"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
t...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

And I think the three classes of license are reasonable and
appropriate.
Tech becomes the "entry" license, general is "mid-grade," and extra is
"top." I don't see anything wrong with that ...

What do you think would be a good division knowledge wise between the
classes? The tech and general are not too bad now, knowledge to
privileges. I lean a bit toward having the Extra require a bit more
knowledge, or perhaps experience. I know a few no-experience Extra's and
it just seems (to me) that some "time in grade" might make the license
more meaningful.

- Mike KB3EIA -


I wouldn't oppose a bit more "meat" on the Extra written ... but I
would oppose any "time in grade" requirements. Folks either
qualify (pass the test) or not ... "time in grade" unnecessarily
discriminates against people who are qualified by making them
wait unnecessarily.

73,
Carl - wk3c


Why? Maybe a little time in grade would mean we don't hear a new extra ask
" how long is a half wave dipole on forty?"

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
t...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

And I think the three classes of license are reasonable and
appropriate.
Tech becomes the "entry" license, general is "mid-grade," and extra is
"top." I don't see anything wrong with that ...

What do you think would be a good division knowledge wise between the
classes? The tech and general are not too bad now, knowledge to
privileges. I lean a bit toward having the Extra require a bit more
knowledge, or perhaps experience. I know a few no-experience Extra's and
it just seems (to me) that some "time in grade" might make the license
more meaningful.

- Mike KB3EIA -


Man you got that right Mike. It was that way, decades ago. The extra
used
to mean something. Now it means squat.

Don't believe me? Look at the before and after code gutting. I was going
to get a fancy 1X2 years ago. Glad I didn't now.

Dan/W4NTI

All the 1x2 sequentially assigned calls were gone long before the 20wpm code
was dropped.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , Dick Carroll
writes:

So you believe a few supplied-answer questions on a couple written
tests, with little technical content, a few memorized band edges and a
few rules, no operational testing of any sort, with no experience record
whatever, makes an expert rahwdyo amatooer.

FCC seems to think that way.....:-(

73 de Jim, N2EY

Election time is not all that far away. I'll wager that the representatives
that pull the FCC's budget strings have PCTA ARO's as constituents.
WRITE...PLEASE! Remember how the vanity call system came about.

--
73 de Bert
WA2SI

P.S. It might just make the difference between dropping Element 1
completely or retaining it for the Extra. (Beats a blank.)

Why? Maybe a little time in grade would mean we don't hear a new extra ask
" how long is a half wave dipole on forty?"

Dan/W4NTI

That would be an improvment Dan, what I hear is, what is a Dipole, and who
sells them, ands of course how much GAIN.

Election time is not all that far away. I'll wager that the
representatives
that pull the FCC's budget strings have PCTA ARO's as constituents.
WRITE...PLEASE! Remember how the vanity call system came about.


they also have lots of NCTA ARO's as very active and vocal consituents.
And we've been writing, emailing, and in a couple of cases, "just to make
sure", faxing.

Clint

Second, what part of "more 'meat' on the Extra written don't you
understand??? You say "with little technical content" ... where'd
you pull that out of? I never said that.

Your zeal to attack anything I say, even if you might actually agree
with the substance if you actually UNDERSTOOD what I said,
and then try to spin your distortion as "NCI position" is telling.

Carl - wk3c


It's more of a move on his (and by that I mean the PCTA's) part
to spin the issue to something that it is not... and attempt to paint a
very unfavorable picture of the NCTA's interests and agenda. I even
recommended the same thing; not an overall simplifying of the tests,
but simply a shift of emphasis on something that is more readily
applicable to ham radio as it is today than it was 30 years ago.
I recommended a thickening up of the written part of the test.
"they" will simply not accept what you say, or allow you to
get the message through to them that this is what we find to be
in the greatest interest in ham radio. It reminds you of the masses
of people a few months ago holding up the "no war for oil"
signs, and you say to yourself, "you just don't GET it, do you?"

Clint

Why? Maybe a little time in grade would mean we don't hear a new extra
ask
" how long is a half wave dipole on forty?"

Dan/W4NTI



to me that just doesn't make any sense... I think you're implying that a
long time
ago, you would NEVER hear an extra ask such an entry-level question, and I
believe you are right. I do not believe the answer lies in haveing a "time
in grade"
requirement... and while it's impossible to have a comprehensive test that
covers
EVERYTHING (for obvious reasons), I believe it's possible to have a test
that
makes sure a person doesn't reach the top level license without knowing
basics
that the novice level licensees should be asking about.

i'm also a nuts-and-bolts person... just start at the basic everyday ham
radio station,
at each part that makes it up, and have a question pool that pertains to
each one....
questions about grounding, questions about feedline, questions about
antennas,
pretty much the way they do now but as he said, add "meat" to it... increase
the
amount of knowledge you have to have in each area to meet the requirements
to
be an extra class ham radio operator. It would be a beautiful thing, and
made
possible by the fact that the perspective extra will have more time to alot
studying
what really matters to know what a ham radio station is than simply test
eye-hand-
hearing coordination in some old communication mode that's being dropped
by non-ham radio services world wide in leaps and bounds...

Let it be repeated
that one of the fundamental concepts of ham radio is the "progression of the
radio art", NOT "the progression of the HAM radio art as a snapshot in time
during the 1950's"... after all, isn't that an oxymoron? trying to progress,
spread
knoweldge about and increase the use of something that is obsolete?

Clint

--

Reasons why it sucks to be a liberal....
file overrun error

--

Don't believe me? Look at the before and after code gutting.

ah, and there we have it.
the agenda.


--

Reasons why it sucks to be a liberal....
file overrun error

--

Man you got that right Mike. It was that way, decades ago. The extra
used
to mean something. Now it means squat.

Don't believe me? Look at the before and after code gutting. I was
going
to get a fancy 1X2 years ago. Glad I didn't now.

Dan/W4NTI

All the 1x2 sequentially assigned calls were gone long before the 20wpm
code
was dropped.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


The real observation here is to note a complaint about extra class hams not
knowing
what the length of a 1/2 wave dipole was on a given frequency; has nothing
to do
with sending and recieving morse code skill.

Kinda showed your colors there.

Clint

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
t...

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


And I think the three classes of license are reasonable and appropriate.
Tech becomes the "entry" license, general is "mid-grade," and extra is
"top." I don't see anything wrong with that ...

What do you think would be a good division knowledge wise between the
classes? The tech and general are not too bad now, knowledge to
privileges. I lean a bit toward having the Extra require a bit more
knowledge, or perhaps experience. I know a few no-experience Extra's and
it just seems (to me) that some "time in grade" might make the license
more meaningful.

- Mike KB3EIA -



I wouldn't oppose a bit more "meat" on the Extra written ... but I
would oppose any "time in grade" requirements. Folks either
qualify (pass the test) or not ... "time in grade" unnecessarily
discriminates against people who are qualified by making them
wait unnecessarily.

I don't look at it as discrimination. Right now, there isn't that much
difference between the General and Extra licenses. The largest being
some frequency segments which are often ignored. So the only
"discrimination" is that. No one is stopping anyone from getting on HF.

My thinking is that if we are to have three classes, they should mean
something. When I was a Technician, I had much more HF operating
experience -by way of the kind control op's from my club, thanks guys! -
than some Extras that I have tutored since. I could have, but wouldn't
dare, Elmer these Extra's at the time of having my Tech license.

A person has to start somewhere. Many if not most who get a Technician
license have their first experience on Radio the first time they push
the PTT button on thier HT. Many General class licensees get their first
tast of HF only after getting their ticket. All very good, and makes
good sense.

However, it doesn't seem reasonable to me that a person can have the
highest class license available, and yet have no clue about operating or
putting together a station. That really means that on a purely
functional level, there is no real difference between the General and
Extra class.

All that being said, if there is no waiting period or significant
bennefit to become an Extra, then I would support two licensing classes.

- Mike KB3EIA -