It's actually pretty clear, Dan. The big objective here is to lower
the requirements until anyone can qualify at will without needing to
complain about how hard it is.


That is exactly the way it is working. And heres the Kicker, the next set of
Knuckle Draggers are going to complain the written is to HARD. Then we will
lower it again.
What is amazing is the New Hams think they have done something, by passing a
Dumb Down Test. They also think its perfectly OK, and will use any excuse to
try and say that they are EQUALS. But anybody with any sense at all will know
that it is not TRUE.
Its amazing the extent they go thru to try and Justify Dumbing Down, and
refuse to admit its Dumbing Down.

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
om...
"Clint" wrote

what do you think will also change in the licensing
system when the drop the morse code test?

Go to http://home.earthlink.net/~k0hb and click on the link "FCC
Comments" in the left column.

That describes the most sensible "post-CW-test" structure.

73, de Hans, K0HB

I like that proposal. But its way to simple to be accepted. Maybe the govt
could spice it up by slicing up the bands...oh sorry. They already tried
that. hi.

Dan/W4NTI

"WA8ULX" wrote in message
...
It's actually pretty clear, Dan. The big objective here is to lower
the requirements until anyone can qualify at will without needing to
complain about how hard it is.


That is exactly the way it is working. And heres the Kicker, the next set
of
Knuckle Draggers are going to complain the written is to HARD. Then we
will
lower it again.
What is amazing is the New Hams think they have done something, by
passing a
Dumb Down Test. They also think its perfectly OK, and will use any excuse
to
try and say that they are EQUALS. But anybody with any sense at all will
know
that it is not TRUE.
Its amazing the extent they go thru to try and Justify Dumbing Down, and
refuse to admit its Dumbing Down.

Whatcha think Bruce? Are all the 'knuckledraggers' Democrats in training?

Dan/W4NTI

Whatcha think Bruce? Are all the 'knuckledraggers' Democrats in training?

Dan/W4NTI


Either in training, or Full Fledged Members.

N2EY wrote:
In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:


When they drop the morse code test requirement, it's
fairly clear to me they just won't "drop" it all by
itself with a stroke of an administrative pen;

Why not? That's all that most of the anticodetest petitions are asking for.
Both the NCI and NCVEC petitions simply ask for the dropping of Element 1 and
nothing else.

I don't think it can work by "just" dropping the test. Too many loos
ends. Tech plus, novices, that kind of thing.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ...


N2EY wrote:
In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:


When they drop the morse code test requirement, it's
fairly clear to me they just won't "drop" it all by
itself with a stroke of an administrative pen;

Why not? That's all that most of the anticodetest petitions are asking
for.
Both the NCI and NCVEC petitions simply ask for the dropping of Element
1 and
nothing else.

I don't think it can work by "just" dropping the test. Too many loos
ends. Tech plus, novices, that kind of thing.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Actually it would work quite easily. Everyone keeps their current
privileges except that all varieties of Techs are combined to one class of
Tech with the privileges of the Tech with HF.

However, as you know I think they ought to keep the code test.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article k.net,
"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com writes:

Why should the FCC simply grandfather the Tech (no code) to Tech plus (code
and Novice test) ??

Because the only test difference between a Tech and a post-March-21-1987 Tech
Plus is Element 1

The Tech (no code) has no HF test questions. (as I understand it).

Actually that's not true, The old Novice Q&A was incorporated into the Tech
pool.

Thus
there is no reason a Tech (no code) would, or should be qualified to operate
HF.

Tell it to the FCC. A Tech who passes Element 1 gets the same HF privs as a
Novice or Tech Plus.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Alun Palmer
writes:

(N2EY) wrote in
:

In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:

When they drop the morse code test requirement, it's
fairly clear to me they just won't "drop" it all by itself with a
stroke of an administrative pen;

Why not? That's all that most of the anticodetest petitions are asking
for. Both the NCI and NCVEC petitions simply ask for the dropping of
Element 1 and nothing else.

I imagine it
will accompany other changes in the license structure...

Only if somebody asks for them.

The FCC considered all sorts of proposals 4 years ago and we got what
we have now.

what do you think will also change in the licensing
system when the drop the morse code test?

I think you're right, Jim. My guess is that Element 1 will be dropped and
all Techs will be given Tech+ priviledges. I don't expect anything else to
happen.

It's been almost 3 months. I'm convinced FCC had the authority to dump Element
1 soon after WRC 2003 ended.

Of course it's not a high priority for them.

That's not to say that some reform of the licence classes isn't overdue,
but the FCC position is that until there is some sort of consensus they
won't do anything about it.

See my post to KB3EIA. I doubt we'll ever get consensus due to the "nobody
loses/no giveaways" mindset.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

Clint wrote:

When they drop the morse code test requirement, it's
fairly clear to me they just won't "drop" it all by
itself with a stroke of an administrative pen; I imagine it
will accompany other changes in the license structure...
what do you think will also change in the licensing
system when the drop the morse code test?

This is the biggest reason that I believe it will take quite a while to

remove the Morse test. There will probably be a lot of changes that
need to be discussed and made, if the licensing structure is to make any
sense.

Having the amateur license classes make sense has never been much of a priority
to the FCC - at least not for 50 years or so.

I still remember getting my first License Manual in 1966 or 67, and discovering
that there were six classes of ham license. Interesting system, I thought, lots
of steps to climb the ladder to the top.

Then I found that four of the six license classes granted all operating
privileges. Three of them could only be gotten by mail, and two could only be
gotten via FCC examiners .And one of the classes was closed to new entries but
those who had 'em could keep on renewing 'em. Huh?

Even more mystifying was finding out that things had been that way for more
than a dozen years.

My earlier prediction was 4 years in a "guess the drop time" contest we

started earlier in the year.

You may be right.

I see three possibilities:

1) FCC just dumps Element 1 and not much else

2) FCC does the whole restructuring thing all over again

3) FCC does nothing at all. (For a few years, anyway).

Before you dismiss that last one, note how long some petitions have been
hanging fire with the FCC. Like the Novice refarming petitions.....

I would guess that we will have either two or three classes, as we do
now:

The technician license will probably be very similar to what it is now.

I don't know that any significant changes will be made.

The HF licenses are a much murkier area.

That would be unfortunate.

The whole idea of VHF/UHF as the entry is an artifact of S25.5. Hundreds of
thousands of us started out on HF. All it takes is a little know-how.

If there were to be only two license classes, my wish would be that the

testing regimen would be more or less what the Extra is now.

But there may be some resistance to that, and it is understandable.
There is no reason not to have an entry level HF license similar to the
General.

But note how the number of Techs has dropped off. W5YI has already made
statements about the Tech being too difficult for an entry-level license - and
that was with the old pool!

I tend toward two license classes, but don't have any strong feelings
against three.

Testing......

The multiple guess format is probably here to stay.

Unfortunately true. FCC is certainly going to insist that any test method have
one and only one correct answer, and be totally independent of examiner
interpretation.

I don't think it is
as bad as some say. Reading the answers in a textbook or reading them in
multiple choice format is all the same to me. It took me a week of
fairly steady study to get ready for the exam. The way they get you to
learn is to have a lot of questions, and only test on a few.

One of the biggest differences between the old and new Tech pools is that the
new one is bigger - almost twice the size.

And as a fairly new Extra, I can say that those answers don't always
show up in the same abcd order as they do in the question pools. So you
really do have to know an answer.

You only have to know the *right* answer...

I would like to see the tests a little more in depth (note I don't say
harder) with more operation questions. Perhaps even a post-test booklet
with good operating procedures. I really needed this after passing my
general. I had some small HF experience from contesting with the club,
but contesting etiquette and everyday etiquette are two very different
things.

I'd like to see the test subdivided by subject area so that you could not pass
with, say, less than a certain number of safety questions wrong.

My biggest hope is that we take the time to make a good system, and
not come up with some Byzantine mess.

Agreed, but don't count on it. Look at the last restructuring - took almost 2
years, and the end result was a complete hodgepodge.

One of the big problems is the "nobody loses/nobody gets a windfall" paradigm.

Even though incentive licensing was reintroduced 35 years ago, the bad feelings
that were created by a system that took away existing hams' operating
privileges continue. They even continue among some hams who were not even
licensed at the time! So demoting anybody will be opposed strongly.

OTOH, automatic upgrades (like the 1998 ARRL idea to give Generals to existing
Novices and Tech Pluses) will be opposed just as strongly by folks who don't
want to see any "giveaways".

That kinda limits any cleanup efforts.

73 de Jim, N2EY

yea, but it's outta here.

Clint

--

More reasons it sucks to be a liberal:

A new study just released shows absolutely NO
decreasing trends in gun related violence after
increasing gun control laws & measures.

--
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
.com...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


N2EY wrote:
In article , "Clint" rattlehead at
computron dot net writes:


When they drop the morse code test requirement, it's
fairly clear to me they just won't "drop" it all by
itself with a stroke of an administrative pen;

Why not? That's all that most of the anticodetest petitions are asking
for.
Both the NCI and NCVEC petitions simply ask for the dropping of
Element
1 and
nothing else.

I don't think it can work by "just" dropping the test. Too many loos
ends. Tech plus, novices, that kind of thing.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Actually it would work quite easily. Everyone keeps their current
privileges except that all varieties of Techs are combined to one class of
Tech with the privileges of the Tech with HF.

However, as you know I think they ought to keep the code test.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE