About Us

August 2nd 05, 02:57 PM

wrote:

Dee Flint wrote:

wrote in message
groups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:

wrote in message
legroups.com...

Dee Flint wrote:

In the discussion in the NPRM, they make it clear
that they expect any Tech
not having HF privileges (i.e. codeless Techs)
to take the General exam and
upgrade to get HF privileges.

Interesting - in many ways!

For one thing, there would still be two kinds of
Technicians - those with HF and those without.

Yes there will be. The NPRM bore down heavily on the point
that licensees
are expected to continue to develop and learn and thus if they want
more
privileges, they show that development by upgrading.

The problem is that such an implementation of the concept
contradicts the FCC's own arguments and reasons!

But it does completely satisfy those who kept hammering on no
automatic upgrades and then some as I got the impression that most would
not have minded Techs being consolidated with Tech Plus at the Tech Plus
privileges even though otherwise against automatic upgrades.

Perhaps.

Or perhaps FCC thinks that anybody who really wants HF should just go
for General or Extra.

But what would be the rationale of giving the priveliges of a class that
tehy chose to remove (not test for, and eventually merge with
Technician) earlier?

The only testing difference between a Tech and Tech Plus/Tech- with-HF
is that the latter passed Element 1 and the former did not.
The latter
has some HF privileges and the former has none.

The FCC says that Element 1 is no longer necessary, and
proposes
to remove it completely. If someone accepts that reasoning, it
follows that all Techs should have the same privileges - but that's not what FCC proposes?!

The only explanation I can think of is that FCC is looking for
long-range simplification. Perhaps what FCC wants in the long
term is for all entry-level licensees to be on VHF/UHF only,
and require at least a General for HF.

It is hard to say what the FCC was thinking. However perhaps
they too are
looking at the statistics and interpret it as no need for the
introductory
license to have HF privileges. Afterall the Novice are
declining at a fast
enough pace that it looks like almost none are active and that almost all
are failing to renew. They can easily go into the data as they have it and
see how many Tech Pluses actually upgraded, let themselves
lapse, or simply
renewed. The last indicating a low activity level and/or
interest level since they have not upgraded.

The number of upgrades isn't easily obtained from the database, though.

Also, they may be thinking that this keeps the minimum number
to tests to
get onto HF at least at two. The Novices had to take two and
Techs after
April 2000 had to take two to get on HF. Prior to that, Techs had to take 3
tests to get on HF (Novice written, Tech written, and code).

True enough!

And when you consider that the old, pre-restructuring 20 wpm *Extra*
was earned by at least one third-grader at the age of 8,
it's a bit hard to accept that the written tests are "too hard".

(OTOH, the same can be said about the code tests...)

They also discussed the concept that they do not want Techs to stay at the
Tech level. They consider upgrading as a significant element
in individuals
fulfilling the basis and purpose of ham radio (i.e. self
training, etc).
Allowing the Technicians some HF privileges reduces the
motivation to
upgrade. And the FCC repeately referred to the Techs being
able to get on
HF by taking the simple written test to upgrade to General.

It gets more and more interesting. Sounds like a rebirth of
Incentive Licensing.

THey better call it something else! ;^)

Think about it: FCC saying that it's *not OK* to stay a Tech!?!
That upgrading is part of being a good ham and supporting the
Basis and Purpose...

Works for me!

rest snipped

- Mike KB3EIA -

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Switch to Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
BPL NPRM v. NOI	Len Over 21	Policy	149	April 8th 04 12:59 PM
AMATEUR RADIO ENTHUSIASTS COME OUT SWINGING IN OPPOSITION TO NPRM ON BPL	Steve Stone	Policy	9	March 22nd 04 06:58 PM
Access BPL NPRM versus NOI	Len Over 21	Policy	1	March 16th 04 01:38 PM
BPL NPRM	Len Over 21	Policy	5	February 23rd 04 03:15 AM
BPL NPRM Approved	Keith	Shortwave	7	February 20th 04 07:30 PM

Menu

About Us