RadioBanter - South Africa!

Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:

some snippage

However, there are well over
50,000 hams in Canada, which is also likely to abolish the
code
test very soon.

Yep. But there are two big points about Canada:

1) The proposal would increase the written test level
This is a biggie. Simply proposing to drop the code test is
*not*
the

same thing as proposing to drop the code test *and* beef up the
writtens.

I'd like that quite a bit.

But that hasn't been proposed in the USA.

True. It would probably not fly either in the land of entitlements.

Where is the "land of entitlements"? Sweden?

IIRC, one of the things proposed in Canada was to make the
code
test optional in that if you passed code you didn't need as high
a grade
on theory to get the license.

Now that just seems strange.

How so? It's simply an option.

Would it be reciprocal? If you did well on the writtens, would they
allow a poor performance on the Code test?

I think the idea was you could get, say a 70 on the writtens (up from
the current passing grade of *60*!) and pass code, *or* get, say, an 85
on the writtens and the code wouldn't be required at all. I'm just
guessing at the numbers but you see the concept.

The test should either be or not be. Not
some kind of bonus that allows you to be less technically
proficient.

Then why require more technical knowledge for an Extra? That
license
does not allow the holder to use any more modes, power, or bands
than a General.
Just a few additional slices of spectrum.

Bad question to ask me, since I would prefer more privilege
differences between General and Extra

Me too, but that's not how FCC has implemented it.

(Len will no doubt have interesting comments on that one)

Len's comments are rarely if ever interesting, IMHO. Error-laden, yes,
but not interesting.

If the nocodetest folks in the USA proposed options like
those they
might get a lot more support. But instead, we have folks like
NCVEC
telling us we must drop code *and* reduce the written still more.

And how! Let's not forget that NCI also supports lowering the test
requirements.

So do others that support automatic upgrades.

In principle I oppose automatic upgrades

Me too.

All they have to go on is "gut" feelings. And unfortunately, the
first wave of no-code Technicians appear to be dropping like
flies. "Gut"
feelings can be wrong.

I don't see *any* license class "dropping like flies". Check the
AH0A
data on renewals - thousands of Techs are renewing every month,
either
before the license runs out or in the grace period.

The numbers didn't seem that way to me. Could be wrong tho'

Point is, reducing the requirements hasn't promoted growth. Recall that
before April 2000, the Tech required passing two written tests
totalling 65 questions. Now it's a single 35 question test - yet we
don't see growth!

Note that almost 5 years after the 200 restructuring we still
retain
more than 50% of Novices and 75% of Advanceds.

Theirs is a failed and incorrect paradigm.

Maybe. The concept of "lowered entry requirements = sustained
growth"
just hasn't happened in the ARS.

We don't need hams that thought that maybe it would be kewl to get
a
ham license some weekend between coffee at Starbucks and their
Pilates classes, and then forget about it. We need hams who want
to be hams.

Agreed! But of course people have to know what ham radio *is* to do
that!

Someone suggested some short commercial spots on time.

"on time"?

I wonder if that
has ever been done. Nothing too elaborate, just getting the
name out there.

Good idea, but expensive.

2) Commentary to the Canadian proposal showed a clear majority
favored the change. That's not the case in the USA, in any
survey
done to date, nor in the commentary to FCC.

Another biggie.

Don't forget that Japan, with a ham population of 1.2 Million

(twice that of the US, out of maybe a fifth of your general
population), has long had a no-code HF licence, albeit limited
to 10 Watts.

Check your numbers!

Japan has over 3.1 million operator licenses - but they cost
nothing and never expire, so that number is really the number of
ham operator licenses issued since 1955, not the number of
present-day hams.

Japanese *station* licenses are a bit over 600,000 now, and have
been dropping for a decade. The number of new JA licenses has
also been dropping. See the AH0A website.

I'm not sure
how many Japanese hams have a no-code HF licence,

Well over 95%.

but they may even
rival all the new ones so far put together, although the new

guys can use more than 10 Watts! It's probably only a matter
of
time before Japan lets all of their hams use HF anyway.

All Japanese hams have HF privileges *today*. Been that way for
decades.

But for all classes of ham license except 4th class, JA hams
have

a

code test. And there's no move to change that yet.

And for ten years JA ham license numbers have been dropping fast.
*With* nocodetest HF.

Quick! Let's emulate Japan! Except we can do it better by allowing

the

newbies full power privileges.

Japan's obvious success can be our own!

Indeed.

Even without the low power Japanese stations, the number of
no-coders who have full HF privileges right now is probably
about the same as the number of no-code Techs in the US.

Close enough.

And if there are already that number of no-code hams on HF
without
any incident, what is the problem with abolishing the code test

here?

The USA isn't Japan. Different society, different culture,
different rules.

I don't know if any of us geniuses have though about it, but lets
say
in a country where a business can get successfully sued for a woman
not knowing that here hot coffee was hot, and burning herself when
trying
to hold the darn thing between her legs. (sorry Phil, but what if
she
simply ruined her dress because the coffee was wet?- negligent
design
of the cup?)

So lets have a newbie ham that fires up his/her kilowatt rig, and
is
half fried because no one told him not to touch the wirey thingies
on
the back of the box thingy. Ohh, I can see the successful lawsuits
already!

We have that situation today.

I've nailed myself with 50 watts, enough to produce a painful burn
and
a cute little scar on the boo-boo finger. Some dunce that catches a
ride on a thousand watts might just have a very successful lawsuit
if we
don't train them well.

The same is true of ordinary house current.

Sure. Fortunately most of the public is well educated from a young
age
that what comes out of the wall socket can be a bad thing.

Yet people are still shocked and electrocuted doing really dumb things
with electricity.

And it's not just voltage. Get a metal ring a high current supply
and
the results aren't pretty. If the ring is on your finger.....

Years ago I used to work on a lot of digital electronics that used
massive power supplies at 5 volts. No rings, no metallic glasses (you

should have seen my NASANerd plastic rim safety glasses!) and no
metal
belt buckles, no change in the pocket, etc, etc.

Yet the NCVEC folks say the solution is to create a class of ham
that
can't use rigs with more than 30 volts on the electronics...

Goofy, goofy, goofy!

Tell it to NCVEC. They think they know better than you.

And it is the wrong approach. The proper approach is to allow access
coupled with adequate education.

Watta concept!

RF Safety should be the FIRST order of the day, and NO one should
be
a Ham until they are tested for RF safety to the ability to handle
full
legal limit.

Why? We don't test people on gasoline-handling safety, nor ladder
safety, nor many other things that injure thousands of Americans
every
year.

Familiarity breeds contempt, Jim. If gasoline were "introduced today,

the infrastructure for handling it would be mind boggling.

Shrub says hydrogen is the answer. Oh the humanity.

And ladder
makers carry huge liability policies. (I had the experience of
having a
defective design ladder collapse under me).

I agree that every ham should be safety-aware. But a true test of
safety would be far more extensive than even the Extra writtens.

You can't teach Attitude, eh?

My employers have all taken safety *very* seriously. It's an
attitude that can be taught, but it's a constant thing.

And those who think that limiting the finals voltage, or some other
weird thing is the answer, are advised to think about things such
as
Technician Hams operating under supervision. It only takes a second
to drop a paper and reach behind a Rig. Less time than the control
op
can react. I want those Technicians to be exposed to full power
safety
requirements.

They are - today, anyway.

And I'd like to add just a smidgen more knowledge to that!

Me too but then it's called "hazing" or some such nonsense.

Anything else is criminally negligent.

Umm, Mike, you're saying it's the Govt's role to protect people
from
their own ignorance and unsafe behavior.....

In some cases. When the licensing requirement encompasses the nation,

then so do the responsibilities.

Ya can't outsmart Darwin.

It would be interesting to see what the JA 4th class *written*
exam
looks like.

And as mentioned before, the number of JA station licenses and new
operator licenses is way down.

That's 18, I didn't count both Austria and Australia!

OK. But it's still a small fraction of the number of hams
and the number of countries.

The big questions: Must all countries drop the code test
because a few have decided to? Or can each country decide for
itself.

Each country can do as it chooses, but the trend is to abolish
the
code test.

The trend in most countries is to ban or severely restrict

individual

ownership of firearms, too.

Has the change caused lots of new growth in countries that have
dropped code testing?

No, but it's increased HF activity in those countries

So all it's done is to permit *existing* hams to upgrade. But it
*hasn't* brought in lots of new folks.

Which means the Morse code isn't the "problem" some people make it
out to be.

Of course!

It's the classic case of a red herring diversion. Blame the code
test
for everyhting bad while the real problems are not addressed.

You mean like dragging the gay marriage issue into the Social
Security
problem? 8^)

Yep. The interesting thing is that allowing gay civil unions would
*increase* tax revenue.

And speaking of marriage: One thing I find interesting is that the
divorce rates in the "red" states are consistently and clearly higher
than the rates in "blue" states. Seems those folks who rant and rave
about "family values" and "covenants" can't seem to stay hitched very
long.

Here's the kind of thinking being put forth:

One plan being suggested in DC is for the USA to create a special
savings account for each baby born in the USA, starting on a certain
date. The Feds would put $2000 into each account each year until the
kid reaches 18. Total investment $36,000. Assuming about 6% annual
interest, each account would be worth over a million dollars when the
"baby" reached 65.

Nice retirement package, huh? Except it won't work for several reasons
completely obvious to anyone with common sense.

73 de Jim, N2EY