FCC Seeks Comments on Petition to Grant Lifetime Amateur Radio Licenses

Quote from K3RW ; "and drop advanced down to the lower class"

I think not!! I am an advance class. I took a test that was more difficult than what a current extra has to take today, plus a 13 wpm code test. That is what keeps me from taking the extra today. You do not get much for it!
Gary
W7TRP

 

Also, you will find that the most vehement deniers that a Lifetime License will be from those who make money on those who are unable for some reason to go online and renew their own licenses themselves, free. Where there is money to be lost, of course there will be those who will agonize over this.

Consider this, also: When/IF the license is free and for life, there will be more that will be interested in getting it. There are some "notables" that operate without a license and others that operate in ways that would make you think they had no license at all. We will always have these lawbreakers. However, once they realize that they can be a lifetime ham, the license should mean more to some of those same people.

I also see this as a way for the ARRL to have more enforcement abilities. Given the Volunteer Examiner system is managed by the ARRL, then the OO (Official Observer) may be put in a position to actually have to go out and get the bad guys by finding them and handing this information over to the FCC for actual enforcement, this also might be a good thing since the FCC is not doing this as much as before. We are supposed to be a "self-policing" system in that we watch out for our own, then this would make it more official and not in words only.

 

FCC: NO LIFETIME LICENSES
RENEWAL: EVERY 10 YRS
STAY WITH THE PLAN
3 license levels - fine with me, it used to be 5.....

 

I like the idea. Change can be beneficial if it's well thought out using common sense, without bias. That's a hard challenge
these days but it's doable. As a side note, the assertion about the Advanced class being dropped to a lower class is without merit because it is a grandfathered class with a certain respect acquired by hard work. Getting my advanced ticket was an achievement that I am still
proud of and made my jump to Extra in 1992 pale by comparison.
I encourage everyone to contemplate all of the angles of this idea and contribute your thoughts.
Having our FCC seeking comments from the ranks of Amateurs can be one of the most effective means for us to contribute to the destiny
of our great hobby.
This requires all of us to take the time to write and express our thoughts in a manner that promotes a powerful contribution.
73 de Billy N6YW

 

When I was a novice and took the license exam at Cincinnati, they only let me go from Novice to Advanced in one sitting saying that I had to be a ham for 60 days before taking the Extra. Perhaps this could be a factor in licensing.

Also, the role of Volunteer Examiner could include this. Give all privileges except Extra privileges at one sitting and then, after 60 days (or whatever) go for the Extra exam.

I have found in the tiered licensing format, going from one license to another, stepping up in technology, is one way of marking one's progress in electronics. Going from 2nd Class to 1st Class Radiotelephone gave some sense that one was "moving up" and also gave a person the idea that they were expanding their knowledge. Same way with moving from Novice to Extra. Therefore, some thought should be given this since Ham Radio is not only about operating a rice-box, it's also about expanding one's knowledge and ability in the technology.

 

If there is put in place a scheme to notify the FCC every few years that the physical address is the same or to notify that the address has changed, then they will have to provide a PIN or some other way to authenticate the ham him/herself is making the update to the license information. Otherwise, I foresee some character here and there finding ways to manipulate the system and messing things up. Using a PIN would forestall any attempts to defraud the system and never being caught.

 

So, when one becomes a "silent key", how will the FCC know that, so it may free up the call sign? Otherwise, we'll end up with super-long call signs, like the ones the CBers had when the CB service first came into existence.

 

Perhaps the Extra could only be achieved with a CW proficiency exam, even it it is only at 13WPM. Some designation could also apply to those who got the Extra with the 20WPM exam like Extra Plus. That is IF this goes that far. However, considering this is a Goobermint thing, it's not gonna happen overnight and it will no doubt have to be done over many times before someone has to truthfully say that it's still a mess and has to be fixed.

 

You can earn one from the League, among several other ham organizations (Canada and Switzerland, for example).

 

The only ones who fear the idea of a Code Argument are those who fear code or have never really experienced it, in my opinion. Even today, once many of those no-code licensees who "discover" code as a way of communicating with little or no interference, it becomes an item of interest and very often the mode of preference. I think the idea of "don't knock it until you've tried it" comes to play with CW.

 

I don't believe you'll be finding much support for downgrading licenses, specifically the Advanced licenses. Why would you support upgrading one class and downgrading another?

 

In the beginning of the Ham Radio Era, anyone who could put up and antenna and make that juice talk at a distance was considered the same as an engineer. With the sophistication of the general public, this distinction has ceased to exist in the minds of many who are more adept at programming a TV remote or a cell phone. This is also why we have moved into a rice-box mentality instead of a parts house to self-constructed station group, for the most part. Still, though, the real engineers who are among us are still there and they are the ones that publish articles showing what they have done and, by extension, what can be done.

The idea of a license is more for the concept of allowing people to do what they like to do without interfering with others with the same ambitions.

 

http://www.arrl.org/amateur-code
Please note the item "PROGRESSIVE".

If you enjoy CW , fine.

But in this age - CW in an equivalent to using spark gap TX . Trying to make knowledge of CW part of amateur radio licensing is just stale and IMHO good for bragging rights only. ...-.- ..

In closing - WHEN was the last time CW knowledge was beneficial to radio amateur community?

73 Shirley

 

Be careful what you wish for. There are a couple practical issues with many of the proposals I've seen here.

While yes, the ULS is linked to your Social Security number, it is not necessary to have a US Social Security number in order to get a US license. It is also not necessary to give a physical address when registering in the ULS - a PO Box works just as well. And honestly, when I first signed up in the ULS I gave my French address and the system was perfectly happy with that. Before I took the tests, I made arrangements with a friend to be my "mail address" in the US but even now, "my" address is c/o My Friend at her address. I've always wondered what would happen if I were to go back into the ULS and simply change back to my real French address. They don't mail out paper licenses any more (and that was always the explanation for needing a US address) and all that I've gotten through my friend's address is advertising. If the FCC were to get complaints about my transmissions, are they going to send out a letter or will they contact me by e-mail? (My e-mail address clearly places me in France.)

I like the idea of having to validate your address every x years, but really, how different is that from "renewing" your license online? (Actually, it reminds me of the annual "are you still alive" letter my husband gets from the insurance company that pays his pension.)

 

Maybe meet somewhere in the middle? You can keep your license for life but you must show at least X number of confirmed QSO's every Y number of years to hold onto it.