|
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
KØHB wrote: kb9rqz wrote: are you willing should the issue arise (you know RRAPer and proof) to make the full data avable if asked? Yes. impress as proof Only flaw I saw was I ddi not find were you were id as subitting that log but even that is nitpicking since the point is made if anyone made those contacts http://lists.contesting.com/pipermai...er/065854.html |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: Jeffrey Herman on Dec 29, 10:47 am
"K؈B" wrote "Jeffrey Herman" wrote Let's crunch some numbers: Our total MF/HF spectrum consists of just 3.75 MHz, with only about half of it, 1875 kHz, useful for communications at any one particular time of the day. If suddenly, as if by magic, all licensees were granted MF/HF privileges, we could possibly have 670,000 hams attempting to fill that 1.875 MHz. Watch this closely, boys and girls. We're about to be given a demonstration of "figures don't lie, but liars figure". In this case the person "figuring" is no less than a self-proclaimed university "math lecturer", so we're seeing a pro at work! "Self-proclaimed"? Send me an email and I'll give you the phone number of the personnel office -- they'll verify that I've been a Step C Lecturer for 20 years. There's NO need to call long-distance to the University of Hawaii. Everyone can access www.hawaii.edu, click down a few pages to Kapiolani Community College class schedules. Under that will be two classes in Elementary Algebra I taught by Jeffrey Herman. The 2006 class schedule begins 9 January, continues to May 12, 3 credits, course number 24. ELEMENTARY ALGEBRA I is not exactly what one would call "higher mathematics" in any mainland university. A COMMUNITY COLLEGE is still a 2-year "junior college" even though aligned with a University; a "university" is a collection of individual colleges, has always been thus. A LECTURER in mathematics carries with it the concept of some professor of high or many degrees "lecturing in a hall" (mini- auditorium size). Elementary Algebra I is, by title, an INTRODUCTION to mathematics, not even close to beginning The Calculus. Such a "lecturer" is really an INSTRUCTOR, a TEACHER. Nothing wrong with being a teacher, such is well respected by most folks. (I've never understood why liberals resort to name-calling and sarcasm; do they lack the ability to provide a rebuttal in a calm and polite manner?) Well, I've never understood why someone has to "sign" his postings using TITLES which work on the emotional perception of others by omitting full details. Being a "Chief Petty Officer" in the USCG is fine, but there IS a difference between being on active duty and in the reserves. Since the USCG had one of the smallest of all military branches' communications networks, such a title is hardly any relation to the HOBBY of amateur radio...which, when not being used for the purpose of title-rank-privelege personal pleasures, is about radio communications. Okay, I'll grant you that folks have to work and sleep, so let's say at any one time, we have one-fourth of all 670 kilohams on the air, with two per QSO. One-fourth? That averages out to 6 hours of hamming every day by every ham, or 167,500 US hams on the air at any given instant, 24/7. It was a worst-case starting point. Feel free to take that 670,000 and chop it down anyway you please, then divide that figure into bandwidth of usable spectrum at a particular time of day. To be accurate, the 1.7 MHz of 10m should be excluded at this time, bringing that 3.75 MHz of total spectrum bandwidth down to 2.05 MHz. 2,050,000 Hz divided by (670,000 hams divided by 2 hams per QSO) gives the worst-case scenario, about 6 Hz per QSO. Now you can take that figure and use it in any reasonable and realistic manner you please. Actually, I would take your "worst-case scenario" and THROW IT INTO THE DUMPSTER WITH "GREAT FORCE." [borrowing from Hans] First of all, "the bands" as colloquial ham-speak for HF only wouldn't be used ENTIRELY, even by the "highest" class hams. The world above 30 MHz has 99+% of all the bandwidth of amateur radio frequency allocations in the USA. Secondly, "excluding" the 10 meter band is ridiculous. It is entirely BELOW 30 MHz, thus qualifies as being IN "the bands" (those below 30 MHz). Third, there are SEVEN time zones among the United States. Not all radio amateurs would be ON "the bands" at the same time, certainly so during week/work days. For more practical application, one can consider FIVE time zones (excluding the far west and far east portions of Alaska where population is less dense). Fourth, the morseaholics would be down in the "lower halves" of "the bands" playing with the morsemanship skills, pretending to be "pros" at OOK CW. Their numbers would remain relatively the same as now since there is NO great hue and cry by newcomers to do the morse thing. Fifth, the number of no-code-test Technicians is presently on the order of approximately quarter million of all licensees (Technician class is just over 300 thousand, or twice as many as General class). Technician Plus is about 45 thousand. IF, and only IF all those denied HF operating privileges before were now given permission to operate below 30 MHz, the ACTUAL "worst-case" scenario would call for ONLY a doubling of the "bands" occupancy. There is NOTHING approaching the "6 Hz per licensee worst-case" NOW, quite observable by just listening. Sixth, the conventional QSO - as it is done now - is simplex. One licensee is transmitting while the other is listening. In some cases, "netting" has several licensees on the same frequency, but only one transmitting at any one time. There is NO WAY that all licensees would be ON THE AIR at the same time. The most popular US operating event is the ARRL Field Day. And if all 670 kilohams DID have HF privileges, the worst-case scenario above *might* actually occur. NOT in the foreseeable future, i.e., the next decade IMHO. Other than those five "60m" channels allocated for USA hams, how much have radio amateurs gotten since 1979? [1979 is 26 years ago, a quarter century] If you are really, really worried about spectrum space in "the bands," then the time is NOW to start getting some change momentum going. WRC-07 is only two years away. The ARRL has been ineffectual in getting anything more than a few 60m channels. The long-time "pro" hams haven't helped out on that in their efforts of "citing need" to the FCC in regards to the 60m BAND petition. Jeff KH6O -- Chief Petty Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Mathematics Lecturer, University of Hawaii System Hey, I can do that sort of thing in the same style if you can... -- Staff Sergeant, United States Army Signal Corps Retired from regular hours aerospace electronics design engineer Life Member, Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers Aircraft flyer, ex-AMA19700 Nationally-published (many times) author Qualified vehicle driver, International and California licensee Industrial and Art Illustrator Feline wrangler and server Guest lecturer on aerospace at select California Magnet Schools Neighborhood Association Speaker Groundskeeper at select Southern California properties Husband to my high school sweetheart Sunnuvagun! :-) |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
From: K0HB on Dec 29, 7:18 am
wrote You'll probably see that raised to 100-150 W on HF because there are so many ~100 W rigs in existence. The 50W number was chosen because it's a "safe" level according to OET thinking. If there were a 50W permit, manufacturers would quickly market a 50W rigs, just as they manufacture 10W versions of many popular rigs for the JA market. The EXACT RF power output maximum is rather irrelevant. The market can decide the de facto power level after the FCC picks an arbitrary level to fit the greenies' anti-radiation mindset. But "re-takeable" - if someone took the Class B test again, they'd get another 10 years as Class B - right? Not in my proposal. Jimmie has difficulty grasping new concepts. 1) What test would be required for upgrade to Class A for current licenses? Pass the Class A test. Like I said, difficulty in grasping... 2) Would there be any experience requirement for Class B hams that wanted to upgrade to Class A? I originally proposed a "time in grade" requirement, but in retrospect I can't find a logical regulatory reason to defend the idea. There isn't any logical regulatory reason for "time in grade." All that existed before is the CONCEPT in some hams' minds that amateur radio was a 'service' and thus had to be 'professional' as a guild or craft or union. Amateur radio is basically a HOBBY and should be regulated as such. 3) If the licenses are issued "for life", how would FCC know when an amateur expired unless next-of-kin sent official notification? Since no benefits accrue to an "expired" ham, the FCC has no interest in their passing. Were there EVER any benefits for an expired licensee? Other than the follow-on-to-new-rules-changes grandfathering? 4) What would happen to the vanity callsign program under your plan? Obviously a Class A could get a callsign from any block, but what would be available to Class B? Each new licensee would get a new call in sequential order. Vanity calls would be available to any licensee without regard to "blocks". Well, on the practical side (of dealing with some amateurs), this would put a crimp in the VANITY system of getting "snazzy 1x2" callsigns for 'youngsters.' :-) The 1x2 callsign has very much been an ego-trip for many hams and deemed quite desireable with the 'guru' status of an 'old- timer.' With only ONE 'block' instead of five at one time, there isn't any need for 'blocks' of favoritism. [new concepts are still difficult for some to grasp] I would suggest a stricter control at the Commission on CLUB calls, perhaps with an extra alphabetic character reserved for those in the future. It's been obvious that many hams have violated the spirit of the club license in the past, fabricated fictitious "clubs" in order to gather many licenses and callsigns (for whatever their personal purpose). Such club calls have been the SAME as the sequential callsign granting and, as such, take out some of the callsigns that might be desired by others under the Vanity system. There is little point in having club calls essentially undifferentiable with individual calls as it is now. Club activities would normally be different than individuals' activities. But, that is a minor matter of no real consequence now and that minor subject is only good for more flaming in here. All in all, Hans, I can see your new concept is logical, sensible, simpler in regulatory structure than it has been for decades. The biggest problem will be with all those other ego-boo types who NEED the 'seniority' emotional baggage of being "better than others." :-) |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote: wrote: From: on Tues, Dec 27 2005 8:45 pm cut They do try to run people off who happen to disagree with them. I even entertained thoughts of leaving the group at one time, but I won't let them run me off. I plan to turn off the lights when this group is done. Between Steve and Mark, that may be sooner than I thought. I am sorry for my part in that BB and most of the rest, but one looks at ones opitions and makes one choices, in this case By trying to fight fire with hotter flame I have some success not as much as I would like when I get some new inspriation I will shifitng tactics a bit but stevie posts a lot less attack threads this and and by reading my title you generaly stay out of the them if you like like I have said I have decided to reshape the wasteland of RRAP to something I can be more comforatble in. prehaps ymay you are less other than Stevie Dave and Hans. I offer my apolgies. To steve and Dave I wish basicaly plague, to Hans the vsiosn to see whatever the heck you are doing cut |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
KØHB wrote:
wrote You'll probably see that raised to 100-150 W on HF because there are so many ~100 W rigs in existence. The 50W number was chosen because it's a "safe" level according to OET thinking. OK. Also, almost any "100W" rig can be run at 50 W. If there were a 50W permit, manufacturers would quickly market a 50W rigs, just as they manufacture 10W versions of many popular rigs for the JA market. Maybe. My point is only that you'd probably see lots of comments wanting it raised to 100-150 W. Not a deal-killer in any event. But "re-takeable" - if someone took the Class B test again, they'd get another 10 years as Class B - right? Not in my proposal. So it's one 10-year Class B per person - just like the old Novice. That part might not survive the process because FCC would have the additional admin work of making sure someone had never held a Class B before. But again, it's not a deal-killer in any event. 1) What test would be required for upgrade to Class A for current licenses? Pass the Class A test. So everyone is on an even footing WRT upgrading to Class A. This raises another question.... Obviously after the change took place there would be only two test elements - call them Element A and Element B. Obviously getting a Class B would require passing Element B and getting a Class A would require passing Element A. But would Class A also require passing Element B if a person did not hold any class of license before? Or would Element A include everything that was in Element B? Just a detail, really, but for completeness sake... 2) Would there be any experience requirement for Class B hams that wanted to upgrade to Class A? I originally proposed a "time in grade" requirement, but in retrospect I can't find a logical regulatory reason to defend the idea. Plus it would be one more admin thing to do. OK 3) If the licenses are issued "for life", how would FCC know when an amateur expired unless next-of-kin sent official notification? Since no benefits accrue to an "expired" ham, the FCC has no interest in their passing. The biggest problem I can see is that a lot of callsigns would become unavailable unless next-of-kin wrote letters to FCC. Which may be good - or bad. 4) What would happen to the vanity callsign program under your plan? Obviously a Class A could get a callsign from any block, but what would be available to Class B? Each new licensee would get a new call in sequential order. Vanity callswould be available to any licensee without regard to "blocks". So there could be Class B hams with 1x2s and Class A hams with 2x3s.... Some might object to that. However, since the rules would go into effect only after notice was given, all existing hams would have adequate time to upgrade to whatever "old" class of license they wanted before the change took place. They would also have adequate time to get a vanity call before the change. In addition, the granting of vanity calls to Class B would be an added incentive for them to upgrade before the license ran out, because their callsign would be immediately available to others when their Class B ran out - unless they upgraded. --- I'm not sure whether I like this proposal or not. But that's beside the point, really. What's really interesting is that it meets practically all of the criteria I mentioned earlier: - Nobody loses any privileges - Nobody gains any privileges without testing - No real increase in admin work (Class A is really a rebadged, lifetime Extra, and Class B is one new class). - Some admin work will actually decrease. Only one upgrade per ham will be possible. No renewals. Only two test elements. - No big changes to the VEC or QPC systems IOW, it's a complete proposal - just needs to be written up in the proper format. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:18:18 GMT, "KØHB"
wrote in t: wrote You'll probably see that raised to 100-150 W on HF because there are so many ~100 W rigs in existence. The 50W number was chosen because it's a "safe" level according to OET thinking. If there were a 50W permit....... Why even have a "learner's permit" at all? Looks to me like the hobby got along just fine all these years without one, so why start now? In fact, I recently picked up a 1940 edition of the ARRL Handbook, and at that time there was only one license with no learner's permit. The concept (according to the second chapter) was to memorize the code while building your first receiver, listen on your receiver to improve your code while building your first transmitter, and all the while studying for the written test. Sounds like a plan to me. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Frank Gilliland wrote:
On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:18:18 GMT, "KØHB" wrote in t: wrote You'll probably see that raised to 100-150 W on HF because there are so many ~100 W rigs in existence. The 50W number was chosen because it's a "safe" level according to OET thinking. If there were a 50W permit....... Why even have a "learner's permit" at all? Looks to me like the hobby got along just fine all these years without one, so why start now? ?? The current license structure is a direct descendant of the 1951 restructuring that gave us a system with licenses called Novice, Technician, General, Conditional, Advanced, and Extra. In fact, I recently picked up a 1940 edition of the ARRL Handbook, and at that time there was only one license with no learner's permit. Read it some more. In 1940 there were three classes of US amateur radio license - Class A, Class B and Class C. That system was in place from 1933 to 1951, The concept (according to the second chapter) was to memorize the code while building your first receiver, listen on your receiver to improve your code while building your first transmitter, and all the while studying for the written test. Sounds like a plan to me. That's what I did. The question is how much should be required to get the intitial license. In 1940, the minimum requirement for the Class B or C license was 13 wpm Morse Code, sending and receiving, plus a written test of about 50 questions that included multiple choice questions, drawing schematic and block diagrams, and answering some essay questions. Since then, the requirements have changed somewhat... |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
wrote So there could be Class B hams with 1x2s and Class A hams with 2x3s.... Yup. Some might object to that. There are also people who might object to pretty girls wearing lipstick, tight sweaters, and no bra, but I ignore them. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
How many licenses should there be, why and what privileges?
Frank Gilliland wrote: On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:18:18 GMT, "KØHB" wrote in t: wrote You'll probably see that raised to 100-150 W on HF because there are so many ~100 W rigs in existence. The 50W number was chosen because it's a "safe" level according to OET thinking. If there were a 50W permit....... Why even have a "learner's permit" at all? Looks to me like the hobby got along just fine all these years without one, so why start now? In fact, I recently picked up a 1940 edition of the ARRL Handbook, and at that time there was only one license with no learner's permit. The concept (according to the second chapter) was to memorize the code while building your first receiver, listen on your receiver to improve your code while building your first transmitter, and all the while studying for the written test. Sounds like a plan to me. the best answer is to allow for some reduced size of a question pool but the more I look at what is suggested the more I don't see the point Jim attirude makes it look an awfull lot like just another scheme to set anf maintian classism in the ARS ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:05 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com