Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#281
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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 |
#284
|
|||
|
|||
"Steve Robeson, K4CAP" wrote in message m... (Len Over 21) wrote in message ... Seven year old Extras, perfectly "qualified" in radio. Uh, huh... In THIS case, she IS "more qualified" than YOU, Lennie...She's LICNESED! uh HUH! Maybe you can get her to act as control operator for you, Lennie...Then there'd be TWO people there requiring adult supervision! Steve, K4YZ Actually by the FCC rules the licensed 7 year old doesn't require adult supervision. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#285
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
"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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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
|
|||
|
|||
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 |
Display Modes | |
|
|