Incentive Licensing Retrospective

Under the current system, exactly which class of license grants you the priviledge of building your own equipment?

The class of license has NOTHING to do with building anything, it grants you the privilige of OPERATING a transmitter in a specific portion or portions of the spectrum. Anyone who wishes to make the attempt can build any piece of gear they are capable of

You are so eager to quote regulations guys, try reading them first.

And for the gentleman that threw out the argument about the Professional Engineering license...what does that have to do with driving the car he designs? You completely missed the point...a driver's license is an OPERATOR'S license. Come to that, nothing says you can't build your own car either. And you don't need any sort of license to do so. Sell it, market it, assume liability for it or operate it, sure. Build it if you feel led to do so.

 

The drivers license makes no point at all. Apples and oranges.

Ham radio allows us to build our own, and to modify commercial equipment. Other radio services require unmodified type accepted transmitters. To say that knowing theory is not needed, is just not in line with the flexability we have with equipment. There is no doubt that there are hams that don't know what ALC does, by the splatter that I hear from time to time. They should be cited, and I have seen a couple get greetings from Riley.

I imagine that all that think dumbing down ham radio is good, would prefer type accepted radios, with hard wired mics, and regulations to make it illegal to even open your rig.

And if we are not capable of passing a test to show that we are no more the radio operators, we certainly shouldn't be allowed to use any modes not included on the radio, by hooking external equipment to our type accepted radios.

I would think that hooking external TNC's, pactor boxes or PC sound cards should be illegal, as non-technical "operators" don't understand audio levels or modulation, and would certainly cause the type accepted radio to generate illegal signals.

Think about it. We are given freedom to experiment, and with that, we should demonstrate basic knowledge.

If you buy commercial radios and coax with the connectors installed, and don't give a hoot about anything but pushing a mic button fine. But don't try to force your narrow idea of the hobby on the rest of us that do a lot more. To some of us, Ham radio is more the CB with VFO's and more bands.

Sadly, from a lot of what I read, CB with VFO's and more bands is exactly what the future seems to hold.

You would think that learning 5 wpm and passing a simple theory test was the end of the world.

Sad indeed.

73 - W6NJ

 

kb1sf-sir I dont know about all the stuff in your post I was not in ham Radio then ,But you got some stuff that is Right on and I agree with you 100% on what I do know , so get Ready these stuff know,rs are going to come at you on this one , hope you have a good new year, 73 Bill

 

Exactly right, Tim. We can build, we can modify, we can call CQ, no other service has those freedoms. And what is wrong with letting people gradually work their way up the ladder? Long live incentive licensing!!

 

Try listening,(on any given night) on the high end of
75 meters,--3900 and above and see how many
"interesting" or "stimulating" QSO`s you will hear.
Sounds more like 75 meter CB from my experience
lately.
And the "future" ham radio is "great" if you listen to
the ARRL and "powers that be", --yep, sure.

                            73, K1MVP

 

Now wait a minute there Skippy....if you look back through the posts on this subject (and several others in the archives), read a bit and stop being in such a hurry to argue, you'll find that I have said over and over that the the tests needed to be changed to make people know things instead of memorizing the first 4 or 5 words of the question and then remembering that answer C or whatever goes with that question. As for the code test, I go even further than eliminating it, I think people should have to test for proficiency before using it on the air. Ever heard some of the fists that on the extra class portion? I could send better code than that touching two bare wires together.

I said it before, and I say it again...make the test reflect current operating procedures, rules and enough theory to at least let the guy that operates the radio know whether it works correctly or not. Then teach him from there.

But perhaps you are right. Maybe is should be changed to the point that only higly qualified techicians can pass it. I've been licensed 30 years, (and yes, I took a 5 wpm test, and a 13 wpm test) and I have to say that the bulk of the hams I've met in my life that are extra class are just as I described earlier...got thier noses stuck up in the air so high that they'd drown if caught in a rainstorm. Heaven knows they sure wouldn't help a newcomer, because "he's not a real ham". Poor guy didn't bleed enough, so he doesn't deserve any help or guidance.

Want to know what's killing ham radio? Not the NCT's, not the dumbing down of the tests, not even the incentive licensing....it's this crap right here. "My license is better than yours, so I'm better than you."

 

I quote:

Part 97.1

The rules and regulations in this part are designed to provide an amateur radio service having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles:

       © Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communication and technical phases of the art.
   (d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.

Encouragement *through rules* which provide for advancing skills in the technical phases of the art is certainly accomplished via a licensing scheme which has incentives to advance ones technical knowledge.

A licensing scheme which provides incentives to increase technical knowledge are certainly rules and regulations which work to provide an expansion of the existing reservoir of trained technicians and electronics experts.

[/QUOTE]
Tim,

Your quotes and comment from Part 97 illustrate my point beautifully.  

Let’s now compare and contrast what’s in Part 97 with the ITU definition of the Amateur Service:

"1.56     Amateur Service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations carried out by amateurs, that is, by duly authorized persons interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest."

PERIOD!

Nowhere in the ITU definition of our service does it say anything about HOW that technical investigation is to be carried out. Rather, it is our own FCC that has added all the verbiage about creating "rules" with the express intent of "expanding the reservoir of trained operators, electronic experts and technicians", etc.  

In short, those are the FCC's words written expressly to implement THEIR goals...not the ITU's.  

And this is precisely how the FCC has continued to justify peddling their stupid "incentive licensing" garbage on American Hams over the years.  They have (in my opinion) needlessly expanded on the ultimate basis and purpose of the Amateur Service.  Instead, they long ago turned it into something far more structured and regulated (if not self-serving) than was absolutely necessary.

I contend Rich Moseson's “ham university” approach, devoid of all the FCC’s external "incentives", would be just as effective (if not more so) in creating their "trained reservoir" of experts.  Moreover, I contend that goal is now being achieved IN SPITE of the FCC's over-regulation of our hobby, not because of it.

Rather than vehemently defending all this incentive licensing nonsense, I should think we'd all now find it quite sad (if not downright insulting!) that the FCC still thinks American Hams are so stupid and lazy that all of us require an institutionalized "kick in the tail" from time to time in order to continue advancing our skills!  

73,

Keith
KB1SF / VA3KSF

 

k1mvp-sir I hope you had a good christmas and hope you a good new year , I have seen what you are saying about 75m and I do have to agree with you some time it is pretty Bad , and some of these guys are high on the job list , and I q,s seam high to ,( so why do you think it is like this) , would like to hear your thought on this,as I am sure others will have some thought to , 73 Bill

 

wb5yiw-sir I have got to give it to you , on this one well said good post , on the code I am trying to learn to Recieve it and after 8mo I am Receiving a - z pretty good 1thru 9 haveing trouble getting it , so I bought a code Reader and some of them it cant even copy them it dose pretty good when I am listening to the arrl w1aw ,the the paper work with the code Reader said that some send code so sloppy that it could not copy it and they where Right it cant ,73 Hope you a good new year, Bill

 

[ I am Receiving a - z pretty good 1thru 9 haveing trouble getting it , so I bought a code Reader and some of them it cant even copy them it dose pretty good when I am listening to the arrl w1aw ,the the paper work with the code Reader said that some send code so sloppy that it could not copy it and they where Right it cant ]

What you are supposed to do is copy enough that you can fill in the part you missed. Excluding call signs and Q signals you can raed most anything if you can copy 50% of it. Sometimes even less.


Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.

 

k5myj- thank you sir for the info if I can get these numbers down I think I can pass the test , hope you have a good new year , 73 Bill

 

Want to know what's killing ham radio?  Not the NCT's, not the dumbing down of the tests, not even the incentive licensing....it's this crap right here.  "My license is better than yours, so I'm better than you."[/QUOTE]
...and, sadly, even getting one of those "new" Extra Class licenses is not good enough in the eyes of some to make you a "Real Ham".

Sure sounds like a caste system to me.

73,

Keith
KB1SF / VA3KSF

 

been reading all the post on the incentive license,got my first license in 1957 became a tech next year then general, why didnt i upgrade? if offered nothing that i wanted as far as operating priviliges, I was happy on 6 meters, and as far as code I could copy 25/30 wpm, if the arrl had required that
you must upgrade to use SSB or other techniques on hf then i might have did the upgrading, deed restrictions, the internet,cellphones are all hurting the hobby today, my biggest complaint is lack of parts suppliers today. the rat shack has been dropping all small parts for years. I dont believe they even carry enough parts to build the basic crystal radio set today. Today failing eyes and unsteady hands are causing problems so it just takes me longer
but my elmer an old railroad telegrapher had parkinsons
and if he could do it then i can.

Chris K9OXX my original call

 

Skippy? Who's Skippy?

Anyway, who mentioned anything about license classes? I sure didn't. I don't think Tim did either.

The point wasn't about license classes, it was about having enough knowledge to operate a station without the restrictions of other services, and retaining the privileges we have in doing our thing without type accepted radios as a requirement.

The trend I see is more and more poor operating, and poor station setup.

The bottom line, is that there is more splatter and distorted audio in the bands then I ever heard 20 years ago. There are hams that have no idea how to set audio levels, and those hams come in the Extra Class flavor also. I hear RF in transmitted audio all the time, and have heard a few mention that they aren't worried much about a ground system, because they unhook the coax when there is lightning.

Now is it too much to ask, that a ham could understand how to set audio using the ALC meter as opposed to trying to pin the watt meter. That hams should understand signal purity?

It is obvious that some out there aren't even to the level of competent appliance operators.

Now beyond that, I have no idea what your issue is with someone being Extra Class. I had a couple extras helping me when I was a tech in the seventies. They sure didn't act superior, and in that I had an electronics education, I used to fix their radios. The only thing they had on me was 20wpm, and that was rectified later.

They didn't think they were better then me, when I was a tech wet behind the ears. But they did help me learn the right way to operate, but I guess if I was real sensitive, I would have thought they were acting superior. Most times, someone that is offended, is someone that thinks they know it all.

Now if some are proud that they made the grade to 20wpm, explain why they shouldn't be proud of that? It isn't easy, and it takes a lot of work. 20 wpm was much harder then even the "pre-multiple choice answers" written tests that we took at the FCC field office.

And to that point, I never said that the test should be so hard that only highly qualified techicians could pass.

With my backround, the tests back then weren't that hard. For others, they had to learn ohms law, and understand inductance, capacitance, and the other building blocks of electronics.

No one had to design transmitters, just work a couple simple formulas. Is it really that hard to find the voltage on the other end of a voltage divider? Is it that much to ask that someone in this hobby should understand basic electronics? Do you really think that the FCC, that allows hams to build transmitters, is asking too much when they request that we show some small amount of competence?

The real issue is that the tests are not tests at all, they are exercises in memorizing answers.

Now to your last paragraph. I really don't recall anyone on this thread saying "my license is better then yours". So I think you are spinning on that one.

License classes mean nothing anyway. My XYL went from civilian to Extra Class in 6 months, thanks to Gordon West and 5wpm. I sure don't get any satifaction being an Extra anymore. And I really don't care what anyone thinks about my class anyway, because I did it for me, not you.

While it is true that there is lots to learn beyond the tests, there should be some amount of pain involved in learning basics, to show the feds, and fellow hams, some desire before you get the "Key to RF City".

Or, as suggested, let every yahoo that can afford a Gordon West book, take that one test, on the suggested general ham license, and have at it with full access.

All I can say, is that between BPL, digital robots all over the bands, and the "take this little test and have at it" theory. I don't see much good in the future.

I had respect for those extras that helped me in the seventies. I don't see any respect now, just folks that want it easy.

I didn't get where I am, to put anyone down. Just because you didn't do it, isn't a reason to call me arogant. You decided not to, and that is your choice. Put it in perspective.

Beyond that, I have better things to do then worrying about what class license someone has, like running my business and feeding my family. I sure have better things to think about, then silly crap like "I don't like my arogant neighbors because they have a bigger house then me".

If some of you don't like what is said because we have a passion for this service, that is fine, but I don't think that our opinions are killing ham radio.

I don't think having an extra class license makes an opinion any more valuable then any other, and I don't think any extra ever said it did.

What is killing ham radio, is "lack of desire". It is plain as day. Everytime I hear "why would I do ham radio, when I have a cellphone and the internet?", I have all the proof I need.

73 - W6NJ "Skippy"

 

Oh Keith,

Do you really think that what is required today is that hard?

I haven't had a "kick in the tail" from the FCC for 25 years. I passed, and got the license. Now, I just have to renew my license every ten years.

However, to continue to fly aircraft, I have the FAA give me a "kick in the tail" every two years. And that is for "private pilot "aka" hobby pilot", not ATP. If I don't perform up to spec, I don't get to fly anymore. What is so horrible about the current FCC regs? You think it is unreasonable the way it is?

I don't know how it could be easier other then paying people to be hams.

I should be insulted that the FCC made Jack Gerritson take a test, but didn't give him all access to ham radio??? They expected Jack to prove his worth???

The fact is, that Jack only got a tech license before showing the world that he didn't deserve that license.

Your plan would have had Jack Gerretson with full HF access with the "have it all" license.

Need I say more?

I won't speak for the FCC, but in my opinion, there are quite a few hams that are lazy, and they just may need a "kick in the tail". At least some help in setting microphone gain, so they don't splatter across the bands like CB'ers.

73 - W6NJ