wrote in message
oups.com...

[snip]



Tech has been the defacto "entry level" since 2000.


Although the licensing structure was changed in 2000, the Tech license has
been the defacto entry license for several years before that. I earned my
original license in 1992. All the new licensees that I personally knew
started at either Tech or Tech with code.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

I absolutely agree with that.+

(if one agrees with this Oldster, all is good, otherwise you will spend a
week as a cashier in the Wal-Mart checkout lane)

With just one "class" everyone is free to try any band, any
mode, as they wish. Those that want to specialize in certain
bands with specific modes can continue to do so.

(I think I'll try 11 meters, thank you)

The Commission is, and has been, quite free with OPTIONS open
to most licensees. To paraphrase Gene Kranz' famous line
during Apollo 13's near disaster, "Option is no failure!"

And may I say, "Age is no excuse."

So, Lennie, Star Spangled Banner music sully forth and do your best to
address the varicose veins that make your legs appear as an Allied map of
the Rhine River crossing of WW II. Those old legs must have jumped from an
uncountable number of perfectly good aircraft...or were pushed from the
backs of moving Deuce-and-a-Halfs to join the rest of the roadside detritus.

The latter is most likely how you served.

I think I love you, Dee.
I like women with strong opinions.
I like women who can out bench press 200 pounds with one hand.
I especially like women who squeeze my nuts into a corner.
Woger
AB8MQ

wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:

(SNIP)

FCC also
left 13wpm and 20wpm as requirements for many years
with the lack of change/elimination of said 13/20 wpm
elements supposedly waiting for a "consensus" in the
amateur ranks.

Perhaps. Yet anyone who could come up with a doctor's
note could get a medical waiver. Such notes were never
hard to get.

But in the overall perspective waivers were used only by
a relatively small percentage of new hams.

I've heard figures as high as 10%.

Perhaps, but that can't be verified easily.

In the few VE
sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being
used. Was the waiver process abused by some?
Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all.

Who can say what constitutes "abuse" if the person got
a doctor's note?

Exactly. In the end, it was the doctor's, if anyone, that
would have to be assessed as signing off on a waiver
that shouldn't have been issued.

In spite of the lack of any consensus on
code the FCC did, in fact, end 13/20wpm test elements
in April 2000 based on arguments and the FCC's own
conclusions at that time.

Yep. FCC also reduced the written tests at the same time
and closed off three license classes to new issues.

I presume you mean the FCC reduced the number
of written tests as opposed to the overall
difficulty of the test material since the syllabus for
the now three remaining test elements did not change.

What FCC did was to reduce both the number of tests and
the total number of questions for each class of license.

Neither of which makes testing easier as long as
the total syllabus of questions remains the same.
If a student is given a list of 100 spelling words
to learn, it is neither easier or harder for the student
to pass if the spelling test has 20 words or 10 words.
In the end, the student still has to learn all the
words on the list.

(SNIP)

End result is less admin work for FCC. No more medical
waivers, only three written elements instead of five, and
eventual elimination of some rules.

That eventual elimination, unless
changes are made by the FCC, could
well be upwards of 50+ years assuming there are
some Advanced hams who are in their 20s.

Only true if those hams continue to renew and never
ever upgrade.

Do you see any mass effort to upgrade by currently
licensed Novice or Advanced license holders? In fact,
there seems to be more than a handful of Advanced
that say they'll never upgrade so they can be ID'd
as having passed 13wpm morse.

Bottom line, every statement or opinion offered by the FCC
in any NPRM and/or R&O is not cast in stone and can
end up being revisited and changed at a later review.

Agreed - but at the same time, getting them to do so
is an uphill battle. Particularly when such an change will
result in more work for FCC.

On the issue of a learners license I see no additional
work for FCC if there are only one or two other
licenses as some (e.g. Hans) have proposed.

The big admin issue with new license classes is that the
database has to be re-done.

In today's environment that shouldn't be a big deal at all.
The entire database could probably be imported into an
Excel file and given to some college computer science
majors and modified in a day or so. This stuff just isn't rocket
science anymore.

(SNIP)

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

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

wrote in message
Yep. FCC also reduced the written tests at the same time
and closed off three license classes to new issues.

I presume you mean the FCC reduced the number
of written tests as opposed to the overall
difficulty of the test material since the syllabus for
the now three remaining test elements did not change.

The syllabus for the Extra class license most certainly did change. The
material that had formerly been on the Advanced license was rolled into
the Extra exam. However, due to timing issues there was a very short
window of time where anyone upgrading was taking the Extra exam that did
not include that material as the question pool took a while to revise.

The syllabus for the Technician also changed although not as dramatically
and again timing issues came into play so that there was a window where
the exams had not yet been updated. But it was revised to cover the
material that had been on the old Novice exam as well as including the
Technician material.

Agree as to the specific syllabus for Tech and Extra (both increased
in overall material). My point was that the total material covered
did not become less than it was before.

The only syllabus that was unaffected was that of the General license.

Agreed.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:

[snip]


What you're seeing is the classic "Law of Unintended Consequences".
If FCC does what they propose, eliminating the code test will also
eliminate any way for Technicians to get any HF privileges except
by upgrade to General.


Perhaps it is not "Unintended". It may be precisely what the FCC wanted to
do.

It was a screwy idea anyway. Old Tech w/o HF, Old Tech with HF, Tech
Plus, New Tech w/o HF, New Tech (no Plus) with HF.

Good grief!

Forget incentives. License people to be "Amateur Radio Operator" and
be done with it.

Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:

(SNIP)

FCC also
left 13wpm and 20wpm as requirements for many years
with the lack of change/elimination of said 13/20 wpm
elements supposedly waiting for a "consensus" in the
amateur ranks.

Perhaps. Yet anyone who could come up with a doctor's
note could get a medical waiver. Such notes were never
hard to get.

But in the overall perspective waivers were used only by
a relatively small percentage of new hams.

I've heard figures as high as 10%.

Perhaps, but that can't be verified easily.

Ditto the number of Conditionals that "got waivers in other ways." ;^)

Dee Flint wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
ink.net...

wrote in message
oups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
Bill Sohl wrote:

[snip]

Perhaps. Yet anyone who could come up with a doctor's
note could get a medical waiver. Such notes were never
hard to get.

But in the overall perspective waivers were used only by
a relatively small percentage of new hams. In the few VE
sessions I assisted in I don't recall ever seeing one being
used. Was the waiver process abused by some?
Probably, but it wasn't a wide practice at all.


I only saw two cases of waivers being used. One was my ex-husband and I
personally knew how severe his problem was. Naturally I was not a VE at
those sessions.

I don't see a problem with that, but I still consider a pass/fail exam
for just one operating mode to be insane.

The other case was at a test session where I was taking my
Extra exam. Someone did come in and present his waiver.

[snip]

Sometimes Extra VE's talk about the folks who have waivers, even the
ones they recommended the process to.

KØHB wrote:
"Jeffrey Herman" wrote

A Vietnamese proverb I include in my syllabus each semester says, "If you
study you'll become what you desire; if you do not study you'll never
become anything."

Chief Petty Officer, U.S. Coast Guard
Mathematics Lecturer, University of Hawaii System

I'll remember that for the next time I want to impress a Vienamese bimbo.

Vietnamese proverbs, huh? I'm going to guess that Jeff wants his
"students" to think he's a vietnam vet.

Meanwhile here's a proverb from Bokonon which I include in my lectures:

"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something,
learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before.
He is full of murderous resentment of people who
are ignorant without having come by their ignorance
the hard way."

Pokomon sounds very wise.

You sound like a socialist, Hans -- a believer in one and only one class
in a society.


Quite the opposite, Jeffrey, I'm a staunch Libertarian, and I believe that the
only legitimate interest that government has in Amateur Radio licensing is to
determine if the applicant is qualified or not qualified,

and to enforce...

not to
social-engineer the Amateur Service into an arbitrary layer cake of
good/better/best operators.

But, but, but if the Government couldn't determine who the very best
operators were, then QST would have no "antique radio" article to write
about in the January issue of QST.

Randy wrote:

(I think I'll try 11 meters, thank you)

Bye and Good Luck!