"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level tests
that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to Morse
proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]

73,
Carl - wk3c

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level tests
that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to
Morse
proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]


The real oddity is how this situation came about. Once the no-code
technician license was introduced, people chose to take the route of
studying the 200 page book to get the no-code tech license rather than the
much simpler Novice written and simple 5wpm test. It was the beginners
themselves who changed the Tech to a beginner license by choosing to bypass
the Novice. People are strange.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

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

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level
tests
that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to
Morse
proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]

The real oddity is how this situation came about. Once the no-code
technician license was introduced, people chose to take the route of
studying the 200 page book to get the no-code tech license rather than the
much simpler Novice written and simple 5wpm test. It was the beginners
themselves who changed the Tech to a beginner license by choosing to
bypass
the Novice. People are strange.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

They didn't bypass Novice since they had to pass the written before
2000. The testing to get to tech was divided into two written elements.
What many bypassed was the code test. If Novice was nocode with
VHF access, especially to 2m, I'd bet there wouldn't have been anywhere
near the number of techs we have today.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

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

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

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe
they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should
have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of
RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the
evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with
their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level
tests
that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to
Morse
proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]

The real oddity is how this situation came about. Once the no-code
technician license was introduced, people chose to take the route of
studying the 200 page book to get the no-code tech license rather than
the
much simpler Novice written and simple 5wpm test. It was the beginners
themselves who changed the Tech to a beginner license by choosing to
bypass
the Novice. People are strange.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

They didn't bypass Novice since they had to pass the written before
2000. The testing to get to tech was divided into two written elements.
What many bypassed was the code test. If Novice was nocode with
VHF access, especially to 2m, I'd bet there wouldn't have been anywhere
near the number of techs we have today.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK


I said they elected to use the no-code Technician as their entry to ham
radio rather than the Novice license. Yes they took the Novice written but
not the code. Thus they "bypassed" the Novice license in the sense that
they never held a Novice license. They had basically two choices to enter
ham radio (unless of course they chose to do additional study and sit for
higher class tests at the same time).

1) They could take (and pass) the Novice written plus 5wpm and get a Novice
license.
2) They could take (and pass) the Novice written and Tech written and get a
no-code Tech license.

The prospective ham generally took the route 2 to enter ham radio rather
than route 1. Thus by that choice, the people themselves made the Tech
no-code the entry level license despite the fact that it was more difficult
than earning the Novice license. The restructuring in 2000 merely
formalized what had already occurred.

Having earned my initial license in 1992 (Tech with HF), I'm quite familiar
with what was going on. The majority of people sitting for their first
license took the Tech no-code route to put off learning the code not because
of its two meter and VHF access. Prior to on-air experience, they simply
were not personally familiar enough with various ham activities to select
their entry route on the basis of the desireability of having 2m access.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

I said they elected to use the no-code Technician as their entry to ham
radio rather than the Novice license. Yes they took the Novice written but
not the code. Thus they "bypassed" the Novice license in the sense that
they never held a Novice license. They had basically two choices to enter
ham radio (unless of course they chose to do additional study and sit for
higher class tests at the same time).

1) They could take (and pass) the Novice written plus 5wpm and get a Novice
license.
2) They could take (and pass) the Novice written and Tech written and get a
no-code Tech license.

The prospective ham generally took the route 2 to enter ham radio rather
than route 1. Thus by that choice, the people themselves made the Tech
no-code the entry level license despite the fact that it was more difficult
than earning the Novice license. The restructuring in 2000 merely
formalized what had already occurred.

I agree except for one point: The decision was made by different people for a
number of factors, such as the *perceived* difficulty and the *perceived*
rewards.

Having earned my initial license in 1992 (Tech with HF), I'm quite familiar
with what was going on. The majority of people sitting for their first
license took the Tech no-code route to put off learning the code not because
of its two meter and VHF access. Prior to on-air experience, they simply
were not personally familiar enough with various ham activities to select
their entry route on the basis of the desireability of having 2m access.

Here in EPA, after about 1980 the predominant entry license was the Tech. This
was true even before it lost its code test. The reason was 2 meter/440 access,
which Novices didn't have. A prospective ham would see almost every ham with a
2 meter HT or mobile, ask "what license do I need to talk to you guys" and wind
up with a Tech. Code or no code.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

Here in EPA, after about 1980 the predominant entry license was the Tech.
This
was true even before it lost its code test. The reason was 2 meter/440 access,
which Novices didn't have. A prospective ham would see almost every ham with a
2 meter HT or mobile, ask "what license do I need to talk to you guys" and
wind
up with a Tech. Code or no code.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), as a government entity, is
not under any regulations of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC). EPA operating on amateur radio bands is a violation of the
Communications Act of 1934.

The regulations covering civil radio and communications in the
United States is contained in Code of Federal Regulations, Title
47. The full-volume set or separate Parts may be ordered from
the United States Government Printing Office (USGPO) in paper
form or downloadable free from www.gpo.gov in either text or
scanned from printed form.

There you have it: A simple correction of your erroneous use of a
federal agency acronym. No acrimony, no name calling, the
names that of identification of the correct names and acronyms.
Plus a helpful suggestion for your self-education.



"Please state the nature of your medical emergency." - Zimmerman

LHA / WMD

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Dee D. Flint"
writes:

I said they elected to use the no-code Technician as their entry to ham
radio rather than the Novice license. Yes they took the Novice written
but
not the code. Thus they "bypassed" the Novice license in the sense that
they never held a Novice license. They had basically two choices to
enter
ham radio (unless of course they chose to do additional study and sit for
higher class tests at the same time).

1) They could take (and pass) the Novice written plus 5wpm and get a
Novice
license.
2) They could take (and pass) the Novice written and Tech written and get
a
no-code Tech license.

The prospective ham generally took the route 2 to enter ham radio rather
than route 1. Thus by that choice, the people themselves made the Tech
no-code the entry level license despite the fact that it was more
difficult
than earning the Novice license. The restructuring in 2000 merely
formalized what had already occurred.

I agree except for one point: The decision was made by different people
for a
number of factors, such as the *perceived* difficulty and the *perceived*
rewards.

Actually that was what I was trying to point out and you've clarified it
quite nicely.


Having earned my initial license in 1992 (Tech with HF), I'm quite
familiar
with what was going on. The majority of people sitting for their first
license took the Tech no-code route to put off learning the code not
because
of its two meter and VHF access. Prior to on-air experience, they simply
were not personally familiar enough with various ham activities to select
their entry route on the basis of the desireability of having 2m access.

Here in EPA, after about 1980 the predominant entry license was the Tech.
This
was true even before it lost its code test. The reason was 2 meter/440
access,
which Novices didn't have. A prospective ham would see almost every ham
with a
2 meter HT or mobile, ask "what license do I need to talk to you guys" and
wind
up with a Tech. Code or no code.

73 de Jim, N2EY

I can see where that could easily be a dominant factor if the prospective
ham had some exposure to that.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

PAMNO (N2EY) wrote in message ...


Here in EPA,

snip


73 de Jim, N2EY

Jim, do you work for the EPA?

Bill Sohl wrote:
"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

The power limits make sense.

Do you support not teaching newcomers about RF safety? I believe they
should be, and as long as they know the fundamentals, they should have
the same power privileges as the rest of us.

I'll say right out that not teaching new people the fundamentals of RF
and electrical safety is not very responsible.

The power limit is about RF exposure and the need to do the evaluations.
This is something that I think can reasonably be considered beyond the
"beginner" level, as it requires a foundation in a number of areas.

We can't expect the newcomer to learn EVERYTHING before then
can get on the air ... compare the Novice tests of years past with their
small number of questions and study guides with a dozen or less pages
to "Now You're Talking," which contains 200-some pages and it's clear
that "the bar" for entry has increased greatly from the entry level

tests

that
I and many others took those many years ago ... the proposal is not a
"dumbing down" for the entry level ... it's an attempt to rationalize
beginner level tests and beginner level privileges, while providing an
incentive
(gee, I hate to use that word, since the incentive used to be keyed to

Morse

proficiency more than anything else) to learn and advance.

[snipped the rest where we seem to be in fundamental agreement]

The real oddity is how this situation came about. Once the no-code
technician license was introduced, people chose to take the route of
studying the 200 page book to get the no-code tech license rather than the
much simpler Novice written and simple 5wpm test. It was the beginners
themselves who changed the Tech to a beginner license by choosing to

bypass

the Novice. People are strange.
Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


They didn't bypass Novice since they had to pass the written before
2000. The testing to get to tech was divided into two written elements.
What many bypassed was the code test. If Novice was nocode with
VHF access, especially to 2m, I'd bet there wouldn't have been anywhere
near the number of techs we have today.

Even with an Element 1 test, there would probably be a lot more novices
if there had been VHF access. Conjecture of course.

- mike KB3EIA -

Subject: FCC Assigns RM Numbers To Three New Restructuring Petitions
From: Mike Coslo
Date: 3/25/2004 9:33 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

They didn't bypass Novice since they had to pass the written before
2000. The testing to get to tech was divided into two written elements.
What many bypassed was the code test. If Novice was nocode with
VHF access, especially to 2m, I'd bet there wouldn't have been anywhere
near the number of techs we have today.

Even with an Element 1 test, there would probably be a lot more novices

if there had been VHF access. Conjecture of course.


I dunno, Mike...

Novices were given 220MHz priviledges along with some (dubiously) adequate
10 meter phone priviledges and it sputtered to a halt almost as quickly as it
started.

I was in SoCal when "Novice Enhancement" took effect, and one can hardly
argue that there is a dearth of repeaters on that band in that region...even
that, very little additional activity was heard. I think I worked a half dozen
Novices on 220 in the year after it was implemented.

HF is the spectrum everyone wants to play on, all of the wizz-bang
technology that's sprouting up on V/UHF notwithstanding.

Any carrots we wish to put in front of the new-licensee cart are going to
have to be 1.8 to 29.7MHz flavored carrots, I think!

73

Steve, K4YZ