Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
wrote in message oups.com... On Mar 3, 11:30 pm, " wrote: SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE CODELESS "REVOLUTION" Based solely onwww.hamdata.compublished statistics from 22 February to 3 March 2007, there doesn't seem to be the kind of "revolution" nor the influx of CB hordes expected by the long-timers. Specifically, the table below uses the small block of daily statistics that appears to the left of the license class totals. Since the data of the data is derived from FCC database files, the numberic values represent daily quantities from FCC actions the day befo NEW EXPIRED UPDATES CALL CHG. CLASS CHG === ======= ======= ========= ========= 22 Feb, Thu. 174 172 894 49 88 23 Feb, Fri. 78 83 432 5 44 24 Feb, Sat. 190 127 494 47 121 25 Feb, Sun. 1 95 195 20 13 26 Feb, Mon. 0 0 58 0 0 27 Feb, Tue. 144 2 700 13 347 28 Feb, Wed. 99 168 846 44 89 1 Mar, Thu. 138 203 783 13 369 2 Mar, Fri. 87 204 729 12 346 3 Mar, Sat. 85 168 724 83 270 NEW = Never before licensed or retest after long absence EXPIRED = Past the two-year grace period UPDATES = Renewals, address changes, adminstrative changes, not 'upgrades' to another class CALL CHG = Changed call sign of existing license CLASS CHG = Changed class of license (mostly 'upgrades') Numbers for 25 and 26 Feb idicate the weekend off for FCC; Expirations would probably be automatic as a result of computer check of pre-determined grace period end. The Updates column may be a result of more automation from renewals received and thus might be due to just computer activity automatically changing the licensing dates. Tuesday the 27th probably indicates the beginning of the "deluge" of VEC input that arrived on the Monday before. The sudden jump in Class Changes is no doubt from existing "lower" class Techs or Tech Plusses moving up to General. What is interesting is that there don't seem to be ANY significant change of NEW licensees' daily numbers. Those have overwhelmingly come from unlicensed entering the Tech class and have been at a constant increase since Tech was created in 1991. The totals of Technician class HAVE started to drop since the 23rd of February and continue to decrease slowly; it is very certain that class' licensees have upgraded to General or Extra now that there is no code test requirement. Whatever, it seems clear at a week after 06-178 became legal that there isn't much of any influx of newcomers. In the last 12 monthswww.hamdata.comreports that 22,609 NEW licensees entered. In the same period, 29,096 licenses EXPIRED. Licensee grand total dropped by 6,487 in that past period. A good thing or bad one? Eventually, they'll all be Extras and my wish for a one class amateur radio service will be fulfilled. We should change the name of that license to: Amateur. While I agree that a significant percentage will go on to Extra, I also think that there will be a noticeable percentage who will stay at General. Unless you are into contesting or DXing, there is not a lot of advantage to getting an Extra. Dee, N8UZE |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 4, 9:00 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... On Mar 3, 11:30 pm, " wrote: SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE CODELESS "REVOLUTION" Based solely onwww.hamdata.compublishedstatistics from 22 February to 3 March 2007, there doesn't seem to be the kind of "revolution" nor the influx of CB hordes expected by the long-timers. Specifically, the table below uses the small block of daily statistics that appears to the left of the license class totals. Since the data of the data is derived from FCC database files, the numberic values represent daily quantities from FCC actions the day befo NEW EXPIRED UPDATES CALL CHG. CLASS CHG === ======= ======= ========= ========= 22 Feb, Thu. 174 172 894 49 88 23 Feb, Fri. 78 83 432 5 44 24 Feb, Sat. 190 127 494 47 121 25 Feb, Sun. 1 95 195 20 13 26 Feb, Mon. 0 0 58 0 0 27 Feb, Tue. 144 2 700 13 347 28 Feb, Wed. 99 168 846 44 89 1 Mar, Thu. 138 203 783 13 369 2 Mar, Fri. 87 204 729 12 346 3 Mar, Sat. 85 168 724 83 270 NEW = Never before licensed or retest after long absence EXPIRED = Past the two-year grace period UPDATES = Renewals, address changes, adminstrative changes, not 'upgrades' to another class CALL CHG = Changed call sign of existing license CLASS CHG = Changed class of license (mostly 'upgrades') Numbers for 25 and 26 Feb idicate the weekend off for FCC; Expirations would probably be automatic as a result of computer check of pre-determined grace period end. The Updates column may be a result of more automation from renewals received and thus might be due to just computer activity automatically changing the licensing dates. Tuesday the 27th probably indicates the beginning of the "deluge" of VEC input that arrived on the Monday before. The sudden jump in Class Changes is no doubt from existing "lower" class Techs or Tech Plusses moving up to General. What is interesting is that there don't seem to be ANY significant change of NEW licensees' daily numbers. Those have overwhelmingly come from unlicensed entering the Tech class and have been at a constant increase since Tech was created in 1991. The totals of Technician class HAVE started to drop since the 23rd of February and continue to decrease slowly; it is very certain that class' licensees have upgraded to General or Extra now that there is no code test requirement. Whatever, it seems clear at a week after 06-178 became legal that there isn't much of any influx of newcomers. In the last 12 monthswww.hamdata.comreportsthat 22,609 NEW licensees entered. In the same period, 29,096 licenses EXPIRED. Licensee grand total dropped by 6,487 in that past period. A good thing or bad one? Eventually, they'll all be Extras and my wish for a one class amateur radio service will be fulfilled. We should change the name of that license to: Amateur. While I agree that a significant percentage will go on to Extra, I also think that there will be a noticeable percentage who will stay at General. Unless you are into contesting or DXing, there is not a lot of advantage to getting an Extra. Dee, N8UZE Dee, as a Technician (from Novice), I enjoyed DXing and Contesting on 10M SSB. Lots of fun. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
wrote in message ps.com... On Mar 4, 9:00 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: wrote in message oups.com... On Mar 3, 11:30 pm, " wrote: SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE CODELESS "REVOLUTION" Based solely onwww.hamdata.compublishedstatistics from 22 February to 3 March 2007, there doesn't seem to be the kind of "revolution" nor the influx of CB hordes expected by the long-timers. Specifically, the table below uses the small block of daily statistics that appears to the left of the license class totals. Since the data of the data is derived from FCC database files, the numberic values represent daily quantities from FCC actions the day befo NEW EXPIRED UPDATES CALL CHG. CLASS CHG === ======= ======= ========= ========= 22 Feb, Thu. 174 172 894 49 88 23 Feb, Fri. 78 83 432 5 44 24 Feb, Sat. 190 127 494 47 121 25 Feb, Sun. 1 95 195 20 13 26 Feb, Mon. 0 0 58 0 0 27 Feb, Tue. 144 2 700 13 347 28 Feb, Wed. 99 168 846 44 89 1 Mar, Thu. 138 203 783 13 369 2 Mar, Fri. 87 204 729 12 346 3 Mar, Sat. 85 168 724 83 270 NEW = Never before licensed or retest after long absence EXPIRED = Past the two-year grace period UPDATES = Renewals, address changes, adminstrative changes, not 'upgrades' to another class CALL CHG = Changed call sign of existing license CLASS CHG = Changed class of license (mostly 'upgrades') Numbers for 25 and 26 Feb idicate the weekend off for FCC; Expirations would probably be automatic as a result of computer check of pre-determined grace period end. The Updates column may be a result of more automation from renewals received and thus might be due to just computer activity automatically changing the licensing dates. Tuesday the 27th probably indicates the beginning of the "deluge" of VEC input that arrived on the Monday before. The sudden jump in Class Changes is no doubt from existing "lower" class Techs or Tech Plusses moving up to General. What is interesting is that there don't seem to be ANY significant change of NEW licensees' daily numbers. Those have overwhelmingly come from unlicensed entering the Tech class and have been at a constant increase since Tech was created in 1991. The totals of Technician class HAVE started to drop since the 23rd of February and continue to decrease slowly; it is very certain that class' licensees have upgraded to General or Extra now that there is no code test requirement. Whatever, it seems clear at a week after 06-178 became legal that there isn't much of any influx of newcomers. In the last 12 monthswww.hamdata.comreportsthat 22,609 NEW licensees entered. In the same period, 29,096 licenses EXPIRED. Licensee grand total dropped by 6,487 in that past period. A good thing or bad one? Eventually, they'll all be Extras and my wish for a one class amateur radio service will be fulfilled. We should change the name of that license to: Amateur. While I agree that a significant percentage will go on to Extra, I also think that there will be a noticeable percentage who will stay at General. Unless you are into contesting or DXing, there is not a lot of advantage to getting an Extra. Dee, N8UZE Dee, as a Technician (from Novice), I enjoyed DXing and Contesting on 10M SSB. Lots of fun. Yup, 10 meters is a fun band. However as a Tech, you only get part of it. While there can certainly be a lot of DX in the Tech portion, I've seen it full from top to bottom with DX during a contest if the band is open. You could have even more fun if you upgrade. When the band has been really open, I've enjoyed working up at the top end where FM is allowed. However, my comment was addressing the avid, heavy duty DXer/contester. For the casual operator, the General usually conveys a wide enough range of spectrum. Dee, N8UZE |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message ps.com... On Mar 4, 9:00 am, "Dee Flint" wrote: wrote in message groups.com... On Mar 3, 11:30 pm, " wrote: SOME OBSERVATIONS ABOUT THE CODELESS "REVOLUTION" Based solely onwww.hamdata.compublishedstatisticsfrom 22 February to 3 March 2007, there doesn't seem to be the kind of "revolution" nor the influx of CB hordes expected by the long-timers. Specifically, the table below uses the small block of daily statistics that appears to the left of the license class totals. Since the data of the data is derived from FCC database files, the numberic values represent daily quantities from FCC actions the day befo NEW EXPIRED UPDATES CALL CHG. CLASS CHG === ======= ======= ========= ========= 22 Feb, Thu. 174 172 894 49 88 23 Feb, Fri. 78 83 432 5 44 24 Feb, Sat. 190 127 494 47 121 25 Feb, Sun. 1 95 195 20 13 26 Feb, Mon. 0 0 58 0 0 27 Feb, Tue. 144 2 700 13 347 28 Feb, Wed. 99 168 846 44 89 1 Mar, Thu. 138 203 783 13 369 2 Mar, Fri. 87 204 729 12 346 3 Mar, Sat. 85 168 724 83 270 NEW = Never before licensed or retest after long absence EXPIRED = Past the two-year grace period UPDATES = Renewals, address changes, adminstrative changes, not 'upgrades' to another class CALL CHG = Changed call sign of existing license CLASS CHG = Changed class of license (mostly 'upgrades') Numbers for 25 and 26 Feb idicate the weekend off for FCC; Expirations would probably be automatic as a result of computer check of pre-determined grace period end. The Updates column may be a result of more automation from renewals received and thus might be due to just computer activity automatically changing the licensing dates. Tuesday the 27th probably indicates the beginning of the "deluge" of VEC input that arrived on the Monday before. The sudden jump in Class Changes is no doubt from existing "lower" class Techs or Tech Plusses moving up to General. What is interesting is that there don't seem to be ANY significant change of NEW licensees' daily numbers. Those have overwhelmingly come from unlicensed entering the Tech class and have been at a constant increase since Tech was created in 1991. The totals of Technician class HAVE started to drop since the 23rd of February and continue to decrease slowly; it is very certain that class' licensees have upgraded to General or Extra now that there is no code test requirement. Whatever, it seems clear at a week after 06-178 became legal that there isn't much of any influx of newcomers. In the last 12 monthswww.hamdata.comreportsthat22,609 NEW licensees entered. In the same period, 29,096 licenses EXPIRED. Licensee grand total dropped by 6,487 in that past period. A good thing or bad one? Eventually, they'll all be Extras and my wish for a one class amateur radio service will be fulfilled. We should change the name of that license to: Amateur. While I agree that a significant percentage will go on to Extra, I also think that there will be a noticeable percentage who will stay at General. Unless you are into contesting or DXing, there is not a lot of advantage to getting an Extra. Dee, N8UZE Dee, as a Technician (from Novice), I enjoyed DXing and Contesting on 10M SSB. Lots of fun. Yup, 10 meters is a fun band. However as a Tech, you only get part of it. However, as a Tech, I wasn't greedy. While there can certainly be a lot of DX in the Tech portion, I've seen it full from top to bottom with DX during a contest if the band is open. You could have even more fun if you upgrade. And so I did. Today I have all of 10 Meters. When the band has been really open, I've enjoyed working up at the top end where FM is allowed. I've never bothered with FM on 10. However, my comment was addressing the avid, heavy duty DXer/contester. So if the amateur radio service was comprised of only 10 meteres, there could be no avid, heavy duty DXing and Contesting? I think there could be. For the casual operator, the General usually conveys a wide enough range of spectrum. Dee All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
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 |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
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. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
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 |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
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 Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
"Thomas Horne" wrote in message nk.net... 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 Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. The European approach with one "extra" license class and compulsory classroom training is not such a bad idea for people who operate on HF. Can you imagine that we are now allowing kb9rqz to operate a linear amp whose plate voltage might be /= 3KV? Do you think kb9rqz is technically qualified to open an AL80-B and change the 3-500Z tube? What if he forgets (or doesn't know to) bleed the the DC bulk caps or even forgets to unplug it? When he electrocutes himself we will have the dumbed-down general license exam to blame. Perhaps linear amp usage should be restricted to extra class, or, we should apply the above stated European approach. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
A "Codeless Revolution?"
"Thomas Horne" wrote in message nk.net... 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 Dee Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that make it a good thing for amateur radio. Not necessarily. I was trying to make the point that people should be careful what they wish for. It may come with unintended consequences. I'm perfectly satisfied with the self study approach and the voluntary classes that some groups sponsor. If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along those lines. -- Too bad you are not in my area. The club just coaxed me into doing one again this year for the Extra. I don't know of any correspondence or on line classes. Since you will probably be going the self study route if/when you choose to upgrade, I have the following recommendations: 1. DON'T RUSH. There's a lot of material so if you rush through it, you'll have a hard time remembering it as it will be in your short term memory rather than your long term memory. 2. Periodically review the parts you've already studied. It's a long haul and by the time you get to the end, you might forget what you learned in the beginning. 3. For studying and learning the material use something that explains it in detail like the ARRL extra class license manual. 4. Review use something with the questions, answers and brief explanations like the W5YI question and answer manual 5. Don't hesitate at buying the two separate books. It's worth it. The ARRL book has too many words and the W5YI is too brief. Using the former for the initial study and reference and using the latter for review worked well for my students. 6. Find someone (perhaps through your local club) who would be willing to answer questions and clarify hard parts as you go along. Dee, N8UZE |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|