Subject: Care To Try Again, Steve?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/24/2004 7:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Hardly "gobbling", Jim. Either them OR us!

According to your own statistics, a large percentage of the most desirable
KH2
and KH0 calls are held by noresident aliens.

No...YOU said the "most desireable" calls were being gobbled up! That's
pretty subjective. Personally, I don't care for the 2 x 1 formatted calls. If
it were me, and I were out there, I'd get a 2 x 2 formatted call in either the
AH or KH block.

You've NOT answered my question Jim.

Were the "tests" conducted illegally or inappropriately?

I don't know. I've never been to one of those VE sessions. I'm not going to
make any claims one way or the other.

However, suppose for a moment that there *were* some rules broken by a VE
team
made up of noncitizens who have never been to US territory. How could FCC do
any enforcement actions against them other than revoking their US licenses?

Fair enough. However, after 20+ years of VE testing, I have yet to hear
of one of those overseas tests as being determined to be a "license for sale"
situation rather than an above-board test session.

Yet we HAVE had more than a small number of VE test session right here in
the US that WERE just that (license for sale). I am sure there have been cases
of fines, but in most cases, revocation of of licensure for both "licensee" and
"examiner" was the only penalty enforced.

Big snippage...Not much to argue with...

I'm not the one arguing that there's a probelm, Jim. (Note: IRT Jim;s
concerens vis-a-vis foreign nationals holding US licensure) You and Hans can
work that one out!

That's what we're trying to do.

OK...then send a copy of the document to me and I'd be glad to sign on as a
co-sponsor. But right now there's not much to argue with since what's going on
appears to be legal and there's no other legal precedent for the FCC to say
"No, We won't accept license applications from non-resident foreign nationals".

Ya *really* wanna stir things up?

Imagine if FCC came up with a new callsign system, like this:

1) No more vanity calls
2) All CONUS callsigns begin with W
3) All non-CONUS callsigns begin with K
4) All nonresident callsigns begin with N
5) All special event callsigns begin with A
6) All callsigns indicate the geographic location of the licensee's address.
If
you move across a call district boundary, you get a new callsign,
sequentially
issued, no choice.
7) Everybody gets a 2x3 call except Extras, who get the shorter calls,
sequentially issued, until they're used up.
8) If your present call matches the new system, you can keep it. Otherwise
you
get a sequentially issued new call on the next renewal. No choice of the new
call.

Can you imagine the uproar?

Since when has creating an up-roar been un-American...?!?!

Actually, Here's MY idea.

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a change
which they pay for.

The FCC continues to offer the different "Group" callsigns, but if the
licensee wants a call other than what was issued, they pony up the change...No
more "sequential" calls other than the 2x3 they were issued.

If you move across a call district line, you either apply for a call in
that district, or you are obligated to sign "portable", "stroke", "mobile", etc
that call district. There are both enforcement and "good operating practice"
issues therein.

The actual cost of the licensing program would go down since the FCC would
no longer be issuing tons of "sequential" callsigns gratis, and fees collected
would go up since you couldn't get any other format of call without ponying up
the change to do so.

Of course it'll never happen, because the admin paperwork alone would be a
nightmare. Plus the vanity revenue would go away.

The paperwork would go down since they'd no longer be getting 605's at
every change of class of license or address change and the fees would go up
since they were no longer issuing (save for the initial call) gratis licenses.
And the FCC would be getting paid to process what extra paperwork they DID
receive.

73 and Happy Turkey Day

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: (Steve Robeson K4YZ)
Date: 11/25/2004 5:16 AM Central Standard Time

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a
change
which they pay for.

Excuse me....

"All new LICENSEES" are assigned a 2x3 callsign....."

73

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote in message
...
Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: (Steve Robeson K4YZ)
Date: 11/25/2004 5:16 AM Central Standard Time

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a
change
which they pay for.

Excuse me....

"All new LICENSEES" are assigned a 2x3 callsign....."


Not quite correct. If a person tests all the way to Extra starting with no
license at one sitting, their new license will be a sequentially assigned
2x2 beginning with A. Your statement is correct, however for anyone who
starts out their first license as either a Tech or General since there are
no more sequentially available 1x3s.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article , (Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Care To Try Again, Steve?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/24/2004 7:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Hardly "gobbling", Jim. Either them OR us!

According to your own statistics, a large percentage of the most desirable
KH2
and KH0 calls are held by noresident aliens.

No...YOU said the "most desireable" calls were being gobbled up!

And they are!

That's
pretty subjective. Personally, I don't care for the 2 x 1 formatted calls.
If
it were me, and I were out there, I'd get a 2 x 2 formatted call in either
the
AH or KH block.

Well, there you have it.

You've NOT answered my question Jim.

Were the "tests" conducted illegally or inappropriately?

I don't know. I've never been to one of those VE sessions. I'm not going to
make any claims one way or the other.

However, suppose for a moment that there *were* some rules broken by a VE
team
made up of noncitizens who have never been to US territory. How could FCC do
any enforcement actions against them other than revoking their US licenses?

Fair enough. However, after 20+ years of VE testing, I have yet to hear
of one of those overseas tests as being determined to be a "license for sale"
situation rather than an above-board test session.

KH2D, who has *been there* says differently. See his posts on the subject.

Yet we HAVE had more than a small number of VE test session right here
in
the US that WERE just that (license for sale). I am sure there have been
cases
of fines, but in most cases, revocation of of licensure for both "licensee"
and
"examiner" was the only penalty enforced.

And a US citizen cannot use a foreign amateur license in the USA. So the
penalty is much tougher on them.

Big snippage...Not much to argue with...

I'm not the one arguing that there's a probelm, Jim. (Note: IRT Jim;s
concerens vis-a-vis foreign nationals holding US licensure) You and Hans can
work that one out!

That's what we're trying to do.

OK...then send a copy of the document to me and I'd be glad to sign on as
a
co-sponsor. But right now there's not much to argue with since what's going
on
appears to be legal and there's no other legal precedent for the FCC to say
"No, We won't accept license applications from non-resident foreign
nationals".

Don't need a precedent.

Ya *really* wanna stir things up?

Imagine if FCC came up with a new callsign system, like this:

1) No more vanity calls
2) All CONUS callsigns begin with W
3) All non-CONUS callsigns begin with K
4) All nonresident callsigns begin with N
5) All special event callsigns begin with A
6) All callsigns indicate the geographic location of the licensee's address.
If
you move across a call district boundary, you get a new callsign,
sequentially
issued, no choice.
7) Everybody gets a 2x3 call except Extras, who get the shorter calls,
sequentially issued, until they're used up.
8) If your present call matches the new system, you can keep it. Otherwise
you
get a sequentially issued new call on the next renewal. No choice of the new
call.

Can you imagine the uproar?

Since when has creating an up-roar been un-American...?!?!

Actually, Here's MY idea.

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a
change
which they pay for.

Right away I can hear the yelling.

The FCC continues to offer the different "Group" callsigns, but if the
licensee wants a call other than what was issued, they pony up the
change...No
more "sequential" calls other than the 2x3 they were issued.

hooboy

If you move across a call district line, you either apply for a call in
that district, or you are obligated to sign "portable", "stroke", "mobile",
etc
that call district. There are both enforcement and "good operating practice"
issues therein.

So I'd have to start signing "N2EY/3" after more than 20 years of not having to
do so from here? That's effectively lengthening the call to a 2x3

Would I have to pay the fee to get a 3 land call?

What if all the 3-land 1x2s are gone?

The actual cost of the licensing program would go down since the FCC
would
no longer be issuing tons of "sequential" callsigns gratis, and fees
collected
would go up since you couldn't get any other format of call without ponying
up
the change to do so.

Issuing sequentials costs almost nothing because the computer simply spits them
out automatically.

Of course it'll never happen, because the admin paperwork alone would be a
nightmare. Plus the vanity revenue would go away.

The paperwork would go down since they'd no longer be getting 605's at
every change of class of license or address change

whoa!

5 years ago I moved from 19082 to 19087. Still EPA, no callsign change would
have been required under any rules. Yet I had to send in a 605.

and the fees would go up
since they were no longer issuing (save for the initial call) gratis
licenses.
And the FCC would be getting paid to process what extra paperwork they DID
receive.

But do vanity fees go to FCC or to the general fund?

73 and Happy Turkey Day

don't each too much bird

73 de Jim, N2EY

Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: "Dee D. Flint"
Date: 11/25/2004 9:25 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote in message
...
Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: (Steve Robeson K4YZ)
Date: 11/25/2004 5:16 AM Central Standard Time

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a
change
which they pay for.

Excuse me....

"All new LICENSEES" are assigned a 2x3 callsign....."


Not quite correct. If a person tests all the way to Extra starting with no
license at one sitting, their new license will be a sequentially assigned
2x2 beginning with A. Your statement is correct, however for anyone who
starts out their first license as either a Tech or General since there are
no more sequentially available 1x3s.

You came in in the middle of something Dee.

This was my suggestion as to what SHOUL be...Not "What is".

My suggestion was that they should "can" the "sequential call system" and
just issue a 2x3 callsign to all new licensees regardless of class earned.
Then if the licensee wants something other than what they got, they can select
from the appropriate Callsign Group and pay for it. It would cut down on
"gratis" license functions and increase revenues at FCC.

73 es Happy Turkey Day

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote


If you move across a call district line, you either apply for a call
in
that district, or you are obligated to sign "portable", "stroke",
"mobile", etc
that call district.


Been there, done that, and have the litany of call signs to prove it.
In fact, used to be that you needed to NOTIFY the FCC if you were going
to operate away from your assigned station location, and periodically
renew that notification. Some of just got an additional station
callsign if we were going to spend time at another location. Once had a
station license with my now-mother-in-laws address because I spent so
much time there courting her daughter. Saved having to sign "KG6AQI/W0"
and sending those pesky notices to Washington.

FCC finally figured out it was unnecessary regulation for their
purposes, and discontinued the requirement.

There are both enforcement and "good operating practice"
issues therein.


No there aren't.

Each licensee is required to have a current mailing address on file at
FCC. One reason, I presume, is in case they need to "enforce".

"Good operating practice"? --- that's just a control-freak way of saying
"I want to know exactly where you are, regardless of what the FCC
wants".

73, de Hans, K0HB

Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/25/2004 9:29 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

Subject: Care To Try Again, Steve?
From: PAMNO (N2EY)
Date: 11/24/2004 7:32 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article ,
(Steve
Robeson K4YZ) writes:

No...YOU said the "most desireable" calls were being gobbled up!

And they are!

Subjective, Jim, subjective!

That's
pretty subjective. Personally, I don't care for the 2 x 1 formatted calls.
If
it were me, and I were out there, I'd get a 2 x 2 formatted call in either
the
AH or KH block.

Well, there you have it.

Again...it's all subjective.

Fair enough. However, after 20+ years of VE testing, I have yet to
hear
of one of those overseas tests as being determined to be a "license for
sale"
situation rather than an above-board test session.

KH2D, who has *been there* says differently. See his posts on the subject.

I read it.

He refered to "CBers" with Amateur licenses. He did not specify that ther
were licenses obtained from VE exams held at foreign hamfests. Sounded to me
like "locals"...

And I said that if he didn't get the desired results, he should push
it with DoJ.

Yet we HAVE had more than a small number of VE test session right here
in
the US that WERE just that (license for sale). I am sure there have been
cases
of fines, but in most cases, revocation of of licensure for both "licensee"
and
"examiner" was the only penalty enforced.

And a US citizen cannot use a foreign amateur license in the USA. So the
penalty is much tougher on them.

That's not the point.

You brought up how to enforce regulations on foreign Amateurs who may
allow some misconduct in the performance of a VE session.

No where did I say ANYthing about using a foreign license in the United
States.

What I DID say was that in VE session right here at home, conducted by
Americans, the "most" penalties usually enforced are license revocation of both
the licensee and the "examiner".

Are you suggesting any GREATER penalty on a foreigner who commits the same
crime?

Do you dispute this fact?

OK...then send a copy of the document to me and I'd be glad to sign on
as
a
co-sponsor. But right now there's not much to argue with since what's going
on
appears to be legal and there's no other legal precedent for the FCC to say
"No, We won't accept license applications from non-resident foreign
nationals".

Don't need a precedent.

Sure you do.

Why would the government revoke ANY privilege unless there was some
misconduct or abuse of that privilege?

If you force THAT issue, then "they" can adequately argue that there are
even far greater abuses right here at home and the whole program goes out the
window!

Ya *really* wanna stir things up?

Imagine if FCC came up with a new callsign system, like this:

1) No more vanity calls
2) All CONUS callsigns begin with W
3) All non-CONUS callsigns begin with K
4) All nonresident callsigns begin with N
5) All special event callsigns begin with A
6) All callsigns indicate the geographic location of the licensee's
address.
If
you move across a call district boundary, you get a new callsign,
sequentially
issued, no choice.
7) Everybody gets a 2x3 call except Extras, who get the shorter calls,
sequentially issued, until they're used up.
8) If your present call matches the new system, you can keep it. Otherwise
you
get a sequentially issued new call on the next renewal. No choice of the
new
call.

Can you imagine the uproar?

Since when has creating an up-roar been un-American...?!?!

Actually, Here's MY idea.

All new callsigns are assigned a 2x3 callsign, regardless of class,
period. All existing calls stay the same unless the licensee requests a
change
which they pay for.

Right away I can hear the yelling.

Why? If it's someone "new", they will have never known any other way...and
I specifically stated that all those already licensed would not be forced to
make any changes.

The FCC continues to offer the different "Group" callsigns, but if the
licensee wants a call other than what was issued, they pony up the
change...No
more "sequential" calls other than the 2x3 they were issued.

hooboy

Why? Do you walk up to Burger King and just take the food?

Fee-for-service is the way of the future if we continue to enact tax cuts.

If you move across a call district line, you either apply for a call in
that district, or you are obligated to sign "portable", "stroke", "mobile",
etc
that call district. There are both enforcement and "good operating
practice"
issues therein.

So I'd have to start signing "N2EY/3" after more than 20 years of not having
to
do so from here? That's effectively lengthening the call to a 2x3

And no one looking for a 2-land call would wind up working someone in PA!

"dadididadit didididadah" takes about 1 second extra at 20WPM. Big deal.

Would I have to pay the fee to get a 3 land call?

What did I say?

What if all the 3-land 1x2s are gone?

Ominus Feces Occurum. There'd be 3-laders living in FL and other places
force to give up their "out-of-dictrict" calls too.

The actual cost of the licensing program would go down since the FCC
would
no longer be issuing tons of "sequential" callsigns gratis, and fees
collected
would go up since you couldn't get any other format of call without ponying
up
the change to do so.

Issuing sequentials costs almost nothing because the computer simply spits
them
out automatically.

Still costs time to attend the computer, input the data, and pay for the
actual forms and postage.

Of course it'll never happen, because the admin paperwork alone would be a
nightmare. Plus the vanity revenue would go away.

The paperwork would go down since they'd no longer be getting 605's at
every change of class of license or address change

whoa!

5 years ago I moved from 19082 to 19087. Still EPA, no callsign change would
have been required under any rules. Yet I had to send in a 605.

You're the one talking about changes to the rules.

How's this for example: "Where a change of address is requested and no
other change of callsign would be required due to location within the same call
district, attaching a copy of the letter of notification sent to the Commission
to the original station records shall be considered adequate. A change of
address on the original license document will be reflected upon the next
routine renewal or paid license transaction."

and the fees would go up
since they were no longer issuing (save for the initial call) gratis
licenses.
And the FCC would be getting paid to process what extra paperwork they DID
receive.

But do vanity fees go to FCC or to the general fund?

Againn, Jim, you're the one suggesting changes...

73 and Happy Turkey Day

don't each too much bird

No problem...when this one is gone, I am sure Lennie or Brain will flip us
another!

73

Steve, K4YZ

Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 11/25/2004 10:29 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote

There are both enforcement and "good operating practice"
issues therein.

No there aren't.

Sure there are.

Each licensee is required to have a current mailing address on file at
FCC. One reason, I presume, is in case they need to "enforce".

And a primary station location should be required on the license.

Submit a mailing address chage to the FAA with just a post office box or
"Rural Route" number and see what happens, and they require it for the same
reasosn..."enforcement issues"

"Good operating practice"? --- that's just a control-freak way of saying
"I want to know exactly where you are, regardless of what the FCC
wants".

It's a way of saying it's annoying to answer a W1 calling CQ cuz you need
New England states for WAS only to find out he's in Los Angeles.

And stuff your "control freak" issues, Hans. That's just your way of
trying to demean someone else's ideas by attaching some misdirection without
valid reasoning behind it.

Pretty lame, actually, but nothing new.

Steve, K4YZ

"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote


And a primary station location should be required on the license.


That's your opinion.

In the FCC's opinion it is not a regulatory necessity, thus they don't
require it.

Just as they no longer require you to certify you've operated CW at
least 10 hours in the past year or you can't renew your license, they no
longer require you to be an Extra to operate an amateur radio station in
space, they no longer require you to keep a strict record (log) of your
stations transmissions (including fruitless CQ's), they no longer
require you to advance-notify your District Engineer each month you will
be operating portable or mobile and include a "specific as possible"
itinery of your mobile operation, and they no longer require your
station to have a device to measure your transmitting frequency
(independent of the transmitter).

These are all archaic regulations, just like "primary station location
required", which did not serve any FCC regulatory purpose and they have
discarded.

If you feel you need to still keep a log, feel free to do so. If you
feel you still need your primary station location inscribed on your
license, feel free to inscribe it there (there's a nice spot on the
document under "Special Conditions" where you could also record the
address of your District Engineer so you can notifiy him each month that
you'll be operating 'mobile' away from your "primary station location").
When you renew, be sure to include a copy of your log to fulfill the
"hours of CW operation in the past year" requirement .

Or not, as you wish.


It's a way of saying it's annoying to answer a W1 calling CQ cuz you
need
New England states for WAS only to find out he's in Los Angeles.


FCC doesn't regulate WAS, so they don't impose WAS requirements on the
call sign structure.

Your example is pretty contrived anyhow, because there are several
states in "1-land", so unless you need every one of them, a quick check
of your callboook would have revealed he's in Sacremento.

73, de Hans, K0HB/4ID

Subject: Who Can Have A US License? Sequential Calls?
From: "KØHB"
Date: 11/25/2004 11:43 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

"Steve Robeson K4YZ" wrote

And a primary station location should be required on the license.

That's your opinion.

And my opinion is worth any less than yours...how...????

In the FCC's opinion it is not a regulatory necessity, thus they don't
require it.

It's not about regulatory. It's about enforcement.

These are all archaic regulations, just like "primary station location
required", which did not serve any FCC regulatory purpose and they have
discarded.

It's not about regulatory. It's about enforcement. You DO know the
difference, don't you?

It's a way of saying it's annoying to answer a W1 calling CQ cuz you
need
New England states for WAS only to find out he's in Los Angeles.


FCC doesn't regulate WAS, so they don't impose WAS requirements on the
call sign structure.

Your example is pretty contrived anyhow, because there are several
states in "1-land", so unless you need every one of them, a quick check
of your callboook would have revealed he's in Sacremento.

It's not contrived.

There's are numerous letters in QST over the past few years (and I must
assume even more who haven't written) lamenting the same thing.

I guess it's no problem when you are running a full gallon and have the
Internet right there at the operating position, Hans. Not everyone is so
blessed with accessories and horsepower.

Steve, K4YZ