"N2EY" wrote:

The written tests which are made from
those questions are a govenrment
requirement.


However, we were discussing the government requirement, not test
questions.


Because we have not seen any significant
changes to the technology used by hams
in all that time that came from hams who
aren't code tested.


Of course not. Radio is a mature technology, so you're not likely to see
"significant" changes in the future. But that doesn't suggest for a moment
that there are no contributions at all being made. With several hundred
thousand hams out there, neither of us are likely to know what contributions
are being made.


But with all due respect, Dwight - how
"technically inclined" are you? Build any
homebrew rigs? Any new modes or
technologies? Any technical articles in
amateur radio publications?


Are these what determines who is technically inclined? If so, I doubt 99%
of the operators today, in any license class, could be described that way. I
use modern radio equipment, far beyond what could be built easily at home.
New modes were rare even before any changes to the code tests and may be
even more rare in the future. And new technologies will obviously be small
in a mature industry. As for my own activities, I'll refrain beyond saying
I've built some lessor equipment at home, written some articles, and helped
to establish policies for the use of amateur equipment within a national
organization.


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

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

cb and shortwave groups trimmed


Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message

some snippage

As I figured, the BPL internet access concept is going down fast.



A test of BPL was run in Alabama. A engineer friend of mine told me it was
not coming up to what was advertised in Birmingham. Repeaters were needed
way too often, thus jacking up the expense.

Unless the FCC is totally braindead I think BPL, as proposed will die by
itself. However what they want is INCREASE the power of BPL over and above
what is presently allowed under part 15.

They may take that route. We shall see.


I think they should be told that "Ya can't polish a Turd!"

- Mike KB3EIA -

"N2EY" wrote

That way, no one who was
interested would be forced off the air, but at the same time there would
be
incentive to get a full-privs renewable license.

If, after 10 years as a learner and exposed to mainstream ham radio they
can't qualify for a standard license, then another 10 years isn't likely to
be sufficient to become qualified.

I can't imagine "one who was interested" would fail to qualify in 10 years,
but if they didn't, well I guess there are other hobbies like finger
painting which might be less challenging and not require a federal license
to pursue. The liberals will whine and wring their hands in dismay, but
life's a bitch sometimes.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"N2EY" wrote

Could the holder of your learners permit ham license operate a ham rig
alone?

Of course, just like the previous learners permit, aka "Novice".

not being banned for life as your plan would do.

They wouldn't be 'banned for life'. They could take the standard
qualification test at any time.

Are there any licenses or learner's permits of *any* kind currently issued
by
the US Govt. that are one-time-only, upgrade-or-you're-out?

None that I'm aware are currently extant, but precedent exists.

73, de Hans, K0HB

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message ink.net...
"KØHB" wrote in message
news

"Bill Sohl" wrote
Only on a one-time basis.

If N2EY's latest post under "ARS License Numbers" is accurate,

It is.

and if the
"fix" was instituted today, the number of Amateur Extra licensees would
increase by 213% and the vast majority (69%) of this enlarged "Extra
Class"
would not qualify for the license under yesterdays rules or tomorrows
rules.

Given that sad state of affairs, now any NEW amateur hopefuls can
reasonably plead that any examination more comprehensive
than the current General discriminates against new applicants.

They can plead all they want...doesn't make it so. The FCC could
certainly counter argue the upgrades were a one-time need to
simplify the overall license structure.

But why is there such a need? Retaining closed-off license classes
like the Advanced and Novice simply requires that a certain field in
the FCC database have more alternatives and the retention of a few
paragraphs of Part 97 listing privs of those licenses.

Back in the days before electronic data, FCC kept the closed-off
Advanced class as a separate entity for more than a decade even though
it carried no additional privileges.

Their counter argument would utterly fail, because they'd first need to
prove that the "one-time need" over-rides the harm of a massive influx of
underqualified (by their own rules) individuals into the top class of
amateur operators. Judges rule on logic, not administrative convenience.

So how come when the Generals "lost" privileges in 1968 they didn't
win that same argument...i.e. you can't take privileges
from me because the new requirements aren't justified
since I already had those privileges via a lower class
license?

Two reasons:

1) The 1968 situation involved existing hams *losing* privs, not
getting a free upgrade.

2) What is proposed, if I read it correctly, is a one-time giveaway,
not a rules change.

The closest thing to it historically isn't 1968 but instead it's the
Great Giveaway of 1953, when FCC completely reversed its restructuring
of 1951 and opened all privs to all hams except Novices and Techs.

And I'll ask again - why is there a need to eliminate the closed-off
license classes? Tech Plus will disappear automatically no later than
6 years, 3 months and 10 days from now. Novice is down by about a
third and Advanced is slowly decreasing as well. What harm do these
old classes do?

73 de Jim, N2EY

(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(Brian) writes:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...
"Len Over 21" wrote


Anything said against YOUR PLAN is worthless, illogical,
inconsequential, irresponsible, irrelevant, etc., etc., etc.


I knew you'd agree with me.

73, de Hans, K0HB

I just happen to agree with Hans' plan. Allow the amateur to
distinguish him or herself through actions rather than an FCC forced
march.

While I agree on the generality of that, such is impossible under
the present-day Class Distinction Rules of US amateur radio.

ALL perceived expertise is judged by the "amateur community"
as demonstrated by the fancy-bordered license (suitable for
framing) from the federal government.

The Amateur Extra is the epitome of excellence. Once achieved,
nothing else need be learned. Education ends. You have been
told by his Most High Excellency, the Dill Instructor.

All learning comes through having tiers and tiers of classes, of
distinctions (enforced by law) right along with the social need of
call letters written behind the name to signify a "title" all may see
(and admire, respect) as if it is a dukedom, barony, or other
noble rank. That is VERY IMPORTANT. Do not criticize any
statements of the ruling classes of the "community."

US amateur radio seems to have ceased being a hobby, an
avocational activity done for personal recreation. It has become a
LIFESTYLE...a True Belief.

cut to stock shot of Rod Serling and signpost up ahead, voice
sign-off by Rod...up theme and take black...

LHA

And poor Mike is getting beat up for saying the W1AW signal was too wide.

(Steve Robeson, K4CAP) wrote in message . com...
(Len Over 21) wrote in message ...
In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

I'm not gonna throw any stones at ya, Bill. But please note how
I was asked to shut up a while back when I pointed out some logical
inconsistencies in the written testing....

[nobody can realistically expect you to "shut up," jimmie...:-) ]

Nor can we expect you, Leonard H. Andserson, to heed your own
advice, ie not using belittling endearments when addressing others.

Scumbags rarely do. And you ARE a scumbag.

OK, little Stevie, you appear to be using belittling endearments when
addressing others. Again.

"Dwight Stewart" wrote in message thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote:
"Dwight Stewart" writes:
The FCC doesn't have a mandate
to test discipline.

Yes, they do. That's what the "character"
stuff in the rules is about.


I've read the rules many times, but must have missed the part or parts
about character testing.

We've had many characters testing.

One of the more memorable ones has been CB Bruce/WA8ULX, who tested on
a lark, scored 100% w/o studying, did so in less than 8 minutes, and
collected $250 from two CB-Plussers.

Shirley you recall that character?

Maybe The Amateur Formerly Known As Rev. Jim had someone else in mind.

In article k.net, "Dwight
Stewart" writes:

"Len Over 21" wrote:

Irrelevant, Dwight. The amateur
community has specifed the criteria
and goals of amateurism.

First and foremost is morsemanship.
(snip)

Because so many obviously agree, your sarcasm falls flat, Len.

Irrelevant. Morse code is the entire foundation for amateur radio.

Morse code is cutting-edge technology, an advancement necessary
to use the HF spectrum for communications.

Morse code gets through when nothing else will, thus proving that
morse code modes do away with electrical power requirements.

All who are "interested in radio" are required to learn morse code
and be licensed in the amateur radio service. Non-morse modes
do not count as "interest." Non-amateur work does not count as
"interest." Professional work in radio does not count as "interest."

Learning morse code shows the self-discipline, dedication, and
commitment to the amateur community and the League.

I have been told this. I repeat it to you for the betterment of all.

LHA

In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes:

"KØHB" wrote in message
thlink.net...

"Dee D. Flint" wrote

You will of course expect the licensing exam to be equivalent to the sum
of
knowledge required for Tech, General and Extra for this single full
privilege license.

Yes. Good plan. (Toss in Novice and Advanced while we're on the topic.)

73, de Hans, K0HB

Well of course but that's already been done. The current Tech pool now
covers the old Novice material and the current Extra pool now covers the old
Advanced material.

Sorry, the entirety of the Tech is totally irrelevant and irreverent...they
are not tested for morse code proficiency.

Morse code is the living heart of amateur radio. Only "real" hams
have been code-tested.

Without morse code testing, all new amateur licenses are Given Away!

LHA