View Single Post
  #13   Report Post  
Old January 23rd 04, 07:00 PM
Dan/W4NTI
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Tom W" wrote in message
...
On 22 Jan 2004 12:19:26 -0800, N2EY wrote:
"Tom W" wrote in message

...
On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 22:00:25 GMT, Dee D. Flint

wrote:

"google blogger" wrote in message
roups.com...

Looks like the Ivy League also has **finally** realized that the

Incentive
License disaster of the 1960's pretty much trashed ham radio.


Learn your history. ARRL fought that proposal. That was solely the

idea of
the FCC.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Learn *your* history. It was the ARRL which first proposed incentive
licensing.

From http://www.qsl.net/ecara/wayback/page13.html:

"In summary, although the vast number of hams were satisfied, a small
minority had complaints. And the ARRL listened. In 1963, acting on
complaints they claim they received from members and operators in
other countries, the ARRL proposed "Incentive Licensing." In an
editorial, the ARRL implied that perhaps it was a mistake when the
Class B and Generals were given the 75 and 20 meter phone segments.
The ARRL's stand was now clear. Exclusive frequencies must be restored
to the Advanced and Extra class amateurs in order to give the Generals
an "incentive" to upgrade. Of course, what was left unsaid was that in
order to do so, frequencies would have to be taken away from the
General class hams."


Unfortunately, that's not quite how it happened.

FCC thought that hams would go for the Extra after 1953 simply
"because it
was there". And some did - but not many. ...


Please cite references. I have before me two historical accounts
which both agree that the ARRL first broached the subject of incentive
licensing, as well as the QST editorial from 1963 which rationalized
it. Web pages such as "The Wayback Machine" also agree that the
League first proposed the changes which were finally implemented in
1967.

In fact, http://www.qsl.net/ecara/wayback/page14.html goes on to say:

"On May 3, 1963, the ARRL Board of Directors adopted their official
position on incentive licensing. Their proposal would completely take
away all General and Conditional class phone privileges on 75, 40, 20,
and 15 meters in a two-year phase-in period. In other words, the
ARRL's incentive licensing would only allow HF phone operation for
Generals and Conditionals on 10 meters and on the small sliver of 160
meters that was available in the days of LORAN Radionavigation. The
ARRL also suggested reopening the Advanced class license again to
those who held a General or Conditional license for one year.
Strangely, the ARRL did not suggest that Extras be given exclusive
frequencies, nor did they propose exclusive CW frequencies. Rather,
they just wanted exclusive access to the 75 through 15-meter phone
segments for the Advanced and Extra class licenses ..."

Based on all of these items, it appears to me that your account could
well be someone's revisionist history. I can find nothing in the
literature to support it, but can easily find material which refutes
it.


Thank you for all the refrences. I also 'remember' it that way. As I
stated to Dee D in another post.

73

Dan/W4NTI