Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Keith" wrote in message ... On 25 Jul 2003 16:37:40 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote: s97.301(e) reads: For a station having a control operator who has been granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in accordance with the international requirements. (followed by frequency table) The 'international requirements' (ITU-R s25.5) now read: Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals. There is no international requirement for proficiency in telegraphy, so arguably any Tech could operate on all the frequencies listed in the table. Be prepared to argue it in court, though! That is what I'm talking about. There is no longer a international requirement for morse code so tech's can pick up the microphone and talk on 10 meters. Here in America the FCC has to issue a warning notice, then a violation notice and the person cited can then simply demand a hearing before a administrative law judge. The ALJ is a pretty informal process and you just need to cite the rules and they are not very strict when it comes to matters like these. If you have a tech license and you operate outside your allowed bands like pop up in the twenty meter band and keep it up they might come after you. But if you meet the international requirements and stay in the HF TECH bands it is not a violation of the rules and no one can verify if you have passed a horse and buggy CW test any god damn way. While not a violation of the international treaty, it would be a violation of the current FCC rules. They are quite clear that Techs (at this time) must have passed a code test to use HF. Keep in mind that the international treaty did not abolish the requirement altogether but simply let each country set its own requirements of any where from no-code to whatever the country wished. Our FCC rules have not yet changed so a codeless tech operating HF is in violation. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:56:50 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote:
While not a violation of the international treaty, it would be a violation of the current FCC rules. They are quite clear that Techs (at this time) must have passed a code test to use HF. NO! This is what the rules say: s97.301(e) reads: For a station having a control operator who has been granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in accordance with the international requirements. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ (followed by frequency table) Now we have the new regs from WRC that are NOW in effect. They require no morse code test except set down by the administration so a tech licensee should be in compliance with the requirement set down in 97.301(e) There is no requirement for morse code test except for the requirement by the international morse code requirements. The 'international requirements' (ITU-R s25.5) now read: Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals. The ARRL tried to pull a fast one, but the way the FCC rules are written it appears that it doesn't hold water with current regulations as set down by the FCC. Don't worry I'm going to get real legal advice on this. 1. FCC requires compliance with international morse code regulation. 2. The international morse code regulation is changed to something completely different and no longer has any morse code proficiency requirement except what the administration of that country requires. 3. The FCC, the administration of the USA, only requires the tech licensee to comply with the morse code proficiency requirements required by international requirements. 4. The international requirements have no requirement to know morse code. This could be a legal loop hole. -- The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more. http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Why don't petition the FCC to ask them if techs can now
use the novice portion of 10 meters. When the official R&O comes out stating that I can, I will be on as soon as it's legal, not one minute sooner, unless I learn CW. I'm going out to enjoy a Friday night. Hamfest on Sunday. Troll your heart out, Keith from Newsguy, that removed his email from his killerwatt-radio web site, put all kinds of strange sh!t in his meta-tags, and just basically puts the same BS on his web page as you see here. Save yourself a trip, folks, don't click his link. His attitude matches that of Stew's!!! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:57:38 -0400, Scott Unit 69
wrote: Why don't petition the FCC to ask them if techs can now use the novice portion of 10 meters. I don't need to petition the FCC. I need a legal opinion from it. Of course, time will tell where this goes. Discussing and protesting rules is not ignoring them. -- The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more. http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Keith wrote in
: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 19:57:38 -0400, Scott Unit 69 wrote: Why don't petition the FCC to ask them if techs can now use the novice portion of 10 meters. I don't need to petition the FCC. I need a legal opinion from it. Of course, time will tell where this goes. Discussing and protesting rules is not ignoring them. A better idea than just operating. They might even agree, although I wouldn't bank on it. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 17:09:06 -0700, Keith wrote:
Why don't petition the FCC to ask them if techs can now use the novice portion of 10 meters. I don't need to petition the FCC. I need a legal opinion from it. Of course, time will tell where this goes. You need to find out what a Petition for Declaratory Ruling means. And how long it takes - IF they care to look at your request at all. Sheesh... I'm back to teaching FCC Administrative law again. So much for "retirement".... -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane ARRL Volunteer Counsel From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Keith wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:56:50 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: While not a violation of the international treaty, it would be a violation of the current FCC rules. They are quite clear that Techs (at this time) must have passed a code test to use HF. NO! This is what the rules say: s97.301(e) reads: For a station having a control operator who has been granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in accordance with the international requirements. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ (followed by frequency table) Now we have the new regs from WRC that are NOW in effect. They require no morse code test except set down by the administration so a tech licensee should be in compliance with the requirement set down in 97.301(e) There is no requirement for morse code test except for the requirement by the international morse code requirements. Actually, this could be read in another way: Since there is no international requirement that one can be in accordance with, then the regulation is no longer operative at all and that means that novice licensees and technician licensees with code credit have NO privileges below 30 MHz at all! :-( International agreement has killed the "coded technician" license and has made it indistinguishable (in operating privilege) from the "no-code technician" license. ;-) The 'international requirements' (ITU-R s25.5) now read: Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals. The ARRL tried to pull a fast one, but the way the FCC rules are written it appears that it doesn't hold water with current regulations as set down by the FCC. Don't worry I'm going to get real legal advice on this. 1. FCC requires compliance with international morse code regulation. What regulation? ;-) 2. The international morse code regulation is changed to something completely different and no longer has any morse code proficiency requirement except what the administration of that country requires. Then is it still an "international morse code regulation?" 3. The FCC, the administration of the USA, only requires the tech licensee to comply with the morse code proficiency requirements required by international requirements. Of which there is no such thing, so there is no longer a "technician" license that has any privilege below 30MHz. 4. The international requirements have no requirement to know morse code. This could be a legal loop hole. But not the one you think! 2x :-) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"D. Stussy" wrote in message
. org... On Fri, 25 Jul 2003, Keith wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:56:50 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: While not a violation of the international treaty, it would be a violation of the current FCC rules. They are quite clear that Techs (at this time) must have passed a code test to use HF. NO! This is what the rules say: s97.301(e) reads: For a station having a control operator who has been granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in accordance with the international requirements. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^ (followed by frequency table) Now we have the new regs from WRC that are NOW in effect. They require no morse code test except set down by the administration so a tech licensee should be in compliance with the requirement set down in 97.301(e) There is no requirement for morse code test except for the requirement by the international morse code requirements. Actually, this could be read in another way: Since there is no international requirement that one can be in accordance with, then the regulation is no longer operative at all and that means that novice licensees and technician licensees with code credit have NO privileges below 30 MHz at all! :-( International agreement has killed the "coded technician" license and has made it indistinguishable (in operating privilege) from the "no-code technician" license. ;-) The 'international requirements' (ITU-R s25.5) now read: Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals. The ARRL tried to pull a fast one, but the way the FCC rules are written it appears that it doesn't hold water with current regulations as set down by the FCC. Don't worry I'm going to get real legal advice on this. 1. FCC requires compliance with international morse code regulation. What regulation? ;-) 2. The international morse code regulation is changed to something completely different and no longer has any morse code proficiency requirement except what the administration of that country requires. Then is it still an "international morse code regulation?" 3. The FCC, the administration of the USA, only requires the tech licensee to comply with the morse code proficiency requirements required by international requirements. Of which there is no such thing, so there is no longer a "technician" license that has any privilege below 30MHz. 4. The international requirements have no requirement to know morse code. This could be a legal loop hole. But not the one you think! 2x :-) See?! I knew the argument would get very interesting! I wonder if it will ever get debated in a court of law...man that would be good! Kim W5TIT --- Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net Complaints to |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Keith wrote: On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 21:56:50 GMT, "Dee D. Flint" wrote: While not a violation of the international treaty, it would be a violation of the current FCC rules. They are quite clear that Techs (at this time) must have passed a code test to use HF. NO! This is what the rules say: s97.301(e) reads: For a station having a control operator who has been granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in accordance with the international requirements. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^ (followed by frequency table) Now we have the new regs from WRC that are NOW in effect. They require no morse code test except set down by the administration so a tech licensee should be in compliance with the requirement set down in 97.301(e) There is no requirement for morse code test except for the requirement by the international morse code requirements. WRC has dropped the code requirement, the FCC has not as of yet, so everything is still as before, nothing has changed. What a twit!! |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|