In article , Mike Coslo
writes:
N2EY wrote:
In article k.net,
"Dwight
Stewart" writes:
snippage
Your proposal
would intentionally take that away by setting the bar to upgrade even
higher
(the Extra class test). And, if newcomers fail to reach that higher bar,
out
they go - their non-renewable license is gone.
Exactly.
But they would have 10 years to do it.
In the bad old days, a new ham had to pass the old General written (which
was
split into the Tech and General writtens in 1987) to get a
permanent/renewable
license of any class. The old Novice was meant as a learning tool, not a
permanent license.
Just because an idea was old, doesn't mean it wasn't bad! 8^)
Watta concept!
I would
have to suspect that the old Novice non-renewable was probably to allow
the prospective "permanent" ham to hone his or her Morse CW skills
rather than learn the writtens of the time.
You suspect wrong!
The old Novice was meant as a learner's permit for both the code and written -
in fact, more for the written than the code. A Novice could upgrade to Tech
with no more written skills (both licenses always required just 5 wpm code).
But upgrading to *any* permanent/renewable license required the
General/Tech/Conditional written test, which was much more involved than the
old Novice written.
The old Novice privileges included 2 meters (145-147 MHz) code and AM voice
(until 1967). The idea was that some Novices would go on to General and others
to Tech, depending on whether they were primarily interested in HF or VHF.
So the big question is what
is going to be different about this new class gap that ten years is an
appropriate time lag.
The idea is that the jump will be all the way to Extra-level written testing.
The ten-year term is meant to be a generous allotment of time, plus the current
license term is ten years.
For a hobby, ten years is just too long a time. If there are going to be
limits, they should be reasonable ones.
Why is 10 years unreasonable? I recall Hans saying that if someone can't or
won't reach the level required for a full-privs license in 10 years, they
probably aren't that interested. (Correct me if I'm mistaken on that, Hans).
And if this isn't all about assigning newcomers to a subordinate class,
why don't you change the names of those new licenses you propose - Class A
for the entry license class and Class B for the other license class? As it
is, it's clear only someone who has taken an Extra class-like test can be a
"Class A" Amateur Radio Operator.
Yup!
It's clear to me that you haven't even taken
the time to read the proposal I've made to
the FCC. (snip)
I've read the proposal and what you've said about the proposal in this
newsgroup. I stand by what I've said here and in the previous message.
I think you missed the major contradiction/paradox of Hans' proposal,
Dwight.
He proposes a simplified test for the LP license, yet all LPs would be
allowed
all frequencies and modes.
So the simplified test has to be adequate for the LPs to use all freqs and
modes - just not full power.
How can a simplifed test do that?
And how are we going to take care of the "shack on a belt" crowd. A
awful lot of hams are quite happy with their Technician licenses.
Hans' proposal would not affect any existing hams' privileges. Those with
existing licenses other than Extra could keep them, renew them and modify them
as long as they retain interest. Existing Techs could stay Tech forever - no
problem.
A
forced upgrade with absolutely no advantage for a person that only does
public events, and uses the local repeater once in a while is not going
to be very popular with them. And "they" are a pretty large percentage.
Yes of course that is among people already licensed, but my point is
that this proposal is very HF-centric.
They wouldn't have to change anything.
But it only applies to existing hams. Newbies might get ticked off that the
same options weren't open to them.
And if the simplified test *is* adequate, why should the higher-class test
require more than the additional stuff needed to run high power?
And of course, how ya gonna enforce that 50 watt limit? Enacting
unenforceable laws is a great way to breed disrespect for laws.
What stops me from running 5 kW? or more than the allowed power on 30 meters or
the Novice bands?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|