Its final - amateur service license fees are coming...

KI4HTC
James
I have all ready have my license Expiration 11-22-2024 when it due do i have to pay the $35.00 since i all ready have my license

 

Sure. But by then it could be $40.

 

The FCC didn't "stick hams" with anything. Hams have been getting a free ride for a long time, now the party is over and the wailing and crying has started. That's the problem when you give something away for free, you can't end that program without incurring a lot of angry resentment from those who have been living off of other peoples labor. The government spends money way faster than it takes it from the governed, they need to "deregulate" in an attempt to lessen their spending. How much do you think a ham test would have to cost if it was given in person in front of an FCC examiner? My guess would be several hundred dollars, pass or fail.

AND TO EVERYONE WHO KEEPS DIGGING UP THE BONES OF THAT LONG DEAD HORSE OF A "CW REQUIREMENT" TO FUTILELY BEAT IT AGAIN AND AGAIN...................... IT AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (yes, I'm shouting)

CW was a valid REQUIREMENT back in the early days of radio. Since you "CW guys" keep repeating yourself, I'm going to repeat myself again...........A CW test is no more valid now than a theory question requiring the applicant to hand draw a schematic diagram of a spark gap transmitter and explain its theory of operation. They are both archaic relics of a long ago era in radio, NEITHER OF THEM ARE, NOR SHOULD THEY BE, A VALID REQUIREMENT TO OBTAIN A HAM LICENSE IN THE 21st CENTURY.

 

Thats probably because there were none of those ridiculous called people back then Larry. I was first licensed in 1955 and we called them MENTORS and not something dreamed up by a part time ARRL helper.
Elmer brings up an Elmer Fudd image and even if that name doesnt ring with some it just sounds plain juvenile or retarded to others, especially the FCC where the ARRL has no influence any longer.....I wonder why.

Ive mentored several into ham radio and their comments are not fit to print on here

Carl
Ham since 1955, Extra since 1968
National Radio 1963-69
Service Tech, Service Manager, Sr Engineering Aide.
Member of HRO-500, NCL-2000, and NCX-1000 Design Teams
Well Mentored while there and also in the USN

 

There was a period of about a dozen years, from the mid-1960s to mid-1970s, when there were license fees for US hams. Adjusted for inflation, those fees were significantly higher than today.

That's right, it's gone and not coming back - UNLESS someone can somehow magically come up with a reason for bringing it back that convinces FCC. Nobody has done so in 30+ years. Every reason given has been deemed unconvincing by FCC.

All depends what you mean by "the early days of radio".

Nope. WRONG. Sorry, but that's not a valid argument at all. Here's why:

Radio amateurs in the USA pretty much stopped using spark transmitters in the mid-1920s. By 1927 or so they were no longer legal for US amateurs to use at all.

But Morse Code (CW) was and is in wide use in Amateur Radio today. Listen to the CW/data parts of the HF bands tomorrow afternoon and evening, when the NAQP is running.

IOW, requiring knowledge of spark transmitter technology makes no sense because amateurs don't use spark transmitters - and aren't even allowed to! The same cannot be said of Morse Code (CW).

However, neither is the fact that something is widely used by amateurs a reason for there to be a specialized, single-subject, pass-or-you-don't-get-a-license test.

See the difference?

A better comparison would be that we don't require every amateur to pass a special, stand-alone test on the "standard" phonetic alphabet - even though it is in wide use, and every ham should know it. Same for things like the limits of every band and subband.

That's true of spark. Not true of Morse Code/CW.

And neither of them are......
Sp

 

My analogy was valid regarding the REQUIREMENT to pass a test for either CW proficiency or spark gap technology proficiency. I used the bold italics in my post to stress the word REQUIREMENT. I used the analogy to show that they both are an outmoded REQUIREMENT, it had nothing to do with whether either of them is a viable technology today. You can use all the CW that you want to, it's a great mode. But it isn't and it shouldn't be a REQUIREMENT.

See the difference?

 

I don't see how knowing (or not knowing) CW has ANYTHING to do with operating a radio, or knowing which mode(s) can be used on which band(s), or how to decipher a schematic. I'd rather see THAT on the exam, then having to be able to send/receive "X" wpm CW...

 

I remember when CB licenses required $5 and a registration to get a call sign. KBFF 9951.

 

Less than 5% of the cost of my IC-7300, or less than .05% per year.

 

If you're a Licensed Amateur Radio operator you SHOULD know which mode(s) can be used on which bands/band segments... You certainly don't want to be operating Phone in the CW band - do you?

Instead of knowing CW in order to get your ticket, perhaps a better idea is to have operators, who wish to operate digital modes, demonstrate the ability to decipher JT8 by ear...

WQ4G

 

I would venture to say the Ham radio license fee is at the very bottom of the list of priorities these days. It's probably one of the reasons it happened so fast--because they were aware of looming issues. The FCC is now looking at much larger issues these days. And this "requirements" issue you guys are currently talking about--they don't care what the ham community requires to get a ham license. The only requirement they have is if they decide to give you permission to transmit.

I've been saying for a couple years the Internet has become a war zone. Most people, up until a few days ago, didn't know what I meant. Most people couldn't understand why I deleted my facebook account 10 years ago. Most people didn't understand why I never created a twitter account. Most people don't understand why I don't participate in any social media.

The good news is this "enforcement arm" of the FCC some people want so badly is getting ready to start up in earnest. Especially when the pirate broadcasters start up (calling themselves "Radio Free America" and such) between, oh, say 4 and 12 Mhz.

 

But WHAT does knowing/not knowing CW has to do with which modes/bands you can operate on, or even knowing HOW to operate your radio??

 

They should grandfather Advance Class to Extra class then that $35.00 worth it.

 

So you're saying keeping your Advance ticket isn't worth the $35.00 fee?
Sounds like it's time to take Element 4...before the fee becomes effective.


Regards,
-Bruce

 

Agreed.

But the FCC did a lousy job on justification for their decision: for example; asserting that Part 97--despite the mission statement as the law of the land--is not 'an emergency service'. It certainly is! 'Voluntary' is not the same as 'not the purpose'.

Furthermore, they know there is a NEED for exemptions, but punted the ball down the court. Now we have to see if the number of new licensees drops and shows a correlation with the new application fee (especially for the 'entry' license of Tech)--and then petition for invokation of select exemptions as appropriate.

They made a NEW problem they should/could have resolved easily with 5 minutes of effort....

73
Chip W1YW