RadioBanter - View Single Post

January 3rd 04, 10:32 PM

(N2EY) wrote in message ...
In article k.net, "KØHB"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote

Suppose FCC enacted your proposal as you submitted it. Why would a
person with the entry-level license be qualified for that license for
ten years but then be unqualified for it after ten years? Particularly
if they were willing to retest for the same license?

It's a learners permit, NOT a license.

What's the difference?

It's provisional, intended to assist in gaining full qualification for
an amateur license.

Here in PA, a person with a learner's permit for driving cannot drive alone.
Could your learner's permit hams operate their own rigs all by themselves? If
so, it's a license.

If they couldn't/didn't learn enough
in 10 years to pass the examination for a license, then they are obviously
not qualified for a license.

But they're qualified to have a learner's permit for 10 years.

Do you have aproblem with 10 years? Should we make it 10 weeks?

Can you name any other license where, if you don't upgrade within a specified
time, you lose the license you have?

There are no such amateur licenses extant, but for the majority of
it's availability the Novice license was exactly like that. That was
probably the most effective method ever devised of introducing
non-amateurs to ham radio with a "sample sized" operating permit.
Easy to get, with limited power so you didn't trash the
RF-neighborhood too badly, and of a duration long enough to decide if
you wanted to become a ham and to gain experience for the
qualification tests. Then they spoiled it by making it renewable.

73, de Hans, K0HB