Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: KØHB wrote: A straightforward plan is already written and in the hands of the FCC. http://tinyurl.com/wce9 It really isn't too bad a plan, although there are a few weaknesses that are a bit bothersome. That 50 watt limit for the class B license is simply unenforcable, save some sort of training wheel governor device that they would have to put on their transmitters. Why would it be any more complex than what we have now? And in the old days, there was no big deal about enforcing Novices' use of no more than 75 watts input and crystal control. I think the old days were a bit different than today. I don't think that people drove thier cars 30-35 miles per hour over the speed limit as a routine thing. We just opend a new double laned road in the area. Has a 40 mph speed limit. The first day, there were something like ten people pulled over for going 75 mph and up on it. The local bypass is 55. I am regularly passed by cars going 100 mph. At least twice every trip. I'm going 70 and I'm a target. Going the speed limit is tantamount to suicide. My point is that if the radio can do 100 watts, that's where they are going to put it. And that being the case, forgo the useless regulation. If you want to put a time limit on upgrading, it really should be a lot shorter, like 3 years. Ten years is simply way too long. The prospective class A Ham almost certainly will upgrade in a year or two. Maybe not! Look how many Tech Pluses are still on the books today, even though for the past 42 months they've been able to upgrade with just a single written - or in many cases, no test at all. And the number of Tech Pluses has also been dropping by renewals as Techs..... And this hurts what? But I still don't like the idea of a forced retirement. It brings up an absurdity like a person that operates exclusivly QRP having to upgrade so that he/she is now allowed to use 1.5 kW. That's all they get. So they are forced to upgrade and spend money for something that means nothing to them - save keeping their license. The same was true in the old days if a ham simply wanted to operate in the Novice bands with xtal control and 75 watts... Perhaps, but it doesn't make it any less absurd. When incentive licensing was reinstituted in 1968, a lot of hams had to upgrade just to do what they'd been doing for years. Is this like 3 lefts make a right? 8^) I really do like the idea of "time in grade". It is one of the best ideas ever abandoned by the FCC. Me too, but it's an uphill climb to get it back. A lifetime grant license? Well, I'm not too sure. I guess it is a pretty good thing. If you don't have to renew it, there aren't processing costs. The big problem is that the license won't expire even if its holder does. The database will contain more and more entries of long-dead or lost-interest hams. True enough, kind of like JA Perhaps that's part of Hans' plan - the number of hams with that class of license will grow and grow and grow... FCC will cancel a license if proper paperwork is done. Usually this takes the form of a family member sending in a death certificate so that the SK's call can be reassigned to a friend, club or relative. Given the 10 year license term and such things as online renewal, I don't see renewal costs as a big line item in the FCC budget. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
The 14 Petitions | Policy | |||
Responses to 14 Petitions on Code Testing | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1362– September 19 2003 | Dx |