Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #101   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 02:52 AM
Phil Kane
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On 26 Jul 2003 04:49:22 GMT, Alun Palmer wrote:

OK Phil, read 97.301(e) and let us know how you understand it, parsing
each part carefully.


OK - I presume that you mean the following text, not the frequency
table:

(e) For a station having a control operator who has been
granted an operator license of Novice Class or Technician Class

This is self-explanatory.

and who has received credit for proficiency in telegraphy in
accordance with the international requirements.

The key to this discussion is, or course, "what are the
international requirements".

Up until the 2003 revision of S25.5 of the IRR, each Administration
was required to determine the proficiency of each applicant for a
license valid for operation below 30 MHz. In the US, this was done
by requiring the applicant to pass Element 1.

Upon the 2003 revision of S25.5 of the IRR, the requirement to
determine proficiency was made optional for each Administration.

That is the only change in the "international requirement" - each
Administration can now decide by its own rules/regulations whether
to require a code test. The code test is no longer mandatory for
each Administration. Each Administration's requirement for code
testing has not been automatically "dropped" or "eliminated" solely
by the revision of S25.5.

Until the FCC changes the rules concering Element 1, the
requirement in the US remains that Element 1 must be passed.

The question of -when- and -how- the FCC Rules will be changed is a
separate item from -what- the rule requirement is up until they
-are- changed. Ditto for how the FCC will handle the issue of
giving -what- privileges to folks who hold a Technician license
but have never passed the code test.

Does that answer your question?

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane
ARRL Volunteer Counsel

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon


  #102   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 03:00 AM
Kim W5TIT
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Radio Amateur KC2HMZ" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 09:40:04 -0400, "Spamhater"
wrote:


HEY KEITH,

IF YOU'RE NOT ILLITERATE, TRY READING PART 95 SOMETIME.... YOU WILL SEE

HOW
STUPID YOU SOUND. THE NEWEST VERSION! ALL AMATEURS ARE SUPPOSED TO HAVE A
COPY OF CURRENT LAWS AVAILABLE... BUT SINCE YOU"VE OBVIOUSLY NOT READ

THEM
TO KNOW THE LAWS, YOU WOULDN'T BE AWARE OF THIS ONE EITHER! NOW, IS THIS

BIG
ENOUGH FOR YOU TO READ AND UNDERSTAND?????? DUHHHHH.......


You're both on crack. Part 95 is the CB regs. The regs for ham radio
are in part 97.

DE John, KC2HMZ


"both on crack" ROFLMAO!!!!

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to
  #104   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 03:02 AM
Kim W5TIT
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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

"Kim W5TIT" wrote in message
...
"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote in message
...
FCC rules have NOT changed (yet) ... Techs are STILL not allowed
HF privs unless they have passed, and have documented credit for,
the 5 wpm Morse test ...

Don't let the writers in this thread talk you into ILLEGAL operation.

--
Carl R. Stevenson - wk3c



I understand your caution, Carl. But, somehow, if one is willing to

ignore
existing R&R, or maybe doesn't even understand them, in an area where

they
would "experiment," don't they kind of deserve whatever trouble they

would
have coming their way?

Kim W5TIT


In a word, YES ... they should have their licenses revoked.

HOWEVER, the REST of us don't need the grief that large-scale flaunting
of the rules would bring down on ALL of ham radio ...

73,
Carl - wk3c


Well, that's true...

Kim W5TIT


---
Posted via news://freenews.netfront.net
Complaints to
  #107   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 03:57 AM
WA8ULX
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Typical....don't confuse me with the facts...I know it all...right Twit?

Dan/W4NTI


****
  #108   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 04:21 AM
Keith
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 10:24:27 -0500, "Kim W5TIT" wrote:

Absolutely. To come to the conclusion that deaf people cannot learn and use
CW is rather narrow-minded in my opnion. I bet there's a way that ANYONE
could learn CW.


No, if a deaf person wants to learn morse code they can. It is wrong for the
government to require them to pass a morse code test because in reality they
have little or no use for it.
Like I said why doesn't the government require blind people to pass a driving
test if they ride the bus? You never know when the driver will pass out and
they will have to take the wheel.



--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/
  #110   Report Post  
Old July 28th 03, 04:32 AM
Keith
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 27 Jul 2003 16:57:14 GMT, "Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

. the FCC has records
of who has code credit and who doesn't, so no-code Techs should
NOT, repeat NOT, try to use HF.


You are ignorant. The FCC has no idea if a tech has passed a morse code
proficiency test and has a CSCE in their hand.

--
The Radio Page Ham, Police Scanner, Shortwave and more.
http://www.kilowatt-radio.org/
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1360– September 5 2003 Radionews Dx 0 September 6th 03 10:08 AM
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1360– September 5 2003 Radionews Dx 0 September 6th 03 10:08 AM
Tech Licensee USA Morse Code Freedom Day is August 1st Bert Craig Policy 12 July 30th 03 01:04 AM
ATTN: Tech Licensee USA Morse Code Freedom Day is August 1st N2EY Boatanchors 0 July 27th 03 06:22 PM
ATTN: Tech Licensee USA Morse Code Freedom Day is August 1st Merl Turkin Policy 0 July 25th 03 03:28 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:12 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017