January 27th 04, 04:32 AM
|
|
|
"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Paul W. Schleck
writes:
In (N2EY)
writes:
In article , Paul W. Schleck
writes:
In (N2EY)
writes:
In article om, "Dee
D.
Flint" writes:
Basically I think the ARRL Board knows that the free upgrades means
that
their proposal probably will not be adopted in this form. The FCC
has
never
gone along with free upgrades before and there is no evidence that
they
would do so now. However, I believe they tossed it in as another
idea
for
the FCC to consider in developing whatever the FCC decides to do, if
they
decide to do anything at all.
That's probably correct, Dee. And that's what bothers me!
As you say, FCC has never done free upgrades, and the last time the
issue
came
up (98-143), the ARRL proposal was for existing Novices (!) and Tech
Pluses
to
get free upgrade to General. Of course, FCC said "no way", and has had
no
problem whatever keeping the closed-to-new-issues classes in their
database.
So why propose something FCC obviously isn't going to do? Just wastes
everybody's time.
More important, it diverts attention from the other issues.
oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...;-)
73 de Jim, N2EY
I brought this subject up with someone in the League. This exact
thread, actually. I was told that the ARRL BoD sincerely believes
(take
at face value, or not) that failure to upgrade licensees in the FCC R&O
for WT 98-143 was not a final "no" answer.
Maybe it wasn't. But are such freebies really a good idea?
It may be a realistic, and pragmatic, idea when considered against the
pros and cons:
Cons:
Provides a "free upgrade" to those that haven't explicitly tested for
it.
That's one. There are others:
- Allowing a free upgrade is proof that the material in the test which is
not
taken
is not necessary for the privileges.
Like that hasn't been the case for decades...
- Amateurs who miss the one time upgrade have to take more tests than
those who
didn't. How do we justify that?
You don't need to justify it. Life's a bitch and then you die.
- Decreased reason for more than half of all hams to upgrade by testing.
Pros:
Avoids having to wait until the last Advanced class license expires to
refarm the Advanced phone bands.
Why does that have to be done at all?
To eliminate having a dual set of regulations.
Alternatively, avoids opening up the
Advanced class phone bands to General-class hams (an effective downgrade
in privileges for Advanced, and crowding out DX users with more
U.S. hams in those bands) or opening up the Extra class phone bands to
Advanced-class hams (which would be a "free upgrade" in all but name).
Again, why not just leave those subbands as they are now?
The FCC and government prefer simplicity.
Also avoids having to accommodate a license class (Tech Plus) that isn't
even carried in the FCC database anymore, which is a records/
enforcement problem for the FCC, and requires the licensee to keep
documentation forever.
If the current rules are left alone, all Tech Pluses will be Techs in six
years, two months and 20 days or so.
But all Novices and Advanced won't be gone for decades.
Why not just give all the existing Techs, Tech Pluses and Novices the
"NewNovice" privs, in addition to their existing privileges? The database
doesn't need to change at all.
Rather, it is just one of
the unresolved loose ends that was deliberately not tied up until
better
consensus emerged from the amateur radio community about things like
Novice band refarming, etc. The League official noted that the ARRL's
band refarming proposal, RM-10413, has been sitting on an FCC
official's
desk for about two years now (he claims to know the exact FCC official,
but did not name him). Because of this, as long a wait, if not longer,
is expected on a "final" answer concerning automatic upgrading.
I say we should judge by actions. When FCC thinksa proposal is a good or
bad
idea, they act. How long did the whole 98-143 process take, from initial
release of the NPRM to the new rules in April 2000?
More important, what would a lack of free upgrades hurt? Is it really
such a
burden to require an Advanced to pass Element 4, or a Tech to pass
Element
3, in order to get the next higher grade of license?
I think the ARRL may be politically shrewder than some would give them
credit.
You mean the BoD. I'm the ARRL too, remember?
How much of the ARRL proposal in 1998 got enacted?
Feel free to let us know.
They can turn to the reformers and say, "See, we're giving you
a both a Novice and General HF-class license that doesn't require Morse
Code." To the old-school (and long-time, dues-paying) members they can
at least imply, "We recognize that the Morse Code tests you took in the
past are valuable, so we are going to reward you with a higher class of
license. Then you will always know that you are better than anyone who
gets a General or Extra class license under the reduced standards in the
future."
Avoids the subject of why free upgrades are needed.
I say they're not.
So argue with the ARRL then.
Cheers,
Bill K2UNK
|