Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #281   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 06:04 PM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
nk.net...


Supposing that the ARRL petition is the form in which the change actually
gets made and that all the newly upgraded people get on HF, how is the ham
community supposed to "elmer" 300,000+ new HF users all at once?

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

  #282   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 06:12 PM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


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


The problem, is that there isn't any accepted relationship
of privileges vs license to apply a truly knoweldege
based upgrade system that links the additional privileges to actual
written test knowlede.


The concept that privileges granted must have a direct correlation to the
test material is a fallacy. The additional privileges are a reward for
doing more work in the overall field of amateur radio. Many rewards in life
have no direct relationship on the material itself. Starting in the home,
some parents give their children money or privileges for getting a good
grade. The reward has no relationship whatsoever to the accomplishment. In
college, you get your degree after fulfilling ALL the requirements. Some of
the requirements are imposed not because they have any relationship to the
student's major but are considered appropriate as part of a well rounded
education.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

  #283   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 06:19 PM
Dee D. Flint
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net, "Bill

Sohl"
writes:

Free upgrades for Techs would affect about 322,000 hams. Last year we got

about
20,000 new Techs, so the proposed freebie would affect as many existing

hams as
the new ones we might get in the next 10-15 years.


And how could the existing ham community possibly elmer these 300,000+ new
HF users should they all decide to be active shortly following that free
upgrade. I hate to think of the resulting SSB DX pileups as it is pretty
bad now. If a free upgrade goes through and significant numbers move to HF
within a short period of time, I suspect that we'll see a lot more DX
stations "hiding" in CW.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

  #285   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 07:46 PM
Bill Sohl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
.com...

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
nk.net...


Supposing that the ARRL petition is the form in which the change actually
gets made and that all the newly upgraded people get on HF, how is the ham
community supposed to "elmer" 300,000+ new HF users all at once?


Do you really believe for a second that if the upgrades take
place that there will suddenly be 300K people "on-the-air"
in HF that haven't been? If yes, I have a nice bridge in
Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.

Reality check...
1. How many Techs now own an HF rig at all?
2. How many, if upgraded will buy an HF rig?
3. How many Techs are spouses or family members
of an existing ham who is already General, Advanced or Extra?
4. How many of existing 300K techs are SK or otherwise
inactive anyway?

As for "elmering" those that would become Generals, I'm
sure many of us are willing to help anyone that asks for help.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK





  #286   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 08:28 PM
Bill Sohl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net, "Bill

Sohl"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net,

"Bill
Sohl"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article

t,
"Bill
Sohl"
writes:

[snip]


Let's get this clear right now.


ARRL proposes that all current Techs and Tech Pluses get a free

upgrade
to General with no additional testing.


They also propose that all current Advanceds get a free upgrade to
Extra with no additional testing.

Do you support those free upgrades or not?

I (K2UNK) do...on this "one time" basis.

I (N2EY) don't support it.

Why is it OK because it's a one-time thing?


Because there's no real harm to anyone...


I say there *is* real harm to the ARS.

However, let's explore your claim for a bit and see where it leads.

You say that the free upgrades are OK "Because there's no real harm to
anyone...". I've also seen it justified by "the difference between the

Tech and
General written tests is not that large".

If that's true, then what would be the harm is simply dumping the General

class
question pool completely and using the Technician pool in its place, with
slight modifications to include General HF privs?

Who would be harmed by such a change?


IF that is what you think must be the only way this can be implemented
then YOU file your coments as such or file your own petition.

By the same token, we could resurrect the old Advanced written and use it

in
place of the Extra.


Ditto my last comment.

and if you want an
incentive licensing scheme to be retained, this does it


I disagree! It works as a disincentive. Why should anyone study for an

upgrade
if there's a chance for a freebie? Would you you pay $500 for a new

computer if
you knew that next month it would go on sale for $300?


The above is ONLY a prospect for the period of time between when
the FCC announces their decisin and the actual implementation
date for free upgrades. Might someone today look at what the
ARRL proposes and now, on the hope the proposal goes through,
decide to do nothing towards upgrade? Well I'm sure some will
do exactly that. For now, the proposal is in the public arena and
that is just the way things are.

plus it simplifies licensing and regs for the FCC and does it in one
snapshot of time.


ARRL proposed similar freebies before and FCC said no, even though it

would
simplify the licensing and regs.


So what. Are you saying the ARRL should not have made the
proposal because it rejected a former upgrade proposal?

Ultimately the FCC will decide. I may hazard a guess as to how the FCC
will rule, but that's all it would be...a guess. Until the FCC
sings on this proposal, none of us know for sure.

If you support them, then by definition you are supoorting a

reduction
in the written test requirements for those licenses.

Incomplete statement. Supporting a one-time upgrade doesn't
mean anyone supports "permanent" reductions of the written
requirements.

That's a good point. The reduction affects only those who have certain
licenses on a certain date.

But it's still a reduction for a very large number of hams.


Agreed.

And that's the point: Folks like Carl who said they'd NEVER support ANY
reduction are now supporting a reduction because it's a one-time thing.

And
ignoring the fact that it affects a huge number of hams.


Neither Carl nor I are ignoring the numbers involved. We fully
acknowledge the numbers you have posted...which anyone can get
from several database and web site sources anyway. Both Carl
and I support the ONE-TIME upgrades with full knowledge of
the numbers.

Free upgrades for Techs would affect about 322,000 hams. Last year we got

about
20,000 new Techs, so the proposed freebie would affect as many existing

hams as
the new ones we might get in the next 10-15 years.


Agreed. You aren't telling me anything I don't know.

THAT is the critical difference.

And it raises a critical question: Why is it OK as a one-time thing but
not as a permanent change?


Because it harms no one to get to the simplified scheme AND
it then continues with the incentive system as before.


I say it does harm people.


Yet you offer no specific "harm(s)."

But if it harms no one to get the simplified scheme, why not make it

permanent?

Yawn...do YOU want an incentive licensing system or don't you?

Now you might argue that it's only a temporary or one-time

reduction,
but it's still a reduction.

It is a ONE time reduction.

Agreed - but it's still a reduction. And Carl said he would not support
any
reductions in written testing. Now, all of a sudden it's OK because

it's a
one time thing.


Time and situations change and people change.

IOW, Carl's "never" didn't mean "never", it just meant "until I change my
mind".


The reality is that words like always and never are usually (I almost
said never :-) too restrictive and subject to critisism when other
factors come into play that one might not have considered before.
I try to avoid use of always/never, but have, I'm sure used them
without thinking about it at the time.

You and I can disagree about the reason's
to do it, but my support or anyone else's support of the one
time upgrade does NOT mean I or anyone else supports
permanent reductions in requirements.

True.


Thank you!


Time and situations change and people change. Next week or next year....


You got it.

But why is a one-time reduction OK, and not a permanent one?


See prior coments on the same thing.


Who would be harmed by a permanent reduction?


It would then, truly lower requirments on a permanent basis.
Neither Carl, you nor I want that. Or have you changed your mind?

And since it affects over 400,000 hams, it's not a small matter.


If it goes through it will be forgotten in a couple of years.


That's what they said 40 years about incentive licensing.


Big difference. Every General that lost privileges still understands
that loss.


I lost privileges as an Advanced. And I had to wait 2 years to even try

the
Extra, even though I could have passed it the day I lost privileges.


You made my point.

With this, no one losses anything.


If the existing classes are not given free upgrades, nobody loses anything
either.


True, but it doesn't "clean-up" the myriad of different licenses that
exist and would continue to exist for decades more. Clearly you
disagree as to the need to "clean-up" the licensing and, I'd guess you
will file comments stating it as such. For now, you and I simply
disagree on the need. I'm not going to waste time
trying to change your mind. The ARRL petition is quite
clear on the why.

Why, because no one losses any privileges.

Maybe. Or maybe not.


If maybe not, please point to what privileges will
be lost by which license holders.


Yet now I see that same person
supporting free upgrades that involve not even having to take
*written* tests...

As Ed pointed out, the difference between the Tech and General

written
tests is not that large - it's a one-shot deal to "make things

right"
i
a way where nobody loses privs, and as Bill pointed out, those
Techs are already
authorized 1500W at frequencies that the FCC and anyone with any
knowledge of RF safety knows are more "risky" than HF.

Then why should *anyone* have to take the General test? If the Tech
written is
adequate for General HF privs for some, why not for all? Why not

simply
dump the General question pools into the Extra, and use the
current Tech pool for General?

If that's what YOU want, then file comments supporting that yourself.

No, it's not what I want.

But how do we argue against those who want it?


YOU are assuming someone will file another petition to do that.


You're assuming they won't.


And I am also assuming IF someone did, the FCC would reject it
anyway. I'll worry about it if and when it happens.

I'll worry about reacting/commenting on that...if and when it happens.


And what will you say to them? How will you argue against making the

one-time
freebie permanent?

After all, they can quote you and Ed and Carl saying "no one will be

harmed"
and "the difference between the Tech and General written tests is not

that
large"

What counterarguments can be used against those quotes?


IF the FCC goes with the ARRL proposal, there is sufficient arguments
there to counter argue.

Bottom line, 2 years from now no one will care.

How do you know?


SWAG applied with common sense.


They said the same thing in 1969. I was there.


I have learned the folllowing basic instincts regarding how people
react....take something away from someone and they resent it
just about forever. Give something to someone but not someone else
and the one that didn't get the freebie rarely cares or thinks about
it for long. That's grass roots political reality 101.

In the past 12 months, FCC issued over 20,000 new ham licenses. Most
of those were Techs. Why is it OK for them to get General privileges
based on having passed the 35 question Tech test, and having less than
1 year experience, but not OK for future hams?


As above, because it will be a one time situation.

Sorry, that dog won't hunt.


It doesn't have to hunt for you.
The FCC is the only place that dog needs to hunt.

Like all those Advanced are on the air now. Give me a break.

If they're not on the air, there's no reason to give them

upgrades,
is there?

They'll get upgrades, even if they're SKs whose family hasn't
sent in their license for cancellation - so what?

I'd expect the FCC will NOT reissue anyone that gets a free upgrade
a new license at all. There's no need to.

So they keep their old licenses. And the database still has their old
license class.


The database could be updated overnight by replacing all licenses with

their
upgraded license. Doing that does not require an actual new paper
license to be issued if Part 97 contains the following statement:

Any license holder whos paper license is Tech is now recognized to be
General and (ditto for Advanced to Ectra).


Then why wasn't it done in 2000?


We'll never know will we?

Why not upgrade all existing hams except Novices to Extra, then?


Because that doesn't comport with either the FCC's or the ARRL's
(or my) desire to have some reason for folks to learn more to

upgrade.

How do you know what FCC wants?

How do you?

I don't claim to. The person who wrote that something "doesn't comport"

is
claiming to know what FCC wants.


Take it as a best quess then.


OK. My best guess is that FCC doesn't care.


Fair enough.

Ultimately the FCC will decide.

Just like BPL. Should we not oppose BPL?


Different subject for a different thread.

Not at all! You're saying we should just trust FCC. BPL shows what can

happen..

Good grief. I never said that at all. The reality is,
in the end, the FCC makes the final decision. I didn't
say you should not oppose any aspect of the ARRL
petition you want. You can continue to
oppose and file whatever you want with the FCC
if it (FCC) decides to implement free upgrades.
It is a free country, express your opinions all you
want.

I (personally, not as NCI)
think it makes the best sense as a one-shot deal as a way

forward
to a license/priv structure that makes sense for the future.

Even though it means a one-shot reduction in written test
requirements for over 400,000 hams.
That's almost 60% of those licensed today.

Again, the differences are not that great (in content - I know you
have a BIG hangup about the number of questions on the test ...)

I don;t have any hangups about the tests. I'm all for them.

If the difference isn't so great, why require the General test at

all?

If YOU accept that, then file comments as such with the FCC.

I'll file comments to do the opposite. Maybe a proposal, too.


As is your right to do so.


let's see....3 classes of license, no free upgrades, imporved writtens...


The balls in your court. Shoot or pass.

So someone without a license could just take the Tech before the
changes take place, and then ride the free upgrade bus to

General.

Give me a break ...

What do you mean? That's exactly what a lot of people will do.

Those with no license or an existing Novice will have an incentive
to get a Tech before the rules change and ride the free upgrade
bus to General.

If "lots" of non-hams suddenly became hams by that process I'll
be truly surprised.

20,000 in the past 12 months.


20K is only about 3% of all hams. Not a very big
number in that perspective.

We'll likly lose that many to attrition this year alone. Look at
the future expirations per Joe Speroni's web site. There's one
month alone that has (I think) over 10,000 expirations.


And how many will renew in the grace period? You have to look longterm.


Just look at the declining Novice and Advanced numbers.
Speroni data doesn't show any significant percent of "grace period"
renewals.

As for the existing novices...that is now
down to about 30,000...assuming everyone of them did what you
suggest.

34,000 or so.


minor difference in the scope of this conversation.

Those with Tech will have a *disincentive* to
actually take (or study for) the General.

Life's a

[expletive deleted]


and then we die.

Apply that philosophy to accepting the code test.


God grant us the wisdom to...
Accept the things we cannot change, change those
we can and hopefully have the wisdom to know the difference.


Right. So why not just accept 5 wpm and the existing classes?


Because God gave me the wisdom to change those
I can.

Same for Advanceds and the Extra.

The rate at which advaceds have been upgrading is pathetically
low already.

17% in 4 years. Gotta wonder why. Maybe the code test wasn't a problem
after all....


No one said it was the only roadblock to all
Advanced hams going to Extra.

It has been touted as the boogieman for years. Now we see that it wasn't.


I speak only for myself. Lots of other people have
said lots of other things.

And let's suppose FCC enacts the ARRL proposal, and even dumps Element 1

for
Extra as well. And suppose we don't get a huge increase in the number of

new
hams, just as we didn't after 2000.

You watch - there will be more proposals to further water down the

writtens.

If the "new" NOVICE doesn't work, then some probably
will. I can't know or be aware of everyone that is
or wants to be a ham. BUT, until it does, this is
just an academic discussion to which my participation
will be limited.

your arguments are just plain lame

How? Do you think people won't do this?

Some will, but it won't be significant.

How do you know?


SWAG and common sense. Do you see a floodgate opening
of new hams rushing to become techs before the FCC
implements free upgrades on a certain date?


Yep. Plus a huge drop in upgrades. Why not? "We're having a one-time

sale - get
'em now!"


The ONLY drop in upgrades that would benefit anyone
is the Techs from a new ham perspective. We already see
only a negligiable amount of Novices upgrading to
Tech or Advanced upgrading to Extra.

Back in 1951, there was a similar one-time sale. FCC announced that they

were
closing out the Advanced/class A and replacing it with the much harder to

get
Extra at the end of 1952. But existing Class A/Advanceds would have the

same
privs as Extras. There was a flood of folks upgrading to beat the price
increase.


Understood, but if we only look at already licensed hams,
the ONLY group that could quickly upgrade to benefit from
a free upgrade later is the existing Novice group...34K
by your numbers at most...or about 5% of all hams.

and your "someone might
get privs without taking a test with the same number of questions

as I
took" is REALLY showing.

Nobody today can even take the tests I took. You couldn't
pass the tests I took, Carl.

Translation, I did it, so should everyone else.

Nope. Not at all.

It means that I met different qualifications. And I've seen the
qualifications, both written and code, slowly reduced for over a

quarter
century. And that's not a good thing.


And if that is your true meaning, why would you state
that "You (Carl) couldn't pass the tests I (Jim) took, Carl."
Do you really think Carl would be unable to pass the same
written tests if he had to?


If he had to, maybe. But he didn't have to.


So in reality, you have no clue as to Carl's ability
or not to pass similar tests that you once did. If correct,
why make such a personal statement you can't
back-up?

And he couldn't pass the other tests I had to take.

And he didn't do it at 16 years of age, with no professional background. I

did.

Who gives a damn how old you or I was when we passed
certain tests? And as to whatever other tests you are talking
about, you realy have no knowledge of Carl's competence
and/or technical expertise in the field of radio and making the
statement: "And he couldn't pass the other tests I had to take."
is just inflamatory rhetoric.

The tests I took are not the issue.
Free upgrades and reduction in written
test requirements are the issue.

The issue is ONE time free upgrades only. No effort is being made to
lower the General or Extra requirements.

Not yet. But a one-time upgrade is one more step. And it paves the way.


As you have said.

Cheers...and add Hong Kong to the list of countries dropping ALL code

tests.

That makes what - a dozen countries?


I believe so.

I wonder what HK's written test requirements are.....


I don't really care.


bwaahaahaa!


Sorry to have upset you. Now back to the Daytona 500.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK



  #287   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 08:32 PM
Bill Sohl
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
.com...

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article . net, "Bill

Sohl"
writes:

Free upgrades for Techs would affect about 322,000 hams. Last year we

got
about
20,000 new Techs, so the proposed freebie would affect as many existing

hams as
the new ones we might get in the next 10-15 years.


And how could the existing ham community possibly elmer these 300,000+ new
HF users should they all decide to be active shortly following that free
upgrade. I hate to think of the resulting SSB DX pileups as it is pretty
bad now. If a free upgrade goes through and significant numbers move to

HF
within a short period of time, I suspect that we'll see a lot more DX
stations "hiding" in CW.


Which would, I think, foster more hams to learn and use morse code
if they really want that hot DX. And if more hams didn't learn
morse to work those DX stations, that'd give more opportunity
to work them via DX to current code capable hams. In either
case it sounds like something the code enthusiasts should be real
happy about.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK



  #288   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 08:39 PM
Len Over 21
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

Supposing that the ARRL petition is the form in which the change actually
gets made and that all the newly upgraded people get on HF, how is the ham
community supposed to "elmer" 300,000+ new HF users all at once?


Put it all on a W1AW bulletin. Will take less than 15 minutes to
describe at 20 WPM in a broadcast. :-)

LHA / WMD
  #289   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 08:43 PM
garigue
 
Posts: n/a
Default



By taking this tack, even a licenced Amateur would not be able to get a
"real feel" as it is just about 100% certain that they will have different
interests and priorities than you.


As well it should be ... the hobby-service-what ever has a wealth of
deversity to offer but in the context of amateur radio. Any thing else for
the non-professional radio affecionado unless he has a ticket would by
defination not be amateur radio. Am I "dissing" those who don't have the
exalted ticket? Nope .. I knew a fellow who could copy 45 WPM and never had
a ticket but loved to listen to high speed CW on the ham bands. He said he
would rather be a SWLer ..and this guy never was a military or commercial
op.

I take a less metaphysical approach to "real feel". I mean it is

relatively
easy to determine what Amateurs do


Not really ...not that is is such a big deal but I find you are falling into
the trap that a lot of our "expert" hams out there fall into ....that is one
of projection of one's knowledge to another. I really read with a chuckle
those who say the test is too easy .. a give away. Again prospective. The
guy or gal who is just starting out with no basis is overwhelmed and needs
support with the simple things. I see this time and time again with our
club's yearly no-code classes.


and there are plenty of related things
(CB & marine radio, electronics kits, regulations, chat rooms, phones,

etc)
so that a person could reasonably be expected to be about to judge whether
this would be interesting - before they went to the effort of getting a
licence.


But they have choosen the unique experience of amateur radio.



As it should be, but that does not prevent unlicenced people from knowing
what the hobby is about. Whether they would enjoy those activities is a
matter of personality, not of holding a licence.


Maybe knowing "about" but really knowing with some sort of "real feeling"
......doubtful . Mater of personality ... boy have I known some personalitie
s in "hamdom" ... I can't say that there is a dominate personality ham type.

Take care Mark ...73 Tom Popovic KI3R


  #290   Report Post  
Old February 15th 04, 09:42 PM
garigue
 
Posts: n/a
Default


And how could the existing ham community possibly elmer these 300,000+

new
HF users should they all decide to be active shortly following that free
upgrade.


My advise is to to buy up ALL the used rigs you can afford and try to
corner the market. The give away price of new equipment will soar with
demand.



I hate to think of the resulting SSB DX pileups as it is pretty
bad now. If a free upgrade goes through and significant numbers move to

HF
within a short period of time, I suspect that we'll see a lot more DX
stations "hiding" in CW.


Can't hide for long ....how long before it will be wall to wall "fone"????

Which would, I think, foster more hams to learn and use morse code



Nope Bill .... it will foster a concerted movement to turn the CW subbands
into SSBville. The mode will die or at best be put into a historical
preserve ...maybe like the bottom 20 kcs of the 30 meter band.


if they really want that hot DX. And if more hams didn't learn
morse to work those DX stations, that'd give more opportunity
to work them via DX to current code capable hams. In either


Bill I wish you were right ...I say IF they were interested in CW DX they
would be there now not waiting for the tooth fairy to leave them the freeby
under the pillow at night

case it sounds like something the code enthusiasts should be real
happy about.


Oh yes Bill I am REAL happy about it ...I can't wait to see the subbands go
the route of "gentleman's" agreement and not defined regulation. The idea
of novice enhancement should have occured years ago with the novices gaining
all CW subbands. But nope the "experts" out there kept them in the ghettos
as 4th class citizens. Attempts years ago to even try to improve this was
met with derision from the establishment. What!!! 5WPM on my belovid bottom
25 kcs. Never ... I will never share this DX with anyone save my speed
peers. What would Hiram say?? So guys don't blame the "foneists" totally
for your troubles as we missed out bigtime in strengthening our ranks and
mode.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK



73 Bill ....Tom KI3R Belle Vernon Pa.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions Louis C. LeVine Dx 36 September 9th 04 09:30 AM
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions Louis C. LeVine General 8 September 8th 04 12:14 PM
ARRL Walks Away From Bandwidth Restrictions Louis C. LeVine Dx 0 September 5th 04 08:30 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1412 ­ September 3, 2004 Radionews General 0 September 4th 04 08:35 PM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1412 ­ September 3, 2004 Radionews Dx 0 September 4th 04 08:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017