140. The ARRL
had earlier proposed the same privileges for a reconstituted Novice license.

The time is right to take a look at the operating privileges of Amateur
Radio license classes, the ARRL said in its filing, "because the entry-level
license class is demonstrably neither attractive to newcomers nor
encouraging in terms of retaining the interest of license holders."

To back up its assertions, the League pointed to surveys it conducted in
1992 and 2003. Nearly half of the licensees responding in the latter poll
indicated that they were not currently active in Amateur Radio--up 30
percent from the earlier survey. "The number of inactive Technician class
licensees is 46 percent," the ARRL noted, adding that more than a quarter of
Technicians responding in 2003 said they'd never even been on the air.

The League pointed out that the FCC's proposed across-the-board elimination
of the Morse requirement eliminates a simple mechanism for current
Technician licensees to obtain HF operating privileges--passing the 5 WPM
code exam.

If the FCC does nothing other than eliminate the Morse requirement for the
General license, the ARRL commented, it would make no sense to continue to
deprive Technician licensees the HF operating privileges that Tech Plus
licensees now enjoy.

"To do otherwise is to draw a distinction that is entirely arbitrary," the
League concluded.

Material from The ARRL Letter may be republished or reproduced in whole or
in part in any form without additional permission. Credit must be given to
The ARRL Letter and The American Radio Relay League.

[w6gmt]

I always felt that the ARRL plan was flawed with the auto upgrades. But the underlying plan was sound. An entry class License with both VHF and HF makes good sense. There are some questions in my mind about the phone privileges I would feel better if they eliminated the 40 and 80 meter privileges. The 40 meter Band is small and often very busy. A better plan would give the Technicians full privileges on the 10 meter Band and 21.35-21.45 on the 15 meter phone band. The power out put is about right.
73
Brock

[KG4RUL]

OK ARRL,

Please, don't muddy the waters at this late date. Let this process take it's natural course.

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

P.S. I am an ARRL member and have been even before I got my ticket.

[nf0a]

Quote[/b] (w6gmt @ Nov. 05 2005,11:38)]I always felt that the ARRL plan was flawed with the auto upgrades. But the underlying plan was sound. #An entry class License with both VHF and HF makes good sense. # There are some questions in my mind about the phone privileges I would feel better if they eliminated the 40 and 80 meter privileges. The 40 meter Band is small and often very busy. # A better plan would give the Technicians full privileges on the 10 meter Band and 21.35-21.45 on the 15 meter phone band. #The power out put is about right.
73
Brock
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif Sounds peachy to me....

[ai4me]

I can agree and also disagree with the ARRL proposal. I feel the ARRL hit it right on the money with the proposal and reasoning of leaving the 5WPM requirement for Extra.

However, the restructuring of HF privileges for Technicians I can disagree on. For one, it would cloud the whole incentive for upgrading to General, and in essence completely void the General Class license. Giving small increments of added band does not provide incentive in itself to achieve the next level. For many the whole incentive for General is access to HF.

What is wrong with simply removing the requirement for 5WPM at General level? This opens the door to those who either have great difficulty in learning Morse or have absolutely no interest in the Morse mode of operating.

Also, if people wish to upgrade from the entry level Technician, the General exam ensures that the potential upgrade has the additional knowledge of essential HF skills needed to "move up".

I also disagree with the ARRL's finding that a majority of Technicians do not upgrade due to the stumbling block of Morse. Of most Technicians I know, a majority of their interest lies in communications above 50 MHz. Since Amateur Radio has so many facets, and there is something for everyone, this doesn't mean all amateurs are interested in HF communications. I know many who only are in to Amateur Radio because they really enjoy 2M, 440, APRS, Airmail, Satellite, 1.2 GHz and other such communication techniques found above 50 MHz.

I also know many General and Extra's that spend a majority of their time in the HF bands because that is the facet of Amateur Radio that fascinate and attract them.

I feel that the Tech/General line is more of a border than a barrier, and has more to do with preference than ability.

[k6faf]

" Sounds peachy to me......."
So it does to me....
They need to have something to earn the first HF spurs.
Then they can go forward or let the new-bought HF-rig get dusty on the shelf....who would want to do that, anyway.
Pity we are at the minimum of the sunspot-cycle, they will have to really chase the DX on 10 and 15.
Will that make them stop or go on?
I hope they all catch the bug!
73 de Hans

[KC9EOG]

In July 2003 I walked in with no ticket and passed the tech and general test. We have an entry level license for HF and it is sadly enough the general class. It is easy to get and will be even easier with the end of code, not that 5 WPM is any challenge.

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (KC9EOG @ Nov. 05 2005,13:43)]In July 2003 I walked in with no ticket and passed the tech and general test. #We have an entry level license for HF and it is sadly enough the general class. #It is easy to get and will be even easier with the end of code, not that 5 WPM is any challenge.
The Technician license will revert to its original intent if the code requirement is dropped. #it will, once again, become a license for those who wish to experiment with radio 50Mhz and above. #

Now, how many of you think that the current, and future, crop of techinicians will now begin to complain that the General test is just "too hard" and is a barrier to them enjoying HF privileges, raise your hands.

Let's see, #1, 2, #3, 4, 5.................

[k4lem]

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif I learned morse at age 12 and first ham license at 13. Passed 20 wpm and second class radio telegraph commerical at age 20. But, as with all things, time rolls only forward and technology changes.

I certainly do NOT oppose the elimination of CW. It might be good in real hard situations where you're in a life boat and the mike won't work. Beyond that its hard to imagine cw at five wpm being useful for anything.

I did understand the FCC was thinking about extending the US phone bands, especially on 80 meters and on 40. What ever happened to that idea? If the ham of the future at the elite extra class level need only demo a five WPM code speed, of what use is the extensive band allocations for cw only?

Cheers and Beers.
W1IT/4

[W5HTW]

Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. Power limitation, 75 watts. No VFO. This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum.



Ed

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,14:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. #Power limitation, 75 watts. #No VFO. # This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. #Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum. #



Ed
That sounds a bit like the privileges of the Novice ticket I held in 1960.


Hmmmmm!!

[n4cqw]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,05:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. Power limitation, 75 watts. No VFO. This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum.



Ed
Hi all,

I am trying to stay out of the fray but with these comment just burns me up! This is HOBBY the last time I checked people do it for fun some of us do it for public service with Skywarn and the other nets on the air.

Why is it we have to make it class war fair... my goodness people why? You act like it's the end of the world if the FCC changes the code requirement... SO they change it you’re still going to be on the air still treating people like crap still being the same idiots you say they are letting in by dropping the code... People you need to take a long look in the mirror.... if you stop and think about it you will not like yourself for what your saying and doing...How is it you beat your chest saying I learned the code blau... blau ... blau then a "new" Extra Lite as you call them shows up and you treat them like crap...? How is hobby going to make it doing that crap? You have a lot more fools on the HF bands now than you’re willing to admit… It’s rather obvious that did not do jack squat to keep them out… just seemed to amplify the stupidity of some of them.

Face it people unless things change for the times this hobby is dead and dieing a slow death...but how cares right? The hobby is nothing but CW or is it? You tell me?

I am not for totally ending the CW mode it does have a importance and a use I agree with that but in today’s age and technology it obsolete. I will NEVER be for abolishing it all together, no, I will not agree with that but the hobby need to move forward new technologies and advancements are going to keep this alive… Right now we have to make a stand or we are fighting a lost cause.


73's to ALL of you

Moe N4CQW

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,14:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. #Power limitation, 75 watts. #No VFO. # This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. #Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum. #



Ed
w5htw- yes go with your way and the code will Be back next year more trouble or go the fcc way and the trouble will Be gone in year or 2 ,73 Bill

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (n4cqw @ Nov. 05 2005,17:38)]Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,05:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. #Power limitation, 75 watts. #No VFO. # This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. #Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum. #



Ed
Hi all,

I am trying to stay out of the fray but with these comment just burns me up! #This is HOBBY the last time I checked people do it for fun some of us do it for public service with Skywarn and the other nets on the air. #

Why is it we have to make it class war fair... my goodness people why? #You act like it's the end of the world if the FCC changes the code requirement... SO they change it you’re still going to be on the air still treating people like crap still being the same idiots you say they are letting in by dropping the code... People you need to take a long look in the mirror.... #if you stop and think about it you will not like yourself for what your saying and doing...How is it you beat your chest saying I learned the code blau... blau ... blau then a "new" Extra Lite as you call them shows up and you treat them like crap...? #How is hobby going to make it doing that crap? #You have a lot more fools on the HF bands now than you’re willing to admit… It’s rather obvious that did not do jack squat to keep them out… just seemed to amplify the stupidity of some of them.

Face it people unless things change for the times this hobby is dead and dieing a slow death...but how cares right? #The hobby is nothing but CW or is it? #You tell me?

I am not for totally ending the CW mode it does have a importance and a use I agree with that but in today’s age and technology it obsolete. #I will NEVER be for abolishing it all together, no, I will not agree with that but the hobby need to move forward new technologies and advancements are going to keep this alive… #Right now we have to make a stand or we are fighting a lost cause.


73's to ALL of you

Moe N4CQW
n4cqw- sir good post 73 Bill

[k4kro]

How long are we going to dance this mess around? How many more times will we go to the FCC and look like a bunch 4 year olds who just can't get along? Why does everyone need to kiss the bottoms of Extras and place them on a pedestal so they can look down on the rest of us? The CW test for Extras is like a rice cooking test for the Chinese. If 9 year olds can pass the Extra exam why would they possibly need a 5 wpm CW test?

It's time to stop the madness and go with a Single-Class licensing system. And we need to do this before the FCC decides to do it for us and impose a substantial admission fee in the bargain. Let the politicians go to Washington and let radiomen get on the bands.

[K4WKM]

Hi all,

I am trying to stay out of the fray but with these comment just burns me up! This is HOBBY the last time I checked people do it for fun some of us do it for public service with Skywarn and the other nets on the air.

Why is it we have to make it class war fair... my goodness people why? You act like it's the end of the world if the FCC changes the code requirement... SO they change it you’re still going to be on the air still treating people like crap still being the same idiots you say they are letting in by dropping the code... People you need to take a long look in the mirror.... if you stop and think about it you will not like yourself for what your saying and doing...How is it you beat your chest saying I learned the code blau... blau ... blau then a "new" Extra Lite as you call them shows up and you treat them like crap...? How is hobby going to make it doing that crap? You have a lot more fools on the HF bands now than you’re willing to admit… It’s rather obvious that did not do jack squat to keep them out… just seemed to amplify the stupidity of some of them.

Face it people unless things change for the times this hobby is dead and dieing a slow death...but how cares right? The hobby is nothing but CW or is it? You tell me?

I am not for totally ending the CW mode it does have a importance and a use I agree with that but in today’s age and technology it obsolete. I will NEVER be for abolishing it all together, no, I will not agree with that but the hobby need to move forward new technologies and advancements are going to keep this alive… Right now we have to make a stand or we are fighting a lost cause.


The only way they can all get along is to abolish the classes and put in effect you are a ham or your not.This is what causes a lot of problems some think they are better.Think about it.It is the F.C.C'S fault for creating this mess They could stop it in a heart beat.
73

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (N4UJF @ Nov. 05 2005,17:57)]How long are we going to dance this mess around? How many more times will we go to the FCC and look like a bunch 4 year olds who just can't get along? Why does everyone need to kiss the bottoms of Extras and place them on a pedestal so they can look down on the rest of us? The CW test for Extras is like a rice cooking test for the Chinese. If 9 year olds can pass the Extra exam why would they possibly need a 5 wpm CW test?

It's time to stop the madness and go with a Single-Class licensing system. And we need to do this before the FCC decides to do it for us and impose a substantial admission fee in the bargain. Let the politicians go to Washington and let radiomen get on the bands.
Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things.


Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. How about, no grading at the school level. Everyone makes an "A" and passes.

Reduce everying to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.

Yep, great idea.

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (N4UJF @ Nov. 05 2005,17:57)]How long are we going to dance this mess around? How many more times will we go to the FCC and look like a bunch 4 year olds who just can't get along? Why does everyone need to kiss the bottoms of Extras and place them on a pedestal so they can look down on the rest of us? The CW test for Extras is like a rice cooking test for the Chinese. If 9 year olds can pass the Extra exam why would they possibly need a 5 wpm CW test?

. And we need to do this before the FCC decides to do it for us and impose a substantial admission fee in the bargain. Let the politicians go to Washington and let radiomen get on the bands.
It's time to stop the madness and go with a Single-Class licensing system n4juf - good post if they would do that , that would stop a lot of of the mess thats in ham Radio to day, 73 Bill

[n4cqw]

Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 05 2005,09:03)]Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things.


Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. How about, no grading at the school level. Everyone makes an "A" and passes.

Reduce everying to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.

Yep, great idea.
Again I ask the Question of Why? It seems some people do nothing to promote the hobby… they do nothing but trash it and the people involved?

“Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things.“


Why are you turning this into a political issue now? What does a persons politics have to do this? That is the whole problem now, try to make it a stupid and off the subject as it can be so that it’s all lost in the mix… Why is it people can not sit down talk and discuss things with out it turning into something personal and very OBNOCTIOUS.


“Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. How about, no grading at the school level. Everyone makes an "A" and passes. “

Again I ask why, this is a hobby not a sport or a educational question, Then again I guess in theory a DX contest is sport… But if remember right they teach computer programming now in school not CW… I am not even sure if the Boy Scouts even give merit badges for CW but I could be wrong… but still my question to all of you which is more prevalent today CW or computer technology? We need to be discovering new uses for what have now… if you do not get the kids of today interested in the hobby it is doomed… CW is not the way to do it today’s world…. Modern technology is going to be the death of ham radio.

“Reduce everything to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.”

I am not saying make it easier, I NEVER have and never will, I think testing should be a heck of a lot harder it is way to easy, it needs to include modern technology. I am not saying get ride of stuff like the tubes or building stuff but more in the new modern radios… some of the test questions are obsolete… The testing for all classes are VERY weak put some teeth in the question pool… if they change it so be it but make the upgrade a test not a freebie… and put some teeth in it…

As far as the passing out the license with the radio that’s true, because you can go online to get the information about your call now almost instantly. That is not a bad thing when you think about it… I had to wait sixteen (16) weeks to get mine…I would have loved to get it in a few days but I had to wait for it… But that’s ok it did not diminish the anticipation of getting my license….

73 all!

Moe N4CQW

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (n4cqw @ Nov. 05 2005,19:01)]Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 05 2005,09:03)]Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things. #


Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. #How about, no grading at the school level. #Everyone makes an "A" and passes. #

Reduce everying to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.

Yep, great idea.
Again I ask the Question of Why? #It seems some people do nothing to promote the hobby… they do nothing but trash it and the people involved?

“Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things.“


Why are you turning this into a political issue now? #What does a persons politics have to do this? #That is the whole problem now, try to make it a stupid and off the subject as it can be so that it’s all lost in the mix… #Why is it people can not sit down talk and discuss things with out it turning into something personal and very OBNOCTIOUS. #


“Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. #How about, no grading at the school level. #Everyone makes an "A" and passes. “

Again I ask why, this is a hobby not a sport or a educational #question, #Then again I guess in theory a DX contest is sport… #But if remember right they teach computer programming now in school not CW… I am not even sure if the Boy Scouts even give merit badges for CW but I could be wrong… but still my question to all of you which is more prevalent today CW or computer technology? #We need to be discovering new uses for what have now… if you do not get the kids of today interested in the hobby it is doomed… CW is not the way to do it today’s world…. Modern technology is going to be the death of ham radio.

“Reduce everything to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.”

I am not saying make it easier, I NEVER have and never will, I think testing should be a heck of a lot harder it is way to easy, it needs to include modern technology. #I am not saying get ride of stuff like the tubes or building stuff but more in the new modern radios… some of the test questions are obsolete… The testing for all classes are VERY weak put some teeth in the question pool… if they change it so be it but make the upgrade a test not a freebie… and put some teeth in it…

As far as the passing out the license with the radio that’s true, because you can go online to get the information about your call now almost instantly. #That is not a bad thing when you think about it… I had to wait sixteen (16) weeks to get mine…I would have loved to get it in a few days but I had to wait for it… But that’s ok it did not diminish the anticipation of getting my license….

73 all!

Moe N4CQW
It has something to do with pride. The sense of accomplishment.

One class of license? OK, lets do that and have the test be the extra class theory. Would that work? I doubt that you would want it to be any more than the current technician exam.

To the lowest common denominator. Every one on the same scale.

That's a liberal/socialist dream. You want it all without having to work for it. EOS!

[K4WKM]

That's a liberal/socialist dream. You want it all without having to work for it. EOS!



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

[n4cqw]

"It has something to do with pride. The sense of accomplishment."

I happened to very, very happy with it, heck I am proud of it, I am proud of anyone who passes the current test because that is what the FCC has determined the test should include. Granted the tests are really weak...

“One class of license? OK, lets do that and have the test be the extra class theory. Would that work? I doubt that you would want it to be any more than the current technician exam.”

First off I never said anything about one class, I said make the test for each class more difficult… not one class. Reread what I said… the tests today are a joke, we need some teeth in them… Different operating classes are a good thing I think the classes should be determined by technical knowledge not a operating mode… I have no problem with keeping a CW test to achieve a Extra Class license… I think that is still a good thing…

“To the lowest common denominator. Every one on the same scale. That's a liberal/socialist dream.“

My question is what do you want to grade everyone by? Different scales, men, women, boy’s, girls… black or white… I thought in America everyone is graded on the same scale that has nothing to do with a “liberal/socialist dream”. Please explain to everyone what your grading scale would be if we are all not graded on the same scale? Why is wanting to be graded evenly and on the same scale as everyone else so political? To me if your not graded on the same scale then what is that…?

“You want it all without having to work for it.”

I happened to have Degree on Electronic Engineering and work for Northrop Grumman so I do know about working for something but I see no need to go around telling everyone they that does not have my degree they have not worked for it… and should not have their job…. I have a friend who is an IBM programmer who has a heck of a job but has NO formal education other than a high school diploma… just because he has not be to collage does that mean he has not worked for it?

73,
Moe N4CQW
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/blues.gif

[W5HTW]

Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 05 2005,17:39)]Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,14:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. Power limitation, 75 watts. No VFO. This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum.



Ed
w5htw- yes go with your way and the code will Be back next year more trouble or go the fcc way and the trouble will Be gone in year or 2 ,73 Bill
Or we can keep making the Extra Class the Entry license. Of course, then, there's nowhere to go, so that is de facto single class of license. Start at the top.

Oh, I forgot to mention, make the Entry ticket one year, non-renewable. Get up or get out.

Ed

[5Z4FT]

All good ideas, from personal experience. That is assuming everbody understands thier role as a new ham on the HF bands. The International environmnet on HF will bring new ideas to new operators. There is not much opportunity to see data modes at work on VHF/UHF. Yes, leave the morse test for the highest class, with the most privelages.
KI4LTH. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[wm9h]

Why don't we just toss any requirement out all together and make it a extended CB FIASCAL. Seems to be the direction it has been heading the past few years anyway.
Pretty soon they won't have to worry about dumbing down the test. There will be nothing left to dumb down.
Good grief, if you want to be a Amature Radio Operator, study, practice, and learn. Nothing to gain by getting something for nothing.

[wm9h]

Why don't we just toss any requirement out all together and make it a extended CB FIASCAL. Seems to be the direction it has been heading the past few years anyway.
Pretty soon they won't have to worry about dumbing down the test. There will be nothing left to dumb down.
Good grief, if you want to be a Amature Radio Operator, study, practice, and learn. Nothing to gain by getting something for nothing.

[xe1af]

It might be that they should test on technical skill and not on mechanical skill.

[5Z4FT]

Mechanics is a technical skill like electronics. The same logic flow is required in the same brain cells, likewise the same brain cells are used in surgical skills.
Stick to the topic. Go FCC go ARRL go W5YI.
KI4LTH http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,19:57)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 05 2005,17:39)]Quote[/b] (W5HTW @ Nov. 05 2005,14:32)]Something like this?

CW only privileges on narrow segments of 80, 40, and 15 meters. #Power limitation, 75 watts. #No VFO. # This allows them to test the HF waters and make contact with some more experienced hams.

Limited voice privileges on 2 meters. #Fixed frequency control and 75 watts power maximum. #



Ed
w5htw- yes go with your way and the code will Be back next year more trouble or go the fcc way and the trouble will Be gone in year or 2 ,73 Bill
Or we can keep making the Extra Class the Entry license. #Of course, then, there's nowhere to go, so that is de facto single class of license. # Start at the top.

Oh, I forgot to mention, make the Entry ticket one year, non-renewable. #Get up or get out.

Ed
w5htw - ed I think you got something there , single class license, fcc just could do that some day you never know ,things change you know , 73 Bill

[N3LUV]

What I wonder is where is the QPC involved in all this? ie: Meaningful Entry Level Privileges. If such a change is being proposed, where and how are they involved? I've reviewed some of the NPRM&O. Has ARRL approached them, or vice versa (QPC)? Has anyone else seen something related to that?

Someone else here seems discouraged by mentioning all is going to be a CB Fiasco...Gee, that outlook really helps the situation doesn't it. It doesn't look promising for a new ham to read a statement like that either. I thought being a ham was about working together, being respectful to your fellow hams..sharing knowledge with others. All in all, it's still up to us. That's at least the theory I've seen through many fellow hams so far.

Meanwhile if you crave the opposite view tune into 40 and 80m..It's now the simile of a Springer show Uncut ..
Here's some more proof it's the people that make it that way and the fools who buy into it..an ill, disgusted, view of Ham Radio..Not your government, not your FCC, not ARRL--the people.

The ultimate question is:
What are we doing to promote it to what it's supposed to be about while leaving room for growth and change.

History: We can still be a part of it, even when times and technology changes. Do you really think if they drop CW or change entry level exams there'll be more sailors and airheads on the mike? (Not literal sailors, the ones with the smutty mouths.) I highly doubt it. No worries, not everything changes. Again though, how do we accept and grow with the changes. There's more than one issue in all of this, including our children.

Whether a person knows CW or not, doesn't make them more or less of an operator. If a person learns CW, kudos on them for their interest in history and knowing one of the top 100 things a person needs to do in life. As someone else mentioned though, the more new technical knowledge you have, the better. Times and ways of doing things do change and yes, our skin must get thicker.

So, really what are we doing....

73's

[gm6lyj]

I hope you guys over there don't go down the same route as us Brits, the novice licence here is a joke, it's often been said that you can now get a ham licence with a pack of Kellogs cornflakes. I have heard novice licencees who dont know how or even why they need to use a repeater shift on a repeater, and that is not a joke!. To make matters worse they can stay on HF with 10watts for life, with no incentive to move on to the next class, after all how many are going to get caught using 100watt or more, it makes you wonder when novice licencees are openly trading linears.
Good luck guys, don't let commercial interests lower standards in the name of sales

John
GM6LYJ

[ne3r]

Meaningful entry-level license priveleges. Didn't we have this with the Novice ticket?

[af2cw]

Quote[/b] (N3LUV @ Nov. 06 2005,04:14)]What I wonder is where is the QPC involved in all this? #ie: Meaningful Entry Level Privileges. #If such a change is being proposed, where and how are they involved? #I've reviewed some of the NPRM&O. #Has ARRL approached them, or vice versa (QPC)? Has anyone else seen something related to that?
In answer to your question:
Quote[/b] ]11. We believe that the present system discourages many potential
applicants, and thus unnecessarily limits the growth of Amateur radio in
this country. The examination for the present entry level license (the
Technician Class license) is substantially more complex than was the case
for the Novice exam. While it is true that some individuals do not find
this more rigorous exam a problem, many, if not most, newcomers to Amateur
Radio are not formally trained in or familiar with the engineering skills
implied by the present exam. The precise numbers of persons who are turned
away by the complexities of the current Technician exam can never be known,
but there is no question that they exist. The basic question seems to be:
AWould Amateur Radio in our country be better off if these other potential
applicants had obtained licenses or not?@ Most respondents would indicate
an affirmative response. Which then leads to an immediate follow up query
of the form: AHow can we modify the present system to attract as many
qualified applicants as possible?

Quote[/b] ]13. The current entry level exam is overly complex. Contrast the former
Novice license study guide with the present Technician Class study guide.
Again, using the ARRL text, titled ANow You're Talking, @ the study
materials for the current entry level license consist of 166 (that's one
hundred and sixty six) pages of text, covering 10 subject areas, plus
another 80 pages of pool questions and answers, plus several additional
pages of appendix, including several charts and graphs, a glossary and more.
That's more than 250 pages of information to be learned before attempting
the exam. It's no wonder that potential applicants become discouraged.
They are presented with study materials that are (on the surface) more than
60 times the complexity of the original Novice license, and a much larger
exam. While some additional questions clearly are necessary because of the
permitted modes and other privileges, much of the information is nether
necessary nor appropriate for an inexperienced applicant.


You can find this in their filing for restructuring here (http://www.rrsta.com/rain/ncvec.html).

[K3UD]

Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Nov. 06 2005,08:50)]Meaningful entry-level license priveleges. Didn't we have this with the Novice ticket?
We certainly did.

15 meters for DX, 40 meters which covered almost all of North America on many evenings, 80 meters where you would almost always be able to get a contact and be able to join into local Novice nets, and 2 meter phone which was a tremendous opportunity if you lived in or near a metro area.

Speaking of the Novice, there are still about 28,000 hams who hold the Novice class license. For some reason the ARRL seems to have written them off as their proposals for "meaningful HF privileges" almost never mention the existing Novices. These are the hams who took and actually passed the dreaded CW exam and maybe that does not fit some agendas out there.

The no code Tech class was originally instituted as a way to bring in the technically oriented but loath to learn the code person into Amateur Radio. These were the people who would transform the face of Amateur Radio. Instead we ended up with over 300,000 hams, most of whom are not active and according to the ARRL, almost 25% of whom have never gotten on the air because of the lack of Elmers to help them.

I still think that any beginner class needs to include the Novice, Tech, and Tech+ classes as these ARE the beginner class licenses we have today. If I were king (thank God I am not http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif ) I would look at full VHF and up privileges as well as HF privileges on 10, 12, and 15 meters, 40 meters and 75 meters.

I notice that the ARRL wants to give Techs CW privileges on HF. Am I missing something here?? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif Many Techs who post here cite the problems with learning code at 5-WPM as the main reason as to why they do not upgrade to General. preferring to wait until the FCC finally gives in and ok's the ARRL's proposal for grand-fathering all of them to General via administrative fiat.

As I mentioned in another post all the ARRL has done is re-submit the wording of the failed RM-1087 as a comment to the the the present proposal concerning the elmination of the code as a tested for element of the Amateur Radio exam process. In the end, I don't think that the FCC will be impressed this time around either.

In retrospect the old Novice - Technician - General - Advanced - Extra hirearchy of licenses with progressively more difficult testing which was in force for so many years was a sound way to do things.

It certainly was not broke and why many in the 80s thought it was remains a mystery to me. The only explanation that seems valid is one of 'make things easier and we will grow the numbers'. Once again our numbers are stagnant and it is yet again a time for another magic potion to be concocted in order to have yet another short lived gain in the numbers.


73
George
K3UD

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (K3UD @ Nov. 06 2005,08:29)]Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Nov. 06 2005,08:50)]Meaningful entry-level license priveleges. #Didn't we have this with the Novice ticket?
We certainly did.

15 meters for DX, 40 meters which covered almost all of North America on many evenings, 80 meters where you would almost always be able to get a contact and be able to join into local Novice nets, and 2 meter phone which was a tremendous opportunity if you lived in or near a metro area.

Speaking of the Novice, there are still about 28,000 hams who hold the Novice class license. For some reason the ARRL seems to have written them off as their proposals for "meaningful HF privileges" almost never mention the existing Novices. These are the hams who took and actually passed the dreaded CW exam and maybe that does not fit some agendas out there.

The no code Tech class was originally instituted as a way to bring in the technically oriented but loath to learn the code person into Amateur Radio. These were the people who would transform the face of Amateur Radio. Instead we ended up with over 300,000 hams, most of whom are not active and according to the ARRL, almost 25% of whom have never gotten on the air because of the lack of Elmers to help them.

I still think that any beginner class needs to include the Novice, Tech, and Tech+ classes as these ARE the beginner class licenses we have today. If I were king (thank God I am not http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif #) I would look at full VHF and up privileges as well as HF privileges on 10, 12, and 15 meters, 40 meters and 75 meters.

I notice that the ARRL wants to give Techs CW privileges on HF. #Am I missing something here?? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif #Many Techs who post here cite the problems with learning code at 5-WPM as the main reason as to why they do not upgrade to General. preferring to wait until the FCC finally gives in and ok's the ARRL's proposal for grand-fathering all of them to General via administrative fiat.

As I mentioned in another post all the ARRL has done is re-submit the wording of the failed RM-1087 as a comment to the the the present proposal concerning the elmination of the code as a tested for element of the Amateur Radio exam process. In the end, I don't think that the FCC will be impressed this time around either.

In retrospect the old Novice - Technician - General - Advanced - Extra hirearchy of licenses with progressively more difficult testing which was in force for so many years was a sound way to do things.

It certainly was not broke and why many in the 80s thought it was remains a mystery to me. The only explanation that seems valid is one of 'make things easier and we will grow the numbers'. Once again #our numbers are stagnant and it is yet again a time for another magic potion to be concocted in order to have yet another short lived gain in the numbers.


73
George
K3UD
k3ud- george I saw that to I was trying to go along with the arrl But now I am going to change my mind , if the fcc gets its way I will join the arrl But if the arrl gets its way I will not join them , I am trying to learn the code now , But I am with the fcc 100% all the way, 73 Bill

[KD8BIL]

I have very little experience in discussing the details of a restructure plan... But I'll just say that there will always be those who just don't get into the hobby and those who take it very seriously, setting goals for themselves, and always following best practices and working toward the next level. #I for one have no gripe with the entry privileges I have been given with the Technician's license... I have made voice contacts through repeaters and traded packets through the ISS and get very excited every time I key the mike. #I look forward to earning HF privileges, but I have very little free time, and haven't passed my CW yet. #I don't find the structure as it is discouraging and even if the CW is eliminated, I will get my CW before buying my Drake T4X. #Everyone I have met in this hobby has been very encouraging - I have had elmers give me radios and great information, etc. #I will say that it would be a shame if, when I do get to HF, it is an overcrowded mess. -KD8BIL

[5Z4FT]

HF is a nice place to be, but people on HF look for different things. They work contests, experiment with different modes, antennas, and work different geographical regions. There is a lot of general exposure on HF in different conditions to personalilites, culutres and so on. On the contrary VHF/UHF operation is localized most people belonging to the same circle of understanding. I think the issue is not allowing the wrong kind of person to cause an uncontrolable international situation on HF. After years of experience many hams become proud, looking down on new operators, letting them learn on their own, most do eventaully make it and learn from reading literature, or listening to others, and making correct judgments based on knowledge. Anybody who has a pecuniary interest in ham radio will soon fall out, not out of pressure from other hams but from the inability to cope with the demands of the real hobby, will soon loose interest, and be off. The real amateur will labour on despite set backs. The licensing system should be such that real amateur operators will not be discouraged by the different aspects of amateur radio, but will be encouraged to fulfillment in the hobby, possibly resulting in a related profession later in life, or even a positive career change due to the overwhelming exposure of amateur radio. Amateur radio should be a fun place for the younger generation to play, and learn about technology which would satisfy some ITU goals of the hobby or we may loose it. Regarding CW, for young men, and women it could prove to be an important learning tool, for the older generation an effort at sharpening personal mental skills, like learning music. Not forgetting ham radio is an outlet for many people of several disabilities. KI4LTH http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[w7lpn]

Quote[/b] (w6gmt @ Nov. 05 2005,11:38)]I always felt that the ARRL plan was flawed with the auto upgrades. But the underlying plan was sound. #An entry class License with both VHF and HF makes good sense. # There are some questions in my mind about the phone privileges I would feel better if they eliminated the 40 and 80 meter privileges. The 40 meter Band is small and often very busy. # A better plan would give the Technicians full privileges on the 10 meter Band and 21.35-21.45 on the 15 meter phone band. #The power out put is about right.
73
Brock
40 & 80m are rarely busy enough to cause interference here in Boise. #I know we're not a densly populated area nor are we apearently in position for bunch of incomming propigation. #I know it can't be decided fairly based on regions either. 20 meters is the busiest band I can hear. Our mountains around Boise provide tremendous elevation for the repeaters and our repeaters are very busy with the General class operators in the local clubs. #It's a good thing because without them, the repeaters would all break-down and fall into disarray. I appreciate everything I learn from the "Elmers" around here, and on this forum. HF privileges would be very enjoyable to me as I have traveled in the military and enjoyed other lands/cultures and truly believe I'm an "Ambasador of Good Will". Lastly, I'm at least as "Entitled" as those "Free Banders" I hear talking to Australia unregulated and uninforced. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wow.gif

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (KD8BIL @ Nov. 06 2005,09:15)]I have very little experience in discussing the details of a restructure plan... But I'll just say that there will always be those who just don't get into the hobby and those who take it very seriously, setting goals for themselves, and always following best practices and working toward the next level. #I for one have no gripe with the entry privileges I have been given with the Technician's license... I have made voice contacts through repeaters and traded packets through the ISS and get very excited every time I key the mike. #I look forward to earning HF privileges, but I have very little free time, and haven't passed my CW yet. #I don't find the structure as it is discouraging and even if the CW is eliminated, I will get my CW before buying my Drake T4X. #Everyone I have met in this hobby has been very encouraging - I have had elmers give me radios and great information, etc. #I will say that it would be a shame if, when I do get to HF, it is an overcrowded mess. -KD8BIL
kd8Bil sir there will always Be room for everyone , as long as everyone has Respeck for the other , it will Be ok ,73 good luck to you hope to talk to you one day, Bill

[KI6BBF]

HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.

[AB0PO]

I have always believed that both the FCC and the ARRL need to re-think the licensing structure. It makes a lot more sense to have TWO classes of licenses, one for VHF/UHF only which requires simply passing a written test and is limited to VHF/UHF from 6m and up, called a "Technician" class, and one that includes everything from HF, VHF, and UHF, #requiring a 5 word per minute code test passable by either sending OR receiving, and an extensive radio theory test. You could call this the "Extra" class. This would eliminate the Tech Plus confusion and allow for a "no-code" only license for those who want to get their feet wet in ham radio. I personally think that a 5 wpm code requirement is a good thing, and anyone serious about getting on HF should not have a problem with either sending or receiving at that speed. Just a tought.
73's AB0PO http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[VA3KSF]

Greetings All!


Thankfully, the FCC (along with many other such agencies in other countries) are now (finally) undoing what the ARRL and others set in motion years ago… turning a basic competency test for a Ham Radio license into an unneeded series of achievement tests. #

Back then, it was called “incentive licensing”. #And over the years, it has helped the ARRL and others sell a gazillion dollars worth of printed manuals, books and other such “upgrade” materials. #Unfortunately, perpetuating this fraud into the twenty first century has now all but killed Amateur Radio. #

Sadly, many of the unwitting proponents of “incentive licensing” who also bought the ARRL’s fraudulent bill of goods years ago are STILL trying their level best to hang onto their dying dream. #This fact is evidenced by all the passionate comments expressed here and elsewhere about keeping CW for Extras (or even HAVING an “Extra Class” license in the first place)! #

As it has oft been said, requiring proficiency in the Morse Code in order to obtain a Ham Radio license is much like having to demonstrate how to shoe a horse in order to get a driver’s license. #And, speaking of a driver’s license, why is it that I STILL don’t need to know how the fuel injectors, transmission and brake lights all work on my car in order to obtain one? #

Maybe that’s because my driver’s license, my private pilot’s license and so many other government-issued licenses that I’ve carried in my pocket over the years have licensing structures that are ALL set up to simply measure basic competencies. #That is, they simply require me to demonstrate to a competent government authority that I won’t be a hazard either to others or myself on the road (or in the air). #The real learning (how to drive or how to fly) comes later, usually with years and years of actual “on-air” experience. #

And I find it most interesting that ALL of these other license structures DON’T require that I go back and take yet ANOTHER “achievement test” in order to drive (or fly) my vehicle farther away from my home, for example.

Think about it! #Who has ever heard of an “Extra Class” driver’s license to drive a passenger car? #Sounds ludicrous, doesn’t it? #In fact, it’s about as ludicrous as requiring that I have an “Extra Class” Amateur Radio License in order to have “full privileges” on the Ham Bands!

Could it be that the REAL reason why the ARRL wants to keep “incentive licensing” alive (including CW testing which has LONG outlived its usefulness) is simply because it helps insure the ARRL will continue to publish and sell lots and lots of ARRL books, tapes and “upgrade” materials to the “unwashed masses”? #After all, it’s publishing that keeps the ARRL afloat. #It certainly isn’t member dues.

I say enough is enough! #It’s high time the FCC finally put an end to all this ARRL-perpetuated “incentive licensing” fraud…for good! #

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (VA3KSF @ Nov. 06 2005,15:20)]Greetings All!


Thankfully, the FCC (along with many other such agencies in other countries) are now (finally) undoing what the ARRL and others set in motion years ago… turning a basic competency test for a Ham Radio license into an unneeded series of achievement tests. #

Back then, it was called “incentive licensing”. #And over the years, it has helped the ARRL and others sell a gazillion dollars worth of printed manuals, books and other such “upgrade” materials. #Unfortunately, perpetuating this fraud into the twenty first century has now all but killed Amateur Radio. #

Sadly, many of the unwitting proponents of “incentive licensing” who also bought the ARRL’s fraudulent bill of goods years ago are STILL trying their level best to hang onto their dying dream. #This fact is evidenced by all the passionate comments expressed here and elsewhere about keeping CW for Extras (or even HAVING an “Extra Class” license in the first place)! #

As it has oft been said, requiring proficiency in the Morse Code in order to obtain a Ham Radio license is much like having to demonstrate how to shoe a horse in order to get a driver’s license. #And, speaking of a driver’s license, why is it that I STILL don’t need to know how the fuel injectors, transmission and brake lights all work on my car in order to obtain one? #

Maybe that’s because my driver’s license, my private pilot’s license and so many other government-issued licenses that I’ve carried in my pocket over the years have licensing structures that are ALL set up to simply measure basic competencies. #That is, they simply require me to demonstrate to a competent government authority that I won’t be a hazard either to others or myself on the road (or in the air). #The real learning (how to drive or how to fly) comes later, usually with years and years of actual “on-air” experience. #

And I find it most interesting that ALL of these other license structures DON’T require that I go back and take yet ANOTHER “achievement test” in order to drive (or fly) my vehicle farther away from my home, for example.

Think about it! #Who has ever heard of an “Extra Class” driver’s license to drive a passenger car? #Sounds ludicrous, doesn’t it? #In fact, it’s about as ludicrous as requiring that I have an “Extra Class” Amateur Radio License in order to have “full privileges” on the Ham Bands!

Could it be that the REAL reason why the ARRL wants to keep “incentive licensing” alive (including CW testing which has LONG outlived its usefulness) is simply because it helps insure the ARRL will continue to publish and sell lots and lots of ARRL books, tapes and “upgrade” materials to the “unwashed masses”? #After all, it’s publishing that keeps the ARRL afloat. #It certainly isn’t member dues.

I say enough is enough! #It’s high time the FCC finally put an end to all this ARRL-perpetuated “incentive licensing” fraud…for good! #

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF
va3ksf- sir I think you are Right on this one I know if the fcc dose what it prepose to do it will Be a Big step forward I think, I am with the fcc on this one ,it took a long time But this will get Rid of a lot of complaining ,and that will help ham Radio a lot, if the arrl gets its way the code will Be Back next year trouble again,you have a good post ,73 good luck Bill

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (KI6BBF @ Nov. 06 2005,12:28)]HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.
ki6bbf-sir was the general test that hard , they say its not Hard enought , what is your thoughton that 73 Bill

[KC0OFZ]

Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,15:49)]Quote[/b] (KI6BBF @ Nov. 06 2005,12:28)]HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.
ki6bbf-sir was the general test that hard , they say its not Hard enought , what is your thoughton that 73 Bill
So you want one class. #Do you want to see that joke of a tech test the test to get everything as well?
Why is it people want everything handed to them and want all requirements removed? Oh that's right, requirements may require effort.

[nc5s]

Quote[/b] (KC0OFZ @ Nov. 06 2005,17:15)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,15:49)]Quote[/b] (KI6BBF @ Nov. 06 2005,12:28)]HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.
ki6bbf-sir was the general test that hard , they say its not Hard enought , what is your thoughton that 73 Bill
So you want one class. #Do you want to see that joke of a tech test the test to get everything as well?
Why is it people want everything handed to them and want all requirements removed? Oh that's right, requirements may require effort.
They're lazy

[K4JF]

Quote[/b] (N3PAQ @ Nov. 06 2005,06:50)]Meaningful entry-level license priveleges. #Didn't we have this with the Novice ticket?
Yes, we did. It was a mistake to remove it. It sould be brought back. Moderate test, no code, limited privileges and power, non-renewable.

Give people a chance to find out if AR is for them without investing so much time and effort.

Then toughen up on the other exams.

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (KC0OFZ @ Nov. 06 2005,17:15)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,15:49)]Quote[/b] (KI6BBF @ Nov. 06 2005,12:28)]HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.
ki6bbf-sir was the general test that hard , they say its not Hard enought , what is your thoughton that 73 Bill
So you want one class. #Do you want to see that joke of a tech test the test to get everything as well?
Why is it people want everything handed to them and want all requirements removed? Oh that's right, requirements may require effort.
kc0ofz- well sir you would have to admit that would give some less to complain about , or I thank it would 73 Bill

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 06 2005,17:36)]Quote[/b] (KC0OFZ @ Nov. 06 2005,17:15)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,15:49)]Quote[/b] (KI6BBF @ Nov. 06 2005,12:28)]HF for techs might be nice, but that would completely defeat the purpose of passing a element 1&3 test. All the HF you could possibly need would be already allocated.
ki6bbf-sir was the general test that hard , they say its not Hard enought , what is your thoughton that 73 Bill
So you want one class. #Do you want to see that joke of a tech test the test to get everything as well?
Why is it people want everything handed to them and want all requirements removed? Oh that's right, requirements may require effort.
They're lazy
nc5s -sir what has one class got to do with Being lazy ,73Bill

[n4cqw]

Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,09:53)]nc5s -sir what has one class got to do with Being lazy ,73Bill
I agree but my question still this..

“To the lowest common denominator. Every one on the same scale. That's a liberal/socialist dream.“

My question is what do you want to grade everyone by? Different scales, men, women, boy’s, girls… black or white… I thought in America everyone is graded on the same scale that has nothing to do with a “liberal/socialist dream”. Please explain to everyone what your grading scale would be if we are all not graded on the same scale? Why is wanting to be graded evenly and on the same scale as everyone else so political? To me if your not graded on the same scale then what is that…?

Is that lazy?

73 Moe N4CQW

[K4WKM]

Quote[/b] (n4cqw @ Nov. 06 2005,19:19)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,09:53)]nc5s -sir what has one class got to do with Being lazy ,73Bill
I agree but my question still this..

“To the lowest common denominator. Every one on the same scale. That's a liberal/socialist dream.“

My question is what do you want to grade everyone by? Different scales, men, women, boy’s, girls… black or white… I thought in America everyone is graded on the same scale that has nothing to do with a “liberal/socialist dream”. Please explain to everyone what your grading scale would be if we are all not graded on the same scale? Why is wanting to be graded evenly and on the same scale as everyone else so political? To me if your not graded on the same scale then what is that…?

Is that lazy?

73 Moe N4CQW
Yes i wish he would explain it too.Good post

[K0RGR]

As I stated elsewhere, if they are going to eliminate the 5 WPM requirement for General, I am not as concerned about adding HF capabilities for the Techs. I can agree with the FCC's comments on this - passage of a written test is all that's needed.

If the 5 WPM test is abolished for General, and the Novice Redeployment NPRM is adopted as expected, I don't see any reason why the Techs couldn't be granted the Tech+ priveleges, including the limited 10 meter phone privleges. I'd also include digital priveleges on the lower bands where they have CW priveleges. But again, if they can get these priveleges with an additional written test, it's not that big a deal.

I agree with ARRL that the 5WPM should stay for Extra.

[kd5gje]

I say 5 WPM should stay as is. #If they do tamper with it, they should keep it for the Extra class requirement. #Then, do away with the tech plus because if no code is required for General what is the use to get a tech license and pass 5 WPM code for less privileges? #In my opinion Amateur radio started with CW and it needs to keep it as a requirement so history is not lost.

The Extra class is an elite license in my opinion. #I am not Extra class and am not focused on getting the license but I have not refused the idea or the opportunity. #I am a technician who is looking forward to General privileges in the very near future. #I have wanted to talk on HF even before I got my license and that is a huge part of why I want to get my general class license.

The plan stated above by the ARRL is a little complicated in my opinion. #Yes, it can be learned easily but if we want to attract new users who are not used to operating a radio within specified rules, we have to keep it simple. #I would propose to give Technicians full privileges on 10M and possibly limiting power. #This would give them a taste of DX and if they buy any HF equipment, they would have the ability to use it on other bands. #This would give them the desire to upgrade so they could use the full potential of the equipment they paid for.

[KD7ZRT]

If there's any hope, it lies in the techs.

[KI4BBI]

Quote[/b] (n4cqw @ Nov. 05 2005,21:01)]Quote[/b] (nc5s @ Nov. 05 2005,09:03)]Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things. #


Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. #How about, no grading at the school level. #Everyone makes an "A" and passes. #

Reduce everying to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.

Yep, great idea.
Again I ask the Question of Why? #It seems some people do nothing to promote the hobby… they do nothing but trash it and the people involved?

“Yep, that's a good liberal way to do things.“


Why are you turning this into a political issue now? #What does a persons politics have to do this? #That is the whole problem now, try to make it a stupid and off the subject as it can be so that it’s all lost in the mix… #Why is it people can not sit down talk and discuss things with out it turning into something personal and very OBNOCTIOUS. #


“Why Don't we quit keeping score in the games we play. #How about, no grading at the school level. #Everyone makes an "A" and passes. “

Again I ask why, this is a hobby not a sport or a educational #question, #Then again I guess in theory a DX contest is sport… #But if remember right they teach computer programming now in school not CW… I am not even sure if the Boy Scouts even give merit badges for CW but I could be wrong… but still my question to all of you which is more prevalent today CW or computer technology? #We need to be discovering new uses for what have now… if you do not get the kids of today interested in the hobby it is doomed… CW is not the way to do it today’s world…. Modern technology is going to be the death of ham radio.

“Reduce everything to the lowest common denominator.

How about we just include a license application with each transceiver and have everyone make up their own calls while waiting for the FCC to send a real one.”

I am not saying make it easier, I NEVER have and never will, I think testing should be a heck of a lot harder it is way to easy, it needs to include modern technology. #I am not saying get ride of stuff like the tubes or building stuff but more in the new modern radios… some of the test questions are obsolete… The testing for all classes are VERY weak put some teeth in the question pool… if they change it so be it but make the upgrade a test not a freebie… and put some teeth in it…

As far as the passing out the license with the radio that’s true, because you can go online to get the information about your call now almost instantly. #That is not a bad thing when you think about it… I had to wait sixteen (16) weeks to get mine…I would have loved to get it in a few days but I had to wait for it… But that’s ok it did not diminish the anticipation of getting my license….

73 all!

Moe N4CQW
nothing like beating your fello hams with a mic... and I agree make the test for tech and gen tougher. everyone is beating each other gang up on the FCC

73's
Duane

[m0tjc]

SHEEZ, WHAT IS UP WITH YOU GUYS??

Whatever country you live in, be it US, UK, Australia or wherever, the situation "to morse or not to morse" always gets teddies thrown from prams.

We had the same thing over here a few years ago.... all the "old timers" who used to monopolize 80m, talking about their hip replacements and arthritis all day long, thought they had an exclusive right to the HF bands, because they had to take the test.

Well, the code was abolished, and a whole new flood of old "B" class licenses came flocking to HF.... we even have 6 year olds with their M3 calls on HF, and there have been no problems at all. The only problems that I have come across, are the "Old Faithful" G3 call holders, that still seem to think that they have exclusive rights over anybody else to a particular band/frequency, and will QRM them to hell until they move... yes, it does happen. Take 18 months ago, as new entry level M3 ticket holder, on 40m phone. In the end I gave up trying, as there were a couple of old timers picking on me, until I gave up. I plugged the key in the next day, and hell, who were the people who were wanting to QSO with me? yup, you got it.......

Morse is an outdated mode. Yes, It has it's uses, and yes, I do CW from time to time. In my personal experience, there are more UK CW'ers now, than when the test was compulsory. Nowadays people use/learn CW because they WANT to, not learn it, take the test and forget it after they HAD to. You would be surprised at the number of M3 entry level calls using CW on 40m, with their 10w limit...... purely because the phone segment is that crowded, they will get swallowed in the QRM. I struggle on 40m phone with 150w!

And the biggest thing that will kill amateur radio??

All the "old timers", who have had the HF bands to themselves for all these years, opposing the no code, as they feel nice and cosy in their own little corner of ham radio. It's time to wake up pops, and take a good look/listen around you. All these newcomers will arrive. Their operating will be impeccable. I wonder who will be doing the the bad operating??

I rest my case.

[wu5e]

Dito! let's get the ball rolling, I'm tired of all the lalala! to the new HF"er's when this happens,you will have about 2 years to learn there new stuff before HF bands come back to life. I would also would learn everything about the testing of a Radio, it's recieve numbers! I know this for sure when this happens Kenwood,Icom,Yaesu and Alinco will flood you with low priced radio that "save" the world. Don't be left out in the cold. And for all the used 706's on the market stay away form them. Oh and "IF" DSP is not it's cut up to be,works good on CW but not on phone; all this comes form me spending alot of money on radios that were less than what I hope for. Good Luck you might get a early christmas present. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (n4cqw @ Nov. 06 2005,19:19)]Quote[/b] (kd4mxe @ Nov. 06 2005,09:53)]nc5s -sir what has one class got #to do with Being lazy ,73Bill
I agree but my question still this..

“To the lowest common denominator. #Every one on the same scale. That's a liberal/socialist dream.“

My question is what do you want to grade everyone by? #Different scales, men, women, boy’s, girls… black or white… I thought in America everyone is graded on the same scale that has nothing to do with a “liberal/socialist dream”. #Please explain to everyone what your grading scale would be if we are all not graded on the same scale? #Why is wanting to be graded evenly and on the same scale as everyone else so political? #To me if your not graded on the same scale then what is that…?

Is that lazy?

73 Moe N4CQW
well I will let nc5s do that he has those Big words hes got the problem not me , 73 Bill

[VA3KSF]

Quote[/b] (m0tjc @ Nov. 07 2005,03:55)]And the biggest thing that will kill amateur radio??

All the "old timers", who have had the HF bands to themselves for all these years, opposing the no code, as they feel nice and cosy in their own little corner of ham radio. It's time to wake up pops, and take a good look/listen around you. All these newcomers will arrive. Their operating will be impeccable. I wonder who will be doing the the bad operating??


Right ON!

And that comment comes from a certified "old timer"! #

I've always found it interesting that the largest percentage of fines and license revocations in the USA always seems to come from the "highest" class of operators....the "Extras".

So much for the ARRL's "incentive licensing" fraud (not to mention the "CW testing forever" crowd's shrill attempts) at keeping the "rif-raff" out.

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (m0tjc @ Nov. 07 2005,03:55)]SHEEZ, WHAT IS UP WITH YOU GUYS??

Whatever country you live in, be it US, UK, Australia or wherever, the situation "to morse or not to morse" always gets teddies thrown from prams.

We had the same thing over here a few years ago.... all the "old timers" who used to monopolize 80m, talking about their hip replacements and arthritis all day long, thought they had an exclusive right to the HF bands, because they had to take the test.

Well, the code was abolished, and a whole new flood of old "B" class licenses came flocking to HF.... we even have 6 year olds with their M3 calls on HF, and there have been no problems at all. The only problems that I have come across, are the "Old Faithful" G3 call holders, that still seem to think that they have exclusive rights over anybody else to a particular band/frequency, and will QRM them to hell until they move... yes, it does happen. Take 18 months ago, as new entry level M3 ticket holder, on 40m phone. In the end I gave up trying, as there were a couple of old timers picking on me, until I gave up. I plugged the key in the next day, and hell, who were the people who were wanting to QSO with me? yup, you got it.......

Morse is an outdated mode. Yes, It has it's uses, and yes, I do CW from time to time. In my personal experience, there are more UK CW'ers now, than when the test was compulsory. Nowadays people use/learn CW because they WANT to, not learn it, take the test and forget it after they HAD to. You would be surprised at the number of M3 entry level calls using CW on 40m, with their 10w limit...... purely because the phone segment is that crowded, they will get swallowed in the QRM. I struggle on 40m phone with 150w!

And the biggest thing that will kill amateur radio??

All the "old timers", who have had the HF bands to themselves for all these years, opposing the no code, as they feel nice and cosy in their own little corner of ham radio. It's time to wake up pops, and take a good look/listen around you. All these newcomers will arrive. Their operating will be impeccable. I wonder who will be doing the the bad operating??

I rest my case.
m0tjc- sir you have got that Right on good post , 73 Bill

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Nov. 06 2005,20:33)]As I stated elsewhere, if they are going to eliminate the 5 WPM requirement for General, I am not as concerned about adding HF capabilities for the Techs. I can agree with the FCC's comments on this - passage of a written test is all that's needed.

If the 5 WPM test is abolished for General, and the Novice Redeployment NPRM is adopted as expected, I don't see any reason why the Techs couldn't be granted the Tech+ priveleges, including the limited 10 meter phone privleges. I'd also include digital priveleges on the lower bands where they have CW priveleges. But again, if they can get these priveleges with an additional written test, it's not that big a deal.

I agree with ARRL that the 5WPM should stay for Extra.
k0rgr-well sir you could Be Right on this , But think for a min,if they (fcc) dont drop the code for xtra to ,it will Be Back next year ,like it has in the past , so I think the Best thing to do is get Rid of it now and the code problem will Be gone for good , and I think the fcc wants to do that ,and I agree with the fcc 100% we need to move on to Bigger and better things ,73 Bill

[n3nkc]

Hello all. After reading thru this post I would like to give my 2 cents worth. Being a young ham (25 years old) that has had my license since Sept 1992 at age 11 and obtaining my extra class in early 1994 I have a different perspective on some problems this hobby has that can keep certain people out. Forget all the code/theory aspects. I do agree that for some the code is a big setback. I remember going thru the plateaus and being stuck at 10wpm for the 13wpm general code and even trying to get solid copy for 5 wpm. But those are minor issues. An ex-girlfriend accompanied my to field day one year and after sitting in listening to me working 20wpm cw a while starting picking out the particular sound of my callsign and my exchange info. Guess some have it and some dont. Fine and Dandy on that. Do what you feel you are capable of.
What I think is a great discouragement is the equipment requirement. Not many people can afford the cost of a rig, especially an HF rig. I know there are used alternatives, but even at a few hundred bucks, it can be difficult. Especially for kids. I was a kid asking my parents for a thousand dollar radio to do this stuff. Fortunately for me, they were very supportive and had the ablility to do this for me. Not all are lucky. Even folks that are working and are just barely sneaking by paying the bills and eating. It can be difficult. Antennas are another thing. HF antennas are large, no matter what kind. Wire antennas, yagis, et. al. With the big real estate build up going on, property size is sinking in order to accomidate more homes. So long wires and dipoles are a bit difficult to string up. Verticals are tall and often have "ugly" capacitance hats or coils or what nots sticking off them. Astectics mean alot to some!! As far as yagis, well I don't have to say much there. They are just big. All this can be discouraging to someone new to the hobby and trying to get going. Even to try and statisfy community requirements or even the feelings of their better half! I get a very good understanding of the outside view of this hobby from my girlfriend. As I install new antennas for the various bands I work, she always has an inquisitite question as to why I need this or what does it do and why I need so many different ones to do the same thing.
Within this all, I believe we should have a basic entry level license that gives people a chance to test the waters of everything this hobby has to offer. This way they know what they are getting into. Some people might be happy with an ht and chatting with locals on a repeater or thru an echolink node. And that is fine. As long as we have activity that keeps the freqs. alive, IT'S ALL GOOD. If they like CW, great. But all in all, give people a place start. Let them experience a little of what we enjoy and let them find their calling. If they like it, they will progress to obtain higher classes or full priviledges. It is sad to see this (and everything else) having to be dumbed down because of a lazy and instant gratification society. But the downfall of that is these people pass the test, get on for a few months and move on to something else. Too sad.

73 all
John N3NKC

[W9WHE]

Why even bother with a test? Just pay your fee and wala! instant Extra.

The only thing seperating us from CB is the standards. Take away the standards and we will become CB.

Why would ARRL push this position? Simple. New hams buy ARRL's overpriced publications. Its all about the money, money, money!

W9WHE

[WA4RYW]

Quote[/b] (ai4me @ Nov. 05 2005,15:57)]I can agree and also disagree with the ARRL proposal. I feel the ARRL hit it right on the money with the proposal and reasoning of leaving the 5WPM requirement for Extra.

However, the restructuring of HF privileges for Technicians I can disagree on. For one, it would cloud the whole incentive for upgrading to General, and in essence completely void the General Class license. Giving small increments of added band does not provide incentive in itself to achieve the next level. For many the whole incentive for General is access to HF.

What is wrong with simply removing the requirement for 5WPM at General level? This opens the door to those who either have great difficulty in learning Morse or have absolutely no interest in the Morse mode of operating.

Also, if people wish to upgrade from the entry level Technician, the General exam ensures that the potential upgrade has the additional knowledge of essential HF skills needed to "move up".

I also disagree with the ARRL's finding that a majority of Technicians do not upgrade due to the stumbling block of Morse. Of most Technicians I know, a majority of their interest lies in communications above 50 MHz. Since Amateur Radio has so many facets, and there is something for everyone, this doesn't mean all amateurs are interested in HF communications. I know many who only are in to Amateur Radio because they really enjoy 2M, 440, APRS, Airmail, Satellite, 1.2 GHz and other such communication techniques found above 50 MHz.

I also know many General and Extra's that spend a majority of their time in the HF bands because that is the facet of Amateur Radio that fascinate and attract them.

I feel that the Tech/General line is more of a border than a barrier, and has more to do with preference than ability.
I'm with you. I believe the whole thing is over selling radios, certainly not the quality, or even the quantity of bodies that use the spectrum. QST's advertisers want to sell the $12,000 radios, not so much the $399 ones. And as everyone should know, the one with the gold makes the rules. I'm afraid the ARRL is a bit bought and paid for in this respect.

[WA4RYW]

Quote[/b] (VA3KSF @ Nov. 06 2005,18:20)]Greetings All!


Thankfully, the FCC (along with many other such agencies in other countries) are now (finally) undoing what the ARRL and others set in motion years ago… turning a basic competency test for a Ham Radio license into an unneeded series of achievement tests. #

Back then, it was called “incentive licensing”. #And over the years, it has helped the ARRL and others sell a gazillion dollars worth of printed manuals, books and other such “upgrade” materials. #Unfortunately, perpetuating this fraud into the twenty first century has now all but killed Amateur Radio. #

Sadly, many of the unwitting proponents of “incentive licensing” who also bought the ARRL’s fraudulent bill of goods years ago are STILL trying their level best to hang onto their dying dream. #This fact is evidenced by all the passionate comments expressed here and elsewhere about keeping CW for Extras (or even HAVING an “Extra Class” license in the first place)! #

As it has oft been said, requiring proficiency in the Morse Code in order to obtain a Ham Radio license is much like having to demonstrate how to shoe a horse in order to get a driver’s license. #And, speaking of a driver’s license, why is it that I STILL don’t need to know how the fuel injectors, transmission and brake lights all work on my car in order to obtain one? #

Maybe that’s because my driver’s license, my private pilot’s license and so many other government-issued licenses that I’ve carried in my pocket over the years have licensing structures that are ALL set up to simply measure basic competencies. #That is, they simply require me to demonstrate to a competent government authority that I won’t be a hazard either to others or myself on the road (or in the air). #The real learning (how to drive or how to fly) comes later, usually with years and years of actual “on-air” experience. #

And I find it most interesting that ALL of these other license structures DON’T require that I go back and take yet ANOTHER “achievement test” in order to drive (or fly) my vehicle farther away from my home, for example.

Think about it! #Who has ever heard of an “Extra Class” driver’s license to drive a passenger car? #Sounds ludicrous, doesn’t it? #In fact, it’s about as ludicrous as requiring that I have an “Extra Class” Amateur Radio License in order to have “full privileges” on the Ham Bands!

Could it be that the REAL reason why the ARRL wants to keep “incentive licensing” alive (including CW testing which has LONG outlived its usefulness) is simply because it helps insure the ARRL will continue to publish and sell lots and lots of ARRL books, tapes and “upgrade” materials to the “unwashed masses”? #After all, it’s publishing that keeps the ARRL afloat. #It certainly isn’t member dues.

I say enough is enough! #It’s high time the FCC finally put an end to all this ARRL-perpetuated “incentive licensing” fraud…for good! #

73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF
I'm not sure how pilot licensing works in whatever country you're in, but the FAA requirements typically have you flying "in training" for nearly 60 hours average before you are issued a "private pilot certificate". With that document, you are granted all privileges and access to all airspace afforded the limits granted the certificate. Now, should I want to fly under IFR conditions, I must upgrade my certificate by taking yet another written test, many, many hours of practical flight training, and yet another checkride (final test) before I'm certified to fly under IFR rules. If I want to fly commercially, it starts all over again. Multi-engine? Yet another tier. You may want to re-visit your analogy, as the FAA flight training program is very similar to incentive licensing as it was.

As for a driver's license, that allows you to drive a vehicle up to a certain weight limit. Should you desire to drive a heavier vehicle, it's back to a more intense level of written/training/testing process to get your CDL, or commercial driver's license. Once again, a tiered structure. If all you want is to drive your two meter rig, then a basic driver's license may be all you require. You want to drive a heavy truck, you need to upgrade to CDL.

[kc0shz]

Quote[/b] (ai4me @ Nov. 05 2005,12:57)]I can agree and also disagree with the ARRL proposal. I feel the ARRL hit it right on the money with the proposal and reasoning of leaving the 5WPM requirement for Extra.

However, the restructuring of HF privileges for Technicians I can disagree on. For one, it would cloud the whole incentive for upgrading to General, and in essence completely void the General Class license. Giving small increments of added band does not provide incentive in itself to achieve the next level. For many the whole incentive for General is access to HF.

What is wrong with simply removing the requirement for 5WPM at General level? This opens the door to those who either have great difficulty in learning Morse or have absolutely no interest in the Morse mode of operating.

Also, if people wish to upgrade from the entry level Technician, the General exam ensures that the potential upgrade has the additional knowledge of essential HF skills needed to "move up".

I also disagree with the ARRL's finding that a majority of Technicians do not upgrade due to the stumbling block of Morse. Of most Technicians I know, a majority of their interest lies in communications above 50 MHz. Since Amateur Radio has so many facets, and there is something for everyone, this doesn't mean all amateurs are interested in HF communications. I know many who only are in to Amateur Radio because they really enjoy 2M, 440, APRS, Airmail, Satellite, 1.2 GHz and other such communication techniques found above 50 MHz.

I also know many General and Extra's that spend a majority of their time in the HF bands because that is the facet of Amateur Radio that fascinate and attract them.

I feel that the Tech/General line is more of a border than a barrier, and has more to do with preference than ability.
"However, the restructuring of HF privileges for Technicians I can disagree on. For one, it would cloud the whole incentive for upgrading to General, and in essence completely void the General Class license. Giving small increments of added band does not provide incentive in itself to achieve the next level. For many the whole incentive for General is access to HF."

I disagree. I am a tech and am in the process of moving up. I would like to get some HF activity to see what I would like to do beyond the repeaters on VHF. Is PSK for me? How about QRP? How would I know?

By letting techs at least get their feet wet in HF, you will create people who will learn that QRP fits their budget or other interests better, or maybe they get bit by a DX bug. Allowing some small HF activity would be a good way for people to get enthused about the bands and the activities that are on HF.

Also, a big barrier to this hobby is the cost of the gear. I can see a lot of young people with kids not being ABLE to get into the game due to cost. Again, a little HF activity could be done on a rig that would go on into full HF priviledges once the license was upgraded.

[W7IB]

Folks, #

Somebody please help me understand why getting each other's shoes wet gets anything done for Amateur Radio?
People who know me don't have to guess where I stand on any of these issues, but before any other ego-driven blathering, I try to place the health of the service first.

The conversation about code/no code and incentive licensing got boring years ago. It's time now to guide, direct or cajole our organizations/agencies to act in the very best interests of Amateur radio, and not those of manufacturers, or the fringe on either end of the spectrum. #The Amateur Service lives or dies for all of us, based on how we represent ourselves to the "powers that be", and this kind of unhealthy nattering doesn't represent us well.

Please stop the noise, because that's all it is and do something productive for Amateur Radio!

73,
Casey

[ke4zhn]

Its seems very obvious that the league is selling out the hobby in the interest of making more money. Thats what its all about to them. Why bother to have any license exam at all? At the rate they keep lobbying the FCC to dumb it down, very soon it will be multiband CB. Its already well on its way! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sad.gif

[ai4me]

Quote[/b] (kc0shz @ Nov. 07 2005,14:48)]"However, the restructuring of HF privileges for Technicians I can disagree on. For one, it would cloud the whole incentive for upgrading to General, and in essence completely void the General Class license. Giving small increments of added band does not provide incentive in itself to achieve the next level. For many the whole incentive for General is access to HF."

I disagree. #I am a tech and am in the process of moving up. #I would like to get some HF activity to see what I would like to do beyond the repeaters on VHF. #Is PSK for me? #How about QRP? #How would I know?

By letting techs at least get their feet wet in HF, you will create people who will learn that QRP fits their budget or other interests better, or maybe they get bit by a DX bug. #Allowing some small HF activity would be a good way for people to get enthused about the bands and the activities that are on HF.

Also, a big barrier to this hobby is the cost of the gear. # I can see a lot of young people with kids not being ABLE to get into the game due to cost. #Again, a little HF activity could be done on a rig that would go on into full HF priviledges once the license was upgraded.
Here is the wonderful thing about Elmers, upgrading and continuing on in the Amateur Hobby... as a Tech, you CAN get your feet wet by simply finding another General or Extra that is willing to be a control op, and you operated the bands under their call sign. This is also one of the purposes of the GOTA station during Field Day.

Ok, so you want QRP ability. I can live with that. But isnt QRP usually about 5 watts? (ARRL QRP Contesting is limited to 5 watts as per the Nov 2005 Sweepstakes rules) The proposal that the ARRL is pushing is for is 100 watts on the lower HF bands while 50w on 10 Meter. This hardly counts as true QRP operating!

A QRP rig for a single band can be rather inexspensive, comparatively speaking. So if we must give Techs some HF, how about limiting it to 20W, 10W or even 5W? Thus there would still be enough incentive to upgrade to General for the substantial power increase. Not to mention the fact that unless you buy a linear amp, most HF radios on the market today come with only 100-200 watts output power. I always use 100W maximum power myself and I'm an Extra.

My problem with their proposal is the lessening of the incentive to upgrade. Give a taste, but make it a big enough gap to encourage upgrades!

[n3nkc]

I don't think dumbing down or taking away any requirements would help. I feel that we should have left license structures the way they were. Tech plus left many hams with the best of all worlds, Little tidbits of HF for DXing, 6m for "magic" DX, 2m and higher for FM and repeaters. I can see taking out advanced, but I feel we should have the structure the way it was. That was a total and sound solution. But since Morse has not been in use for years and even with the Navy and maritime taking CW out in favor of digital just goes to show where the swing of the times is going. Perhaps we all need to step back and realize this is a hobby. And no matter what, you will always have idiots that try to rain on the parade.

73 John N3NKC

[VA3KSF]

Quote[/b] (WA4RYW @ Nov. 07 2005,11:24)][quote=VA3KSF,Nov. 06 2005,18:20]Greetings All!


I'm not sure how pilot licensing works in whatever country you're in, but the FAA requirements typically have you flying "in training" for nearly 60 hours average before you are issued a "private pilot certificate". With that document, you are granted all privileges and access to all airspace afforded the limits granted the certificate. Now, should I want to fly under IFR conditions, I must upgrade my certificate by taking yet another written test, many, many hours of practical flight training, and yet another checkride (final test) before I'm certified to fly under IFR rules. If I want to fly commercially, it starts all over again. Multi-engine? Yet another tier. You may want to re-visit your analogy, as the FAA flight training program is very similar to incentive licensing as it was.

As for a driver's license, that allows you to drive a vehicle up to a certain weight limit. Should you desire to drive a heavier vehicle, it's back to a more intense level of written/training/testing process to get your CDL, or commercial driver's license. Once again, a tiered structure. If all you want is to drive your two meter rig, then a basic driver's license may be all you require. You want to drive a heavy truck, you need to upgrade to CDL.

All true.

However, nowhere does either the state driver's license bureau or the FAA restrict WHERE I can fly or drive. #All of the restrictions you mention relate to WHAT I can drive or fly and/or WHEN (or under what conditions) I can do it.

Let me put it another way. #Years ago, the ARRL (along with their willing "moles" in the FCC) decided to carve up the Ham Bands into "sub-bands" based on their stupid "incentive licensing" scheme. #

When they did that, a number of people actually LOST operational bandwidth. #Essentially, limits were placed on WHERE people who were already licensed with HF privileges could go. #

That is, the ARRL/FCC put in place a series of "incentives" all aimed at giving the HF part of our Ham Bands to us in chunks, based on our passing yet another stupid series of code and written "achievement tests" along the way. #This would be after, of course, each of us bought all the ARRL study materials and/or code tapes needed to get the "upgrade". #

To my knowledge, nowhere else in the world are our HF Ham Bands as carved up as they are in the USA. #And nowhere else (again to my knowledge) do people have to take a whole series of "achievement tests" in order to obtain complete access to all our internationally allocated HF frequencies once a basic HF license is granted.

For example, in Canada, a Basic Licensee that also meets all the requirements for an HF license, can operate ANYWHERE in the HF spectrum and in virtually ANY mode. #The only limits relate to power output (150 Watts) using commercial equipment only (no home-brew transmitters). #They also can't be the licensee of a repeater or club station, and they can't give Ham Radio exams. #Other than that, they can operate wherever and whenever they please thoughout both the#HF AND the VHF/UHF spectrum. #

To me, such limitations on a "beginner" make perfect sense. #Overcoming these restrictions are certainly comparable to getting an#IFR or commercial endorsement on a private pilot's license, or to getting a commercial (heavy truck) endorsement on a driver's license. #

But, in each case, these restrictions relate mostly to SAFETY and in minimizing self-inflicted hazards either to myself or others until some practical "in-the-air" or "on-the-road" experience is obtained. #

What these regulations DON'T encourage is the stroking of someone's ego. #I believe that's largely because they are based on safety considerations rather than on
some ill-defined concept of "achievement". #

They also don't result in millions and millions of dollars of "windfall" revenue in "upgrade" books and tapes for the world's largest publishing organization of such things...an organization that, it just so happened, was also the one shoving the whole idea through the FCC (and down our throats) in the first place.

My friends, "incentive licensing" (and the horrible mess of sub-banding it created in the USA as a direct result) was cooked up by the ARRL years ago for one purpose and one purpose only: #

To further their own virtual monopoly in examination preparation publications.

Unfortunately, over the years, many of the "old timers" (and some "new timers" as well) have bought into this hogwash lock stock and barrel, largely because it is the only licensing structure many in the USA have ever known. #

Fortunately, the FCC is now poised to (finally and completely) dismantle a large chunk of it. #Getting rid of the utterly arcane, government-imposed requirement of testing for CW proficiency will be a welcome start.

Unfortunately, getting rid of all the over-inflated egos the ARRL and the FCC also created with their "incentive licensing" fraud is still going to take a LOT more time.....


73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF








73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (VA3KSF @ Nov. 07 2005,14:22)]Quote[/b] (WA4RYW @ Nov. 07 2005,11:24)][quote=VA3KSF,Nov. 06 2005,18:20]Greetings All!


I'm not sure how pilot licensing works in whatever country you're in, but the FAA requirements typically have you flying "in training" for nearly 60 hours average before you are issued a "private pilot certificate". With that document, you are granted all privileges and access to all airspace afforded the limits granted the certificate. Now, should I want to fly under IFR conditions, I must upgrade my certificate by taking yet another written test, many, many hours of practical flight training, and yet another checkride (final test) before I'm certified to fly under IFR rules. If I want to fly commercially, it starts all over again. Multi-engine? Yet another tier. You may want to re-visit your analogy, as the FAA flight training program is very similar to incentive licensing as it was.

As for a driver's license, that allows you to drive a vehicle up to a certain weight limit. Should you desire to drive a heavier vehicle, it's back to a more intense level of written/training/testing process to get your CDL, or commercial driver's license. Once again, a tiered structure. If all you want is to drive your two meter rig, then a basic driver's license may be all you require. You want to drive a heavy truck, you need to upgrade to CDL.

All true.

However, nowhere does either the state driver's license bureau or the FAA restrict WHERE I can fly or drive. #All of the restrictions you mention relate to WHAT I can drive or fly and/or WHEN (or under what conditions) I can do it.

Let me put it another way. #Years ago, the ARRL (along with their willing "moles" in the FCC) decided to carve up the Ham Bands into "sub-bands" based on their stupid "incentive licensing" scheme. #

When they did that, a number of people actually LOST operational bandwidth. #Essentially, limits were placed on WHERE people who were already licensed with HF privileges could go. #

That is, the ARRL/FCC put in place a series of "incentives" all aimed at giving the HF part of our Ham Bands to us in chunks, based on our passing yet another stupid series of code and written "achievement tests" along the way. #This would be after, of course, each of us bought all the ARRL study materials and/or code tapes needed to get the "upgrade". #

To my knowledge, nowhere else in the world are our HF Ham Bands as carved up as they are in the USA. #And nowhere else (again to my knowledge) do people have to take a whole series of "achievement tests" in order to obtain complete access to all our internationally allocated HF frequencies once a basic HF license is granted.

For example, in Canada, a Basic Licensee that also meets all the requirements for an HF license, can operate ANYWHERE in the HF spectrum and in virtually ANY mode. #The only limits relate to power output (150 Watts) using commercial equipment only (no home-brew transmitters). #They also can't be the licensee of a repeater or club station, and they can't give Ham Radio exams. #Other than that, they can operate wherever and whenever they please thoughout both the#HF AND the VHF/UHF spectrum. #

To me, such limitations on a "beginner" make perfect sense. #Overcoming these restrictions are certainly comparable to getting an#IFR or commercial endorsement on a private pilot's license, or to getting a commercial (heavy truck) endorsement on a driver's license. #

But, in each case, these restrictions relate mostly to SAFETY and in minimizing self-inflicted hazards either to myself or others until some practical "in-the-air" or "on-the-road" experience is obtained. #

What these regulations DON'T encourage is the stroking of someone's ego. #I believe that's largely because they are based on safety considerations rather than on
some ill-defined concept of "achievement". #

They also don't result in millions and millions of dollars of "windfall" revenue in "upgrade" books and tapes for the world's largest publishing organization of such things...an organization that, it just so happened, was also the one shoving the whole idea through the FCC (and down our throats) in the first place.

My friends, "incentive licensing" (and the horrible mess of sub-banding it created in the USA as a direct result) was cooked up by the ARRL years ago for one purpose and one purpose only: #

To further their own virtual monopoly in examination preparation publications.

Unfortunately, over the years, many of the "old timers" (and some "new timers" as well) have bought into this hogwash lock stock and barrel, largely because it is the only licensing structure many in the USA have ever known. #

Fortunately, the FCC is now poised to (finally and completely) dismantle a large chunk of it. #Getting rid of the utterly arcane, government-imposed requirement of testing for CW proficiency will be a welcome start.

Unfortunately, getting rid of all the over-inflated egos the ARRL and the FCC also created with their "incentive licensing" fraud is still going to take a LOT more time.....


73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF








73,

Keith
VA3KSF / KB1SF
va3kse - sir you got a good post there ,tell it like it is where they want to hear it or not good job, 73Bill

[kd5rjz]

Hey FCC & ARRL,

I passed my code, you can leave licensing structure alone now!

Thanks!

[wb8tiv]

:0

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (kd5rjz @ Nov. 07 2005,16:55)]Thanks!
kd5riz- #Hey FCC & ARRL,

I passed my code, you can leave licensing structure alone now # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # #hey hold on dont stop yet I have not passed mind yet , http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/mad.gif #thank,sfor not thinking of someone Besides yourself ,73 Bill http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[AC0GT]

VA3KSF,
I'll second KD4MXE and say you have made a great post. #That has got to be one of the most lucid and thoughtful comments I have even read on QRZ about the Amateur license structure.

I agree with the "how" being regulated by the testing and not the "where" as it is now. #I find it rather amusing (or even frightening) that the FCC will allow a Technician to operate a 1500 watt transmitter on 5.8GHz, a transmitter that could kill, but God (or Congress, which ever sits better with your sensibilities) forbid a Technician operate an HF radio with 10 watts.

I think the FCC is realizing the folly of the old license structure. #I expect that the FCC is taking a step by step (or "boil the frog") approach to a two tier license structure like Canada (Basic/Advanced or Novice/Extra), or to a single license. #I expect that the ARRL will get its revised Novice license in five years, to replace the General and Technician.

[kd4mxe]

Quote[/b] (KC0LXK @ Nov. 07 2005,18:19)]VA3KSF,
I'll second KD4MXE and say you have made a great post. #That has got to be one of the most lucid and thoughtful comments I have even read on QRZ about the Amateur license structure.

I agree with the "how" being regulated by the testing and not the "where" as it is now. #I find it rather amusing (or even frightening) that the FCC will allow a Technician to operate a 1500 watt transmitter on 5.8GHz, a transmitter that could kill, but God (or Congress, which ever sits better with your sensibilities) forbid a Technician operate an HF radio with 10 watts.

I think the FCC is realizing the folly of the old license structure. #I expect that the FCC is taking a step by step (or "boil the frog") approach to a two tier license structure like Canada (Basic/Advanced or Novice/Extra), or to a single license. #I expect that the ARRL will get its revised Novice license in five years, to replace the General and Technician.
kc0lxk - sir you seen that 2 yes he has a good one ,tells it like it is ,and I agree 73 good luck Bill

[K4WKM]

Quote[/b] (VA3KSF @ Nov. 07 2005,14:22)]Quote[/b] (WA4RYW @ Nov. 07 2005,11:24)][quote=VA3KSF,Nov. 06 2005,18:20]Greetings All!


I'm not sure how pilot licensing works in whatever country you're in, but the FAA requirements typically have you flying "in training" for nearly 60 hours average before you are issued a "private pilot certificate". With that document, you are granted all privileges and access to all airspace afforded the limits granted the certificate. Now, should I want to fly under IFR conditions, I must upgrade my certificate by taking yet another written test, many, many hours of practical flight training, and yet another checkride (final test) before I'm certified to fly under IFR rules. If I want to fly commercially, it starts all over again. Multi-engine? Yet another tier. You may want to re-visit your analogy, as the FAA flight training program is very similar to incentive licensing as it was.

As for a driver's license, that allows you to drive a vehicle up to a certain weight limit. Should you desire to drive a heavier vehicle, it's back to a more intense level of written/training/testing process to get your CDL, or commercial driver's license. Once again, a tiered structure. If all you want is to drive your two meter rig, then a basic driver's license may be all you require. You want to drive a heavy truck, you need to upgrade to CDL.

All true.

However, nowhere does either the state driver's license bureau or the FAA restrict WHERE I can fly or drive. All of the restrictions you mention relate to WHAT I can drive or fly and/or WHEN (or under what conditions) I can do it.

Let me put it another way. Years ago, the ARRL (along with their willing "moles" in the FCC) decided to carve up the Ham Bands into "sub-bands" based on their stupid "incentive licensing" scheme.

When they did that, a number of people actually LOST operational bandwidth. Essentially, limits were placed on WHERE people who were already licensed with HF privileges could go.

That is, the ARRL/FCC put in place a series of "incentives" all aimed at giving the HF part of our Ham Bands to us in chunks, based on our passing yet another stupid series of code and written "achievement tests" along the way. This would be after, of course, each of us bought all the ARRL study materials and/or code tapes needed to get the "upgrade".

To my knowledge, nowhere else in the world are our HF Ham Bands as carved up as they are in the USA. And nowhere else (again to my knowledge) do people have to take a whole series of "achievement tests" in order to obtain complete access to all our internationally allocated HF frequencies once a basic HF license is granted.

For example, in Canada, a Basic Licensee that also meets all the requirements for an HF license, can operate ANYWHERE in the HF spectrum and in virtually ANY mode. The only limits relate to power output (150 Watts) using commercial equipment only (no home-brew transmitters). They also can't be the licensee of a repeater or club station, and they can't give Ham Radio exams. Other than that, they can operate wherever and whenever they please thoughout both the HF AND the VHF/UHF spectrum.

To me, such limitations on a "beginner" make perfect sense. Overcoming these restrictions are certainly comparable to getting an IFR or commercial endorsement on a private pilot's license, or to getting a commercial (heavy truck) endorsement on a driver's license.

But, in each case, these restrictions relate mostly to SAFETY and in minimizing self-inflicted hazards either to myself or others until some practical "in-the-air" or "on-the-road" experience is obtain