"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote

Let's say your idea catches on and the FCC enacts it pretty much as you
propose. And let's say the learner's permit (LP) license is popular,
because it
gives lotsa choices for just a simple written test.

Some folks will upgrade, of course. Some will drop out. The problem will
be
with the third group - those who are active hams but who are satisfied
with
their "LP" licenses. If the jump from "LP" to Extra is not trivial, and
requires some real learning (just like the old Novice-to-General written
jump
did), you're gonna have active hams forced off the air at the end of their
10
year terms because they just won't be able to pass the Extra written. Or
they
won't try, or they can't get to a VE session, yada yada yada.

This is precisely why I suggest a 10-year term. Right from the get-go,
these new hams know that they have 10 years to prepare to "re-enlist", and
that it will require some real learning.

OK, fine. No surprises.

If they can't cut it after a
10-year apprenticeship, then they weren't meant to be hams.

Try to sell *that* to the amateur community (including the FCC)!!

The FCC didn't
"stick to their guns" on the original Novice concept, and I lay that at the
feet of the "entitlement" mentality of the 60s-70s.

I think you're just toying with us, Hans...;-)

FCC "stuck to their guns" for almost 25 years with the "no renewal, no
retake" Novice.

As for "entitlement mentality of the 60s-70s", those were the times
that gave us incentive licensing and significantly raised the
requirements (both code and written) for a full-privs license. In fact
the written requirements were raised more than the code....

But that's all ancient history. The main question is how you're gonna
sell the "up or out" concept to FCC and the amateur community.


And the cry will arise: "why are active hams with clean records being
forced
off the air?" Then you'll see history repeat itself, as the "LP" license
becomes renewable, just like the old Novice, to avoid losing those hams.

This will sound cold, and the IOoDHW (International Order of Dismayed Hand
Wringers) will convene a special session to condemn me, but who really CARES
if we lose those learners-permit holders.

Those who don't want to see them leave the air and the ARS will care.
And if there are enough of them, they may simply outvote everyone
else.

Since the only difference between your two proposed classes
is the power level, there will be quite logical arguments that such
a system forces hams who don't want to run high power to "jump
through a written test hoop" to gain privilges they have no intention
of using.

Sorry Jim, but you're waving the same old roadkill again.

How is that argument not valid?

Then there's the whole issue of the conversion of existing ham licenses to
the
two new classes. How many will drop out rather than take the test?

Read my proposal again, Jim. You'll see how I've completely avoided that
problem.

I did and you did. Which means FCC will have to keep the existing
database going. It also sets up the unique situation where a new ham
faces a challenge/requirement that no existing ham has to face.
Somebody may holler 'discrimination'....

As a closing note....... I really don't have a problem with a high dropout
rate among newcomers. I'd be happy to see a million people "have a look at
ham radio" and if just 20% stick around, well so be it. That would give us
200,000 new qualified hams. To the 800,000 who left, I say "I hope you had
a good time, and it's been nice meeting you. Sorry this ham radio thing
wasn't your bag." They're not "bad people" or "quitters" --- they just
don't have the same interest in hobbies that you and I do.

OK, fine. The problem is, how you gonna get those million people to
take the look? We've had an easy-to-get nocodetest ham license for
12-1/2 years now, the old Novice for half a century, and we've gotten
maybe 30,000 new hams per year tops. (check AH0A stats on new
licenses).

In ten years that works out to maybe 300,000 "taking a look", not
1,000,000. If your 20% rate is correct, we'll see drastic reductions
in the size of the ARS in the USA 10 years down the road as LPs
expire. Is that a good thing?

Most of all, how you gonna sell the idea to the FCC and the rest of
ham radio?

Perhaps you should send the ideas directly to FCC and see if you can
get an RM number for it. I know you used it in a comment, but why not
go for the RM? One more on top of the existing 14 won't hurt anything.

73 de Jim, N2EY