|
"N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , Paul W. Schleck writes: In (N2EY) writes: In article om, "Dee D. Flint" writes: Basically I think the ARRL Board knows that the free upgrades means that their proposal probably will not be adopted in this form. The FCC has never gone along with free upgrades before and there is no evidence that they would do so now. However, I believe they tossed it in as another idea for the FCC to consider in developing whatever the FCC decides to do, if they decide to do anything at all. That's probably correct, Dee. And that's what bothers me! As you say, FCC has never done free upgrades, and the last time the issue came up (98-143), the ARRL proposal was for existing Novices (!) and Tech Pluses to get free upgrade to General. Of course, FCC said "no way", and has had no problem whatever keeping the closed-to-new-issues classes in their database. So why propose something FCC obviously isn't going to do? Just wastes everybody's time. More important, it diverts attention from the other issues. oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...;-) 73 de Jim, N2EY I brought this subject up with someone in the League. This exact thread, actually. I was told that the ARRL BoD sincerely believes (take at face value, or not) that failure to upgrade licensees in the FCC R&O for WT 98-143 was not a final "no" answer. Maybe it wasn't. But are such freebies really a good idea? Here's your options: We currently have essentially a 6 license system in place (even though several licenses are no longer issued). To go from that system to the one proposed by ARRL leaves three options as I see it: 1. The one-time free upgrade process as put forth by ARRL which takes nothing away from anyone and immediately gets everyone into the new 3 license system, or 2. Go to the new system but "grandfather" those on current but no longer to be issued license classes which takes nothing from anyone but presents a dual system of licenses, rules and regulations which would likly exist for decades until those with licenses no longer being issued as new ended up SK or otherwise dropped from our ranks or, 3. Implement the ARRL 3 licnense system and downgrade some folks to new Novice (i.e. the Techs) or General (i.e the Advanced). This last scenario takes away privileges and we all know how well that went down in the late 60's Incentive Licensing implementation. To me the answer is clear...and, I suspect so is it also to ARRL which is why the proposal includes free upgrades. Rather, it is just one of the unresolved loose ends that was deliberately not tied up until better consensus emerged from the amateur radio community about things like Novice band refarming, etc. The League official noted that the ARRL's band refarming proposal, RM-10413, has been sitting on an FCC official's desk for about two years now (he claims to know the exact FCC official, but did not name him). Because of this, as long a wait, if not longer, is expected on a "final" answer concerning automatic upgrading. I say we should judge by actions. When FCC thinksa proposal is a good or bad idea, they act. How long did the whole 98-143 process take, from initial release of the NPRM to the new rules in April 2000? More important, what would a lack of free upgrades hurt? Is it really such a burden to require an Advanced to pass Element 4, or a Tech to pass Element 3, in order to get the next higher grade of license? See options 2 and 3 above. Cheersm Bill K2UNK |
In (N2EY) writes:
In article , Paul W. Schleck writes: In (N2EY) writes: In article om, "Dee D. Flint" writes: Basically I think the ARRL Board knows that the free upgrades means that their proposal probably will not be adopted in this form. The FCC has never gone along with free upgrades before and there is no evidence that they would do so now. However, I believe they tossed it in as another idea for the FCC to consider in developing whatever the FCC decides to do, if they decide to do anything at all. That's probably correct, Dee. And that's what bothers me! As you say, FCC has never done free upgrades, and the last time the issue came up (98-143), the ARRL proposal was for existing Novices (!) and Tech Pluses to get free upgrade to General. Of course, FCC said "no way", and has had no problem whatever keeping the closed-to-new-issues classes in their database. So why propose something FCC obviously isn't going to do? Just wastes everybody's time. More important, it diverts attention from the other issues. oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...;-) 73 de Jim, N2EY I brought this subject up with someone in the League. This exact thread, actually. I was told that the ARRL BoD sincerely believes (take at face value, or not) that failure to upgrade licensees in the FCC R&O for WT 98-143 was not a final "no" answer. Maybe it wasn't. But are such freebies really a good idea? It may be a realistic, and pragmatic, idea when considered against the pros and cons: Cons: Provides a "free upgrade" to those that haven't explicitly tested for it. Pros: Avoids having to wait until the last Advanced class license expires to refarm the Advanced phone bands. Alternatively, avoids opening up the Advanced class phone bands to General-class hams (an effective downgrade in privileges for Advanced, and crowding out DX users with more U.S. hams in those bands) or opening up the Extra class phone bands to Advanced-class hams (which would be a "free upgrade" in all but name). Also avoids having to accommodate a license class (Tech Plus) that isn't even carried in the FCC database anymore, which is a records/ enforcement problem for the FCC, and requires the licensee to keep documentation forever. Rather, it is just one of the unresolved loose ends that was deliberately not tied up until better consensus emerged from the amateur radio community about things like Novice band refarming, etc. The League official noted that the ARRL's band refarming proposal, RM-10413, has been sitting on an FCC official's desk for about two years now (he claims to know the exact FCC official, but did not name him). Because of this, as long a wait, if not longer, is expected on a "final" answer concerning automatic upgrading. I say we should judge by actions. When FCC thinksa proposal is a good or bad idea, they act. How long did the whole 98-143 process take, from initial release of the NPRM to the new rules in April 2000? More important, what would a lack of free upgrades hurt? Is it really such a burden to require an Advanced to pass Element 4, or a Tech to pass Element 3, in order to get the next higher grade of license? I think the ARRL may be politically shrewder than some would give them credit. They can turn to the reformers and say, "See, we're giving you a both a Novice and General HF-class license that doesn't require Morse Code." To the old-school (and long-time, dues-paying) members they can at least imply, "We recognize that the Morse Code tests you took in the past are valuable, so we are going to reward you with a higher class of license. Then you will always know that you are better than anyone who gets a General or Extra class license under the reduced standards in the future." -- 73, Paul W. Schleck, K3FU http://www.novia.net/~pschleck/ Finger for PGP Public Key |
|
|
On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Tom Winston wrote:
On 19 Jan 2004 10:08:20 -0800, N2EY wrote: Existing Advanceds get free upgrade to Extra, ... That's not an upgrade; that's a downgrade. Advanced class licensees passed the Extra class written exam, and passed a 13 wpm code test. Furthermore, most Advanced class licensees took the older Extra exam -- an exam that's a lot tougher than the current Extra exam. Possession of the Advanced class license proves that the holder met higher standards than the current crop of Extras. So thanks, but no thanks. When I want to downgrade, *I* will make that decision. But one can still tell: The PRIOR CLASS field will still say "A". Just go away, ARRL, and keep your grimy paws off my license. That part I agree with; they can't seem to leave anything alone without screwing it up. |
In article , "D. Stussy"
writes: On Mon, 19 Jan 2004, Tom Winston wrote: On 19 Jan 2004 10:08:20 -0800, N2EY wrote: Existing Advanceds get free upgrade to Extra, ... That's not an upgrade; that's a downgrade. Advanced class licensees passed the Extra class written exam, and passed a 13 wpm code test. Furthermore, most Advanced class licensees took the older Extra exam -- an exam that's a lot tougher than the current Extra exam. Possession of the Advanced class license proves that the holder met higher standards than the current crop of Extras. So thanks, but no thanks. When I want to downgrade, *I* will make that decision. But one can still tell: The PRIOR CLASS field will still say "A". Doesn't say that on my entry. Even though it's true. Just go away, ARRL, and keep your grimy paws off my license. That part I agree with; they can't seem to leave anything alone without screwing it up. OK, let's just leave the structure the way it is. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"D. Stussy" wrote | | But one can still tell: The PRIOR CLASS field will still say "A". | Not in all cases. My "prior class" was Conditional. |
In article , Paul W. Schleck
writes: In (N2EY) writes: In article , Paul W. Schleck writes: In (N2EY) writes: In article om, "Dee D. Flint" writes: Basically I think the ARRL Board knows that the free upgrades means that their proposal probably will not be adopted in this form. The FCC has never gone along with free upgrades before and there is no evidence that they would do so now. However, I believe they tossed it in as another idea for the FCC to consider in developing whatever the FCC decides to do, if they decide to do anything at all. That's probably correct, Dee. And that's what bothers me! As you say, FCC has never done free upgrades, and the last time the issue came up (98-143), the ARRL proposal was for existing Novices (!) and Tech Pluses to get free upgrade to General. Of course, FCC said "no way", and has had no problem whatever keeping the closed-to-new-issues classes in their database. So why propose something FCC obviously isn't going to do? Just wastes everybody's time. More important, it diverts attention from the other issues. oh wait, I think I just answered my own question...;-) 73 de Jim, N2EY I brought this subject up with someone in the League. This exact thread, actually. I was told that the ARRL BoD sincerely believes (take at face value, or not) that failure to upgrade licensees in the FCC R&O for WT 98-143 was not a final "no" answer. Maybe it wasn't. But are such freebies really a good idea? It may be a realistic, and pragmatic, idea when considered against the pros and cons: Cons: Provides a "free upgrade" to those that haven't explicitly tested for it. That's one. There are others: - Allowing a free upgrade is proof that the material in the test which is not taken is not necessary for the privileges. - Amateurs who miss the one time upgrade have to take more tests than those who didn't. How do we justify that? - Decreased reason for more than half of all hams to upgrade by testing. Pros: Avoids having to wait until the last Advanced class license expires to refarm the Advanced phone bands. Why does that have to be done at all? Alternatively, avoids opening up the Advanced class phone bands to General-class hams (an effective downgrade in privileges for Advanced, and crowding out DX users with more U.S. hams in those bands) or opening up the Extra class phone bands to Advanced-class hams (which would be a "free upgrade" in all but name). Again, why not just leave those subbands as they are now? Also avoids having to accommodate a license class (Tech Plus) that isn't even carried in the FCC database anymore, which is a records/ enforcement problem for the FCC, and requires the licensee to keep documentation forever. If the current rules are left alone, all Tech Pluses will be Techs in six years, two months and 20 days or so. Why not just give all the existing Techs, Tech Pluses and Novices the "NewNovice" privs, in addition to their existing privileges? The database doesn't need to change at all. Rather, it is just one of the unresolved loose ends that was deliberately not tied up until better consensus emerged from the amateur radio community about things like Novice band refarming, etc. The League official noted that the ARRL's band refarming proposal, RM-10413, has been sitting on an FCC official's desk for about two years now (he claims to know the exact FCC official, but did not name him). Because of this, as long a wait, if not longer, is expected on a "final" answer concerning automatic upgrading. I say we should judge by actions. When FCC thinksa proposal is a good or bad idea, they act. How long did the whole 98-143 process take, from initial release of the NPRM to the new rules in April 2000? More important, what would a lack of free upgrades hurt? Is it really such a burden to require an Advanced to pass Element 4, or a Tech to pass Element 3, in order to get the next higher grade of license? I think the ARRL may be politically shrewder than some would give them credit. You mean the BoD. I'm the ARRL too, remember? How much of the ARRL proposal in 1998 got enacted? They can turn to the reformers and say, "See, we're giving you a both a Novice and General HF-class license that doesn't require Morse Code." To the old-school (and long-time, dues-paying) members they can at least imply, "We recognize that the Morse Code tests you took in the past are valuable, so we are going to reward you with a higher class of license. Then you will always know that you are better than anyone who gets a General or Extra class license under the reduced standards in the future." Avoids the subject of why free upgrades are needed. I say they're not. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"N2EY" wrote | | - Allowing a free upgrade is proof that the material in the test which is not | taken is not necessary for the privileges. | Here we go again! Damn it Jim, that is patently false and you know that it is, yet you keep dragging it out as a fact. Allowing a free upgrade isn't "proof" of anything except that a free-pass was given, sort of like a day of amnesty when all overdue library books can be returned without fees. Yes, it's a really bad idea, but it doesn't disprove the need for proper qualification examinations. Go join Carl Stevenson and Ed Hare in the NTI sign-up queue. (I'd mention them by call sign, but I wouldn't want to risk compromising your "standards".) 3333333, Hans, K0-Heavenly-Body |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:47 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com