| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#7
August 13th 04, 05:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
N2EY wrote:
In article , (Steve Robeson, K4CAP) writes: Why not do like the Germans and create an "operator only" license? Because it goes against the Basis and Purpose of the amateur radio service as defined in Part 97. OK, Jim...Please explain to me how having a "student operator" license would violate ANY of the spirit of the Basis and Purpose of Part 97...I've read it several times over in preparation of responding to this post, and I can't find a single thing that would violate either the spirit of the letter of the law... One theme of the B&P is that hams are skilled operators. Another is that they are technically knowledgeable. By reducing the license tests to the point that there would be a class of license which did not allow unsupervised operation works against those goals. So does a license which disallows homebrewing or requires some sort of Big Brother protection against the horrific dangers of 32 volt power supplies. Somewhere in this thread maybe it was pointed out that here in the US we don't really need a student operator license since an unlicensed person can operate with a control operator? Steve, I do like your idea. I think it might be well implemented as a concept and program instead of a specific license. Getting a person to operate is half the battle IMO. At least it worked for me. Working field day with a control operator got me hooked. Any ideas there? The purpose of which is to allow a person to operate a radio, but under the supervison of an experienced operator. We have that now. A licensed ham is the control operator, and someone else actually turns the knobs, pushes, the buttons, talks into the mike, taps on the keyboard. Sure, you can do it that way, but that's not the point now, is it? Actually, yes it is. There's no present need for a "student license" because someone who wants to learn amateur radio operating techniques "by doing" can do so without any license at all - *as long as there is a control op*. Hehe, I guess someone did point this out! For this entry grade license, the operation under a control op would almost have to be eliminated? I dunno, there is a bit of interference between the concepts there. the rest snipped for brevity What Steve proposes is a good idea that just has a few bugs in it. the major one is that in principle, the situation already exists, just not "officially". In other words, an unlicensed person can operate a station under the "steely eye" ;^) of a control Op. Let's take a step back now to Field day. I have run the GOTA station at our FD since it's inception. I know of at least two people that have become interested by use of it and have gone on to become active hams. It is a good concept, and I think that getting people on the air in a low-pressure environment is key to getting prospective Hams hooked. It works. Now to the subject at hand. If instead of a separate license class, why not have an ARRL sponsored initiative, similar to "Kids Day", in which an effort to get anyone that has some interest to work HF and VHF to come out to the local mall or wherever and operate. The same can be done at a club's radio site. It would not only be good from a "getting people interested" perspective" but would be good to potentially get more league members. - Mike KB3EIA - |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1412 Â September 3, 2004 | General | |||
| Why the caste system? was: NCVEC files license restructuringdepends | Policy | |||
| NCVEC files license resstructuring proposal | Policy | |||
| NCVEC NPRM for elimination of horse and buggy morse code requirement. | Policy | |||
| NCVEC Position on Code | Policy | |||
Threaded Mode
