On Mar 4, 11:51 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

[snip]



All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator.

Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one
license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written
exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses.
All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra
written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't
were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups
into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some
countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others
who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were
not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own.

Dee, N8UZE

So when the European countries were dropping the code you didn't want
to be like the European countries. But now you want to be like the
European countries? Dee, make up your mind.

wrote:

...

Yeah, you hit the nail on the head. Amateur radio has been driven by a
weird group of "initiation fanatics." Like they are kinda "inducting"
ya into a cult or somethin'. Or, kinda like joinin' the masons. Weird
group who never outgrew high school and college frat initiations into
"secret societies."

Actually, this would be good group for Art Bell to do a show
on--"amateur frat initiates" ... If the pyramids were here in the US,
they'd use them as the "initiation temple." erie music plays here

Me, I just grabbed the mic and set my own style, course never suffered
from "mike fright" here. Never had a strong need to "feel a part of" or
that I needed others to increase my own self worth. Never found the
"official flock of sheep" had that much to offer either.

But hey, to each their own ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 11:38 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...


[snip]

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level"
license.

Why not?

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

Not at all. There is such a wide range of enjoyable activities available
that I want people to be able to explore them. For the same reason
(expanding one's range of activities and knowledge base), I've dragged
Extra
class licensees over to the VHF station at Field day to show them what
can
be achieved on those frequencies. While there are many Extras familiar
with
the VHF/UHF possibilities, for some reason the Extras in the club I
belong
to it have not really explored them.

I was referrign to Code Testing.


Not relevant to anything I have said in this thread. It is not about code
testing but about each of us "being all that we can be".

With the dropping of the code test requirement, the difference between
the
Tech license material and the General license material is just not that
great.

I want you to always remember that you said that. Always.



No problem as I have been maintaining for quite some time that there is
noticeable overlap in the material. In addition, for that reason, I have
always encouraged applicants to take a shot at the General written if they
do well on the Technician.

First, if there is so little difference between the Technician Exam
and the General Exam (sans Morse Code), then you make my point that
the Technician exam is just too advanced for an entry level exam. It
must be simplified.


No it does not. I've taught the classes to people with wide ranges of
backgrounds. The majority of the overlap is in rules, regs, and safety.
They have to know this no matter how much you "simplify" an entry level
license. You can actually miss all the math questions and still pass the
Tech test. Therefore the Tech can't get a whole lot simpler.

Second, it was the General Exam that once conveyed ALL AMATEUR
PRIVELEGES. Now you are saying that it is the defacto starting point
because there is no Morse Exam to accompany it? That just smacks of
Code Tested Extra elitism.


No, I'm saying that once people get their license, most will choose not to
stay long at the Technician level. Also keep in mind that the General test
of the past was much harder than today's General as they took a lot of that
material and moved it to the new license classes.

Third, the Advanced and Extra Exams have been combined, thereby
dumbing down the Extra, bringing it closer to the present General
Exam,

Not hardly. I've taught the classes for today's Extra exam. The VEC
Question Pool Committee combined the material from the old Advanced and
Extra and created a monstor question pool covering all those topics. The
only "break" is that you end up taking one written test of 50 questions
instead of two tests of 40 and 50 questions for a total of 90 questions.
Today's Extra exam has an 800+ question pool to select from for that 50
question test.

not pushing it toward an MSEE like some of you would like to
think.

I've never made that assertion nor implied it. That MSEE has to learn a
whole lot more than was ever covered in the Amateur radio exams.


So if there is so little difference between the Technician and
General Exams, and the Extra has been dumbed down to Advanced level,
why do we still have people wanting more superfluous license classes
that are growing closer together in difficulty allatime?

I did not say there is so little difference between the Tech and General.
Merely that it is reasonable for a person to study to go to General either
right at the beginning or shortly thereafter.

Nor has the Extra been dumbed down to the Advanced class. If you were to
talk to any of the people who earned their Extra under the pre-2000 system,
they will tell you that the Advanced class written test was the hardest of
all the writtens. That is where the bulk of the difficult technical
material was. The Extra class test addressed more detailed knowledge of the
rules, regs, what it takes to be a VE, and a small amount of technical
material. When the system was changed, all the material for both the
Advanced and Extra went into the new Extra question pool


And in the end, it's still allabout Morse Code with you.


That conclusion is not based on any of the opinions I have expressed in this
thread or any other.

In the exam sessions, we actively encourage a person to try the
General when they pass the Tech exam. Those applicants that have chosen
to
develop an understanding of the Tech material (i.e. learn the antenna
equation and how to use it rather than memorizing the lengths for the
questions that might occur on the test) usually come within a couple of
points of passing the General. Some would have passed the General if
they
had simply known to also memorize the General frequency priviliges along
with the material they already knew.

Did you say memorize? Wouldn't you rather they understood the
frequency privileges?


I don't bother getting involved with that discussion as most just try to
twist it to suit their own purposes. There is some material that must be
memorized just as frequencies and equations. Other things must be
understood as to when and how to use those equations.

The material on the Tech and General is straight forward enough that it
can
be grasped by just about anyone with a moderate amount of study. If one
looks at it in terms of return (license & range of privileges) versus
investment (study), the General is perfectly reasonable as a first
license
step.

All government testing should be straight forward.


All of the testing is straight forward. The Extra is merely difficult not
convoluted.

On the other hand, let's look at an "entry level" license and exam. You
have got to cover rules, safety (including RF radiation safety), and good
operating practices as a bare minimum. By the time you do this, you've
already got a significant portion of what you would need for a General
class
license. Your return (license & privileges) versus investment (study)
for
an entry level license, is just not that worthwhile.

If you remove the RF Safety, and change the power levels below that
required for an RFEA, then you have the makings of a simplified
amateur class.


Why should anybody even bother with such a limited license? It would be so
limited people would get bored and drop out or immediately upgrade. Not
worth the investment of time.

Those countries that have folded their two license classes into one class
often had a written test that was equivalent to our Extra not our General
for both and the only differentiating item was the code test. Thus they
really had no "entry" license.

I wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. You shouldn't be allowed to
talk about anonymous countries.


Never said one wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. Merely pointed out the
invalidity of trying to compare the systems.

They had VHF/UHF licenses and full licenses.
The US has been somewhat unusual in that there is a license (General)
that
has a significant range of privileges on all bands with a moderate level
level of testing.

Dee, N8UZE-

The General once conveyed ALL AMATEUR PRIVILEGES.

Sheesh!


And the General test covered the appropriate material at that time.
Although the "incentive licensing" had major implementation issues, it did
have the benefit of bringing people into the hobby since they could take the
material in smaller bites instead of having to learn everything all at the
same time. It achieved that goal.

So Sheesh! yourself. You are trying to compare the system of several
decades ago with newer systems.

Dee, N8UZE

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 11:51 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

[snip]



All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator.

Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one
license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class
written
exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level
licenses.
All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra
written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't
were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups
into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While
some
countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were
others
who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you
were
not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own.

Dee, N8UZE

So when the European countries were dropping the code you didn't want
to be like the European countries. But now you want to be like the
European countries? Dee, make up your mind.


You read into conclusions that are not there. I did not say anything about
wanting to be like the European countries. I was pointing out the fallacy
of trying to make our system match the European approach. If you get your
wish of a single license class, the FCC may choose to go that route. It's
more of a cautionary note, the "be careful what you wish for sort of thing."

Personally I think two or three license classes is appropriate and have
thought so since I became involved in amateur radio.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:

...
Not relevant to anything I have said in this thread. It is not about code
testing but about each of us "being all that we can be".
...

Now you got it!

Some of us were meant to empty garbage, dig ditch, take shorthand, type
up reports, pound a brass key, etc, etc.

And then, others were meant for more ... science, math, complex
computations, computer programming, etc ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

wrote:

...
I was referrign to Code Testing.

Not relevant to anything I have said in this thread. It is not about code
testing but about each of us "being all that we can be".

no it isn't about that at all and nopthing to do wth testing code or
otherwise will EVERE make it so
http://kb9rqz.blogspot.com/


Yeah, participating in long drawn out conversations where 20WPM is fast
(even abbreviated) would only assist me in developing stress related
heart conditions. For this reason alone, it just is NOT that fun to
play with these guys with a code reader setup ...

I don't know the figures, but the avg conversation must consist of
hundreds of words per minute.

Fairly frequently I run into a slow talker, I am quick to site some
engagement or appointment I must hurry off to (just being polite.) Some
of these slow talkers got some age too, either they are unwilling or
unable to come up to speed--and certainly what is going on has escaped
them for decades--meaning--I am NOT the only one who ditches these
people, and QUICKLY!

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

wrote in message
ps.com...

On Mar 4, 9:10am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level license
system but I think they will be General and Extra. The step from Tech to
General is not that difficult and the licensee will have access to all
modes, power levels and bands. Unless you are into DXing, contesting or
being a VE, the additional privileges that Extra licensees have are not
that
much of an advantage.

I, for one, encourage all those studying for Technician to go ahead and
get
the General study guide and go for it either at the first sitting or as
soon
as possible thereafter. The Technician will be basically turn into a very
temporary way station on their climb up the ladder.

My fiftieth of a dollar:

There are really two issues here.

The first is "what's the best possible license
structure?" and the second is "what can we
realistically put in place in US amateur radio?"




Agreed. These really are separate issues. Usually practicality will
outweigh other issues.


The first step in answering either question is
to define what should be on the tests for a
license that gives *all* US amateur radio
privileges. Some think the testing for the current
full-privileges US amateur radio license isn't
near as comprehensive as it should be, others
think it covers too much, etc.




Since people are split on this issue, my opinion is that we are probably at
about the right level for the full privilege license.


The answer is almost certainly going to be a
compromise between all those opinions.




That may end up leaving it the same as it is now.


The second step is to determine whether
it's a good idea to require a new amateur
to pass that test just to get started in amateur
radio, or whether it's better to have license
classes that require less knowledge in return
for fewer privileges.




Personally I just can't see expecting the new amateur to do that much work
just to be able to start exploring amateur radio. History has shown that
having a basic licensing option is helpful to the growth and health of
amateur radio.


Then decide how many steps are needed from
"not a ham" to "full privileges".




Agreed. Three steps has always seemed appropriate to me. I would not find
two objectionable. However if we keep the full privilege license as is,
then three really seems better. The introductory license to try out amateur
radio and then an intermediate license (like the General) that gives a wide
range of privileges but does not require delving into the more exotic
technical and mathematical areas. Then the full privilege license.


While doing this, it is important to remember
that what appears easy to someone with
significant radio/electronics/engineering/math
background may not appear easy to someone
who does not have that same background.




That is why I favor three license levels but do encourage people to move up
to General as quickly as they can study the material. I've taught classes
for Tech, General, and Extra to people who had no significant
radio/electronics/engineering/math backgrounds. So I'm quite familiar with
this issue. With the exception of two who did not take the Extra test, all
my students have passed the respective licenses for which they were
studying. The ironic part is the two who did not attempt the Extra class
test had significant math/electronics/radio backgrounds. A lady who was an
administrative assistant (no significant background in math/technical/radio
subjects) passed her Extra with flying colors.



Then there's the whole question of what FCC can
be induced to do. In recent R&Os and other
writings, FCC has repeatedly said they consider
the optimum number of license classes to be
three.

So it seems the way to go is:

- an "entry level" license that is easy to get
and gives limited privileges

- a "middle level" license that requires more
knowledge, but not everything

- a "full privileges" license that has comprehensive
knowledge requirements for full privileges

That's close to what we have now, but there are
improvements that can be made. First is the
extreme unbalance in the privileges of the
Technician license. That may be a hard
sell to FCC.




With the expansion of the Novice/Tech+ privileges in December and dropping
of the code so all Techs have those privileges, much of that imbalance has
now been alleviated.


---

It should be remembered that the old Novice class
was extremely successful in getting new hams
started in amateur radio, at least for the first 30-40
or so years of its existence. The main feature of
the old Novice that worked so well was that it
required minimal testing, so that newcomers could
get on the air and see if amateur radio was really
for them.




I wasn't into radio until 1992 and the codeless Tech was already rapidly
becoming the entry point of choice. So I can't really comment on this.
However my elmer/teacher strongly encouraged us to go for Tech+ right off
the bat. I'm glad I did. However, it took so long for the license to come
that I passed my General in the meantime and went on the air as a /AG the
day that first license arrived. So I did not experience operating as a
Novice.


There was never any requirement for newcomers
to start with the Novice, yet for decades most new
hams did just that.




When the codeless Technician came into being, it quickly became the entry
point of choice and rapidly chipped away at the Novice licensing approach.


What's needed now is a "Novice license for the
21st Century", IMHO

73 de Jim, N2EY



So just out of curiosity, what is your version of the 21st "novice" or entry
license?



Dee, N8UZE

Dee Flint wrote:

...


Tech and extra would do ... might be a good argument for three
classes, would have to think about it and hear others thoughts ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

"John Smith I" wrote in message
...
Dee Flint wrote:

...


Tech and extra would do ... might be a good argument for three classes,
would have to think about it and hear others thoughts ...

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

Too big a step in privileges and test material to go with just Tech and
Extra. If one must boil it down to two, then General and Extra would be a
better split.

Dee, N8UZE

On Mar 4, 6:56 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...





On Mar 4, 11:38 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

groups.com...

On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

roups.com...

On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

[snip]





As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level"
license.

Why not?

As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.

Not at all. There is such a wide range of enjoyable activities available
that I want people to be able to explore them. For the same reason
(expanding one's range of activities and knowledge base), I've dragged
Extra
class licensees over to the VHF station at Field day to show them what
can
be achieved on those frequencies. While there are many Extras familiar
with
the VHF/UHF possibilities, for some reason the Extras in the club I
belong
to it have not really explored them.

I was referrign to Code Testing.

Not relevant to anything I have said in this thread. It is not about code
testing but about each of us "being all that we can be".

....an army of one. Try to keep up with the changes.

With the dropping of the code test requirement, the difference between
the
Tech license material and the General license material is just not that
great.

I want you to always remember that you said that. Always.

No problem as I have been maintaining for quite some time that there is
noticeable overlap in the material. In addition, for that reason, I have
always encouraged applicants to take a shot at the General written if they
do well on the Technician.

First, if there is so little difference between the Technician Exam
and the General Exam (sans Morse Code), then you make my point that
the Technician exam is just too advanced for an entry level exam. It
must be simplified.

No it does not. I've taught the classes to people with wide ranges of
backgrounds. The majority of the overlap is in rules, regs, and safety.
They have to know this no matter how much you "simplify" an entry level
license. You can actually miss all the math questions and still pass the
Tech test. Therefore the Tech can't get a whole lot simpler.

Second, it was the General Exam that once conveyed ALL AMATEUR
PRIVELEGES. Now you are saying that it is the defacto starting point
because there is no Morse Exam to accompany it? That just smacks of
Code Tested Extra elitism.

No, I'm saying that once people get their license, most will choose not to
stay long at the Technician level.

Code -was- the barrier.

Also keep in mind that the General test
of the past was much harder than today's General as they took a lot of that
material and moved it to the new license classes.

No, it wasn't. It is substantially more difficult today. And don't
forget that half of the OLD General test is now called "Technician."

Third, the Advanced and Extra Exams have been combined, thereby
dumbing down the Extra, bringing it closer to the present General
Exam,

Not hardly.

How could it not be?

I've taught the classes for today's Extra exam. The VEC
Question Pool Committee combined the material from the old Advanced and
Extra and created a monstor question pool covering all those topics.

Exactly, and you say that as if I didn't know it.

So what do you get when you combine questions from a lower license
class with that of a higher license class? You have REDUCED standards
for that higher license.

Imagine the old Novice Q pool being combined with the Extra Q pool for
the Extra license... that should magnify my point so that even you can
see it.

The
only "break" is that you end up taking one written test of 50 questions
instead of two tests of 40 and 50 questions for a total of 90 questions.
Today's Extra exam has an 800+ question pool to select from for that 50
question test.

Miccolis has covered this...

not pushing it toward an MSEE like some of you would like to
think.

I've never made that assertion nor implied it. That MSEE has to learn a
whole lot more than was ever covered in the Amateur radio exams.

Are you an MSEE?

So if there is so little difference between the Technician and
General Exams, and the Extra has been dumbed down to Advanced level,
why do we still have people wanting more superfluous license classes
that are growing closer together in difficulty allatime?

I did not say there is so little difference between the Tech and General.

I believe you did, but will accept that is not what you meant (unless
you say it again).

Merely that it is reasonable for a person to study to go to General either
right at the beginning or shortly thereafter.

That would be known as the "Old General." They were split in the
Spring of 1987.

Nor has the Extra been dumbed down to the Advanced class.

Sure it has.

If you were to
talk to any of the people who earned their Extra under the pre-2000 system,
they will tell you that the Advanced class written test was the hardest of
all the writtens.

It was. I took and passed both.

So the Extra was already dumbed down, and now it is combined with a
lower class pool...

Sounds really, really dumbed down now.

That is where the bulk of the difficult technical
material was. The Extra class test addressed more detailed knowledge of the
rules, regs, what it takes to be a VE,

My opinion is that the VEC needs to cover being a VE, not a
additional, superfluous license class.

and a small amount of technical
material.

A very small amount.

When the system was changed, all the material for both the
Advanced and Extra went into the new Extra question pool

Which is why it's dumbed down.

And in the end, it's still allabout Morse Code with you.

That conclusion is not based on any of the opinions I have expressed in this
thread or any other.

Dee, it's based upon all of the opinions that you express.

In the exam sessions, we actively encourage a person to try the
General when they pass the Tech exam. Those applicants that have chosen
to
develop an understanding of the Tech material (i.e. learn the antenna
equation and how to use it rather than memorizing the lengths for the
questions that might occur on the test) usually come within a couple of
points of passing the General. Some would have passed the General if
they
had simply known to also memorize the General frequency priviliges along
with the material they already knew.

Did you say memorize? Wouldn't you rather they understood the
frequency privileges?

I don't bother getting involved with that discussion as most just try to
twist it to suit their own purposes. There is some material that must be
memorized just as frequencies and equations. Other things must be
understood as to when and how to use those equations.

Fair enough, but I had to bring it up.

The material on the Tech and General is straight forward enough that it
can
be grasped by just about anyone with a moderate amount of study. If one
looks at it in terms of return (license & range of privileges) versus
investment (study), the General is perfectly reasonable as a first
license
step.

All government testing should be straight forward.

All of the testing is straight forward. The Extra is merely difficult not
convoluted.

So all of the matierial is straight forward? Good.

On the other hand, let's look at an "entry level" license and exam. You
have got to cover rules, safety (including RF radiation safety), and good
operating practices as a bare minimum. By the time you do this, you've
already got a significant portion of what you would need for a General
class
license. Your return (license & privileges) versus investment (study)
for
an entry level license, is just not that worthwhile.

If you remove the RF Safety, and change the power levels below that
required for an RFEA, then you have the makings of a simplified
amateur class.

Why should anybody even bother with such a limited license? It would be so
limited people would get bored and drop out or immediately upgrade. Not
worth the investment of time.

Not children, not scouts. I guess we don't want to attract newcomers
for a lifetime of amateur radio, just the retirees.

Those countries that have folded their two license classes into one class
often had a written test that was equivalent to our Extra not our General
for both and the only differentiating item was the code test. Thus they
really had no "entry" license.

I wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. You shouldn't be allowed to
talk about anonymous countries.

Never said one wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. Merely pointed out the
invalidity of trying to compare the systems.

Invalidity?

They had VHF/UHF licenses and full licenses.
The US has been somewhat unusual in that there is a license (General)
that
has a significant range of privileges on all bands with a moderate level
level of testing.

Dee, N8UZE-

The General once conveyed ALL AMATEUR PRIVILEGES.

Sheesh!

And the General test covered the appropriate material at that time.

Still does.

Although the "incentive licensing" had major implementation issues, it did
have the benefit of bringing people into the hobby since they could take the
material in smaller bites instead of having to learn everything all at the
same time. It achieved that goal.

Smaller bites? That wasn't the purpose of Inventive Licensing.

So Sheesh! yourself. You are trying to compare the system of several
decades ago with newer systems.

Dee, N8UZE

Are there still tube questions in the exams?