Incentive Licensing Retrospective

K4JF,--Jim,
 Your premise,(that one can talk to someone) one has
  never met, was "exciting" or "interesting" back years
  ago when ham radio was exciting and/or interesting.

  With the "utilitarian" mindset now prevalent, with
  an "appliance box" that one does not understand, or
  care to understand, my contention would be what is
  there to talk about that the "new appliance" operator
  can talk about?--the weather?--politics?, religion?

  Sure cannot talk about the "nuts and bolts" of the
  rig they are operating with very little, if any technical
  background.
  It used to be,--years ago, with "basic rigs", tubes,
  or solid state, that one could engage another guy
  at least on a "little" technical talk, even if it was
  "basic", and even antenna`s as one usually at least
   made their own antenna.

   Heck, now with all the "pre-packaged" stuff,--carolina
   windoms, MFJ antenna tuners,--pre-packaged G5RV`s
   linears, etc, all store bought, how many really care
   how even the "basic" stuff works?

   Whether one wants to admit it or not,--the interest
   in HOW things work is NOT what it used to be, and
   this HAS effected ham radio.

   The licensing "standards" (having been relaxed) also
   do not challenge anyone to really "learn" and/ or
   work, so here we are, in 2005 with this "appliance
   mentality", and how is one to look forward to meet
   new people with this mindset?

                               73, K1MVP
   
     P.S., most people will not engage someone they
            do not know, in politics or religion,--so without
            an ability to discuss a few technical topics,
            what is there left except the weather, or
            where they live, or state of their health?
            hmmm, sounds close to CB, IMO

 

I agree 100%. I still think the tests should require some kind of effort besides memorization, and also that the cw should not be eliminated. I don't mean because of reminscing about the "good old days" either, but because of the following:
CW is the simplest of all forms of communication and at least a 5 wpm requirement should be required for that very reason. It doesn't take much skill to key a carrier on and off, even with a handmike if need be. I remember years ago having a QSO with a local ham buddy on 10m SSB, and we started hearing extremely weak cw, so low you sometimes thought it was just imagination, but we both heard it. That peaked our interest because the band was dead at that time. After answering whover it was, it turned out to be our other ham friend who usually joined us at that time, but his modified 11m rig had lost the final transistor, and the only way he could communicate was to key his AM carrier with the handmike off frequency to us using what must have been a small fraction of a watt from the driver transistor. Basically, if we had not had CW as a requirement, we probably would never have learned CW and the communication would have failed. That could just as easily have been an emergency situation. 73!
de Jeff KP3FT

 

I live about 40 miles from Don and hear him on 160 quite a bit. When I was active on 75 meter AM with the 3880 group in the late 60s and early 70s I think he was looked upon as a legend even then and we all aspired to emulate his expertise. As far as I am concerned he is still the King of the AM mode. His signal is a pleasure to listen to.

73
George
K3UD

 

I find many things of interest to talk about with people I just met.  Especially with DX stations, as I love to travel and love to learn about other places, other cultures.  My interest in history, my rebuilding of an old (40 years old) car, sailing, hiking, I could go on and on.  Although I enjoy discussions of ham radio gear, by no means should that limit the conversation.  Think, guys, there is so much more to know than just your radio!

Again, those chats with strangers are nothing like what you could have with a phone (whether cell or hardwired).  Still, I wonder why we say a cell phone is any different than a wired phone.  As far as the utilization, it is not.

Another reason I am GLAD that incentive licensing came along. Those conversations, and new friends, have enriched my life!

 

Greetings All!

Thankfully, the FCC (along with many other such agencies in other countries) are now (finally) undoing what they (and their willing accomplices in the ARRL) set in motion years ago… turning a basic competency test for a Ham Radio license into an unneeded series of achievement tests.  

Back then, as George so eloquently noted when he kicked off this particular discussion, it was called “incentive licensing”.  And over the years, it has helped the ARRL and others sell a gazillion dollars worth of printed manuals, books and other such “upgrade” materials.  

Unfortunately, perpetuating this fraud into the twenty first century has all but institutionalized the concept of incentive licensing into our hobby in the United States.  That is, not only have some of us forgotten that this is still supposed to be “amateur” radio; some of us have now forgotten that we have forgotten that it’s supposed to be “amateur” radio!

Sadly, many of the unwitting proponents of incentive licensing who also bought the FCC/ARRL’s fraudulent bill of goods years ago are STILL trying their level best to hang onto their dying dream.  This fact is evidenced by all the passionate comments expressed here and elsewhere about, for example, the horrible “dumbing down” of the FCC tests, keeping a CW test for Extras (or even HAVING an “Extra Class” license in the first place)!  

As it has oft been said, requiring proficiency in the Morse Code in order to obtain a Ham Radio license these days is much like having to demonstrate how to shoe a horse in order to get a driver’s license. Keeping that particular license requirement alive into the 21st Century is nothing more than a government-sponsored hazing ritual.  And, speaking of a driver’s license, why is it that I STILL don’t need to know how the fuel injectors, transmission and brake lights all work on my car in order to obtain one?  

Maybe that’s because my personal driver’s license, along with many other government-issued, private-type licenses that I’ve carried in my pocket over the years, have licensing structures that are ALL set up to simply measure basic competencies.  That is, they simply require me to demonstrate to a competent government authority that I won’t be a hazard (or a nuisance) to either myself or others while exercising the privileges of my license.  The real learning comes much later, usually with years and years of actual on the road or (in the case of Ham Radio) “hands on” experience.

I’ve always found it interesting that most of these other government license structures also don’t require that I go back and take yet another achievement test in order to drive my vehicle farther away from home, for example.  Granted, state and provincial driver license structures all require another series of tests if I want to drive a larger vehicle (or one for commercial purposes).  But, even here, the requirement for another test is for safety reasons…not just for increased knowledge for knowledge’s sake.  

Think about it!  Who has ever heard of an Extra Class Driver’s License to drive a passenger car?  Sounds ludicrous, doesn’t it?  In fact, it’s about as ludicrous as requiring that I have an Extra Class Amateur Radio License in order to have full privileges and operate anywhere I want to on the Ham Bands!

I think Rich Moseson, W2VU, in his “Zero Bias” editorial in the January, 2006 CQ Magazine illustrates this point quite clearly.  He talks about the “University of Ham Radio” as a college of sorts where learning is going on every single day.   However, in this “university” there are no grades, no tests, no papers, and no deadlines.  If a “course” doesn’t suit you, you can “drop” it at anytime without penalty.  If you want to declare a “major” you can do so, simply by delving into a particular aspect of Ham Radio with gusto, sometimes becoming a leading expert in the field.   Others (like me) choose to learn a little bit about a lot of things.  This, my friends, is where the real “learning” takes place in Amateur Radio.  It certainly doesn’t come from cramming for yet another stupid FCC test!

The truth is that those of us who REALLY want to learn more about electronics and RF theory are going to do so, regardless of the “easiness” or “hardness” of the test(s) we have to take to get our initial Amateur Radio licenses.  Which, in turn, makes the whole concept of “incentive licensing” something of an oxymoron.

I’ve often wondered how many of us who are, for example, STILL pining to bring drawing schematics back into the testing structure are also the same ones who couldn’t now draw one from scratch to save their soul.  And how many more of us will admit that, even in the time of “incentive licensing”, we simply learned enough about electronics and RF theory to pass the test(s) and then promptly forgot it all?

While it is certainly true that Ham Radio has launched careers, I believe that those with a passionate interest in electronics and RF theory will always find a way to advance those interests regardless of what they are forced to learn to pass an FCC test.  That’s because, as Rich has so eloquently noted in his editorial, a passionate desire to learn and master such things ultimately has to come from within.  

That is, while an interest in Amateur Radio may have provided the initial spark for some of us to get up off our finals and get our noses in the books, the continued, passionate desire to learn all we can about such things doesn’t come simply by passing a series of ever more difficult achievement tests for the FCC.

Sadly, all incentive licensing has done for Amateur Radio been to create a “caste system” within the hobby in the United States.  It's a system that, even to this day, is still chock full of meaningless government-sponsored hazing rituals and achievement tests that have absolutely nothing to do measuring real learning.  

That is, beyond the basic exams, all these “incentive” tests have ever measured is one’s innate ability to decipher a series of dots and dashes by ear, and/or how well someone can memorize ever more complicated formulas and information for an exam.  Period.  

Put another way, over the years, all incentive licensing has really succeeded in doing has been to separate us from ourselves.

73,

Keith
KB1SF / VA3KSF

 

Dude,

You MUST spend too much time watching FOX news.

 

Albert,
Not coming from an "intellectual" background, with
college, I am not a "connoisseur" of
"chit-chat" as many "liberals" might be.

You, and many others might have the natural gift of
chit chat, about anything and everything, but many of
us have not "been around the world" and as such it
might be hard, if not at least "uncomfortable" to engage
anybody who we do not know "on the street"
.
Most hams,(from my era) were comfortable in "meeting"
other hams via cw, or phone talking about something
they were "comfortable" with, and that was "how their
radio worked", antenna, etc, etc.

As far as "technical savy" and answering "querries",
most OT`s  I know would not have a problem answering
a "basic question",--BUT what is "basic" nowadays?

When a so called "extra" does not even know what
AM is, or the principle of a basic dipole,--of which
most "novice`s" of years ago, did know,--I/we might say
WHAT??

Again,--I agree,--that a ticket should not be indicative
that one has a EE degree, but many of us would assume
that an "extra" or "general" of today should at least
know what ohms law is(and its applications).

Problem,--as I see it today,--with the "new" mentality
is "why should I learn ohms law"?--I "won`t ever use it"
cause all "I need to know is how to push my PTT switch".
And of course,--with all these "new fangled" rigs out
there,--a guy does not need to know much, other than
how to "box it up" and send it back to Icom. Yaesu, or
Kenwood.(and pay shipping and the "going" hourly rate)

                      Happy New Year to you also,
                      Rene, K1MVP

 

I once spent 2 and half hours talking with someone in Australia about chicken farming. He was in the cattle business and was looking to build a couple of chicken houses in hopes of increasing his income. When he found out I was from Arkansas he immediatelly wanted to know how much I new about the business. Unfortunately for him, I've never been in the business myself, though all of my neighbors are. I shared with him what I had learned through helping them out from time to time (I chose beef cattle instead of chickens...less money, but a lot less work).

Another time, I talked at great length with a guy in South Africa about diamond mining. He was fascinated by the idea that we have a state park here around a diamond mine. (I've been to the park a couple of times...fun place!) I know nothing of comercial mining, but he worked in the industry and had a lot of stories, both funny and scary, about what goes on there.

The point is that there are many things to talk with someone about besides the number of pills you have to take each day.

And where is this cell phone-radio comparison coming from. A phone is a phone...wired or otherwise. They have nothing in common from an operational point of view. A lot of phone calls end up on radio anyway being carried by terrestrial microwave links and satellites even if they start out on a wired system. Telephones, cellular or otherwise are point to point systems. You send a call to specific apparatus, and whoever answers it is the person you talk to. Radio is connectionless, and you never know who you might meet. Granted, there are a number of hams that seem to only want to talk to their little circle of friends and no one else. That's fine too. All adds spice to our little slice of life.

After reading some of the posts here, I'm beginning to wonder why there was ever more than one license in the first place. There is no logic in incentive licensing, now that I've thought about it. It only fuels the "i'm better than you" attitude that has destroyed so many clubs of late.

I don't care if a person has been a ham 5 minutes or 50 years, he or she is still a ham. Think about it for a minute...it is a ham radio operator license and a station license...not a repairman's or builder's license. The gentleman that mentioned his driver's license got me thinking. You don't have to know how the car works to drive it. It's a driver's license, not a repairman's license. Come to that, being an excellent repairman doesn't necessarily translate to being able to operate the car, or the radio any better than anyone else. I've known some excellent electronics technicians that had all the personality of a sledge hammer. By the same token, some of the niecest and most interesting people I've ever known couldn't solder a PL-259 on a piece of coax if their lives depended on it.

So what makes a better ham? A good person that's easy to talk to, or someone who can run cw at 35 wpm, build a 2 kw amp from scratch and has his nose stuck so far up in the air that he can't even see the lowly serfs below? Not saying that all who can do these things are that way of course. One of the guys that elmered me (remember elmers? we used to have them) was equally skilled in electronics and small engine technology, and loved talking to people. Never met a stranger, would do anything in the world to help someone fix a radio or a lawnmower. In fact, he was a constant irritant to the hams in the area who were of the "elitist" persuasion.

Too bad we don't have more like him. Some of you may remember him...Harry Smith, K5DVT. A key that went silent many years ago.

Here's to you Harry.

 

George,

Many a young Amateur will never know what it is like to hear a really high quality AM station on the air.

Don usually met with a group, most of whom I can't recall, on 75m nightly and hand a round table.

Of all those stations, Don always had the flagship.

Today, I spend very little time on phone and none at all on 75m or 160m.  There are occassionally some AM stations on 20M but they never sound like the stations of old on 75 and 160.

What I would really like to have is about 1/1000th of Don's techical skills.  I would be a really happy camper.


Ed
NC5S

 

When I got my ticket in 19557 the test was supposed to prove you had enough knowledge to build and test your own transmitter.

The ARS is the only service where this is allowed. And we are still allowed to design and build our own transmitters.

But the current testing does not prove the new people really have the knowledge to design and build a transmitter.

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.

 

Bob, in 1957 and in 1960, most novices could build a simple CW transmitter. Even I could, and did, do that. It was a simple 6L6(I think) cw oscillator. Most hams then, and now, could not build or home brew a receiver.

If I remember the Novice and Technician exams correctly, there was a goodly amount of basic electronic theory on both of them. Of course, the Technician and General exams were the same exam back in those days.

Today, since my professional field is about as far removed from electronics as one can be, I have no clue about the workings of the sophisticated stuff that is available. Most of the folks entering the hobby today lack to knowledge to build a transmitter. However, if they were exposed to the theory and state of the art that I was, I suspect many could do it.

Uhnfortunately, in my later years as a Ham, I have become the quintessential Appliance Operator. But, I can still pound Brass, and copy, at 30wpm.

 

The ARRL is a group overpaid lobbyist who do not have the ear of Congress or the FCC. Look at their pathetic attempt
to stop BPL. They made a big mistake promoting Incentive
Licensing back in 1968. Now with pending Advanced=Extra operating sub-bands, I am so glad to know I will have outlived this bad idea when I get the back the lower 25 KHz
of 40 meters. I still have my 7007 Kc. cyrstal in my DX-100
from 40 years ago. It needs to be oscillated!
KE0XL

 

You are comparing apples and oranges.

You don't have to know how all that stuff works because you are limited to driving type-accepted equipment that has been designed and tested by people who know what they are doing and have learned the theory and practice, and which has been qualified by the government for sale to and use by the general public.

Try and build your own vehicle from scratch and go get a license tag for it to operate it on public property.

And all it does it allows you to do is drive type-accepted equipment on the public thoroughfares. It doesn't provide you with any way to advanced the art of automotive technology using publically provided infrastructure.

Requiring advancement in knowledge doesn't have to be for safety reasons in order to be a valid objective.  

If you want to design and build cars and trucks to be used on public thoroughfares, even just by yourself, you better have the Extra Class license needed to do so. I believe it is usually called a Professional Engineering license.

And this is somehow a *reason* for doing away with higher class licenses?

How many people promptly forget how far from another vehicle you are supposed to dim your lights after they get their drivers license? And only relearn it when they have to renew again? Is that a reason to do away with the question on the test?

You are using an emotionally charged word, "caste", where it really doesn't apply. A "caste" system implies a fixed order of ranking with little or no opportunity for advancement in rank.

Nothing could be further from describing the ranking system in amateur radio. The opportunity to advance in rank is more open and is more easily done than at any point in the past.

Using your definition, there should be no differentiation between Bachelor, Master, and Doctorate degrees. Everyone should just be a college "Graduate" and if they go on to learn more then that's ok but there shouldn't be any recognition of the fact for that would create a "caste" system of college graduates.

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.

If amateurs want the freedom to build their own equipment or to operate non-type accepted equipment then they are going to have to continue to pass license tests which insure they have at least the basic knowledge to do so in a manner that won't interfere with other services, perhaps even services used for safety-of-life communications. That's the "safety" issue you seem to be so concerned about.

What alternatives do you offer to the FCC for them to use in meeting the direction provided in Part 97.1 other than incentive licensing?

tim ab0wr

 

Actually it *IS* a builder's license.

Otherwise we would all be forced to use type-accepted equipment where you couldn't change the microphone gain, the power output, the modulation type, etc.

tim ab0wr

 

Brilliant Tim, never thought of that way, glad to see the argument so succinctly put.

Mark
KC9HVN
(Been a ham for six months, already on my second homebrew rig.)