Thanks. I thot no-code was prior to 89 but maybe not. The debate goes way
back.
wrote in message
...
On Sep 8, 7:51 pm, Lawrence Statton wrote:
AJ Lake writes:
You need to understand that the FCC really doesn't want to be
bothered with Ham Radio at all.

I think that the ARRL had more to do with the snafu's of that era. For
example incentive licensing.

So, I'm a young whippersnapper (42 y/o ... got my Tech+ ticket in
1988): Can someone, without adding TOO much editorial slant, explain
what the 1970s push to incentive licensing was, and with as little
slant as possible explain why it was a SNAFU (or as one 1x2 in the
first club I was in said: Ruined the service).

--XE2/N1GAK

Here's a history in three parts. It was written in 1999 and so doesn't
cover the 2000 restructuring, but you'll find a lot of background in
there.

Part 1:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...n&dmode=source

or:

http://tinyurl.com/6o8bzf


Part 2:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...n&dmode=source

or:

http://tinyurl.com/6lupxx


Part 3:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.r...n&dmode=source

or:

http://tinyurl.com/6dosbw

---

A couple of points:

1) "Incentive licensing" came into being in the 1960s
2) It wasn't a new thing, but rather a return to the way things used
to be before 1953. Except it was a lot more complicated.
3) ARRL had a big role but wasn't the only one involved. There were at
least 10 other proposals given RM numbers by FCC, over 6000 comments
at a time before ECFS and the internet, and the result went into
effect in 1968.
4) The Tech had a code test until 1991.
5) The ARRL did not want the VE system. FCC pushed it on us to save
money.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sep 15, 1:34*am, msg wrote:

BTW, if anyone knows, I'd appreciate knowing what the grace period after
expiration was in 1975 (I was told by a field-office rep that my expired
Advanced couldn't be renewed and later I was told that I was probably
misinformed and was within a grace period, but I could never confirm that
fact).

In 1975 the grace period was 1 year. License terms back then were 5
years.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sep 14, 10:45*pm, AJ Lake wrote:
ken scharf wrote:
The LACK of incentive plus the 20wpm code was the reason so few upgraded
to the extra class,

Correct. Before Incentive Licensing there was not much incentive to go above
General since there were no additional privileges. Those who did upgrade to
Extra did it for the accomplishment.

Actually, the period when Generals-and-above had all privileges was
less than 16 years (Feb 1953 to Nov 1968). Before Feb 1953, you needed
an Advanced or Extra to use 'phone on the ham bands between 2.5 and 25
MHz.

And since it was a real (no answers supplied) exam before an official FCC
examiner it did show accomplishment. Hams of the day often listed it on
employment applications alongside their commercial licenses.

Also applications for college.

Actually the extra cw segments were the most prized,

Only if you are a CW DXer. And even before the change, by gentlemans
agreement the bottom of the CW band was left for DXers and casual CW
operation was higher, pretty much like now.

so the cw requirement made sense

IMO the only justification for the code test (at that time) was for possible
emergency use. As an example a ship in distress, since many ships were still
using CW at the time. But other than that making a ham take a special code
test made about as much sense as making him take a special soldering test..
That was finally recognized recently... *

There were three reasons for it back then:

The first reason was the ITU treaty, which required Morse Code
testing.

The second reason was that the FCC considered Morse Code skill to be
part of what it meant to be a qualified radio amateur, particularly
one that had full HF privileges. That view has changed since the 1970s
but it was a big thing to them in those days.

The third reason was that before the 1980s amateur radio was quite
different in terms of equipment and mode/band choices. There were no
WARC bands (30, 17 and 12 meters) before 1979, and 160 was full of
LORAN and hams only had limited use of it. The only data mode was
RTTY, done with big heavy electromechanical teletype machines. SSTV
existed but required special equipment. So most hams on HF used either
Morse Code, SSB or AM. SSB and AM use a lot more spectrum than Morse
Code so the total carrying capacity of the HF ham bands would be much
less if everybody used voice.

As far as techs are concerned... Well I knew quite a few techs who were
very much into home brew radios. *

As it should be. The Tech license was supposed to be for technical use, not
just another operators license. But of course that was a laugh. Most Techs
bought their equipment and set up shop on the nearest local repeater...

That depends on what era you're talking about. The Technician was
created as part of the 1951 restructuring, and originally did not
include 6 or 2 meters. Repeaters did not become common in ham radio
until the 1970s.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sep 13, 7:56*pm, AJ Lake wrote:

My moaning was because of the *unfairness* of the incentive licensing
frequency changes. I passed an examination for General and I expected to be
able to use those General frequencies. Then they took away half the General
frequencies. Even these many years later (even after having regained those
lost frequencies) I think it was an unfair change.

They took away half of the General *phone* frequencies on 75, 40, 20
and 15 meters. And 25 kHz of the 80, 40, 20 and 15 meter CW/data
frequencies.

I remember the moaning back then. Basically it came down to the idea
that many hams felt they'd earned the right to full privileges forever
by passing the General test, and shouldn't be required to pass any
more tests.

btw, I earned my Advanced in the summer of 1968 and had full
privileges for a few weeks until the rules changed in November 1968.

Some may moan that the FCC now gives advanced licenses with no code test and
modern hams don't have to work as hard for the license as hams in years
past. Which is true. And some may moan that people can now get an advanced
ham license by memorization without knowing the advanced electronics
pretended in the testing. Which is true. But not me because it takes nothing
away from privileges already earned.

The problem is that changes in the requirements change the nature of
the ARS. Not right away, but over a long time.

I have an idea (analogy). How about we institute an Extra Plus license.
Forget the code test because it's obsolete.

But hams still use Morse Code...

But to make sure that the
applicant is really qualified he must pass a *real* electronics/digital
test, one that can't be passed by memorization. No answer sheets. At the FCC
office like in the old days.

Won't happen because FCC won't take on that job again.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sep 9, 1:52*pm, AJ Lake wrote:
Tim Shoppa wrote:
The controversy in the 70's was the Technician license, a ticket that
required no code,

The Technician required 5 wpm from its creation in 1951 until 1991.

Interestingly in the 50s the Technician (and Novice) was given
by mail. And any ham friend could give you the code test.
Anyone else could proctor your exam and certify that you
were honest. However I'm sure it won't surprise you to learn
that there were many Techs who never took a code
test and had open book exams.

From 1951 until about 1953 or 54 the Novice and Tech were given at FCC
offices unless you lived beyond a certain distance from an FCC exam
point.

But the new licenses made so much work for FCC that they changed the
rules and made both those licenses "by mail".

There was also the by-mail equivalent of the General license, called
the Conditional. In the mid-1970s it was merged with the General.

I remember that when it was announced that the Conditional was being
phased out, there was a false rumor that FCC would require all
Conditionals to retest. You should have heard the cries of anguish! I
found that puzzling because the tests weren't *that* hard. Now I have
a little better understanding...

I always wondered why if the Tech was an experimenters
license as the FCC claimed it was, why they required a code
test.

Because the international treaty required it. Over time that changed,
but in the 1950s any license that allowed a ham to use the bands below
1 GHz required a code test.

73 de Jim, N2EY

On Sep 8, 10:58*pm, "JB" wrote:
"Lawrence Statton" wrote in message
...

AJ Lake writes:
You need to understand that the FCC really doesn't want to be
bothered with Ham Radio at all.

Not any more. But in the past it was very different.

I think that the ARRL had more to do with the snafu's of that era. For
example incentive licensing.

Which was not really an ARRL idea - nor a new one in the 1960s.

I am not sure what the ARRL had to do with events previous to 73 and some of
the chronology from memory.

The 11 meter ham band was taken away to make the Citizens Band in 58? * It
didn't turn out anything like the FCC expected.

Yup. Actually FCC had created UHF cb where FRS/GMRS is now a decade
earlier, but 1950s technology was such that a good UHF radio was big,
heavy and expensive. So they reallocated 11 meters (which wasn't a ham
band by treaty) because decent sets would be a lot cheaper to make.
FCC never imagined that so many people would just ignore the rules.

*Previously there were fewer
ham license classes and everyone was on the same page. Also privileges were
taken away from the highest class to make a higher ones. *Ticked off a lot
of Hams to lose.

Before 1951 there were three license classes, A, B and C. The 1951
restructuring renamed them to Advanced, General and Conditional, and
added the Novice, Technician, and Extra. That 1951 restructuring was
not an ARRL idea, btw.

The Technician License split ham radio into two factions by offering a
license class that had little incentive to upgrade and actually made it much
more difficult to, by limiting the opportunities for on-the-air training.
People who took the Novice ticket were upgraded to General in less than 2
years or never got around to get on the air and let it lapse.

There were always lots of factions. There were the 'phone folks and
the CW bunch, the traffic handlers and the DXers, the homebrewers, kit
builders and factory-made groups, the mobileers, the VHF/UHFers, the
ragchewers, etc. Few of the divisions you see today are new.

*Hams (in my
area anyway) were expected to build something as a right of passage.
Building a code practice oscillator would get you a pat on the back from
everyone and you were in with the simplest project there was. *I built that
and the power supplies for my mil surplus rigs. *Some guys built a whole
Novice station.

Some folks still do. Google my call, for example...

*Techs at that time were expected to retune or modify a rig
or some project as well but would go straight to CB like intercom operations
not conducive to learning the HF skills for upgrade.

I think the real problem was that there wasn't much casual CW
operation on VHF, and many low-cost VHF rigs wouldn't even do CW.

*In my day we were
aware of a difference but we were all brother hams then. *I had Elmers that
were Techs and beyond. *Most all were technically inclined enough to have
built something. *People were generally civilized and knew that we were all
on the same team. *If there was irritation between individuals, and there
were oddballs, it was downplayed for the good of amateur radio, because it
was a small world and people were listening. *And you would run into each
other again and again, so no sense carrying a grudge.

Agreed! There were other forces at work, too. For one thing, equipment
was expensive compared to today and you needed to know something just
to tune it up and get on the air. For another, getting a license
required that you invest some time and effort into learning code and
theory.

The FCC was also a respected and almost feared entity before the cb
boom. Hams knew FCC was listening, and would find them if they
misbehaved.

In the late 70's there was a push by ARRL to get CBers interested, and over
the counter 2 meter radios were first becoming available.

I don't recall that at all. ARRL pushed repeaters and FM because they
were new technology, for hams anyway, and were already popular with
hams in some parts of the country.

ARRL didn't seem to understand that CB was a different service with a
different mindset and many were already set in their ways. * They seemed to
be willing to get people to hang outside of RS stores and lure CBers under
false pretenses about amateur radio in order to pump up the license roles
and subscriptions to QST.

I don't recall that at all.

* Wayne Green was one of the ticked off ones and
started 73 magazine to rag about the ARRL and QST.

Wayne Green was a lifelong gadfly. He's still around, btw. Says the
Apollo moon landings were faked, among other things.

*ARRL also convinced the
FCC (easily) to set up the volunteer examiner program.

Nope, not true. FCC did that in the early 1980s to reduce their
workload. Their funding wasn't keeping up with their costs and they
had to reduce costs somehow. ARRL had no choice.

*Novice exams were
already given by volunteer Extras.

Actually a General or Advanced could give Novice exams.

*FCC wanted to lighten their work load
since Ham testing and licensing was taking up most of a day at the field
offices.

The office in Philly where I took my tests was busy three days a week
with exams.

License renewals were then made easier and for longer. *ARRL liked it
because the rolls didn't drop out so fast and FCC didn't have to bother as
often.

It was FCC's idea. Less administrative work.

The volunteer examiner program gave seminars to get people licensed but
because of the accellerated pace, *people got licensed before they got a
chance to learn the realities of getting on the air and keeping a station up
and meeting the people. *Some people would find it not their cup of tea and
leave but their license was now good for 10 years pumping up the rolls.

Yup.

The no-code Tech license 83? further divided amateurs and even further
sidetracked Techs from upgrading.

1991, not 1983. Don't forget code waivers, created in 1990 as a favor
of then-president Bush to ham who was also a King.

*Lead time for getting a ticket was
shortened from the 2 to 6 months or so to learn the code to as little as 6
weeks, then 2 weeks as the process refined. * It was notable that in the
80s, there were many who learned the code anyway and upgraded but the whole
thing by and large tended to split Ham Radio into those who upgraded and
those who couldn't very well.and were often frustrated.

There were also folks who got into ham radio back then to use it as a
personal communications
system without all the headaches of cb. Sometimes whole families got
licensed and got HTs just to keep in touch. We had a lot of them in
the 80s and 90s. Cell phones killed that.

*Many would tell
themselves they just weren't interested and resented the others. *Way too
sad. *I finally came to grips with the idea that they should do away with
the Tech class license at all costs, even getting rid of code testing for
the General to do it, just so we could mend the split. * I was stunned when
they dropped the code requirement for Extra though. *I really haven't kept
track of all the current structure since I got my Extra in 93.

The changes have been a little here and a little there. It was FCC,
not ARRL, who has pushed for reduced requirements since the late
1970s.

In any case, the "incentive" licensing structure was anything but incentive.
So much for good intentions.

Consider this, though:

In 1951 there were about 100,000 US hams.

By 1962 or so that number had grown to about 250,000.

But then the growth slowed to a trickle and by 1969 there were only a
few more than there were in 1962.

Some said the incentive licensing changes would kill off ham radio,
but instead the numbers grew all through the 1970s and 1980s and into
the 1990s. Not just Techs but Generals and above too.

btw, I got my Novice in 1967 (age 13), Advanced in 1968 (age 14) and
Extra in 1970 (age 16). I didn't think any of the tests were very
hard. Would have gotten the Extra sooner but in those days you needed
2 years experience as a General or Advanced just to try the Extra
test.

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

the FCC considered Morse Code skill to be
part of what it meant to be a qualified radio amateur...

Even if there was no treaty, the ham employees in the FCC didn't want
no-code. The ARRL didn't want no-code. And the average (already) code tested
ham didn't want no-code. It's not surprising therefore that as a political
body the FCC just agreed with it's constituents.

I remember the moaning back then. Basically it came down to the idea
that many hams felt they'd earned the right to full privileges forever...

I think the moaning was over the basic unfairness of *removing* privileges
already earned. Over the years there has been many unpopular (to some)
license changes but virtually all (maybe all?) involved giving new
applicants easier privileges, not taking away already earned privileges.

btw, I earned my Advanced in the summer of 1968 and had full
privileges for a few weeks until the rules changed in November 1968.

And you didn't moan at all?? Give me a break...

On Sep 17, 8:33�pm, AJ Lake wrote:
wrote:
the FCC considered Morse Code skill to be
part of what it meant to be a qualified radio amateur...

Even if there was no treaty, the ham employees in the FCC didn't want
no-code.

Nor did the non-ham employees, until the mid 1970s.

And there *was* a treaty that FCC wouldn't ignore.

The ARRL didn't want no-code.

If you mean the membership didn't want it, you're right.
And the average (already) code tested
ham didn't want no-code. It's not surprising therefore that as a political
body the FCC just agreed with it's constituents.

Because the constituents made themselves heard.

Yet as early as 1975 the FCC was trying to create a nocodetest ham
license. The opposition was clear and they backed down. FCC tried
again in 1983 and the opposition made them back down. But in 1991 FCC
did it anyway.

I remember the moaning back then. Basically it came down to the idea
that many hams felt they'd earned the right to full privileges forever....

I think the moaning was over the basic unfairness of *removing* privileges
already earned.

That's what I said - many hams felt they'd earned the privileges
*forever*, no matter how much things changed.

IMHO one of the driving forces was Sputnik and its cousins.

Up until October 1957, the USA had been confident that we were way
ahead of the Soviets in technology. We had jet planes, they were still
using props. We had transistors, computers, color TV, they were way
behind. Etc.

Then Sputnik went up, and the USSR got a first in the history books.
It was soon followed by a bunch of other firsts - first animal in
space, first pictures of the far side of the moon, first
interplanetary probe, and then the first human in space. It was a
shock that had repercussions in a lot of ways, one of which was more
emphasis on math and science in schools. Another was raising the
expectations of ham operators.

Of course it took time to change the rules.

Over the years there has been many unpopular (to some)
license changes but virtually all (maybe all?) involved giving new
applicants easier privileges, not taking away already earned privileges.

Since 1969 that's been the case, because nobody wants to be blamed for
"incentive licensing version 2".

btw, I earned my Advanced in the summer of 1968 and had full
privileges for a few weeks until the rules changed in November 1968.

And you didn't moan at all??

Nope. I just went and got an Extra the first time it was legal for me
to try for it. Summer 1970.

Give me a break...

I won't lie to you and say I complained when I didn't. I was a new ham
in 1968 and I knew the rules were going to change, so I just upgraded.
It was a challenge, not something to complain about. Haven't regretted
it since.

I think what bothered a lot of hams back then was that they'd let
themselves get really rusty on both code and theory, and the thought
of having to pass more tests was really daunting. On top of that, the
Advanced and Extra tests couldn't normally be done "by mail" like the
Novice, Tech and Conditional, so they'd have to face The Man From FCC
rather than another ham for the exams.

All ancient history now. The VE system has been in place for a quarter
of a century, Generals now have at least as much 'phone space as they
had in 1968, and we're effectively down to three license classes
(almost).

73 de Jim, N2EY

wrote:

But in 1991 FCC did it [a no-code license] anyway.

I always thought it was silly having a code test for an 'experimenter'
license anyway. I never used CW as a Tech. Heck I was too busy working 6M DX
(on AM) during that best of all cycles during the late 50s. But I suppose
could have told the FCC I was experimenting with the ionosphere...

Then Sputnik went up, and the USSR got a first in the history books.

Yes, remember it well. I listened to Sputnik on my S40.

It [Russian technology] was a shock that had repercussions in a lot of ways,

Yup. Got me many years of employment (government contracts).

nobody wants to be blamed for "incentive licensing version 2"

Can't blame em. One screw up was enough.

Generals now have at least as much 'phone space as they
had in 1968,

I could have just kept my old General (or even Tech) license. That's all I
really need these days for CW ragchewing.

and we're effectively down to three license classes (almost).

I predict it will be only one license eventually.

AJ Lake wrote:

I predict it will be only one license eventually.

It (effectively) is over here in the UK. We do have a limited "novice"
licence, but there's little point in going for that. Most people just go
for the full licence.

We used to have "A" and "B" licences - the "A" was all bands, all modes, and
the "B" was limited to above 50 MHz and didn't require the Morse Test. The
requirement for the Morse was removed, so now it's all amalgamated into one
licence.

C.