RadioBanter - View Single Post - NCVEC files license resstructuring proposal

March 18th 04, 05:35 PM

(N2EY) wrote in
om:

Alun wrote in message
. ..
PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in
:

(quoting the NCVEC proposal)

In addition, the NCVEC proposed mandatory low voltage to the final
transmitter amplifier stage

What about the 110 AC line?

and that only commercially
manufactured transmitters be used by Communicator Class licensees.

Might as well call it "Appliance Class" and be done with it.

Communicator Class licensees must pass a simple 20 question
multiple-choice written exam and will be required to obtain, read
and certify their understanding of the Part 97 rules.

This is the worst part. We must fight this like the plague. What it
*really" means is that there will be *no* rules and regs questions
on the 20 question test!

Agreed

It is precisely this sort of thing that messed up cb.

The VECs Question Pool
Committee feels that it is impossible to cover the FCC rules in
what would be a relatively few questions. The ARRL proposed 25
examination questions.

The old Novice I took was 20 questions, and we could homebrew. Which
I did from Day One. If a 13 year old kid with books for Elmers could
safely build transmitters in the hollowstate era, why all these
additional limits today?

This petition was reviewed prior to submission by all 14 of
the
VEC's around the country, and was approved by a 2 to 1 margin.

Which means a third of them disapproved. Were the individual VEs
polled?

No, I wasn't

Do you get to vote on who represents your VEC at NCVEC?

No

Do individual
VEs have any say at all?

Apparently not

It seems to me that NCVEC wants to get into the regulatory side of
things without having to get input of *any* kind from the VEs
themselves.

Probably our contact person might have some input into the ARRL VEC. Maybe
I should ask him.

This NCVEC thing is very similar to the "Amateur Radio in the 21st
Century" paper by KL7CC. I wrote a detailed commentary on it some
time back.

NCVEC's proposal makes the ARRL one look good. Which isn't saying
much...

It has some improvements over the League's plan, but that all depends
on your perspective.

I don't see *any* improvements over the ARRL proposal. What do you
see, besides no code test for Extra (ARRL proposal drops all code
testing except 5 wpm for Extra)?

More phone spectrum - but that's what I meant when I said that it depends
on your perspective

I'm not in favour of making the theory requirements easier.

But that's exactly what the NCVEC proposal does - to an extent even
greater than the ARRL proposal.

Not that the ARRL petition is much better on that point

Both of these
plans upgrade all the Techs to General just to add a lower class
licence without increasing the number of classes. This is because they
know the FCC won't accept anything that makes the end result more
complicated.

They also upgrade Advanceds to Extra.

I have nothing against that

I don't think we need an easier theory test to attract people. If
someone is genuinely interested they will learn the theory.

I agree 100%. NCVEC doesn't - where is the "improvement"?

What we need is simply
publicity. Most people are scarcely aware that ham radio even exists.

Too true.

But we also have to accept that only a small percentage of those who
become aware will be interested, and that of those who are interested
only some will actually become active licensed amateurs regardless of
what is done to the requirements.

True

The code test does need to be dumped to get over the hurdle of
potential recruits who immediately lose interest when it is mentioned.

I disagree. People who are *really* interested will learn 5 wpm. That
has been demonstrated over and over again.

At that point our opinions diverge

No-code
licencing for VHF+ did not eliminate that problem, no matter what
anyone says to the contrary. Any intelligent person knew that code
testing was only postponed if they wanted HF.

Sure - but not all want HF, or can get on HF effectively.

True

However, most people don't even get that far. Our visibility is zero.

Not zero, but not as high as it needs to be.

Besides, I am sure that the FCC will eliminate
Element 1 anyway.

Let's say for a moment that you're right, and Element 1 is simply
dropped for all license classes. Which proposal do you think is better
- ARRL's or NCVEC's, and why?

I don't like either very much, but the latter would give me more spectrum
for phone

By all means restructure, but these petitions are misguided.

I agree that NCVEC's is very misguided.

73 de Jim, N2EY

73 de Alun, N3KIP