"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 31 Dec 2005 02:17:52 -0500, "Dee Flint"
wrote in
:


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
. ..
I've noticed that different hams tend to congregate in different parts
of the spectrum, maybe because different parts of the spectrum have
different characteristics requiring different skills. So why not just
have one license with three "endorsements" based on spectrum use:

-- MF & HF;
-- VHF;
-- UHF & up.

......or something along those lines?????


One license with "endorsement" is the same as having different licenses.
It's just a change in terminology.


Which is different than the current system...... how?



That was my point. It's not really significantly different than the current
system. It's just renaming and a slight reshuffling.

VHF+UHF&up endorsement = current no-code Tech license
VHF+UHF&up+HF&MF = current Extra license (I'm assuming that you mean full
band privileges so that would eliminate the Generals).

There's no sense in splitting VHF/UHF into separate endorsements as most of
the people that I know in this area operate both 2m (i.e. VHF) and 440mHz
(i.e. UHF).

Calling them "endorsements" has no benefits over calling them different
licenses.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE