N2EY wrote:
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message ...

"Bill Sohl" wrote in message
...

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...


Bill Sohl wrote:

"Hans K0HB" wrote in message
news:21581ca121ce6e1a0cb83d94148bf23d.128005@ mygate.mailgate.org...


"Mike Coslo" wrote in message


Actually as a point of interest, and maybe a little trolling, Just

WHY

should there be testing for a ham license?

Because your transmissions travel on a "public thoroughfare", there is

a

requirement to ensure that you have demonstrated the knowledge to
operate without negative impact on the other users of that resource,
sort of like you need a drivers license to operate a motor vehicle on
public highways.
73, de Hans, K0HB

Well said Hans.

Well said indeed, but what if enough people just reject that logic?
What if it is decided that the licenses just need to be bought? Say 200
bucks a shot? Or maybe a yearly sort of thing. Why have any other
qualifications for the license?

- Mike KB3EIA -

When the FCC takes that position then I'll fight
against it. For now, that's just empty speculation.
I have long sgo stated my opposition to any
elimination of written testing...and, have made
suggestions to the VCCs on ways to improve
written testing.

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK
NCI Director

I fully agree with Bill ... I will also oppose any attempt to eliminate
written testing on technical, RF safety, rules/regs, etc.


The way it works is a slow, gradual reduction of written testing, not
complete elimination all in one go.

Consider the 2000 restructuring. IIRC, to get a full-privileges
license, we went from 5 written tests totalling 190 questions
(30/35/35/50/40) to 3 written tests totalling 120 questions
(35/35/50). For a General, it went from 3 written tests totalling 100
questions to 2 questions totalling 70 questions. Technician got the
biggest reduction - from two tests totalling 65 questions to one test
of 35 questions.

Yes, the Q&A pools were merged and the rules simplified, but does that
account for the large drop in both the number of tests and number of
questions? Note that the NPRM comments were full of suggestions to
improve the written tests. Indeed, if there was any subject in which
there was general consensus among those responding, it was that the
written tests were either adequate as they were or needed to be
improved. But all that was done was to reduce written testing and
remove the requirement that each test contain a certain number of
questions from each category.

In fact I recall that several of us were in agreement back before
restructuring that the then-current tests for a Tech were inadequate
for the privileges granted, particularly being able to run 1500 W
output at meat-cooking wavelengths. But FCC disagreed, and cut the
testing for a Tech almost in half.

Some folks here have proposed either a single license class, or at
most two license classes. It is logical to conclude that such changes
would result in even less written testing.

Perhaps the rewording of S25 wrt written testing standards will have
an effect - but I sincerely doubt it.

I have read that W5YI, Fred Maia, has proposed making the license
tests "less technical" in order to attract more newcomers. Perhaps
this is where the misunderstanding about NCI's stand on written
testing originated.


Well put, Jim. It's what I've been trying to say, without getting into
a "slippery slope" argument. You've phrased it very well indeed. Thanks much


THAT's
what separates ham radio from "personal radio services."


That and a lot more. Like the use of a wide variety of bands and modes
- including Morse/CW.

But to ask the devil's advocate question:

Why MUST there be so much written testing for an amateur license,
given that most hams use modern, manufactured equipment today, and
that almost all FCC enforcement actions against hams are for
"operating" violations rather than technical ones?


I've been trying to say the same thing as devil's advocate, and I fear
that Carl and Bill may not quite grasp the concept.

Whether or not the Morse Code is an anachronism, whether or not it
should or should not be tested for, the elimination of the Morse code
test *is* a reduction in the amount of knowledge needed for a amateur
radio license; undeniable unless a person wants to look silly.

Those responsible for such a reduction in knowledge needed for a
license, regardless of their reasons, now find themselves in league with
those who propose even less knowledge needed for that ticket. Politics
makes for strange bedfellows.

I understand that Carl and Bill do not support lessening of the
knowledge needed. But that does not really matter. Those who want the
tests to consist of nothing but sending in an application (if that)
**applaud their efforts** That is another thing that is pretty hard to deny.

Let's put it this way: Those who do not believe that the tests should
be radically simplified or eliminated, but believed the Morse code
requirement should have been eliminated may some day find themselves on
the losing end of the proposition, just as those who support Morse code
testing have lost the battle at this time.

I remember when you had to have a license to use CB.


just something to think about......


- Mike KB3EIA (and one time KBM-8780)