Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Dwight Stewart wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote: Bill Sohl wrote: "Mike Coslo" wrote: And do you think that the prospective ham should not know about RF safety until they reach the equivalent of an Extra? This plan seems to advocate that. Actually, I think they SHOULD know about the basics of RF, RF hazards, etc Seems like we're pretty much on the same page here! 8^) Actually, read over the Extra question pool, Mike. It doesn't extensively cover RF exposure safety. Most of that is already covered in the Novice, Tech, and General, and only lightly repeated in the Extra pools (with perhaps one or two additions). Remember that each test builds onto the info in the previous tests (Techs take both the Novice and Tech tests). All tests now include some RF exposure safety questions to insure those who missed it on earlier tests (a General that didn't get the latest info on tests taken twenty years ago, for example) gets that info when they take the next test. And, finally, remember that Hans' proposal would entirely drop the Novice, Tech, and General (losing everything on those tests), making the Extra the sole license test for full privileges. I think that is what I was saying, Dwight. FR safety should be one of the first things learned, not the final lesson! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
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 |