RadioBanter - View Single Post

July 28th 05, 06:48 PM

wrote:
K=D8HB wrote:
"Bill Sohl" wrote

The support is/was for ONE-TIME free upgrades as proposed by
the ARRL petition and one or two others. No support was
given to any permananent relaxation of written tests by NCI.

That's true on the surface. But it belies the claim of some who
said they would *NEVER* support a reduction in the written test
requirements.

Never is a very long time!

In some ways a one-time reduction is worse than a "permanent"
reduction. In a "permanent" reduction, the message is that
the older, higher requirements have been removed because they
aren't necessary.

and bill may simply see thing defferently Indeed I am certain he does

For example, in 2000 FCC changed the written
testing for Technician from two exams (old Elements 2 and 3A)
to a single exam of about half as many questions. That action
meant FCC was satisfied that anyone who passed new Element 2
from then on out was adequately qualified to be a Technician
class licensee.

But if they had made a one-time reduction, they would be saying
that those who benefited by the reduction were somehow "special"
in that did not need to meet the requirements that were in
effect both before and after the one-time reduction.

Some might argue that "experience" or "time in grade" should
count for something. Maybe so - but if that's the case, why
not have a permanent automatic upgrade system based on time
licensed? For example, your license could be automatically
upgraded one class every time you renew, if you have a clear
record. If having a Novice for 5 years qualifies someone to
be a General, or having an Advanced for 5 years qualifies
someone to be an Extra, who could argue about 10 years? (It's
been 5 years since the last Advanceds and Novices were issued.)

I think the suggestion has merit and merit discussion

I also think either a mostly fee based system( with the fees tied to
enforcement) or some hybrid merits discusion and prehaps something out
of it merits adoption, But I'll to speak speak for Bill (in terms he
and carl can deny if they choose) NCI has never been able to even
suggest such discusion without being attacked by the ProCode crowd

There's also the case of the "last one aboard". Suppose FCC
did announce free upgrades to General for all Novice/Tech/TechPlus
hams. The announcement would of necessity precede the implementation
by a few weeks or months, during which time anyone in those classes
planning to upgrade could just wait and get the upgrade for free.
And anyone planning to become a ham could just get a Tech and wait
for the free upgrade to General.

you know Jim Nothing is perfect Indeed when my wife beagn studing for
license I suggested exactly that since that is what made logical sense
given the ARRL position

Why are you and other even more so always seem to looking to judge new
hams before you have even had a chance to work them or not

What happened to inocent till proven guilty Her the se folks are being
tried convicted and snetenced for simply preparing to follow the rules

It would be an anti-incentive plan! Why study if the upgrade is
free?

in a very short term

Under this NCI-endorsed plan, 345,802 current hams (using Jim's July 15=
th
census) would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the requirement to test=
for
General and another 75,730 would receive a PERMANENT relaxation of the
requirement to test for Extra. That's means that 421,532 individuals, =
or 63.4%
of the existing hams, would suddenly hold licenses for which they had n=
ot passed
the current written examination.

Yup.

And the situation is more complex - suppose someone whose license is
expired but in the grace period renews - what license class do they
get? Maybe the offer of free
upgrades would get some of them to renew?

and the point is now moot

why keep beating on it

Trying to trivialize that as a simple
"one-time" adjustment is intellectually dishonest and a cop-out.

The worst parts of it are two:

1) In the case of General, those who had not passed the required tests
would outnumber those who had - by a 3 to 1 ratio! Extra would be a
little better, but about 40% of those who folks would not have
passed the test.

2) Those who come to ham radio after the Great Giveaway could
legitimately
claim that the written for Tech should be adequate for General, etc.

By any
reasonable measure, NCI and ARRL both officially are on record as suppo=
rting a
lowering of the qualification requirement for General and Extra.

Worse - permanent reduction. Here's why:

Suppose FCC did announce that they were doing free upgrades effective,
say, October 1, 2005.

Joe Newham goes to a VE session in late September and passes the Tech
written.
A few days later, even before he sees his new call in the database, he
gets a free upgrade to General.

That free upgrade would mean FCC considered the Tech test adequate for
General privileges. And when Mary Newerham shows up in November 2005,
why should she
have to pass the General written? After all, the Tech written was
adequate for
Joe Newham a few weeks earlier....

The joker in the deck is that such free upgrades would mean a lot of
admin work
for FCC. That alone may exclude them from consideration.
=20
73 de Jim, N2EY