View Single Post
  #30   Report Post  
Old March 25th 04, 04:48 AM
Robert Casey
 
Posts: n/a
Default






It's clearly a "learn as you go" proposition any way you look at it ...
NOBODY knows
everything there is to know from day one.

Since the rules can be looked up (just as one can use a "crib sheet" to
remember sub-band
edges) it seems to me that its not an unreasonable proposition. I'd rather
have someone
know a bit more about radio and operating and have to refer to the rules as
they learn to
make sure they did things "by the book" than to shortcut the *basic* theory
and operating
practices.

Back in the olden days before Bash published his books, I imagine that
some ham clubs
had compiled remembered questions from FCC tests. To help members
upgrade. And
I suppose someone had snuck a peek at those mail in novice and tech
tests before the FCC
said everyone had to test at a field office (Early 1976 they decreed
that, so I had to test
at the FCC).


However, having said that, I personally much prefer the ARRL proposal to the
NCVEC one
for the following reasons:


2) I don't like the "commercial gear only" part of the NCVEC petition
because it unnecessarily
discourages homebrew and tinkering - something that novices have *always*
been allowed (and
encouraged by 97.1) to do.
3) I don't like the "low voltage" only part of the NCVEC petition, because
it precludes the new
ham from getting a good hamfest deal on an older rig like FT-101,
TS-520/820, etc. for no good
reason (nothing stops them from building power supplies that use 110VAC or
220VAC on the
*primaries*, so what's the sense in this proposal.

A few questions on electrical safety and procedures on the test should
address this issue.
Besides, other than an FCC inspector paying a visit, how could be
enforced? The FCC
doesn't have the budget for that. Output power can be limited to say
100W. Easier to
enforce, as signal strength can be measured remotely (not foolproof,
maybe his beam is
aimed right at you). The power limit would avoid the RF exposure issue.

and,
4) I don't like the NCVEC to "put the mark of Cain" on the newbies with a
special, never-used
callsign block that makes them stand out as targets for those who are
disgruntled with ANY change.

The old Novice licensees got WN#XXX callsigns to designate them as
novices. Other than a
few bozos, everyone accepted them as legit hams. When you upgraded to
general, the FCC
replaced the N with A or B in your callsign. The FCC must have had an
internal use only
note as to which you'd get when they issued your novice call. Today, you
could get a vanity callsign with the
WN if you want, even if you're an extra. Wonder if WN2ISE was ever
issued? Someone did
have WA2ISE before I was issued it in 1976, as a tech (general written
and 5wpm).