About Us

November 25th 03, 01:28 PM

(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

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The 14 Petitions	Len Over 21	Policy	3	November 10th 03 12:31 AM
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing	Len Over 21	Policy	0	October 22nd 03 11:38 PM
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1362â€“ September 19 2003	Radionews	Policy	0	September 20th 03 04:13 PM
Amateur Radio NewslineÃ¢â€žÂ¢ Report 1362Ã¢â‚¬â€œ September 19 2003	Radionews	General	0	September 20th 03 04:12 PM
Amateur Radio NewslineÃ¢â€žÂ¢ Report 1362Ã¢â‚¬â€œ September 19 2003	Radionews	Dx	0	September 20th 03 04:12 PM

Menu

About Us