Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"KØHB" wrote in message thlink.net...
"N2EY" wrote FCC or somebody would have to keep a database of everyone who had held one and let it expire without upgrading, to insure that someone wouldn't retest and get a second one. No more than FCC or somebody kept a similar database to prevent ex-licensees from glomming onto a Novice permit back in the 1950's. I think people had more respect for the FCC and its R&R back then, Hans. Just IMHO. And i'm not "insisting" on it, just pointing out some of the possible problems. I think the best solution might be to have it nonrenewable, but if someone *really* wants another one, they can take the exam again after the first one expires. Just a thought. A false application today is just as unlikely as a false application 50 years ago, and I suspect the penalties are similar. I hope you're right. And why bother --- after 10 years of experience, the standard exam would be a laugher. That's what I thought back in 1968. I was amazed that there was so much moaning and groaning and complaining from *experienced* hams about having to take another license test...... 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
ARRL Propose New License Class & Code-Free HF Access | Antenna | |||
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions | Dx | |||
BPL, the ARRL and the UPLC | Homebrew | |||
NEWS: N2DUP announces for ARRL section manager in Minnesota | General | |||
ARRL FUD about BPL | General |