N2EY wrote:

In article , Alun
writes:


Four years ago there were 6 license classes open to new hams. Now there
are only 3, but the other 3 classes are still held by almost 200,000
hams. Was that an "absurd" change? Tell it to the FCC!

Hans' proposal would create 2 new license classes and close off the
other 6 to new licensees. Is it really so absurd, given the changes
we've already seen?

His proposal is no more absurd than the claim that a single 5 wpm code
test is a "barrier".....

73 de Jim, N2EY


It's not really three, though. Although the 'Tech Plus' was abolished in
theory it still exists in practice. That particular absurdity will go away
when Element 1 is abolished, which it soon will be. To avoid actually
taking away any privileges the FCC will have to give the Novice subbands
to all Techs (assuming Element 1 will no longer be mentionned anywhere in
Part 97, the only other alternative would be to take them away from those
Techs who have them now, which would be very unpalatable).


And also without any purpose.

I don't agree with all aspects of Hans' proposal. In particular, I oppose
all time limits and time in grade requirements.


Do either of them really create a problem? I entered ham radio with both of
those features (Novice license only good for two years, upgrade or go off the
air, and a two-year experience rule for Extra). I don't think they were such
awful ideas.

I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.

I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A. Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

N2EY wrote:

In article , Alun
writes:


Four years ago there were 6 license classes open to new hams. Now there
are only 3, but the other 3 classes are still held by almost 200,000
hams. Was that an "absurd" change? Tell it to the FCC!

Hans' proposal would create 2 new license classes and close off the
other 6 to new licensees. Is it really so absurd, given the changes
we've already seen?

His proposal is no more absurd than the claim that a single 5 wpm code
test is a "barrier".....

73 de Jim, N2EY


It's not really three, though. Although the 'Tech Plus' was abolished in
theory it still exists in practice. That particular absurdity will go away
when Element 1 is abolished, which it soon will be. To avoid actually
taking away any privileges the FCC will have to give the Novice subbands
to all Techs (assuming Element 1 will no longer be mentionned anywhere in
Part 97, the only other alternative would be to take them away from those
Techs who have them now, which would be very unpalatable).


And also without any purpose.

I don't agree with all aspects of Hans' proposal. In particular, I oppose
all time limits and time in grade requirements.


Do either of them really create a problem? I entered ham radio with both of
those features (Novice license only good for two years, upgrade or go off
the
air, and a two-year experience rule for Extra). I don't think they were
such
awful ideas.

I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.

Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the current
license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)

Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels: QRP,
50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


N2EY wrote:


In article , Alun
writes:



Four years ago there were 6 license classes open to new hams. Now there
are only 3, but the other 3 classes are still held by almost 200,000
hams. Was that an "absurd" change? Tell it to the FCC!

Hans' proposal would create 2 new license classes and close off the
other 6 to new licensees. Is it really so absurd, given the changes
we've already seen?

His proposal is no more absurd than the claim that a single 5 wpm code
test is a "barrier".....

73 de Jim, N2EY


It's not really three, though. Although the 'Tech Plus' was abolished in
theory it still exists in practice. That particular absurdity will go away
when Element 1 is abolished, which it soon will be. To avoid actually
taking away any privileges the FCC will have to give the Novice subbands
to all Techs (assuming Element 1 will no longer be mentionned anywhere in
Part 97, the only other alternative would be to take them away from those
Techs who have them now, which would be very unpalatable).


And also without any purpose.


I don't agree with all aspects of Hans' proposal. In particular, I oppose
all time limits and time in grade requirements.


Do either of them really create a problem? I entered ham radio with both of
those features (Novice license only good for two years, upgrade or go off

the

air, and a two-year experience rule for Extra). I don't think they were

such

awful ideas.

I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.


Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the current
license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

Its just too long. The license renewal period would just be another
number by that time, since the new A license would be forever. I'm busy
as all gitout, and it took me something over a week of hard study to get
ready for the Extra.

Plus I can't figure out what can make a person qualified to operate on
day 3652 of their licensing period and unqualified on day 3653. It takes
a lot less time than that to understand RF safety - the only real reason
I can think of for the second class license, so if we're going to do
this, it should make some timing sense.


I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Not sure about BTDT.


Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)


Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op. We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station) Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto. Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good


Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels: QRP,
50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.


Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the
current
license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

Its just too long.

Is it really too long, particularly considering the two-year experience
requirement?

One of the problems with the old 1 and 2 year Novices was that if a new ham ran
into "life happens" situations, their upgrade schedule would be seriously
disprupted.

Example: A few weeks after a teenager gets the Novice license his folks inform
him that the family is moving across the country. New house isn't quite ready
so they'll be living in temporary quarters for a while. Meanwhile most of their
stuff is in storage. "A while" becomes "a few months"..

Finally they get into the new house and there's a flurry of activity to get set
up - and the parents say ham radio isn't a top priority. By the time Our Hero
is back on the air, there's not much time left on his one-year license.

Look how long it's taken some *adults* (alleged adults, anyway) in this NG to
upgrade, or even get licenses.

The license renewal period would just be another
number by that time, since the new A license would be forever. I'm busy
as all gitout, and it took me something over a week of hard study to get
ready for the Extra.

Very true!

Plus I can't figure out what can make a person qualified to operate on
day 3652 of their licensing period and unqualified on day 3653.

The same principle that makes a General or Advanced class ham qualfied to
operate on 3526 kHz but not on 3524 kHz.

The same principle that makes a Tech Plus ham qualified to operate a
transmitter of 1500 W output using any authorized mode on 6 meters but not 10
meters.

It takes
a lot less time than that to understand RF safety - the only real reason
I can think of for the second class license, so if we're going to do
this, it should make some timing sense.

There's a lot more to it than RF safety.

I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Not sure about BTDT.

Been There, Done That

Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)


Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op.

Why?

As long as the power level is less than 50 W, that Class B ham could operate
any freq, any mode, as the control op.

We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station)

Not at all! Existing hams would retain their existing privs under Hans'
proposal.

Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto.

You mean you folks operate 1500 W on FD? (that's "full output")

Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good

Try QRP some time ;-)

The fact is that if a non-Extra wants to operate FD, there has to be a control
op present whenever the non-Extra exceeds his-her subband restrictions. That's
a lot more onerous than turning down the power to 50 W.

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels:
QRP, 50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.

There's another option: Change the rules so that different power levels could
be used for different stations in the same multi setup. (It used to be this
way!)

In fact, these changes should be done anyway. Right now there are three power
levels on FD:

"QRP/battery", which requires 5 W or less output *and* non-generator power,
(multiplier 5)

"Low power" which allows up to 150 W and requires a power source independent of
mains (multiplier 2)

"High Power" (multiplier 1)

Multi transmitter setups are categorized at the power level of the *highest
power* transmitter.

I'd do it this way:

"QRP", would require 10 W or less output (multiplier 5) and a power source
independent of mains

"Low Power" would would allow up to 50 W and requires a power source
independent of mains (multiplier 3.5)

"Medium power" would allow up to 200 W and requires a power source independent
of mains (multiplier 2)

"High Power" (multiplier 1)

"Battery" multiplier (instead of a weenie 100 point bonus) for non-fossil-fuel
energy sources

Multi transmitter setups would be categorized at the power level of the
*highest power* transmitter but scored by the transmitters actually used on
each band/mode. So 40 CW might run Low while 40 phone ran High, etc.

It used to be that way - and it was a good thing!

(Yes, I've suggested this to ARRL)

It seems that a major objection to the 50 watt rule is based on the fact that
there aren't a lot of 50 watt rigs for sale today. That's a pretty sad
commentary on the technical state of things, I think.

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.


Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the

current

license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

Its just too long.


Is it really too long, particularly considering the two-year experience
requirement?

One of the problems with the old 1 and 2 year Novices was that if a new ham ran
into "life happens" situations, their upgrade schedule would be seriously
disprupted.

Example: A few weeks after a teenager gets the Novice license his folks inform
him that the family is moving across the country. New house isn't quite ready
so they'll be living in temporary quarters for a while. Meanwhile most of their
stuff is in storage. "A while" becomes "a few months"..

Finally they get into the new house and there's a flurry of activity to get set
up - and the parents say ham radio isn't a top priority. By the time Our Hero
is back on the air, there's not much time left on his one-year license.

Look how long it's taken some *adults* (alleged adults, anyway) in this NG to
upgrade, or even get licenses.


The license renewal period would just be another
number by that time, since the new A license would be forever. I'm busy
as all gitout, and it took me something over a week of hard study to get
ready for the Extra.


Very true!

Plus I can't figure out what can make a person qualified to operate on
day 3652 of their licensing period and unqualified on day 3653.


The same principle that makes a General or Advanced class ham qualfied to
operate on 3526 kHz but not on 3524 kHz.

The same principle that makes a Tech Plus ham qualified to operate a
transmitter of 1500 W output using any authorized mode on 6 meters but not 10
meters.

I don't agree there Jim! True enough, its an arbitrary thing, but what
you are talking about is power limits and sub-bands, and I am talking
about the qualifications to operate *at all*. the other folks simply
operate within the limitations of their licenses, and the 10 year and 1
day class B ham is no ham at all anymore.


It takes
a lot less time than that to understand RF safety - the only real reason
I can think of for the second class license, so if we're going to do
this, it should make some timing sense.


There's a lot more to it than RF safety.


I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Not sure about BTDT.


Been There, Done That


Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)


Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op.


Why?

If he/she is operating 50 Watts, they are outside their priveliges.


As long as the power level is less than 50 W, that Class B ham could operate
any freq, any mode, as the control op.

Ahh, but now we have to set up a special low power station. The low
power ghetto I was talking about. For good or bad, my club runs high
power during Field Day. I'm taking my reference of "Class B Ghetto" from
experience with the GOTA station. The first year our GOTA station
operated, many of the people operating it called it a "toy station".
They could op one of the high power stations, park on a frequency, and
rack up points, and the lowly GOTA station has to hunt and pounce. It
wasn't until I put PSK31 on the GOTA station that it took off.

note: I'm not suggesting that newbies use high power. Just the opposite
in fact. Hunt and pounce at low power builds competence in the new ham.
But its so hard to compete with power when you're working like crazy to
get a QSO, and the guy in the next tent is racking them up at a high rate.

We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station)


Not at all! Existing hams would retain their existing privs under Hans'
proposal.

I'm saying that I'm sitting with the guy as a control op and not
operating myself.



Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto.


You mean you folks operate 1500 W on FD? (that's "full output")

Actually we operat @1kW. My bad.


Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good


Try QRP some time ;-)

Nothing wrong with QRP. I'm just noting possible problems as outlined
above. If you're going QRP then everyone is operating at less than 5 watts.


The fact is that if a non-Extra wants to operate FD, there has to be a control
op present whenever the non-Extra exceeds his-her subband restrictions. That's
a lot more onerous than turning down the power to 50 W.

I stayed in my bands when I was a General at FD. Wasn't a problem.


Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels:
QRP, 50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.


There's another option: Change the rules so that different power levels could
be used for different stations in the same multi setup. (It used to be this
way!)

This might work well enough, but I still don't care for relegating the
class B to the ghetto, or to remove an Extra or class A from operating
to be a control op.

I know that the others I work with on field day wouldn't be too wild
about that sort of thing either. These are people that love working high
power, and enjoy racking up points. Inexperienced users can get working
with us, but adding another station (and putting us in another class)
for a 50 watt station isn't going to be too popular with them - and
after all, they and myself are the ones doing the setup and teardown, so
as long as we are within the rules, we should be allowed to do this. I
just don't think that the proposed setup will be both newbie friendly
and experienced friendly at the same time.

Note I'm not saying things couldn't work. I'm saying that every time I
turn around, this proposal is bumping into something else, and not
necessarily in a good way. It starts out prety simply, but then we have
to do all kinds of things to shoehorn it into the real world. So we end
up changing this so can coexist with the thing we changed before in
order to avoid messing that up which came about as a result of modifying
the rule that contradicted...........

"Mike Coslo" wrote

Ahh, but now we have to set up a special low power station.

No you don't. At worst you need to put a wattmeter in the transmission
line, and maybe a neon-orange sign reading "Observe the power limits of your
operators license." with an arrow pointing to the "Pwr" knob on the radio.

73, de Hans, K0HB

KØHB wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote


Ahh, but now we have to set up a special low power station.


No you don't. At worst you need to put a wattmeter in the transmission
line, and maybe a neon-orange sign reading "Observe the power limits of your
operators license." with an arrow pointing to the "Pwr" knob on the radio.

At worst......

So we operate class one while operating 50 watts. Another bump.

All this is not insurmountable, but far reaching.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote in message ...
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo
writes:


I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.


Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the

current

license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

Its just too long.


Is it really too long, particularly considering the two-year experience
requirement?

One of the problems with the old 1 and 2 year Novices was that if a new ham ran
into "life happens" situations, their upgrade schedule would be seriously
disprupted.

Example: A few weeks after a teenager gets the Novice license his folks inform
him that the family is moving across the country. New house isn't quite ready
so they'll be living in temporary quarters for a while. Meanwhile most of their
stuff is in storage. "A while" becomes "a few months"..

Finally they get into the new house and there's a flurry of activity to get set
up - and the parents say ham radio isn't a top priority. By the time Our Hero
is back on the air, there's not much time left on his one-year license.

Look how long it's taken some *adults* (alleged adults, anyway) in this NG to
upgrade, or even get licenses.


The license renewal period would just be another
number by that time, since the new A license would be forever. I'm busy
as all gitout, and it took me something over a week of hard study to get
ready for the Extra.


Very true!

Plus I can't figure out what can make a person qualified to operate on
day 3652 of their licensing period and unqualified on day 3653.


The same principle that makes a General or Advanced class ham qualfied to
operate on 3526 kHz but not on 3524 kHz.

The same principle that makes a Tech Plus ham qualified to operate a
transmitter of 1500 W output using any authorized mode on 6 meters but not 10
meters.

I don't agree there Jim! True enough, its an arbitrary thing, but what
you are talking about is power limits and sub-bands, and I am talking
about the qualifications to operate *at all*. the other folks simply
operate within the limitations of their licenses, and the 10 year and 1
day class B ham is no ham at all anymore.

Just like the old Novices when their licenses ran out.

Point is, that hypothetical Class B had a window of 8 *years* to
upgrade to Class A. You said it took you all of a week to get ready
for Extra.

It takes
a lot less time than that to understand RF safety - the only real reason
I can think of for the second class license, so if we're going to do
this, it should make some timing sense.

There's a lot more to it than RF safety.

I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Not sure about BTDT.


Been There, Done That


Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)


Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op.


Why?

If he/she is operating 50 Watts, they are outside their priveliges.

OK. So turn down the power.

As long as the power level is less than 50 W, that Class B ham could operate
any freq, any mode, as the control op.

Ahh, but now we have to set up a special low power station. The low
power ghetto I was talking about. For good or bad, my club runs high
power during Field Day.

Most clubs don't.

And if the power levels were restructured, the points from a 50 watt
station could make more difference than those from a 1500 W station.

I'm taking my reference of "Class B Ghetto" from
experience with the GOTA station. The first year our GOTA station
operated, many of the people operating it called it a "toy station".

That's *their* problem.

They could op one of the high power stations, park on a frequency, and
rack up points, and the lowly GOTA station has to hunt and pounce. It
wasn't until I put PSK31 on the GOTA station that it took off.

So? They're used to being Big Guns. Anybody who wants to be a Big Gun
could just get a Class A and be done with it.

note: I'm not suggesting that newbies use high power. Just the opposite
in fact. Hunt and pounce at low power builds competence in the new ham.
But its so hard to compete with power when you're working like crazy to
get a QSO, and the guy in the next tent is racking them up at a high rate.

That's part of the experience requirement. Part of the plan.

And remember the power multiplier idea. If the 50 watt station is
hunt/pecking 20 per hour but has a 3.5 multiplier, they're making more
points than the Big Gun doing 60 per hour.

We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station)

Not at all! Existing hams would retain their existing privs under Hans'
proposal.

I'm saying that I'm sitting with the guy as a control op and not
operating myself.

If they're existing hams (say, Generals) they could still do what
they've always done. If they're unlicensed, or not licensed for the
freq/power/mode in use, they still need a control op today.

And one of the *best* ways for them to learn is to work with an
experienced op.

Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto.

You mean you folks operate 1500 W on FD? (that's "full output")

Actually we operat @1kW. My bad.

FD rules can be changed, y'know.


Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good


Try QRP some time ;-)

Nothing wrong with QRP. I'm just noting possible problems as outlined
above. If you're going QRP then everyone is operating at less than 5 watts.

Only if the current rules are kept.

The fact is that if a non-Extra wants to operate FD, there has to be a control
op present whenever the non-Extra exceeds his-her subband restrictions. That's
a lot more onerous than turning down the power to 50 W.

I stayed in my bands when I was a General at FD. Wasn't a problem.

It's been so long since I had to worry about such things.....;-)

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels:
QRP, 50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.


There's another option: Change the rules so that different power levels could
be used for different stations in the same multi setup. (It used to be this
way!)

This might work well enough, but I still don't care for relegating the
class B to the ghetto, or to remove an Extra or class A from operating
to be a control op.

Then let the Class Bs keep a log or feed the generator or cook
weenies. Or, heaven forbid, take the Class A test. Is it gonna kill
'em?

I know that the others I work with on field day wouldn't be too wild
about that sort of thing either. These are people that love working high
power, and enjoy racking up points.

Uh-huh. How many points did they make per transmitter last year?

Inexperienced users can get working
with us, but adding another station (and putting us in another class)
for a 50 watt station isn't going to be too popular with them - and
after all, they and myself are the ones doing the setup and teardown, so
as long as we are within the rules, we should be allowed to do this. I
just don't think that the proposed setup will be both newbie friendly
and experienced friendly at the same time.

Then the rules need some refining.


Note I'm not saying things couldn't work. I'm saying that every time I
turn around, this proposal is bumping into something else, and not
necessarily in a good way.

So does any other proposal. FD is once a year. It's supposed to be a
learning experience, last time I checked.

It starts out prety simply, but then we have
to do all kinds of things to shoehorn it into the real world. So we end
up changing this so can coexist with the thing we changed before in
order to avoid messing that up which came about as a result of modifying
the rule that contradicted...........

Then what's *your* solution, Mike?

I don't agree with all of Hans' ideas, but at least he's put forth a
coherent proposal.

I'd have three license classes, all renewable, minimum 1 year in each
class experience required, power levels 100W, 400W, 1500W,
subbands-by-license-class on HF/MF, and better writtens.


73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote in message ...


snippage


I don't agree there Jim! True enough, its an arbitrary thing, but what
you are talking about is power limits and sub-bands, and I am talking
about the qualifications to operate *at all*. the other folks simply
operate within the limitations of their licenses, and the 10 year and 1
day class B ham is no ham at all anymore.


Just like the old Novices when their licenses ran out.

Point is, that hypothetical Class B had a window of 8 *years* to
upgrade to Class A. You said it took you all of a week to get ready
for Extra.

Granted, I had a head start, and didn't need as much time as some, but
I find it hard to argue that 10 years is a good time limit when it isn't
needed. Anyone that takes ten years to upgrade to Extra is probably not
going to upgrade to Extra. Ooops, class A.


I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op.


Why?

If he/she is operating 50 Watts, they are outside their priveliges.


OK. So turn down the power.

Sigh... our club has a group of guys and gals that make a big
production out of FD. It isn't what everyone does, but its what we do.
We don't want to run 50 watts. The first year I went to field day, I was
a Technician. I got to run a high power station with a control op
logging. It was great, and was what really got me interested in getting
my General. then I logged while he opped.

Then next year, when I had my General, I could op by myself,
discovering the joy of overnight operation.

My points are two. We worked in this rank beginner from a technician
up, and didn't interfere with the station operation, and it worked well.
No adjustments needed. And I was part of the group from the git-go.


As long as the power level is less than 50 W, that Class B ham could operate
any freq, any mode, as the control op.

Ahh, but now we have to set up a special low power station. The low
power ghetto I was talking about. For good or bad, my club runs high
power during Field Day.


Most clubs don't.

We do.


And if the power levels were restructured, the points from a 50 watt
station could make more difference than those from a 1500 W station.

Another "if-then" situation. Gaw, were getting a lot of them.



I'm taking my reference of "Class B Ghetto" from
experience with the GOTA station. The first year our GOTA station
operated, many of the people operating it called it a "toy station".


That's *their* problem.

And it becomes *our* problem then. Since then, I have worked hard to
make the GOTA operators feel like part of the group. move that tent
nearer the big tent. Keep more people than just myself and the person at
the mic there. I'm a little surprised, Jim. All that I'm talking about
is making these potential hams and inactive hams feel like maybe we
*want* them there. Your arguments sound a little like some of the old
cranks I hear once in a while.


They could op one of the high power stations, park on a frequency, and
rack up points, and the lowly GOTA station has to hunt and pounce. It
wasn't until I put PSK31 on the GOTA station that it took off.


So? They're used to being Big Guns. Anybody who wants to be a Big Gun
could just get a Class A and be done with it.

After two years.


note: I'm not suggesting that newbies use high power. Just the opposite
in fact. Hunt and pounce at low power builds competence in the new ham.
But its so hard to compete with power when you're working like crazy to
get a QSO, and the guy in the next tent is racking them up at a high rate.


That's part of the experience requirement. Part of the plan.

And remember the power multiplier idea. If the 50 watt station is
hunt/pecking 20 per hour but has a 3.5 multiplier, they're making more
points than the Big Gun doing 60 per hour.

"if-then"


We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station)



Not at all! Existing hams would retain their existing privs under Hans'
proposal.

I'm saying that I'm sitting with the guy as a control op and not
operating myself.


If they're existing hams (say, Generals) they could still do what
they've always done. If they're unlicensed, or not licensed for the
freq/power/mode in use, they still need a control op today.

And one of the *best* ways for them to learn is to work with an
experienced op.


Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto.

You mean you folks operate 1500 W on FD? (that's "full output")

Actually we operat @1kW. My bad.


FD rules can be changed, y'know.


Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good


Try QRP some time ;-)

Nothing wrong with QRP. I'm just noting possible problems as outlined
above. If you're going QRP then everyone is operating at less than 5 watts.


Only if the current rules are kept.

The fact is that if a non-Extra wants to operate FD, there has to be a control
op present whenever the non-Extra exceeds his-her subband restrictions. That's
a lot more onerous than turning down the power to 50 W.

I stayed in my bands when I was a General at FD. Wasn't a problem.


It's been so long since I had to worry about such things.....;-)

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels:
QRP, 50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.


There's another option: Change the rules so that different power levels could
be used for different stations in the same multi setup. (It used to be this
way!)

This might work well enough, but I still don't care for relegating the
class B to the ghetto, or to remove an Extra or class A from operating
to be a control op.


Then let the Class Bs keep a log or feed the generator or cook
weenies. Or, heaven forbid, take the Class A test. Is it gonna kill
'em?

I know that the others I work with on field day wouldn't be too wild
about that sort of thing either. These are people that love working high
power, and enjoy racking up points.


Uh-huh. How many points did they make per transmitter last year?

We were 3A

W3YA + W3GA (GOTA) did 7362 points - I don't have the breakdown for each
transmitter. We don't get any power multiplier at all, so what you see
is what we get.

Inexperienced users can get working
with us, but adding another station (and putting us in another class)
for a 50 watt station isn't going to be too popular with them - and
after all, they and myself are the ones doing the setup and teardown, so
as long as we are within the rules, we should be allowed to do this. I
just don't think that the proposed setup will be both newbie friendly
and experienced friendly at the same time.


Then the rules need some refining.


Note I'm not saying things couldn't work. I'm saying that every time I
turn around, this proposal is bumping into something else, and not
necessarily in a good way.


So does any other proposal. FD is once a year. It's supposed to be a
learning experience, last time I checked.


It starts out pretty simply, but then we have
to do all kinds of things to shoehorn it into the real world. So we end
up changing this so can coexist with the thing we changed before in
order to avoid messing that up which came about as a result of modifying
the rule that contradicted...........


Then what's *your* solution, Mike?

I don't agree with all of Hans' ideas, but at least he's put forth a
coherent proposal.

I gave mine a while back, and I'll give it again.

Technician

General

Extra

Same rules as now. Tests expanded for General and Extra.

Minimum impact, and there ya go. Question pool change.


I'd have three license classes, all renewable, minimum 1 year in each
class experience required, power levels 100W, 400W, 1500W,
subbands-by-license-class on HF/MF, and better writtens.

And I'm still a little surprised, Jim. Perhaps I shouldn't point out
any problems that will happen under Hans' proposal? I get the impression
from your answers - "so what" "that's their problem" "Uh Huh" and the
like, that you must think my objections are as Hans describes me
sometimes - "novel".

What the heck? Perhaps it's better if I just keep the old yap shut?
Anytime things are changed, things are impacted. We can point them out
before hand, or run into them blind.

You might not think my concerns are valid, but I can tell you that I
know plenty of people that have the same concerns. We are all novel I
guess! 8^) Maybe I point out small facts - but I've pointed out a pretty
fair number of them, and I'm not looking very hard. Any small fact is
insignificant by itself, but when a lot of them come up.....


- Mike KB3EIA -