Should Technicians be given 17m, 12m, and 10m phone?

Discussion in 'Survey Center' started by AB2T, Oct 9, 2011.


More Tech phone?

  1. Yes

    63 vote(s)
  2. Yes with conditions (explain)

    14 vote(s)
  3. No

    198 vote(s)
  4. Don't care

    10 vote(s)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-assoc
ad: l-Waters
ad: l-gcopper
ad: l-rl
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-rfparts
ad: l-innov
  1. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    I've had this idea that's been floating around in my head for a while: give Techs 17m, 12m, and 10m full phone privileges.

    Why? It'll help to relieve congestion on the small 28.300 to 28.500 band. Why restrict Techs to a small sliver on 10m? Just let them use the entire band, all modes. Also, letting Techs on 17m and 12m phone will be a good way to get more hams on two of the WARC bands.

    160, 75, 40, 20, and 15m phone would still require at least a General ticket.

    Also, I think it'd be a good idea to retain the 200W ERP limit for Techs on HF. This is the current policy, and should be maintained even if Techs get more HF phone. Limiting power would be a good way to entice operators to upgrade to General and qualify for an amp.

    Let's see what you all think.

    73, Jordan
  2. AF6LJ

    AF6LJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    In a word

  3. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    Sue, I respect your opinion. Though, I'm curious. Why in particular are you strongly against this proposal?

    73, Jordan
  4. ND6M

    ND6M Ham Member QRZ Page

    OK, I'll play. why did you say: "160, 75, 40, 20, and 15m phone would still require at least a General ticket."
    why don't you want to give them full privs on all bands?
  5. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    I look at it this way:

    Novices and Techs have had 10m access for more than twenty years. Most 10m SSB activity takes place in the 28.300 -- 28.500 window, so it's not as if the Techs have been missing out on DX. Letting Techs have the full range might get more hams of all licenses to utilize more of the 10m spectrum (there's quite a bit of it!). I've always wondered how to get more hams to use 10m above 28.500. Also, allowing Techs all modes on 10m only would give them a chance to try AM and FM HF.

    17m is a band that American hams often use, but 12m is often underutilized. Giving Techs full privileges on 12m will increase the utilization of the band. Maybe 17m should be reserved for General and up. Still, I don't see why a band like 12m should lay fallow. If hams with higher tickets aren't using 12m, give it to the introductory license.

    Although Techs have limited CW privileges on 80 and 40, realistically most Techs will only have 28.300 to 28.500 as their HF experience. Allowing Techs one or two more bands might not only relieve 28.300 -- 28.500 congestion but also get hams of all licenses to use underutilized bandwidth.

    I'm actually not a phone operator. Still, all bands, including the unused space on 10m and the phone WARCs, should be used frequently. Maybe I'd be against this idea if I operated phone more than CW.

    73, Jordan
    Last edited: Oct 9, 2011
  6. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    17M is a small band. Maybe an allocation of 100 to 150 KHz on 15M would be better. 15M is underutilized, too.
  7. KJ6EZQ

    KJ6EZQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Maybe all of 10m would be ok. My hope would be that allowing techs on all of 10m would drive the popularity of 10m repeaters up.
  8. KC5FM

    KC5FM Ham Member QRZ Page

    I voted before I answered but NO would be my answer here too.

    I scan Ten Meters frequently. The only time I have experienced what I consider congestion is when the band is open and on 29.600 FM. :)

    Ten-Ten Net International operates a number of daily nets. On their reflector, I've noticed less than a handful of instances where nets reportedly had interference.

    If Technicians want extra privileges, the principle of incentive licensing is in place.

    Now, let's talk about Advanced Class license holders getting Extra Class privileges. :D

  9. AF6LJ

    AF6LJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm against it because;
    A. The General Class license is easy to earn.
    B. 28-3-28.5 isn't any more crowded than twenty meters when the band is open.
  10. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    Fair enough. Many people take the Tech and General in one sitting anyway. That's the way I'd do it if I were starting out today. It's not that much more work to study for the General when studying for the Tech.

    Maybe this poll idea wasn't such a great idea after all. I'd use 17 and 12 more often, but I don't have antennas for those bands and wouldn't be able to put them up anyway even if I wanted to.

    73, Jordan
  11. KA5ROW

    KA5ROW Ham Member QRZ Page

    No: if a tech wants more privileges let them work for it.
  12. AA7EJ

    AA7EJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    It is time to get rid of "privileges" based on knowledge which is no longer necessary to OPERATE COMMERTIAL equipment.
    The whole idea of “incentive licensing” was wrong, did not work for years and does not work today and nobody is going to admit it.

    Thunder is good, thunder is impressive; but it is lightning that does the work.
    --Mark Twain
  13. WG7X

    WG7X Ham Member QRZ Page

    Slippery slope.

    Here we go again...

    Why is it that in this country today, all we see and hear is all about giveaways?

    • Students are passed from grade to grade without ever learning anything.
    • People "immigrate" to this country with out ever bothering about all those silly laws.
    • People are on the dole without ever putting a dime into the system.

    I could go on, but you get the idea.

    Now, we have someone who wants to include ham radio into the giveaway. Why not?

    After all, we have apparently given up on the idea of having any standards, accountability, or ethics. Why not just say to heck with it and open the bands to anyone with some cash and an itch to "broadcast"? After all, isn't it their "right" as a citizen of this once-great country to do so?

    Well... Is it?

    Or is operating Amateur radio equipment more akin to operating a car, a boat or an airplane?

    All of those are potentially hazardous, and usually require exams, experience, and a license of some sort. Ham radio might seem harmless, but there are some hazards involved and also the problem with signals that propagate over international boundaries.

    All of the above are good reasons to require that our country's Amateur radio operators have the knowledge necessary to operate their equipment in both a safe and legal manner. The best way to ensure the experience necessary is to require that our hams spend a little time going though some sort of process, however limited it may be.

    Just giving them HF privileges to generate activity is probably self-defeating. Yes, I know that the Brits and the Aussies have their foundation tickets, but we're talking about the good old US of A here. Frankly, I don't think that our operators would abide with the limitations of a "Foundation" type license. This opinion is based on what I've been hearing since, OH I don't know... About 1990 or so.

    Lets stick with the three levels that currently exist.

    Personally, since the original poster wanted opinions, I would do away with the tech license altogether and simply change it to a novice-type ticket with limited HF and VHF privileges. The much maligned novice ticket provided a valuable learning field for the newbies. It also provided places where the new ham could experience HF propagation and learn from the mistakes that newbies invariably make.

    This subject has been beaten to death many times since I first became a not-so-humble novice back in 1987, and not always for the better.

    Lets quit tweaking the system, (or at least trying to) and just live with what we have now, OK?

    Would that be too difficult?

    73 Gary
  14. KI6USW

    KI6USW Ham Member QRZ Page

    10m/SSB is a fine privilege all on its own with the tech ticket. 6m, 2m, and 70cm along with that is a lot. I thought that was a lot on my plate to get right after I got my tech ticket. Understanding antennas, repeaters, and band allocations along with a myriad other details is a lot w/o an Elmer. I know it was for me. Becoming a General ticket holder has put a smorgasbord in front of me. I enjoy my meals without over eating.

    Making it too easy to acquire without continuously developing the interest leads to less respect.

    The testing could be a bit more practical though. Looking back recently, I thought it left something to be desired.
  15. W5TTW

    W5TTW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I'm all for it, on the condition that they can send/copy CW at 13 WPM.
  16. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    Okay. Seems like the "no" has it. That's cool.

    Personally, I have mixed feelings about Incentive Licensing. Who doesn't? It's strange or sad (not really sure which) that legislation which was passed in the mid 1960's continues to have such a profound influence on American ham radio almost 50 years later. I don't consider getting the "20 wpm Extra" anywhere near as significant as my professional achievements. I'm glad for the knowledge to operate code and the basic technical knowledge I've learned, but I wouldn't be angry at all if the FCC decided to give Generals and Advanceds all the frequencies Extras have. That would anger most hams, so I don't go there. It's sad, though, that hamdom will never really have a true discussion about our examination system because of all the emotions that surround the issue.

    I only suggested that Techs get some space on the WARC bands because of underutilization. We fought for and won the WARC bands. We earned them only to neglect much of the bandwidth. 10 is also underutilized in some segments. We won't lose these bands since they're not desired by industry or the military. Still, anybody who's got the privileges to use these bands and has the gear should! If I could put up a beam, I'd get on 12 phone just to get others to use it even though I'm a boring and pedantic conversation partner. Eh, at least there'd be a CQ.

    Let's try to keep it chill. 73,
  17. AB2T

    AB2T Ham Member QRZ Page

    Your avatar is sort of um, don't know what to say. It looks like the hand will get carpal tunnel in no time.

    73, Jordan
  18. W0UZR

    W0UZR Ham Member QRZ Page

    I voted no. I would have voted yes it you said 10, 12, and 15 meters. 12 and 15 are the bands that need more activity. I mostly never hear anything on 12. But them hogging up 17 meters? Nope
  19. KB9BVN

    KB9BVN Ham Member QRZ Page

    I see no reason to expand the HF ability for Technician class licensees, and you make my point right here. Technician class license holders are not utilizing all the privileges they already have, so why give them more? The General Exam is so simple 8 year olds are passing it in numbers. There is no need to expand the band for this license class when upgrading is so simple.
  20. N1JGE

    N1JGE Ham Member QRZ Page

    65% said no and there's really no reason for it. Too many I had to do it that way and you ask yourselves why techs lose interest or you just don't give a darn about them. Nobody is asking for a hand out just the experience to make them good operators. Assigning bands and modes that have little activity doesn't help. Sorry I'm a great beliver that all modes and all band should be available to everyone, it's not rocket science, it's just a radio.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

ad: EasyWay-1