ad: chuckmartin

ARRL Petition to Expand Technician Privileges

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by K4KYV, Mar 2, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: Left-3
ad: abrind-2
ad: Subscribe
  1. K7JEM

    K7JEM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Most ham communications could be conducted over the cell phone, if we want to get real specific.

    I think you need to determine what a "regular basis" is. Occasional use on a sailboat may not be a "regular basis".
    WU8Y likes this.
  2. KD0TLS

    KD0TLS Ham Member QRZ Page

    This is completely wrong, and a major part of the problem with retention and attraction.

    As a "Technician by choice", it really irritates me that so many "senior" hams push this mentality that the Tech Class is some of ghetto that needs to be escaped from as quickly as possible -- to move into the Promised Land of HF.

    A Technician can do 6M MSK144, 10M (and up) EME, ATV, APRS and packet, microwave, satcom, 10M digimodes and SSB, HF CW...and FM repeaters. When the new geo-sync satellite goes up in 2020, a Tech will have 24/7 access to North America (and the northern third of South America). That's a pretty broad array of different aspects to explore -- even if you live in a rural area.

    Far too many get their Tech ticket, and then are told that they 'need' to upgrade and move into HF, or else they are wasting their time. So they shrug and abandon the hobby without ever learning about all of the opportunities the Class offers. The ARRL is guilty of this, too. As far as the ARRL is concerned, there is nothing above 50 MHz beyond a few contests. It has nothing to do with laziness or being a "snowflake". It has everything to do with well-meaning "senior" hams strongly conveying the impression that the new operator's Technician license is worthless, and that the new operator will be considered to be a dimwit and failure until they move beyond it.

    Look, there's nothing wrong with HF. If you like it, then enjoy it. Just don't project that on others and imagine that everyone is desperate to get on HF. They aren't.
    KG5CMS, K4KPT, W5TTP and 7 others like this.
  3. N2EY

    N2EY XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    How do you know that for sure?

    How? Nobody loses one bit of spectrum in the proposal.

    So.....Technicians are "yay-hoos" but Generals, Advanceds and Extras aren't? And the bands involved are SO jammed that they cannot accommodate more amateurs?


    I think the real issue is something else.
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2018
    KD0TLS, KC3BZJ, KC3JTF and 3 others like this.
  4. WU8Y

    WU8Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    This is true, but Technicians don't have access to all ham radio activities - phone and digital on lower HF bands being the gap. Yes, Technicians have HF CW.

    You know what? Generals and Extras have access to all that you list and more. So why not upgrade if you can? You can still do the activities that interest you.
    K8AI and NL7W like this.
  5. N2EY

    N2EY XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Or CW.....

    This is one of the fundamental differences between "the old days" and today.

    It used to be that many if not most newcomers started out on HF. For me it was 80 CW, for others it was 40 or even 15, or some combination. With even modest setups, we and they could cover tens or hundreds of thousands of square miles, reaching hams hundreds of miles away. New acquaintances almost every time.

    On VHF/UHF, with a modest setup, the coverage is much less and much more predictable. Sure, once in a while there's an opening which is useful for the ham with an HT, but those are few and far between.

    73 de Jim, N2EY
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2018
    WU8Y likes this.
  6. N2EY

    N2EY XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Easier for whom?

    The idea is to offer newcomers a more balanced selection of modes and bands. Why is that a problem? Why all the resistance to change?

    Much of what I read in this and other threads that opposes the change boils down to "No giveaways! Nobody should get privileges I didn't get without passing the tests I passed! If I had to do it, so should they!"

    I am reminded of what Kurt Vonnegut wrote, years ago, in his book Cat's Cradle:

    "Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before... He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way."
    W1SS, W4NNF, KU4X and 1 other person like this.
  7. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    To quote FCC:

    The NCVEC Petition II proposes that we establish a new “Communicator Class” license as the new introductory amateur service operator license. NCVEC claims that what attracts individuals to amateur radio appears to have changed over the years, as a consequence of which the current license system does not correlate particularly well with the present needs of licensees, and it argues that a new introductory license would allow individuals who presently are not licensees access to amateur radio in a meaningful way and with enough privileges so that they can experience a reasonable cross-section of the various facets of amateur radio. Similarly, the ARRL Petition proposes that we establish a new entry-level "Novice" Class operator license that would include VHF and UHF privileges, and limited HF telegraphy, data, and voice privileges without requiring a Morse code test. In support of this request, the ARRL argues that the Technician Class license leaves newcomers to the amateur service in an isolated position because it allows them to conduct only local, rather than worldwide, communications, thus not providing many licensees the opportunity to pursue an active, progressive interest in amateur radio. ...

    Regarding requests that we establish a new introductory class of operator license, we note that the requested license would authorize significantly greater HF privileges than the current Novice or Technician Plus Class license authorizes, but significantly less than the General Class license currently authorizes. We do not believe that such a new type of license is necessary because, as the Commission observed in the Phone Band Expansion NPRM, Novice and Technician Plus Class licensees can easily upgrade to the General Class, thereby obtaining access to significantly more spectrum than the requested new introductory class of operator license would authorize. We also note that, if our proposal to eliminate telegraphy testing in the amateur service is adopted, a person who is not a licensee will be able to qualify for a General Class operator license by passing two written examinations, and that a person who is a Technician Class licensee will be able to qualify for a General Class operator license by passing one written examination. We do not believe that these requirements are unreasonable, given the amount of spectrum available to General Class licensees. Accordingly, we deny the requests.

    The argument that "things are different now" was even tried back in 2005, and it failed for the reasons given. From a regulatory standpoint, nothing has changed, and nothing is new. The "idea ... to offer newcomers a more balanced selection of modes and bands" was exactly the argument that was tried and failed in 2005, and the reasons the FCC gave for rejecting the idea are at least as valid today as they were then.

    Nobody has said anything that the FCC has not already specifically rejected. There are no new arguments. There is nothing different today that wasn't already "different" in 2005. This is just the League spinning their wheels on a proposal that was specifically rejected by FCC for cause and in detail.

    There are no remaining valid arguments in support of the League's "new" proposal. None. Any argument being offered by anybody in all of these threads has already been captured and rejected in the quotes above.
  8. WU8Y

    WU8Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    That is not true, as the petition itself points out it's not about the ease of upgrading from Tech to General, it's about the exposure. The petition itself directly addresses the FCC quote you post above.
    KD0TLS and N2EY like this.
  9. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    The "exposure" argument was also included in the 2005 arguments in favor of a more HF-enabled entry-level license, and it was specifically rejected. All you have to do is read the text. It was in the very first sentence that I quoted above. :oops:
  10. W9QR

    W9QR Ham Member QRZ Page

    Last evening I finished an 8 week Technician class for 15 students. I asked my students if they planned to upgrade to the General license after receiving their Tech license. I asked that question after two weeks of instruction. All 15 said that they were planning to do so. I asked that question because several had purchased the General and Extra class license manuals. These folks were a cross section of our society, high school students, housewives, engineers, retired business owners etc. They did not need an incentive to understand the advantages of the General class license. They do need the background that will be covered by the General class test. The lack of mentors and qualified instructors is the cause of stagnant growth. That is the reason that few new licensees ever get on the air. My mentor was a mentor to Hiram P.
    Maxim. He was hired to be the first salaried chief operator of W1AW back in the '20s when it was called 1MK. Mentoring in amateur radio is as old as the service itself. It is need now, as much as ever. 73, Larry, W9QR
    K4KPT, KB3FEI, N2EY and 3 others like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page