"N2EY" wrote

But how much experience? Looks like someone could waltz in and get a
full-privs ticket right away under that proposed system.

Then you didn't notice the following sentence

--- Holders of this license would be required to have 2 years experience as
a licensee ("time in grade") before being eligible to upgrade to "Class A".

73, K0HB

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Just a few short weeks ago, auroral activity
imposed so much distortion on HF voice
that it was not useable. (snip)


Perhaps you mean HF voice was limited, not unusable. I wasn't aware that
all HF voice communications, including short range, was impossible during
that period. Regardless, a very temporary condition doesn't make a mode
itself necessary in the overall scheme of Amateur Radio. Amateur Radio
continued on during that period, even for those HF operators who simply
decided to turn the radio off or to other frequencies during that period. At
the same time, I heard no reports of emergency services, or other similar
Amateur Radio activities, being seriously disrupted.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

Just a few short weeks ago, auroral activity
imposed so much distortion on HF voice
that it was not useable. (snip)


Perhaps you mean HF voice was limited, not unusable. I wasn't aware that
all HF voice communications, including short range, was impossible during
that period. Regardless, a very temporary condition doesn't make a mode
itself necessary in the overall scheme of Amateur Radio. Amateur Radio
continued on during that period, even for those HF operators who simply
decided to turn the radio off or to other frequencies during that period.
At
the same time, I heard no reports of emergency services, or other similar
Amateur Radio activities, being seriously disrupted.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/


For local communications, one has many choices and although one could use HF
there are better frequencies for that and experienced hams know that. The
choice for local work is generally going to be VHF. So when hams are
talking about HF propagation and usage, they are talking about other than
local communications.

Long distance HF voice was unusable during that time for many locations (the
north is affected worse by auroral but geomagnetic disturbances seem to have
an equal effect everywhere). Such "temporary conditions" can happen several
times a year. If one wants or needs to make other than local contacts then
yes code is necessary. We've had several such occurrences in the last
month. Auroral conditions and other items like geomagnetic storms can
affect all the HF frequencies simultaneously. So for long distance
communications under such conditions, changing bands or frequencies within
HF is often of little help. Yes one could turn off the radio if they didn't
know code but why place that limit on one's self? If the choice is to turn
off the radio or use code then I'd say that code is indeed necessary whether
or not it is an emergency.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

(N2EY) wrote in
om:

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
link.net...
"N2EY" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" writes:

It's time to move on, Jim.

To what?

I meant to answer that in the last message. Anyway, it's time to
move on
to something besides just endlessly debating the Morse Code testing
requirement.

OK, fine. Let's do just that.

The issue will be decided one way or another by the FCC at some point
anyway.

This debate has sharply divided the Amateur Radio community

I don't see that at all in "real life" amateur radio outside
newsgroups and such.


That's because in real life and on the air most people don't discuss it,
but once it is raised, you find that there is a fault line where most hams
fall on one side or the other.

and
I think that alone is having a major impact on any attempts to further
the goals and purposes of the Amateur Radio Service

We'll have to agree to disagree about that)

(we can't discuss anything without this topic constantly interfering).

I say the opposite is true. We can try, anyway.

Here's a selection of topics:

- Regardless of code test requirements, should there continue to be
separate HF subbands for voice/image and cw/data modes in the USA?


Yes, although I beleive they should be the same in all countries

- Is there a need to change the entry-level license requirements and
privileges?


Requirements, no

Privileges - I'm not sure, but I expect them to change when element 1 is
dumped, whether it's needed or not

- What can/should be done about CC&Rs?


PRB-1 should be extended to include them

- What can be done to increase the visibility of the ARS to the
general public?


Don't know

- Are contests a good thing or a bad thing for the ARS?


Good, because they boost activity (which, of course annoys all those who
_think_ they have exclusive use of a frequency)

- Is homebrewing by hams dead or dying?


Yes, unfortunately

- Should there be a minimum age requirement for a ham license?


No

- Should there be an experience requirement for upgrading?

No


- How many classes of ham license should exist, and what should the
requirements/privileges be (other than code test/no code test)?


Either one or two

Requirements should be theory tests

Privileges should not involve subbands like the current system, and should
not give someone a band if they can't use the bands on either side of it
(e.g. as in Canada). Nor should someone be given some modes and not others
on any particular band. I am, however in favour of a power restriction for
a lower tier licence, even though it would be hard to enforce.

A lower tier licence might allow use of, say, 160m, 10m, VHF and UHF, all
at reduced power.

Pick one or more, or sugghest your own, and let's go!

73 de Jim, N2EY


73 de Alun, N3KIP

"KØHB" wrote in message hlink.net...

--- Holders of this license would be required to have 2 years experience as
a licensee ("time in grade") before being eligible to upgrade to "Class A".

Works for me!

Would any sort of radio license count, or only amateur licenses?

Would the experience have to be current? (not "my license expired 5 years ago")

73 de Jim, N2EY

"N2EY" wrote

Would any sort of radio license count, or only amateur licenses?

Would the experience have to be current? (not "my license expired 5 years
ago")

My inclination would be amateur experience only (insert here LHA and LHA(jg)
rotors being spun up in mock indignation), and experience need not be
current.

73, Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote


DO you really think it's mock indignation?


No other explanation is believeable.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote

Even further back (70 years) the old Class A required a year's
experience.

Everything old is new again.

Even further back (in 1919) the old Amateur First Grade was required to pass
a 10WPM test in Continental Morse

Even even further back (in 1913) the old Amateur First Grade was required to
pass a 5WPM test in Continental Morse

Even even even further back (in 1912) the old Amateur First Grade "must be
able to transmit and receive in Continental Morse, but no speed rate will be
prescribed." (Presumably 1 word per fortnight was sufficient.)

Everything old is new again.

Sunuvagun!

de Hans, K0HB

"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

(snip) If one wants or needs to make other
than local contacts then yes code is
necessary. (snip) If the choice is to turn
off the radio or use code then I'd say that
code is indeed necessary whether or not
it is an emergency.


I think you missed the point. Other than the emergency or public services
we offer, any contact whatsoever is an avocation, not a necessity.
Therefore, any mode needed to facilitate that would also not be a necessity.
If one wants to use code during those periods, one can do so by learning
code on his/her own. It is not necessary for the goals and purposes of the
Amateur Radio Service at this point to mandate that learning through a
testing requirement.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message
hlink.net...
"Dee D. Flint" wrote:

(snip) If one wants or needs to make other
than local contacts then yes code is
necessary. (snip) If the choice is to turn
off the radio or use code then I'd say that
code is indeed necessary whether or not
it is an emergency.


I think you missed the point. Other than the emergency or public
services
we offer, any contact whatsoever is an avocation, not a necessity.
Therefore, any mode needed to facilitate that would also not be a
necessity.
If one wants to use code during those periods, one can do so by learning
code on his/her own. It is not necessary for the goals and purposes of the
Amateur Radio Service at this point to mandate that learning through a
testing requirement.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

A. I was discussing the USE of code itself not the testing. So the last
two sentences in the above paragraph are not relevant to this discussion.

B. No you missed the point. My point is that if you want to communicate
then code can sometimes be necessary. I was not discussing emergency coms.
I was discussing the pursuit of my hobby. I believe in minimizing the
impact that propagation has on MY choice of when to participate in that
hobby. The "choice" of turning off the radio simply because of not knowing
code is not really a choice and is unacceptable.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE