HamRadioNow: That ARRL Entry Level License Survey

hi hi

 

I can only say that my 1st License back in 1957 was a Novice.Built a small xmtr kit(Heathkit AT-1) and a Hallicrafters SX-99 rcvr.The antenna was a simple end fed Wire.As one can see,certainly nothing considered "state of the art"by today's standards.With my novice then I did have 2 Mtr phone
privileges with my licence but never had the desire to go on VHF,however the few novices that did go on 2Mtr am phone never got to their next class and after a year wound up going off the air.I must say that first year of ham radio was the most exciting and enjoyable in my last 60 years of operating!Even with 1 crystal(no vfo allowed) one needed to only turn their station on,tune for a CQ or call CQ yourself if no one was calling.Within a minute or two by tuning up or down a few khz.you would would hear someone would come back to you!There was never a problem finding a contact.I never felt learning 5WPM was a major problem,in fact I believe it helped define discipline in the operator.Just my point of view,it really was a shame they did away with the Novice,as it helped the operator prepare for the future.It should be made 10 yr.renewable however. Vy 73, Gregory L. Mitchell-W2MYA

 

PS I still have that first 25 watt xmtr and it wrks too!!! glm

 

I started out as a Tech with code on 2 meter AM in 1971. Loved weak signal VHF/UHF and hated the code. Never went to HF until 30 years later.

2 meters was just as exciting as HF for me except now, on VHF there is very little DX activity except repeaters. I miss those days on 2 meters, building amps and putting up big yagi's.

Worked every state east of the Mississippi on 2 meter SSB.

 

Wonder why hams do not need code BUT techs can ONLY use code below 10 meter.

Wondering for 10 years.

 

The objective of the first license should be to just get them competent to be OTA.

That doesn't necessarily mean building rigs from scratch any more. They will figure out how to do that on their own if desired. Being a "systems integrator" appliance operator is fine too. Train and test for rules & reg's, safety, OTA operation skills.

Amateur radio needs to market itself in modern terms. Of course there are technical knowledge and skills that underly it. But what are the features, advantages and benefits?

Social networks, dependent on electronic communications, are the fad of the times. But Amateur Radio was there first.

We exist as a mashup of RF signals, hence with apologies to Zuck, call my analogy "HamBook", the open source "free trade" social network on the World Wide Wireless Web.

It makes the internet look as closed and proprietary as it really is. CQ's, nets, and ragchewing are the chat rooms and forums. DX'ing and contests are the "Pokemon GO" apps for fun.

The modes are texting, image, voice, but hey, the airtime is "no charge". Perhaps high bandwidth video is on the horizon with a geo-sync ham-sat constellation some day (?)

Show them how obtaining the license legally enables POWER, literally QRO, over the unlicensed wireless alternatives. Doing so makes them special, official permission to be on the stage of an entire SPECTRUM of bands to perform upon, with analog or digi modulation instruments to play.

Get them OTA properly and the tech pool content will follow.

 

It is an incentive to learn code or upgrade their license. Not having to learn code for the tech is incentive to get licensed.

 

Test were never meant to be relevant but it's time to make them relevant if you want to salvage the hobby! Morse code is still relevant. If you want more band privileges, learn code!

 

Do you really think it is going to die?? I guess I am just and old guy that doesn't see a problem. It is a "chicken little" problem in my opinion. People making a problem out of nothing to have something to complain about.
Yes I know some just say get my head out of the sand and look around. I am just not going to spend everyday worrying about something that is so off base. If others want to spend their time worrying about it and causing them anxiety then they can do that.
My opinion, John, WB0MPB

 

Have you been to any ham radio club meetings recently? What would you say the average age of attendees is? my observation would be around 70-75. When there is a club activity, do a majority of the members contribute or is it the same 5-6 hams all the time. How easy is it for your group to get officers? If we don't start to get more middle aged any young hams to participate and contribute to the hobby, what do you think will happen in 10 years? Our wonderful, wide range of interests hobby will vanish into history due to lack of anyone wanting to grab the reigns and DO SOMETHING. If you really care about the future of Ham Radio, we ALL need to get some folks to get off their back sides and do something to keep this hobby around for the next generation.

 

Similar to meetings of people who play quoits or croquet, and those who collect shrunken heads, roman coins, human hair, mourning cards... Plenty of dead hobbies out there, but if you really want to kill ham radio, deader than a doornail, then dumb-it-down with give-away licenses and greater privileges for unmotivated people who can't even be bothered to prepare for a multiple guess exam with published answers. That should put the final nail in the coffin!

 

no dumbing down. no new license tier. We need to gather facts and work with those that get licensed to get them active. We need to work to find potential new hams, find them and encourage them like we were found and encouraged.

 

Yup - if we want ham radio to survive, we need to make it relevant to this century. Prepping and emComm won't make the bands active or contribute meaningfully to the art of radio. The last thing we want to do is create an imbecile level license or unleash untrained licensees on more HF bands. That's the worst idea I've seen from the lobbyist league since they started lobbying (without a valid reason) to repeal parts of private agreements affecting millions of homeowners. The former was profoundly dishonest, while the latter is just plain dumb.

 

So...I think there's a point that needs to be quantified.

In 1966, the Novice exam had--44-- study questions.

In 1966, the Tech exam had --100-- study questions.

The Novice exam was deliberately less 'volumetric' in its study pool.

BTW the AMECO study guide has Novice and Tech/General questions and is THIN-- about 30 pages.

It is a BOOKLET not a TEXTBOOK.

NOW yer talkin'!

 

Tom,

The 50 year old novice study pool wasn't particularly 'easy', and each of the 44 questions was an invitation to explore more about electronics, regs, and so on.

So where is there a potential imbecile moniker with an entry test with a smaller study pool?