In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

I don't oppose a time limit per se. I don't like a ten year time limit
though.


Why? It's my understanding that the 10-year idea is based partly on the
current
license term and partly on the idea that we don't want to force anyone out
because of "life happens" events like education and family.

Its just too long.

Is it really too long, particularly considering the two-year experience
requirement?

One of the problems with the old 1 and 2 year Novices was that if a new ham ran
into "life happens" situations, their upgrade schedule would be seriously
disprupted.

Example: A few weeks after a teenager gets the Novice license his folks inform
him that the family is moving across the country. New house isn't quite ready
so they'll be living in temporary quarters for a while. Meanwhile most of their
stuff is in storage. "A while" becomes "a few months"..

Finally they get into the new house and there's a flurry of activity to get set
up - and the parents say ham radio isn't a top priority. By the time Our Hero
is back on the air, there's not much time left on his one-year license.

Look how long it's taken some *adults* (alleged adults, anyway) in this NG to
upgrade, or even get licenses.

The license renewal period would just be another
number by that time, since the new A license would be forever. I'm busy
as all gitout, and it took me something over a week of hard study to get
ready for the Extra.

Very true!

Plus I can't figure out what can make a person qualified to operate on
day 3652 of their licensing period and unqualified on day 3653.

The same principle that makes a General or Advanced class ham qualfied to
operate on 3526 kHz but not on 3524 kHz.

The same principle that makes a Tech Plus ham qualified to operate a
transmitter of 1500 W output using any authorized mode on 6 meters but not 10
meters.

It takes
a lot less time than that to understand RF safety - the only real reason
I can think of for the second class license, so if we're going to do
this, it should make some timing sense.

There's a lot more to it than RF safety.

I support a time in grade, even though I would be frustrated (read
teased) by a two year stint before I could get the class A.

BTDT.

Not sure about BTDT.

Been There, Done That

Another
thing, which would be a little strange would be having to have a control
op at field day (or operate lower power)


Why would that be strange? It's the rule *today*.

I keep drawing parallels between the second class license and Generals.
We try to get people out to operate on field day, and you can get some
pretty strange setups. First a Ham with less than 2 years time in grade
would have to have a control op.

Why?

As long as the power level is less than 50 W, that Class B ham could operate
any freq, any mode, as the control op.

We have hams what operate now at field
day that would suddenly have to have a control op (therefore taking
myself or another Extra away from a station)

Not at all! Existing hams would retain their existing privs under Hans'
proposal.

Of course the second class
ham could operate a 50 watt or less station, but that would mean that
either we change our setup - all stations except GOTA are full output -
or set up a special station just for the second class hams, a sort of
low power ghetto.

You mean you folks operate 1500 W on FD? (that's "full output")

Heck, the GOTA station can run more power. Maybe this
is no problem for you, but for others it isn't so good

Try QRP some time ;-)

The fact is that if a non-Extra wants to operate FD, there has to be a control
op present whenever the non-Extra exceeds his-her subband restrictions. That's
a lot more onerous than turning down the power to 50 W.

Back in the late '60s and early '70s, there were *four* FD power levels:
QRP, 50 W, 150 W, and the legal limit, IIRC.

Could be. But if we went back to that, the clubs could be forced to
make a decision to either run what they would like to run, take control
ops away from available stations for those who don't have time in grade.
(or the proper upgrade) or make that little ghetto for the second class
Hams. I really don't think that is a good way to welcome new people. YMMV.

There's another option: Change the rules so that different power levels could
be used for different stations in the same multi setup. (It used to be this
way!)

In fact, these changes should be done anyway. Right now there are three power
levels on FD:

"QRP/battery", which requires 5 W or less output *and* non-generator power,
(multiplier 5)

"Low power" which allows up to 150 W and requires a power source independent of
mains (multiplier 2)

"High Power" (multiplier 1)

Multi transmitter setups are categorized at the power level of the *highest
power* transmitter.

I'd do it this way:

"QRP", would require 10 W or less output (multiplier 5) and a power source
independent of mains

"Low Power" would would allow up to 50 W and requires a power source
independent of mains (multiplier 3.5)

"Medium power" would allow up to 200 W and requires a power source independent
of mains (multiplier 2)

"High Power" (multiplier 1)

"Battery" multiplier (instead of a weenie 100 point bonus) for non-fossil-fuel
energy sources

Multi transmitter setups would be categorized at the power level of the
*highest power* transmitter but scored by the transmitters actually used on
each band/mode. So 40 CW might run Low while 40 phone ran High, etc.

It used to be that way - and it was a good thing!

(Yes, I've suggested this to ARRL)

It seems that a major objection to the 50 watt rule is based on the fact that
there aren't a lot of 50 watt rigs for sale today. That's a pretty sad
commentary on the technical state of things, I think.

73 de Jim, N2EY