Good points, Mike - my comments are below:

Well if you raise the skill level, it will just keep people out of Ham
radio. That has been one of the reasons cited for getting rid of the
code test. It won't do just to increase the entrance requirements, which
will partially defeat the purpose.

There are advantages to having more people in Amateur Radio - not the
least of which are more voices to oppose things like BPL. And, less
unused bandwidth, which could be taken away and reassigned to
commercial iterests if we don't utilize it.

On the other hand, bringing in large numbers of less-skilled operators
defeats the purpose of Amateur Radio, which I recall was to develop a
pool of skilled radio operators.

The concept of modifying the test is a middle ground - by adding
questions on actual practical HF operation, for example, we would
ensure that new amateurs could go and set up and operate their station
without undue interference to others. A good thing, I believe, and
one that would raise the level of 'professionalism' amongst the novice
Amateur operators.

Perhaps being knowledgeable about RF matters is also in the past, Leo. A
person can pick up a rig, a linear and an antenna without knowing
anything about RF electronics. He/she can pay someone to put it up, and
can be talking in no time. Given this, why should there be any
requirements at all?

There are legions of operators out there today who operate 'point and
shoot' equipment - the level of technical knowledge and ability has
most certainly deteriorated as a result. Not many construct their own
equipment any more, not even antennas. But, the price of admission to
the Amateur ranks is testing of theoretical knowledge - this keeps
those who are unwilling of making the commitment from oprating
(legally) on our frequencies. As it always has been, and should be.
Without this, we would become a variant of CB.

(suggested antenna is a 1/4 wave dipole) 8^)

....for some of the incognoscenti on the air, I'd recommend a 1/4 wave
stub


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo