In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

(Vipul wrote
what does it matter about ARS license numbers?

Numbers = use of our spectrum = justification for keeping what we have
(and maybe getting a bit more in the future)

Not necessarily! What really matters is how many ACTIVE hams we have, and
how active they are.

I agree that that is true, but in purely political terms, the number of
licensees counts, too.

Sure - but it's only part of the picture.

There are more US hams now than ever before. More modes, more activities,
smaller and much less expensive equipment, etc. We have about the same
amount
of spectrum below 500 MHz as we had 45 years ago, when there were fewer
than
half as many US hams. (WARC-79 added 250 kHz of HF in 3 bands, and we lost
220-222 MHz about a dozen years after that).

But are the bands full-to-busting with activity 24/7? Yes, it's hard to
coordinate a new repeater in some metro areas - but are all the existing
ones tied up around the clock so that we need more?

That's a whole different argument.

I mean it as a discussion. One of the reasons hams have stuck with technology
such as FM repeaters on dedicated pairs is that except in a few areas there's
no pressing need for more. Also why bands like 222 and above 450 are
underutilized.

For example, one of the things that drove hams to abandon AM and NBFM in the
'50s was the crowding and heterodynes in the 'phone bands when AM was king.
This may be a big reason for the "great giveaway" of late 1952.

with today's demographic,

What IS today's demographic? Do you have a reliable source?

The last data I saw, the average age of US hams was somewhere
in the 60's ...

From what source? FCC has been on-again, off-again with the requirement for DOB
info.

"average age" tells us very little unless we know how it is determined. Mean?
Median? What's the distribution curve look like?

I recall seeing an 11 year old Extra and a 79 year old Advanced talking at FD a
few years back. Their "average age" works out to 45...

how that's changed in the last couple of years is probably
anyone's guess, since the age data no longer seems to be available,
but I doubt it's come down dramatically.

Perception can be quite different from reality. Unless we have the entire
database or a truly representative sample, impressions are misleading.

the sad reality is that a large
percentage of current hams will be SK in the next 10-20 years, resulting
in a major drop in our numbers unless we make ham radio more attractive
and interesting to the younger generation.

Actually, the younger generation first has to know ham radio even exists.

This is true ...

Something we gotta fix.

To do that, we can't force the
PC/internet generation to cling to/embrace some "traditions" (such as
Morse)
in which the "older generation" iks so deeply invested (in an emotional
sense).

How do you know, Carl?

It seems obvious that you generally can't force anyone to do something
they don't want to do ...

Of course. But how do you know that young people won't embrace traditions? For
many people, the novelty of doing something that isn't mainstream is a big
attraction. PCs used to be like that - now they're appliances.

eliminating Morse testing will help

No, it won't. The entry-level license is already code free. Eliminating
Morse testing will not cause more people to want to join.

I disagree. Eliminating Morse testing will remove a barrier to advancement
that many folks find disagreeable ... keep the carrot, eliminate the stick.

And if removal doesn't change the growth appreciably?

Many folks are interested in HF access as part of their "portfolio" of
capabilities ... the entry level license currently precludes them from
HF use ... that is a major disincentive to many.

I disagree 100%, but let's put that aside for a moment.

We obviously disagree. What makes you think that "Many folks are interested
in HF access as part of their 'portfolio' of capabilities." ???

The disagreement is that the code test is a major disincentive to many. It's
just a requirement. However, let's put that aside because it will soon be a
moot point.

(That the entry level license currently precludes them from HF use is a fact
and I don't see how you could begin to dispute that.)

I'm not disputing it

Suppose tomorrow morning, next week or next month, by some method or
another,
FCC just dumps Element 1 and merges the Tech and Tech Plus licenses. The
entry-level license will then have some HF access, consisting of little
CW-only
slivers of 80, 40 and 15 meters, plus a slightly bigger chunk of 10 meters
with
SSB and CW. All with a power limitation. Above 30 MHz, though, the entry
level
license has all privileges. Is that really the best arrangement? Will the
removal of Element 1 fix that alleged disincentive problem?

I believe so ... getting even a "taste" of HF operation as a Tech will be a
good thing.

Even if that "taste" consists of nothing but Morse/CW on little parts of four
bands, plus a bit of SSB on a fourth band that will largely be dead as we head
into the sunspot minimum? That's what you're saying - take away the code test
but leave most of the entry-level HF privs as CW/Morse!

I also believe that many current Techs will upgrade to General rather
promptly
once the code test goes away. (some won't, being content with their current
privs, but I believe many will want to extend their privs to HF and will
take,
and pass, the General written to get there).

We'll see. I think many won't. Look what happened to existing Tech Pluses -
even after three years, the number of Tech Pluses is about half what it was in
April 2000. Of those are gone from the Tech Plus numbers, some upgraded, some
dropped out, and some were renewed as Techs - even though none of them had to
take a code test to get a General, and many didn't even have to take a written
test.

Look at how little the Advanced numbers have dropped, even though getting an
Extra only takes a written test.

Or are other changes needed?

Is that supposed to be a "trick question" ???

Nope. The whole artificial above/below 30 MHz thing came about because of
S25.5. That's not going to be an issue much longer. Time to take a fresh look
at things.

NCI's "agenda" is to eliminate Morse testing.

I'm not asking "NCI". I'm asking a wideranging question of anyone who's
interested. It's time to look beyond the code test as the only issue on the
table, if we're really interested in improving the future of the ARS.

73 de Jim, N2EY