wrote

If the amateur radio licensing statistics posted on Speroni's web site are
any indication, then code -wasn't- the barrier.

if.... well you are wrong there

Where is the 'influx' of new hams who wouldn't get licensed because of that
nasty code test?


as can be seen by the fury of upgrades

What do upgrades have to do with a code test? Upgrades are hams already
licensed obtaining higher privileges.


sorry Mike we tech can't keep you old geezers from droping dead

What's Lennie's excuse then?

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
. ..

I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level license
system but I think they will be General and Extra. The step from Tech to
General is not that difficult and the licensee will have access to all
modes, power levels and bands. Unless you are into DXing, contesting or
being a VE, the additional privileges that Extra licensees have are not
that much of an advantage.

I agree that this is the way it seems to be heading. However, I think ARRL
members should pressure the organization to lobby the FCC for another, coded
class who could exclusively operate on certain sections of the OOK morse sub
bands. I think it would be good for society if we could preserve the mode
for the future, given that there a certain albiet isolated occaisions when
its use can be extremely beneficial to society.

On Mar 4, 8:16 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

oups.com...

On Mar 4, 6:56 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

[snip]

Also keep in mind that the General test
of the past was much harder than today's General as they took a lot of
that
material and moved it to the new license classes.

No, it wasn't. It is substantially more difficult today. And don't
forget that half of the OLD General test is now called "Technician."

There were several changes. There was the change to the incentive licensing
where material was moved from the General to the Advanced and Extra.

Completely impossible. Miccolis tells us that the additional license
classes, Advanced, and Extra, were needed because the FCC wanted
amateurs to be more knowledgeable, so moving General questions to
Advanced and Extra would not serve that purpose. Unless Miccolis was
wrong.

That
changed General test was the one that was the same for the Technician and
the General. Then a decade later or so, the General test was split to a
Tech written and General written.

That is correct.

Third, the Advanced and Extra Exams have been combined, thereby
dumbing down the Extra, bringing it closer to the present General
Exam,

Combining material does not dumb down a category.

It does when you combine it with material from a lesser class QP.

Dumbing down requires
removing material.

Not always, and I've explained it to you too many times to go over it
another time. You either get it or you don't.

The material has not been removed. It has made the
Extra harder because you cannot take the material in smaller chunks. You
still have to learn all the same material but do it all at once.

Suit yourself.

So what do you get when you combine questions from a lower license
class with that of a higher license class? You have REDUCED standards
for that higher license.

No you do not as no material was removed. It's actually more difficult
because you have to do it all at once.

See below.

Imagine the old Novice Q pool being combined with the Extra Q pool for
the Extra license... that should magnify my point so that even you can
see it.

Nope it does not make your point. Only if material is removed does it
become easier. If you just combine material without removing any, you make
it harder.

You run the risk of simpler questions being selected for that 50
question exam. It is easier.

The
only "break" is that you end up taking one written test of 50 questions
instead of two tests of 40 and 50 questions for a total of 90 questions.
Today's Extra exam has an 800+ question pool to select from for that 50
question test.

Miccolis has covered this...

not pushing it toward an MSEE like some of you would like to
think.

I've never made that assertion nor implied it. That MSEE has to learn a
whole lot more than was ever covered in the Amateur radio exams.

Are you an MSEE?

Nope but as part of my degree, I had to take basic electronics courses and
they were more detailed than what is on the ham exams. I can't even begin
to imagine that MSEE level.

Do you mind if I point some other Extras in your direction when it
appears appropriate?

So if there is so little difference between the Technician and
General Exams, and the Extra has been dumbed down to Advanced level,
why do we still have people wanting more superfluous license classes
that are growing closer together in difficulty allatime?

That is not a valid conclusion.

Sure it is.

There was no material dropped so it was not
dumbed down.

Sure it was.

I did not say there is so little difference between the Tech and General.

I believe you did, but will accept that is not what you meant (unless
you say it again).

Merely that it is reasonable for a person to study to go to General
either
right at the beginning or shortly thereafter.

That would be known as the "Old General." They were split in the
Spring of 1987.

I am talking about the General test as it exists since the changes in April
of 2000.

Nor has the Extra been dumbed down to the Advanced class.

Sure it has.

I've taught the material. It has not not been dumbed down.

But you have them taking lower class questions for a higher class
license.

Either way,
whether you took the two tests separately or took today's single test, the
same quantity of material has to be learned.

If it is learned.

If you were to
talk to any of the people who earned their Extra under the pre-2000
system,
they will tell you that the Advanced class written test was the hardest
of
all the writtens.

It was. I took and passed both.

So the Extra was already dumbed down, and now it is combined with a
lower class pool...

Sounds really, really dumbed down now.

See above.

[snip]

When the system was changed, all the material for both the
Advanced and Extra went into the new Extra question pool

Which is why it's dumbed down.

Not when all the material was kept.

When half of the material and questions previously earned a lower
class license, it is dumbed down.

And in the end, it's still allabout Morse Code with you.

That conclusion is not based on any of the opinions I have expressed in
this
thread or any other.

Dee, it's based upon all of the opinions that you express.

If you choose to believe that, not my problem. I'm into encouraging people
to explore the many facets of amateur radio.

[snip]

All government testing should be straight forward.

All of the testing is straight forward. The Extra is merely difficult
not
convoluted.

So all of the matierial is straight forward? Good.

[snip]

Why should anybody even bother with such a limited license? It would be
so
limited people would get bored and drop out or immediately upgrade. Not
worth the investment of time.

Not children, not scouts. I guess we don't want to attract newcomers
for a lifetime of amateur radio, just the retirees.

The children and the scouts seem to thrive on the challenges. It is the 20
somethings, 30 somethings, and 40 somethings that seem not to want
challenges.

[snip]

Although the "incentive licensing" had major implementation issues, it
did
have the benefit of bringing people into the hobby since they could take
the
material in smaller bites instead of having to learn everything all at
the
same time. It achieved that goal.

Smaller bites? That wasn't the purpose of Inventive Licensing.

That was exactly the purpose of Incenting Licensing.

Dee, N8UZE

Miccolis would disagree.

On Mar 4, 8:32 pm, "KH6HZ" wrote:
wrote:
Code -was- the barrier.

If the amateur radio licensing statistics posted on Speroni's web site are
any indication, then code -wasn't- the barrier.

Feb 2007's licensing statistics clearly show the downward trend in amateur
radio licensing continues unabated.

Code has -long- been a barrier. And people are no longer
interested...

Too bad for amateur radio.

On Mar 4, 8:36 pm, John Smith I wrote:

My BIGGEST turnoff? Pseudo-military, self-important-bags-of-hot-wind!

JS

The RF Commando?

On Mar 4, 7:36�pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
ps.com...
On Mar 4, 9:10am, "DeeFlint" wrote:

My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level license
system but I think they will be General and Extra. The step from Tech to
General is not that difficult and the licensee will have access to all
modes, power levels and bands. Unless you are into DXing, contesting or
being a VE, the additional privileges that Extra licensees have are not
that
much of an advantage.

I, for one, encourage all those studying for Technician to go ahead and
get
the General study guide and go for it either at the first sitting or as
soon
as possible thereafter. The Technician will be basically turn into a very
temporary way station on their climb up the ladder.

My fiftieth of a dollar:

There are really two issues here.

The first is "what's the best possible license
structure?" and the second is "what can we
realistically put in place in US amateur radio?"

Agreed. *These really are separate issues. *Usually practicality will
outweigh other issues.

The first step in answering either question is
to define what should be on the tests for a
license that gives *all* US amateur radio
privileges. Some think the testing for the current
full-privileges US amateur radio license isn't
near as comprehensive as it should be, others
think it covers too much, etc.

Since people are split on this issue, my opinion is that we are probably at
about the right level for the full privilege license.

I disagree, but that just proves your point!

So let's assume for discussion that the current requirements
for Extra remain the same. Is it reasonable to ask *all* new
hams to learn all that material to get a license? I say it's not.

Of course if someone wants to, they can.

The answer is almost certainly going to be a
compromise between all those opinions.

That may end up leaving it the same as it is now.

I think we can do better.

The second step is to determine whether
it's a good idea to require a new amateur
to pass that test just to get started in amateur
radio, or whether it's better to have license
classes that require less knowledge in return
for fewer privileges.

Personally I just can't see expecting the new amateur to do that much work
just to be able to start exploring amateur radio. *History has shown that
having a basic licensing option is helpful to the growth and health of
amateur radio.

Agreed.

Then decide how many steps are needed from
"not a ham" to "full privileges".

Agreed. *Three steps has always seemed appropriate to me. *I would not find
two objectionable. *However if we keep the full privilege license as is,
then three really seems better. *The introductory license to try out amateur
radio and then an intermediate license (like the General) that gives a wide
range of privileges but does not require delving into the more exotic
technical and mathematical areas. *Then the full privilege license.

While doing this, it is important to remember
that what appears easy to someone with
significant radio/electronics/engineering/math
background may not appear easy to someone
who does not have that same background.

That is why I favor three license levels but do encourage people to move up
to General as quickly as they can study the material. *I've taught classes
for Tech, General, and Extra to people who had no significant
radio/electronics/engineering/math backgrounds. *So I'm quite familiar with
this issue. With the exception of two who did not take the Extra test, all
my students have passed the respective licenses for which they were
studying. *The ironic part is the two who did not attempt the Extra class
test had significant math/electronics/radio backgrounds. *A lady who was an
administrative assistant (no significant background in math/technical/radio
subjects) passed her Extra with flying colors.

That's great!

But remember that not all new hams take
amateur radio classes. Not practical for
a lot of folks.

Then there's the whole question of what FCC can
be induced to do. In recent R&Os and other
writings, FCC has repeatedly said they consider
the optimum number of license classes to be
three.

So it seems the way to go is:

- an "entry level" license that is easy to get
and gives limited privileges

- a "middle level" license that requires more
knowledge, but not everything

- a "full privileges" license that has comprehensive
knowledge requirements for full privileges

That's close to what we have now, but there are
improvements that can be made. First is the
extreme unbalance in the privileges of the
Technician license. That may be a hard
sell to FCC.

With the expansion of theNovice/Tech+ privileges in December and dropping
of the code so all Techs have those privileges, much of that imbalance has
now been alleviated.

Not really. The defacto entry level license has
all VHF/UHF, including full power at "meat cooking frequencies"
(thanks to WK3C for that phrase). Which means a lot of testing
details on that stuff.

But they only have two modes on part of 10 meters, and
one mode on parts of 80/40/15.

We can do better than that for entry-level!

---

It should be remembered that the oldNoviceclass
was extremely successful in getting new hams
started in amateur radio, at least for the first 30-40
or so years of its existence. The main feature of
the oldNovicethat worked so well was that it
required minimal testing, so that newcomers could
get on the air and see if amateur radio was really
for them.

I wasn't into radio until 1992 and the codeless Tech was already rapidly
becoming the entry point of choice. *So I can't really comment on this.

What drove the change was the repeater boom of the late 1970s
and 1980s. Splitting the old General/Tech written in half in
1987 pushed it more, and dropping Element 1 for Tech
in 1991 sealed the deal.

However my elmer/teacher strongly encouraged us to go for Tech+ right off
the bat. *I'm glad I did. *However, it took so long for the license to come
that I passed my General in the meantime and went on the air as a /AG the
day that first license arrived. *So I did not experience operating as aNovice.

I was a Novice for about 10 months (1967-68). Lot of fun,
many contacts with incredibly simple gear.

There was never any requirement for newcomers
to start with theNovice, yet for decades most new
hams did just that.

When the codeless Technician came into being, it quickly became the entry
point of choice and rapidly chipped away at theNovicelicensing approach.

The change had begun years earlier, driven by the repeater
boom.

What's needed now is a "Novicelicense for the
21st Century", IMHO

So just out of curiosity, what is your version of the 21st "novice" or entry
license?

Here's a whole license structure for ya,
in ten points:

1) Three classes of license: Basic, Intermediate, Full (change the
names if you don't like them - Third, Second, First, Novice,
General, Extra, whatever)

2) HF/MF bands split into subbands by mode and split again by
license class. Some bands (30 meters) may be split by mode only.

3) "Basic" license test is simple 20-25 question exam on regs,
procedures, and safety. Very little technical and RF exposure
stuff. Main objective is to keep Basics out of trouble. Basics
get 100-50 watts on HF/MF and 25 watts or so on VHF/UHF (power
level is below the point where RF exposure evaluation required).
Modes are CW, analog voice, PSK31, RTTY and many of the other
common data modes like packet. Basics cannot be VEs, control
ops for repeaters, or club trustees. Basics get most VHF/UHF
and about half of HF/MF spectrum, including parts of all
subbands-by-mode. Basic is meant as the entry level. Easy to
get, lots of privs, yet there's still a reason to upgrade.

4) "Intermediate" license test is more complex 50-60 question exam
on regs, procedures, safety and technical stuff. Intermediates
get 300-400 watts on all bands, all modes. Intermediates can be
VEs after qualification (see below), control ops for repeaters,
and club trustees. Intermediates get all VHF/UHF and about
three quarters (or more) of HF/MF spectrum.

5) "Full" license test is quite complex 100-120 question exam on
regs, procedures, safety and technical stuff. Mostly technical,
with some regs to cover expanded privs. Fulls get all
privileges, modes, bands, etc. except that Fulls can be VEs
only after qualification (see below).

6) All licenses are 10 year and fully renewable/modifiable. No
age requirements or limits.

7) Basics have six-character calls, Intermediates have five- or
six-character calls, and Fulls have four-, five-, or
six-character calls. Nobody has to give up an existing callsign.

8) Separate 30-35 question test for VE qualification, open to
Intermediates and Fulls, which allows them to be VEs. Existing
VEs are grandfathered.

9) Existing Novices, Techs and Tech Pluses become Basics,
existing Generals and Advanceds become Intermediates, and
existing Extras become Fulls. Existing hams can continue to
use their current privileges when they exceed privileges granted
by the new system as long as they retain license
documents showing their old license class. Existing Tech Pluses
who can show proof of license before Mar 21, 1987 get Intermediates.

10) Change to new system is at least six months to one year after
announcement to allow time for question pool reorganization and
so existing hams can upgrade under present rules if they want.

End result is a system that is easy to get into (Basic is
envisioned as a 21st century version of the Novice) and has
reasonable but meaningful steps to reach full privileges.
Testing matches the privs granted. Power levels are set about
one S-unit apart. Nobody loses any privileges. There are only
three license classes and four written tests, so FCC doesn't
have more work.

73 de Jim, N2EY
____

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message

...

There will ultimately be two classes of ham radio license.
Tech, and Extra.
Or Class A and Class B. A VHF+ entry-level license, and a license with
all
privileges.
Just as I suggested in my Y2K NPRM restructuring comments, I might add.
I disagree. My bet is that we'll indeed have a de facto two level
license
system but I think they will be General and Extra.
I've been on record for a long, long time advocating a one license
"system." However, I've compromised with Hans suggestion of a simple
entry level license, and a full license. Whover said we needed more
license classes ought to have his head examined.


Well it's hard to say what the right number of classes is. I would advocate
two licenses: a 50 question General exam and a 50 question Extra exam. The
material in the Tech & General tests has enough overlap and is basic enough
that it would not be a big hardship on applicants to master the combined
material. Going straight from a Tech or other entry level test to Extra is
a huge jump in both quantity and complexity of the material. It would
certainly discourage a lot of people and might increase the drop out rate.

Already our club is planning for future licensing classes to combine these
two. Of course, we'll have to create our own syllabus and figure out how
best to present the combined material. At this point in time, there are no
combined manuals that already address the material for both license classes.
In principle it would be similar to the Now You're Talking book that was
available prior to the 2000 changes, which combined the Novice and
Technician material in one integrated study guide such that a person could
study for both Novice and Tech writtens at the same time. Our goal will be
to not only help them get licensed, but to try for General right out of the
box.

As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level" license.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee
If this comes across as quarrelsome then I apologize in advance. The
technician class license serves a useful purpose as a place for those
who are interested in local public service radio. I got two of my
Community Emergency Response Team members to take the weekend class to
prepare for the technician exam. Both of them passed and are now ready
to serve as Radio Telephone Operators (RTO) for there units. If
training for emergency communications service isn't a legitimate
function of Amateur Radio then nothing is. Not every one is interested
in DX work. The ability to talk across the area without depending on a
rather complex and brittle trunking or cellular system is attractive to
some folks. The only reason that I'm striking for the higher licenses
is that I'd like to learn more about radio and it's various modes of
transmission.

I believe that the present general is a little too light on the theory
however. I was able to prepare for the upgrade exam in only two weeks.
I was urged to take the element four exam when I turned in the element
three even if only to get an idea of what I was preparing for. It was
very humbling to take that element with no preparation but it did give
me an impression of the difficulty level of element four. From what I
saw something between the present general and the extra would be a good
level for the general test to be. A heavier emphasis on field
measurement and other aspects of Radio & Electric Safety would be one
aspect to consider making more demanding.
--
Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG

wrote:
On Mar 4, 4:53�pm, wrote:
On Mar 4, 6:56 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:





wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 11:38 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 10:25 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...
On Mar 4, 9:10 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:
"KH6HZ" wrote in message
...
[snip]
As I see it, there simply is no longer a need for an "entry level"
license.
Why not?
As I suspected, and Len asserted, "It's all about Morse Code" with
some of you's guys.
Not at all. �There is such a wide range of enjoyable activities available
that I want people to be able to explore them. �For the same reason
(expanding one's range of activities and knowledge base), I've dragged
Extra
class licensees over to the VHF station at Field day to show them what
can
be achieved on those frequencies. �While there are many Extras familiar
with
the VHF/UHF possibilities, for some reason the Extras in the club I
belong
to it have not really explored them.
I was referrign to Code Testing.
Not relevant to anything I have said in this thread. �It is not about code
testing but about each of us "being all that we can be".
...an army of one. �Try to keep up with the changes.

Salute! :-)

The
only "break" is that you end up taking one written test of 50 questions
instead of two tests of 40 and 50 questions for a total of 90 questions.
Today's Extra exam has an 800+ question pool to select from for that 50
question test.
Miccolis has covered this...

I thought I had?

For the new QP with the General set to start on 1 Jul 07 there
are a total of 1679 questions for all three writtens. Since only
120 questions make up all three, the number of possible test
questions are in a ratio of 13.99:1. That is MORE than the
10 minimum required in FCC regulations.

The Extra class exam (50 questions) has a ratio of 16.04:1
pool to required, new General 13.86:1, Techinician that
began in January is 11.20:1.

Just thought I'd toss that into the maelstrom. :-)

73, LA
not pushing it toward an MSEE like some of you would like to
think.
I've never made that assertion nor implied it. �That MSEE has to learn a
whole lot more than was ever covered in the Amateur radio exams.
Are you an MSEE?

�So if there is so little difference between the Technician and
General Exams, and the Extra has been dumbed down to Advanced level,
why do we still have people wanting more superfluous license classes
that are growing closer together in difficulty allatime?
I did not say there is so little difference between the Tech and General.
I believe you did, but will accept that is not what you meant (unless
you say it again).

Merely that it is reasonable for a person to study to go to General either
right at the beginning or shortly thereafter.
That would be known as the "Old General." �They were split in the
Spring of 1987.

Nor has the Extra been dumbed down to the Advanced class. �
Sure it has.

If you were to
talk to any of the people who earned their Extra under the pre-2000 system,
they will tell you that the Advanced class written test was the hardest of
all the writtens. �
It was. �I took and passed both.

So the Extra was already dumbed down, and now it is combined with a
lower class pool...

Sounds really, really dumbed down now.

That is where the bulk of the difficult technical
material was. �The Extra class test addressed more detailed knowledge of the
rules, regs, what it takes to be a VE,
My opinion is that the VEC needs to cover being a VE, not a
additional, superfluous license class.

and a small amount of technical
material. �
A very small amount.

When the system was changed, all the material for both the
Advanced and Extra went into the new Extra question pool
Which is why it's dumbed down.

And in the end, it's still allabout Morse Code with you.
That conclusion is not based on any of the opinions I have expressed in this
thread or any other.
Dee, it's based upon all of the opinions that you express.





In the exam sessions, we actively encourage a person to try the
General when they pass the Tech exam. �Those applicants that have chosen
to
develop an understanding of the Tech material (i.e. learn the antenna
equation and how to use it rather than memorizing the lengths for the
questions that might occur on the test) usually come within a couple of
points of passing the General. �Some would have passed the General if
they
had simply known to also memorize the General frequency priviliges along
with the material they already knew.
Did you say memorize? �Wouldn't you rather they understood the
frequency privileges?
I don't bother getting involved with that discussion as most just try to
twist it to suit their own purposes. �There is some material that must be
memorized just as frequencies and equations. �Other things must be
understood as to when and how to use those equations.
Fair enough, but I had to bring it up.

The material on the Tech and General is straight forward enough that it
can
be grasped by just about anyone with a moderate amount of study. �If one
looks at it in terms of return (license & range of privileges) versus
investment (study), the General is perfectly reasonable as a first
license
step.
All government testing should be straight forward.
All of the testing is straight forward. �The Extra is merely difficult not
convoluted.
So all of the matierial is straight forward? �Good.





On the other hand, let's look at an "entry level" license and exam. �You
have got to cover rules, safety (including RF radiation safety), and good
operating practices as a bare minimum. �By the time you do this, you've
already got a significant portion of what you would need for a General
class
license. �Your return (license & privileges) versus investment (study)
for
an entry level license, is just not that worthwhile.
If you remove the RF Safety, and change the power levels below that
required for an RFEA, then you have the makings of a simplified
amateur class.
Why should anybody even bother with such a limited license? �It would be so
limited people would get bored and drop out or immediately upgrade. �Not
worth the investment of time.
Not children, not scouts. �I guess we don't want to attract newcomers
for a lifetime of amateur radio, just the retirees.

Those countries that have folded their two license classes into one class
often had a written test that was equivalent to our Extra not our General
for both and the only differentiating item was the code test. �Thus they
really had no "entry" license.
I wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. �You shouldn't be allowed to
talk about anonymous countries.
Never said one wasn't allowed to talk about Japan. �Merely pointed out the
invalidity of trying to compare the systems.
Invalidity?



They had VHF/UHF licenses and full licenses.
The US has been somewhat unusual in that there is a license (General)
that
has a significant range of privileges on all bands with a moderate level
level of testing.
Dee, N8UZE-
The General once conveyed ALL AMATEUR PRIVILEGES.
Sheesh!
And the


Lee
If you start applying logic to this thread your going to ruin a
perfectly good shouting match.
--
Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG

From: on Sun, Mar 4 2007 6:41 pm

On Mar 4, 8:16 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message
On Mar 4, 6:56 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
wrote in message

[snip]

Also keep in mind that the General test
of the past was much harder than today's General as they took a lot of
that material and moved it to the new license classes.

No, it wasn't. It is substantially more difficult today. And don't
forget that half of the OLD General test is now called "Technician."

There were several changes. There was the change to the incentive licensing
where material was moved from the General to the Advanced and Extra.

Completely impossible. Miccolis tells us that the additional license
classes, Advanced, and Extra, were needed because the FCC wanted
amateurs to be more knowledgeable, so moving General questions to
Advanced and Extra would not serve that purpose. Unless Miccolis was
wrong.

Miccolis will NEVER admit he is wrong. :-(

That
changed General test was the one that was the same for the Technician and
the General. Then a decade later or so, the General test was split to a
Tech written and General written.

That is correct.

Why is ANY of that relevant?!?

NOBODY passes amateur radio tests TODAY on OLD test questions
or material.

To get the up-to-date question pools go to www.ncvec.org.


The material has not been removed. It has made the
Extra harder because you cannot take the material in smaller chunks. You
still have to learn all the same material but do it all at once.

Suit yourself.

Women with sewing machines can suit themselves...


Nope it does not make your point. Only if material is removed does it
become easier. If you just combine material without removing any, you make
it harder.

You run the risk of simpler questions being selected for that 50
question exam. It is easier.

Like "what is the unit of resistance..." :-(

"Who regulates the amateur radio service?"

The Technician test is the Technician test. I wouldn't
fault it in the present form. "Extra" grade it is NOT.


I've never made that assertion nor implied it. That MSEE has to learn a
whole lot more than was ever covered in the Amateur radio exams.

Are you an MSEE?

Nope but as part of my degree, I had to take basic electronics courses and
they were more detailed than what is on the ham exams. I can't even begin
to imagine that MSEE level.

Do you mind if I point some other Extras in your direction when it
appears appropriate?

Heh heh heh heh heh... :-)


Smaller bites? That wasn't the purpose of Inventive Licensing.

That was exactly the purpose of Incenting Licensing.

Miccolis would disagree.

Miccolo Tesla would disagree about anything not involving
morse code.

The PUBLICLY-stated "purpose" of incentive licensing was to
advance knowledge and experience. The REAL purpose of
incentive license created a desired class distinction that
the morsemen wanted, complete with status, rank, and
more privileges for the morsemen. That is sooooo evident.

Ah, but those who clawed their way up the incentive plan
will run around saying ONLY the PUBLIC purpose. Typical
hypocritcal BS on their "superior" posteriors. :-(

"the times they are a-changin'"

73, LA

Dee Flint wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
On Mar 4, 10:09 am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

[snip]

All of amateur radio is fine for the casual operator.


Ok then, let's do the same as some typical European countries. Only one
license class and every one takes the equivalent of the Extra class written
exam. Prior to the no code change, they did not have entry level licenses.
All licenses took the same written (basically equivalent to our Extra
written) and those who passed code got everything while those who didn't
were VHF/UHF only. When the code was dropped, they folded the two groups
into one. No need to haul out the many variations that existed. While some
countries did have an entry license with a simpler written there were others
who didn't. In some countries, you had to take formal classes and you were
not allowed to take the test if you had just studied on your own.

Dee, N8UZE

Dee
Are you saying you see that last as a positive thing? It would
certainly be good for the technical education industry but does that
make it a good thing for amateur radio.

If a formal course were a requirement then I imagine that it would be
easier to find one. I'd love to find a formal class for the extra class
material. I'd even be happy with a referral to a respectable
correspondence or on line course. Anyone have any suggestions along
those lines.
--
Tom Horne, KB3OPR/AG