Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , "Dee D. Flint" writes: I did some exploring around in the FCC database and it appears that there is a way to determine these things. When a person changes call signs or upgrades and so on, the old one is marked as "terminated" not "expired". Is this really the case? I thought an upgrade is considered a modification. It's my understanding that an upgrade does not extend the license term, but a vanity call does (to avoid having to prorate the vanity fee). I'm talking about when they actually change call signs, the old call sign is marked as terminated. The person's license is modified with the new call sign but that is listed as a new grant date. I believe an upgrade does extend the license but a change of address does not. The term "expired" appears to be used only when a person has neither renewed nor upgraded. This is based on checking the call signs of persons that I know upgraded. Changing a name or address does not result in either an "expired" or "terminated" on the call sign. So if one uses the the feature so search on the Amateur Radio Service rather than the basic search and types in dates and checks "expired" and specifies the license class, you should get those and only those that were not renewed. The numbers are indeed rather large. Note however, it isn't marked as "expired" until the two year grace period has elapsed from what I can determine by exploring the data base. Interesting stuff, Dee! I wonder how much of this was done by the "97%" folks. So using the time period 10/18/2000 through 10/18/2001, here are the number of expired licenses that pop up. Novice - 5645 expired in that one year time frame Tech - 3811 expirations Tech+ - 3687 expirations This is a total loss of 13,143 of licensees in the year from 10/18/2000 to 10/18/2001. In those three license classes, anyway. But this info raises a question: If your method only counts licenses which have reached the end of the grace period without a renewal, then the expirations listed above are those for licenses issued or renewed during the period 10/18/1998 to 10/18/1999. But that time period is before the Tech/Tech Plus split! I was indeed focusing on the various entry level licenses as the debate has been over how many people stuck with it. These figures would be for licenses issued between 10/18/1990 and 10/18/1991. Their grace period expired 10/18/2003 and that is when they show up in the database as expired. That is to say the expiration date listed in the database is 10 years from the grant date although it won't show as expired in the database until the two year grace period has elapsed. For example, if I enter an expired date range covering the past year, it shows NO expired licenses. That's because they are still in the grace period and will not be listed as such until that grace period is up. I hope I've explained it clearly. If not let me know and I will try again. On the other hand it does not appear possible to determine the actual number of truly new licenses from the data base as far as I can tell at this time. You can select "Grant date" but that gives you all newly issued licenses and updated licenses (i.e. renewals, adress changes, etc). I think FCC makes that info available another way, because the AH0A site carries a "new license" category. But it's based on current data, not historic stuff. Perhaps the best indicator is to watch how the total number of each license class, and the combined Tech/Techplus total, rise and fall. For instance, notice how slowly (percentagewise) the number of Advanceds is dropping, compared to how fast the number of Novices is dropping. The number of Tech Pluses is dropping fast too, but that's aided by the fact that FCC is renewing all Tech Pluses as Techs. That's why we should consider the Tech/Tech+ as a single group for the purposes whether a class is growing or shrinking. I would suspect that the number of Advanced licenses drop more slowly than the Novice for several reasons. The percentage of Advanced licensees who are active is likely to be higher than the percentage of Novices. The Advanced licensee is probably more apt to renew, as he/she has a lot more effort invested. And the Advanced licensee often has little reason to upgrade as they have almost as much spectrum as the Extras. All the upgrade would get them would be a minimal increase in band space and the privilege of being eligible to administer Extra class upgrade exams. If they are not interested in spectrum space or giving Extra exams, that only leaves the "prestige" of being able to say they are an Extra. For many that's an insufficient reason to upgrade. It would not surprise me if the drop in Advanced licensees is due in a significant part to some of them becoming silent keys. However, there really isn't any way to determine that. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
FCC Amateur Radio Enforcement Letters for the Period Ending May 1, 2004 | General | |||
First BPL License Awarded - | Boatanchors | |||
First BPL License Awarded - | Boatanchors |