In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

in Canada, as we grant full Amateur license privileges upon
request to persons with appropriate Professional license
qualifications.

In the USA, there are almost no professional radio operator licenses
left. There's the GROL and some radiotelegraph licenses, the latter
because Morse operation on ships is still permitted (but no longer
required).

Tsk, tsk, tsk...you should look again. But, that's not "amateur
radio" is it? :-)

An excerpt from Industry Canada's Radio Information Circular follows:

It would seem to me that this makes perfect sense - radio operation is
radio operation,

Is it? Then why all the various endorsements? Is "operating" a TV broadcast
transmitter the same thing as 160 meter RTTY operation? I don't think so.

I don't know of any TV transmitter sending RTTY.

I don't know of any amateur sending live television of 160 meter
wavelength either.

Weird choice of analogies. :-)

and the Pros have made a career of it

All that means is that they get paid. There are some ladies and gentlemen
on the streets of most major cities who make a "profession" out of something
most people do as amateurs. (Some say it's the oldest profession).

You are one of those right now (unless you got fired). By your own
admission.

Those
people must be qualified to give advice on the subject of their profession,
don't you think? ;-)

You should know...

We should revere what they say and do, and not
question their knowledge and opinions on the subject, right? ;-) ;-)

Tsk, tsk, tsk, "revere and not question?!?"

No one who is a professional in radio-electronics have demanded such
in here...not even when the MMMs have demanded exclusive control
and decision over amateur radio matters solely by the licensed.

They
must be better at it than us unpaid amateurs because they get paid to
do it, right? ;-) ;-) ;-)

Thank you for admitting some truth, however hollow it rings.

- and invested
considerably more education, time, effort and ongoing training than
would be possible for most hobbyists.

Maybe - remember that most of them got the license *before* the job. Back
when
the USA granted such things, the old Extra written was considered by most to
be
at least the equivalent of the First 'Phone.

"Was considered" by those who held an Amateur Extra. :-)

Complete the sentence without the selective editing, lest the Ding
Dong Schoolmaster rap your knuckles, naughty boy.

But now here's the big one: do the professional licenses include testing of
the
amateur rules, regulations, and operating practices? USA ones don't.

Why in the world would professional engineer licenses in the USA
have ANYTHING about amateur radio?

And are professional licensees allowed to build their own transmitters and
put them on the air without any certification?

It's done routinely in the USA, by those WITHOUT any license.

Don't you just hate it when your rant point falls down and goes boom?

After all, it would be pretty
silly for the folks at the local photo club to argue that Yosuf
Karsh's pictures were pretty good, but not up to "Amateur" standards!

After all, the testing done for Amateur licences today is pretty easy
to pass, even without a formal education in electronics.

Agreed! But at least it still exists.

Yes. Seven year olds can pass it.

What does that say about your vaunted federal merit badge?

Too easy,
I'd say,

The FCC disagrees.

This isn't a debate with the FCC and you are not a federal insider.

but that is another issue......(when 7 year olds can pass
exams with questions requiring calculation of squares, logs and
complex numbers - which sure as heck weren't part of my kids Grade 2
syllabus - I start thinking rote memorization of question pools....)

And that's not going to change any time soon. The GROL pool is public info,
too.

And that of several other commercial radio licenses you didn't mention
because you don't know they exist...

Do you know the 7 year old in question? If not, how can you say whether or
not she's qualified or knows how to do the required math?

Do you know the honesty and integrity of the VEs who adminstered
the test? Would that hold up in a court of law?

[your reply is already guessed in several rationales so don't bother typing]

A question - was a similar arrangement for the recognition of
professional credentials in the Amateur service ever in place in the
US?

No, except that some radiotelegraphy test elements were credited
because they were essentially the same in both services.

Yes, morse code gets through when everything else will.

The problem has always been that the commercial (not professional - in the USA
that means something very specific) licenses did not test for knowledge of
amateur regs or operating practices. So a commercial licensee was not
qualified to operate an amateur station based on the commercial license test
alone. And that's still the case.

You KNOW this for certain, even back in 1956? :-)

Go to Ebay and buy some clues to who uses radios in the USA.
The first hint is that they aren't amateurs. The second hint is that
they don't have to test for morse code to be perfectly authorized to
communicate.

Don't take off the ARRL blinders just yet...your mental optic nerves
might not take the overload.

With the reciprocity agreement between Canada and the US, someone
who has obtained their Amateur licence based on their Professional
qualifications automatically gains full Amateur operating privileges
when travelling in the US. One would think it logical for this
arrangement to be bidirectional, n'est pas?

No. It's a bad arrangement. Unless the Canadian professional tests include
the amateur rules and operating practices, your government is derelict in
its duty to the ARS. That's a plain and simple fact. For the USA to make the
same mistake would be a very bad thing, unless the GROL tests were changed.
Even then it would be questionable, because it would probably be possible
for someone to pass the Commercial exam but get all the amateur-radio-related
questions wrong. Such a person is simply not qualified to operate an amateur
radio station.


"Plain and simple fact: the government of Canada is derelict in its duty
to the ARS." My, my, aren't you the War Crimes prosecutor about to
Make a Case!

Tell us, oh Noble Lord, why does the government of Canada HAVE to
do any duty to the ARS? Can't they just govern their own amateurs and
not have some "obligation" to the rest of the Americas?

Most Noble Lord of the Inquisition, you once again confuse "qualification"
with "authoritzation" or "grant." Adminstrations don't "qualify" any radio
operators in the USA, but they do AUTHORIZE them certain privileges
according to the radio service they were tested in.

My Lord, please step up to this pile of twigs and try on these ropes.
We want to "light your fire," so to speak. :-)

You want some fries with that?

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , (N2EY)
writes:

In article , Leo

writes:

in Canada, as we grant full Amateur license privileges upon
request to persons with appropriate Professional license
qualifications.

In the USA, there are almost no professional radio operator licenses
left. There's the GROL and some radiotelegraph licenses, the latter
because Morse operation on ships is still permitted (but no longer
required).

Tsk, tsk, tsk...you should look again. But, that's not "amateur
radio" is it? :-)

An excerpt from Industry Canada's Radio Information Circular follows:

It would seem to me that this makes perfect sense - radio operation is
radio operation,

Is it? Then why all the various endorsements? Is "operating" a TV broadcast
transmitter the same thing as 160 meter RTTY operation? I don't think so.

I don't know of any TV transmitter sending RTTY.

I don't know of any amateur sending live television of 160 meter
wavelength either.

Precisely. By golly, you might be getting the hang of things, Leonard.


They
must be better at it than us unpaid amateurs because they get paid to
do it, right? ;-) ;-) ;-)

Thank you for admitting some truth, however hollow it rings.

Whoosh! Right over your head...


But now here's the big one: do the professional licenses include testing of
the
amateur rules, regulations, and operating practices? USA ones don't.

Why in the world would professional engineer licenses in the USA
have ANYTHING about amateur radio?

Precisely. You ARE getting the hang of it.


Agreed! But at least it still exists.

Yes. Seven year olds can pass it.

Leonard the Fox: "Those grapes are probably sour."

What does that say about your vaunted federal merit badge?

It says that a mere child is one up on you. She has the badge. You
don't.


Dave K8MN

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

What does that say about your vaunted federal merit badge?

It says that a mere child is one up on you. She has the badge. You
don't.

I'm not a SEVEN YEAR OLD Extra.

If you think that a SEVEN YEAR OLD has anything "up" on me,
I'd say you have the mentality of a seven year old.

Now go out to the sandbox and play with your "fellow Extras" in
the First Grade. That's a nice boy. Behave or Mama Dee will
spank you for being naughty.

LHA / WMD

Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , Dave Heil
writes:

What does that say about your vaunted federal merit badge?

It says that a mere child is one up on you. She has the badge. You
don't.

I'm not a SEVEN YEAR OLD Extra.

Precisely. You're not ANY kind of Extra or any kind of radio amateur.

If you think that a SEVEN YEAR OLD has anything "up" on me,
I'd say you have the mentality of a seven year old.

The facts are the A seven-year-old has an Amateur Extra. You do
not.

Now go out to the sandbox and play with your "fellow Extras" in
the First Grade. That's a nice boy. Behave or Mama Dee will
spank you for being naughty.

Aren't you the guy whose wife is scolding him for playing with
seven-year-olds?

Dave K8MN