Tyro Petition (entry level license and more) filed with FCC

There has never been a minimum age limit on the issuance of amateur radio licenses. So I do not understand WHY the petitioner has even inserted that provision [of 11 years of age] for an 'entry level' amateur radio license that any average youngster with marginal effort can obtain a Technician Class License.

 

Not at all, but,.............. wrapping it up as "mentoring elementary school children" is quite frankly B.S.

And you can bet on me making appropriate comments to the FCC, just as I have made on previous subjects

 

I don't know why there should be an age limit either. I do believe that it would be a good idea to have a first tier license that is limited on RF power output for the sake of safety by inexperienced radio operators. Someone that young might be able to pass the test but I'm not sure someone that young understands the consequences of violating the rules. There's more to maturity and intelligence than understanding Ohm's Law.

Is it legal for a young licensed Technician to prop open the door on a microwave oven and try to modulate the output? Seems so by FCC rules. Is that wise? Probably not. I think a new license class where young people (and old) can learn to communicate with low power radios is a good idea. Don't limit it to channels though, that's not how Amateur radio is supposed to work, at least I don't think so. Don't limit frequencies arbitrarily either, if the applicant knows enough to safely transmit on 28.1MHz then they know enough to transmit on 29.1MHz.

Let's not add a new license to the mix though, but create a new license to replace an existing one or two. This Tyro proposal adds a new license to the existing tiered structure but is in parallel to it, this is not a step to Technician in that someone gets any kind of testing credit. People might get some on-the-air experience but there are other existing ways to do this. This duplication of "entry-level" is largely why the FCC got rid of the Novice license. I believe this Tyro proposal took a good idea too far. Dial it back a bit and we might have something more acceptable to the public and the FCC.

This proposal includes an option for online testing but doesn't that option already exist? I thought it did only no one, as far as I know anyway, takes advantage of this. I'm not a fan of online testing for things like this with exceptions for very rare circumstances. If we start a colony on the Moon and someone there wants an Amateur license to practice some Earth-bounce communication then we can talk about online testing. Until then I think we got this covered pretty well.

 

An NPRM will allow your constructive thoughtful comments to be added to the process. As the ARRL Document #25 exposes, we have a membership problem. I think this is translating to a cultural relevance problem. If I am right, this is not a glib issue. We either re-vision ham radio or other interests will re-vision our spectrum... piece-by-piece. Help the Commission with some well reasoned constructive comments. AD0WU

 

Years ago, there was an entry level license named "Novice Class" . Passing a 20 question (multiple choice) written exam and a 5 wpm code test were the requirements. Power was limited to 75 watts DC input to the plate and cw operation only on limited novice sub-bands on 80,40, and 15 meters. Term of license was one year (non-renewable) and you either upgraded to Technician, Conditiional or General Class or got out of amateur radio. At the time during the 50s,60s, and 80s; the Novice License had a 50-60% drop put rate. Many youngsters got their start in amateur radio via this route. Today, it is with the Technician License which was originally created as an "experimenter's license" in 1951 with 220 mc and up privileges.

There was a time prior to 1975 when both the Novice and Technician Licenses were available by mail. All an applicant had to do was to locate a licensed General Class ham over the age of 21 to administer the code and written exams. Then the examiner would mail the test papers back to Gettysburg PA for grading and license issuance.

Doesn't take an FCC license for anyone to be foolish enough to play around with microwaves in that sense.

 

Yes, that's how it was done before. I suggest we not repeal past mistakes or base current law on yesterday's technology. There were some very real limits of technology then that made such limits perhaps not necessary but logical. We have solid state electronics now that make a lot of the limits created then nonsensical now. Let's not place arbitrary limits on operating frequencies. Limits on power though is a matter of safety, those make sense for a lot of reasons. Don't "nerf" it too much with limits like 5 watts but give them something that can actually reach somewhere.

Yes, and the reasons that such a policy was created no longer exist and there were good reasons to end it. Again, let's not repeat past mistakes. The VEC system seems to work. I think it might be a good idea to have the FCC do some testing itself on a regular basis, rather than just a matter of checking for falsified exam scores. I realize that's not likely to happen but I can hope.

Also true, but we don't have to issue a license for it. It seems to me that the failures in licensing, if there are any, is to get people all worked up about what they can do with an Amateur Radio license have them take a test and then tell them all the things they can't do. That if they want to be a "real" amateur radio operator they have to go back to studying again and take another test. We don't need a license like a bowling alley with bumpers in the gutters or a bike with training wheels. Give them a license like a drivers license, you get a license and you get to drive anywhere you like, but if you want to drive the "big rigs" then you need to go back and study. Don't take the driving license analogy too far with the learner's permit, we have those already with mentored operation, Part 15, Part 95, and more.

We don't need a new "learner's permit", we need a license that won't smother them with a pile of arbitrary limitations. I think we need really only one permit but I know that's not likely to happen, so let's talk about not a "recruit" license but more of a passenger car license that lets people move freely but not drive the "big rigs" and likely hurt themselves and others in the process.

 

The Tyro Petition does not place an age limit for Technicians, Generals or Extras. Daniel's (W2AI) six-year old licensees can still test into these classes using the current VEC process. The Tyro age limit is about maturity... which may not be well tested by the simplistic on-line test. On the other hand, the VEC tests are likely to discover our most motivated and mature adolescents. Admittedly, many Tyro Licensees may never be more than "appliance operators"... but, as we already know, appliance operators add value to Amateur Radio too... they are there when the water rises... when your car breaks down... or, when you just want some simple companionship. They do not need to know a FET from an SCR or MSK from PSK to be valuable to our community. Amateur Radio is a "Big Tent" with new room for both "kids and space cadets" (see W2OY from back in my day). AD0WU

 

I think the arguments posed in the petition are specious at best, and laughable at worst. Do they actually think people are going to come out of the woodwork to "mentor" these entry-level operators? I think that is extremely unlikely.

We already have an entry-level license that requires almost no knowledge of radio or electronic theory. This petition proposes one that requires almost no knowledge of the rules of operation.

 

Not entirely. The U.S. subscribes to ITU and some of its rules are required while others are optional. For instance, one of the reasons the morse code requirement was not dropped years ago by some countries (including the United States) is because ITU regulations required the knowledge to be licensed to operate on frequencies below 30 Mhz. Only after that requirement was dropped could countries drop the code requirement.

 

It's also interesting to note the submitter is AD0WU and has only been licensed since January 24 of this year. But he did seem to go from nothing to Amateur Extra in one test session. At least there is no record of any upgrade.

 

In order to avoid exposing my ignorance, I looked up specious. Perhaps I am wrong about Amateur Radio mentors coming out of the "woodwork." This might make my idea superficially plausible but actually wrong. Yet, I belong to a plurality of Ham Radio Clubs... and not a meeting goes by without a report on mentoring programs... merit badge instructors, tech classes, general classes, APRS classes, emergency communication classes, etc. All freely given by ham volunteers. If I had not read the above responses to my Tyro Petition, I would have believed Amateur Radio was one of Humankind's most altruistic ventures. If I am wrong about Amateur Radio's vision of community, I should have petitioned the Commission to give FEMA's CERT program the 99 channel slice of our 70cm band and no longer involve Amateur Radio. But I am not wrong about Amateur Radio. Obviously, altruism is not ubiquitous in the Ham community... but, it is abundant. FEMA and CERT need us. We can respond. Most of us will see value and purpose in the Petition. After spending decades of my career around two-way radio, I came back to Amateur Radio because of what I saw. Not in the radios or the electronics or the technology... I have had that every day of my working career. No, it was what I saw in you that brought me back. Spending a three test Saturday morning was just a simple start for me. I know making the "tent" bigger is risky. I remember the CB days. Look at it... the Tyro Petition puts Amateur Radio in charge of what happens. The higher class licensees set the rules of conduct and use... and they will mentor the new recruits... just as they do now. AD0WU

 

This is ham radio, we do not use "channels"(except on 60m but that is a different case), we use VFO's and operate where we want within the limits of our licenses and the band plan. Burying newbies to UHF graveyards that get little use outside big cities is just a bad idea. PERIOD. There are 3 70cm repeaters in range of my house. Other than hearing them ID I never hear anyone actually use them!

 

Dumbing down dumb and dumber .

Sarcasm is not my intention, however, I fail to see a rational purpose in adding this class of license to amateur radio. It defeats the purpose intended for Part 97 operation. The activity suggested In this petition is more suited to GMRS than amateur radio.

Dave, AD5NM

 

I am not sure you are necessarily wrong about Ham Radio being altruistic. But, I doubt you will find must support for teaching something that requires basically no knowledge at all. As has been stated many times, the Technician class license requires only rudimentary knowledge of anything technical and grants many more privileges than what you are proposing. I think AD5NM makes a good point that this is better suited for GMRS than for Amateur Radio.

I would also argue that, rather than needing us, FEMA and CERT only tolerate amateur radio operators. There is literally no valid use case for amateur radio in the modern emergency scenario. There is almost nowhere you can go on this planet where you cannot access the phone or Internet networks by satellite. If you have emergency power for amateur radio, you have emergency power for satellite networking and a port-a-cell:

https://gizmodo.com/at-ts-armz-an-emergency-cellular-tower-in-a-suitcase-5795347

Amateur radio is an incredibly fun hobby but I am not going to fool myself into thinking it's even remotely necessary, or even that helpful, in a disaster.

 

mindless 'growing the ranks' is the worst approach to keeping ham radio vibrant.

I have elmered over 10 people in the past decade into getting at least their technician. what i found: the ones that really 'got the radio bug' had no problem studying, kept progressing through their hobby, and got general and even extra without a bunch of pain. the ones that just got it for emcomm/'i want to stay in touch with my spouse/kids in a disaster'/'i saw something about ham radio on hackernews how do i hook this to a computer' ended up with Baofengs in a junk drawer and went QRT.

the age restriction is weird and i've known several operators that started before then and were great ops, and i know OF several that are decades older than that and don't have the maturity to control their own PTT. See 7200/7255/14313.

In addition, it's kind of insulting to both the weak signal and amsat crew - both of which are communities of dedicated, talented and intelligent operators - to suggest that we burn 430-440 on another band of dead, unused, silent repeaters.

ad0wu, i believe you live in longmont. I live in denver. Have you actually put your radio on scan on 70cm here? The entire 440 FM band is closed to new coordination applications for repeaters because we are full - and yet, fewer than 10% of the machines I can hit in the 50 mile radius key up more than once a week. I literally have 96 70cm repeaters in my HT that I can access from Denver. 2-3 will have an actual conversation in any given 24 hour period.

Ham radio is not "dying". It doesn't need bar-lowering revitalization attempts like this. More new hams than ever are doing more complex things straight out of the gate, putting up a crapload of channelized 70cm repeaters that'll never be used is not the solution to a problem that doesn't even _exist_.

Ponder that maybe there ARE a bunch of younger hams out there that don't key up because they hear either silence, or offensive viewpoints on the local machines. Because pursuant to my elmering efforts noted above, I know for a fact that the generation gap between the repeater loudmouths and these new hams - especially when expressed as a function of political views, economic status (kids are BROKE!) and other viewpoints is really, really offputting to them.

I'm not saying I know what the solution is, but I know what the problem isn't. this honestly feels like a GMRS/FRS end-run.