| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#11
October 1st 03, 04:29 PM
|
|||
|
|||
In article , Radio Amateur KC2HMZ
writes: On 30 Sep 2003 15:12:12 -0700, (N2EY) wrote: by that logic, most of the General and Extra written exams are also "government-subsidized life-support system for an anachronism" and/or "a welfare program". You've been dangling the above for a few days now. A few years, actually. Sorry, I don't buy it. I didn't expect you to. But it's still true. One of the principles that makes up the Basis And Purpose of the ARS is "Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts." That's right. Does passing the General or Extra written exam make someone an electronics expert? Do you know any hams who, upon passing the General and/or Extra exams, suddenly decided to start building their equipment instead of buying it? The design of modern communications equipment is based on digital electronics. Partly. There's also a lot of analog stuff in there. Learning about digital electronics, therefore, is in keeping with the Basis And Purpose. Of course. But why *must* hams be tested on digital electronics beyond the level of the Tech exam? Is the digital electronics used in HF/MF amateur radio equipment somehow different from the digital electronics used in VHF/UHF amateur radio equipment? Why must all that theory stuff be forced down prospective HF hams' throats whether they are interested in it or not? There's nothing in the Basis And Purpose about telegraphy. Sure there is - it's under "trained operators". There's nothing in the "Basis And Purpose about digital electronics, either. FCC has already allowed that "because the amateur service is fundamentally a technical service, the emphasis on Morse code proficiency as a licensing requirement does not comport with the basis and purpose of the service." (Both quotes above are from FCC's report & order on the last round of restructuring in the ARS) This is the same FCC that thinks BPL is a good idea, remember. And the same FCC that will probably take 2 years to drop Element 1. And the same FCC that radically reduced the written tests in that same restructuring. Here's proof of my argument about the content of the writtens: A newcomer can get a Tech license by passing the current 35 question Element 2. That license permits the new ham to use any authorized mode on any authorized amateur frequency above 30 MHz. Every amateur HF/MF mode is also allowed on VHF/UHF, and the power limits are the same. So FCC obviously thinks that the 35 question Tech test is a valid indicator of what a ham needs to know to design/build/repair/align and operate any amateur station on VHF/UHF. But even after the code test is passed, a new ham has to pass more written tests to get more than 'Novice' privileges on HF/MF. Of course the General and Extra writtens contain some "necessary" propagation, regulatory and safety stuff that is not in the Tech test. But the rest is stuff that is not absolutely necessary to design/build/repair/align and operate any amateur station on HF/MF. Add to this the fact that the only difference in operating privileges between a General class ham and an Extra is a few bits of spectrum on 4 of the 9 HF/MF bands, and it becomes very clear that most of the General and Extra written exams are also "government-subsidized life-support system for an anachronism" and/or "a welfare program". The situation is made even clearer by the emergence of rigs that cover both HF and VHF/UHF. A Tech can buy, repair, align, and operate, say, an FT-897. Why is said Tech qualified to use its full capabilities on 2 meters but not on 20 meters? Now you might say that the tests "encourage" hams to become more "technical". Have you ever observed that effect on hams who were not inclined to be "technical" before they took the General and Extra class writtens? Which activity is more prevalent in amateur radio today: Hams operating CW, or hams designing and building their own radio equipment from scratch? Why must there be a test for all that stuff if it's not necessary to the safe and legal operation of an amateur radio station? How many doctors, lawyers, and other people who would be great hams are we keeping out because they are not interested in all that technical stuff? (We could sure use more hams who are lawyers to help fight CC&Rs and BPL!) Except for some extremely basic stuff on regulations and safety, *everything* in the tests is the result of somebody's opinion. An oft-repeated argument against the code test is that code operation is no longer absolutely necessary for any operation, so there's no absolute need to test for it. Apply the same logic to the writtens, and a lot of what's in them has to go as well. It's an inescapable logical conclusion. Clint has subsequently elaborated on his comment, citing government subsidizing of the agricultural industry as one example, demonstrating that this is in fact what he had in mind as well. What major industry in this country is *not* subsidized in some way? Um, well, there's the porn industry, I suppose.. Good point! .but other than that, you're right, there's a lot of subsidizing going on. However, that doesn't mean that I, or anyone else for that matter, wants the government to select my recreational activities for me on my behalf. I'll make my own choices, thank you. Your recreational choices are being subsidized and chosen for you as well. If you like hiking and camping as recreational activities, there's a whole system of parks, forests and wilderness areas, set aside by the government, for those activities. But if you want to be a lumberjack for a recreational activity, you cannot cut down trees in those areas. You have to go elsewhere, almost always to private property. Now, then...once the government has stopped subsidizing the manufacture and testing of CW operators by eliminating the code test, how do you think we should reallocate the Novice subbands? Reallocate them as special digital experimental subband. Allow any documented digital mode that will fit in the subbands to be used there. Including digital voice, image, and yes, Morse Code/CW. No arbitrary limits on occupied bandwidth or symbol rate as long as the signal fits inside. If somebody wants to run "PSK-3100" and they can document it for FCC, fine, let 'em have at it. I don't agree with unlimited signal bandwidths on HF - that means one guy trying out some ultrawide digital mode wipes out the whole subband and nobody else can experiment until he's through playing around. That's why we have the subbands. Not just locally, but if the band is open, the subband's wiped out over a significant portion of the planet. The same is true in part for any mode. But if it really bothers you that much, then perhaps the rule could be "any mode less than X kHz wide" where X is, say, 5 or 10 kHz rather than the entire subband. I could agree with this on the microwave bands, though, where the signals don't travel as far and there are far fewer users in line to use the spectrum that is available. DSSS near-far problem comes to mind. Meanwhile, give the Novices and Tech Pluses more HF space than those four little slots. I definitely agree with that. I'd say they should have at least half of the General CW/data subbands. |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| How does a 6146B fail? | Boatanchors | |||
Threaded Mode
