One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

From: on Sun, Dec 11 2005 7:33 pm


wrote:
From: on Dec 11, 11:03 am
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

The alternative would be to eliminate all license classes except
the Amateur Extra, and require all new hams to meet all the
requirements of the Amateur Extra without any intermediate
steps.

The ONLY alternative? :-)

If you don't want to lower the written test requirements, yes.

Jim just got through posting that in 1936 the code speed was *increased
and the written exams made *more comprehensive for the three license
classes at the time. Later, all priveleges were granted to the
General class license. Then they were taken away.

Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Jim sees what Jim wants to see.

Jimmie need help of opthalmologist...he have astigmatism.

He have a stigmup tis bottom.

Well, he has 20-20 hindsight but seems to be of extreme
tunnel-vision
for the future (only He "knows" what will come to pass).

It isn't logical to have ONE license labeled "Extra." :-)

Then call it something else.

"Amateur"

Ummm...yes, that's what I answered. Too obvious to be "seen,"
I guess...

Not enough "prestige."

...and Rank, Status, Privilege. All POLITICALLY stomped into the
regulations by those who thought they were "better" than others
in a HOBBY radio activity over the last half century.

I wish I had saved a longish post made by another about the time
I started accessing this newsgroup. Someone had written the
"new classes" of ham licenses, perhaps fifty-plus, delineating
how so many were so "superior" to those of "lesser rank."
Such as the supermen of amateur radio "able to leap tall pileups
in a single QSO." Hilarious!



Every month, a few dozen new licenses are issued to
Generals and Extras. While that number is small
compared to those who start out as Technicians, it
proves that at least some new hams bypass one or both
upgrading steps.

Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher. Then the FCC
implemented the Incentive Licensing System which you loved, took away
priveleges, and the rest is history. Now you say that going back to
all priveleges for the General exam is lowering requirements.

Sorry you feel that way.

Confusion reigns there. Must be the weather...

When it reigns, it poors.

TRUE! While these super-extra morsemen are busy hurting their
shoulders by patting themselves on the back over their superiorness,
the number of Expirations each month is just slightly more than the
number of Newcomers (never before licensed). Not many, but it is
consistent and has been so for the last 2 1/2 years. It's not a
"statistical anomaly" anymore. Amateur radio is getting "poorer"
as a result.

Advertising revenue - the fuel that feeds the periodical fires -
has been dropping for over a decade. Two major independent
publishers had to drop out of the business. The league wants more
money...to "keep the faith" (in the Church of St. Hiram?). Way
too many hams are busy with a "Let's Pretend" fantasy (almost
palpable) about their glorious service to the nation (as radio
hobbyists) and wearing virtual uniforms (unseen by ordinary
mortals) of glory and honor in their morsemanship a vital asset
in the War Against Terrorism! [I kid you not, some comments were
made in 05-235 saying that very thing] The "richness" is in
the tales of fantasy they generate, NOT a commodity that generates
any sort of revenue.


If there were only ONE license, there would be no
"upgrading" via licenses, would there?

Right.

And if there were only one license, regardless of
what it would be called, its test(s) would
have to contain everything that is now contained in
the three written tests for the Amateur Extra.
Otherwise the standards would be reduced.

No, it wouldn't. Strawman.

The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

Not applicable to Jimmie-discussions. He get Extra license,
be "superior." He typify "superior" class, elite. Nobility?

Blue blood is thicker than water.

Just thick. Need thinner. Coronary imminent.

Similar to their self-coronation as Kings of Radio.

"Bloody clots" as the Brits might remark. :-)


So what you propose is that all new amateurs would
have to pass the equivalent of all the written tests
for the Amateur Extra all at once, just to get an
amateur radio license.

Is that what you want?

You're the one who loved the Incentive Licensing System which took
priveleges away from fully qualified amateurs. You're the one who
loves unnecessary licensing requirements.

Brian, that wasn't the point.

Good. I'm glad I was able to bring Jim back around to the discussion
of policy.

Don't bank on that lasting.


Jimmie try more misdirection
by trying to start yet-another controversy over "what I want."
That can be expanded with his imaginary helium to "reach the
threshold of [newsgroup] space."

Wonder how Coslo's BBS is coming along?

I wonder too. Anyone else know?



He tried the same bull**** with my remark on "extra out of the
box" five years ago in here...that I "WANTED" one...and the same
thing on my Reply to Comments of Mikey D. on WT DOCKET 98-143
six years ago with "my WANTING an age limit on licensing."

Tsk, Jimmie complains that I "don't *read* what he wrote" and
then takes my postings so far out of context that we might as
well all be in outer space and/or the Twilight Zone.

Okay, in that spirit of misdirection in here, let me pass on
an EXACT QUOTE of Jimmie's made on 10 December 2005:

"The FCC doesn't license radio amateurs."

He presumes that the VEC does? Like so many Morsemen confuse "ARRL"
with "FCC?"

Jimmie just said "major typo alert!"

He acknowledged a MAJOR mistake in posting as a "typographical
error" but that is apparently okay for him to do. It's not okay
for any of us to do it...if we do it, we get reminders of it for
the next five years, negative critique, accusations of "not
following up on 'promises,'" the whole magilla. :-)




Offhand, I'd say that Jimmie "wants" amateurs to be UN-
LICENSED! :-)

Let's see if he can "tapdance" a few time-steps on that one?

Jim has his back in a corner. He's losing major ground on his lifetime
achievement of being an Extra, and the worst is probably just around
the corner.

Not to worry. He will rationalize the "worst" somehow, probably
based on "what the FCC did 37 years ago" or his getting a license
at age 14 or getting a college degree without having a car or
being a "manufacturer of amateur radio equipment" in the 1990s
using recycled vacuum tube technology. Whatever he's done is
guaranteed to be "better" than what anyone else has done, whether
avocationally or occupationally. shrug

ARBITRARY and REDUNDANT, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

The alternative would be to eliminate all license classes except
the Amateur Extra, and require all new hams to meet all the
requirements of the Amateur Extra without any intermediate
steps.

The ONLY alternative? :-)

If you don't want to lower the written test requirements, yes.

Jim just got through posting that in 1936 the code speed was *increased
and the written exams made *more comprehensive for the three license
classes at the time. Later, all priveleges were granted to the
General class license.

From before 1936, until 1951, full amateur privileges in the USA
required a Class A license. (15 years including the WW2 shutdown)

From 1951 until 1953 full amateur privileges in the USA required an
Advanced or an Amateur Extra license. (2 years)

Did the General license convey the modes and power privs that the
Advanced and Extra licenses conveyed?

From 1953 until 1968 full amateur privileges in the USA required a
Conditional, General, Advanced or Amateur Extra license. (15 years)

(the requirements for full privileges were lowered in early 1953)

From 1968 until the present time, full amateur privileges in the USA
have required an Amateur Extra license. (37 years)

Did the General and Advanced licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the Extra license conveyed?

Then they were taken away.

37 years ago. I lost privileges. You and Len did not.

The entire USA amateur service lost in a big way, but you find a way to
personalize it.

Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Yes, it would be.

Does the Advanced and Extra licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the General license conveyed?

Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher.

And FCC was convinced that wasn't a good thing. FCC is still convinced
of the need for at least 3 license classes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Using the same logic, if the FCC were conviced that a
Morse Code exam were still a good idea, they would have a specification
for Morse Code in the regulations.

Just because no one at the FCC is paying attention doesn't mean that
the present rules are worthwhile.

You might want to read the current NPRM. Pay particular attention to
footnote 142...

Asleep at the wheel.

Then the FCC
implemented the Incentive Licensing System which you loved, took away
priveleges, and the rest is history. Now you say that going back to
all priveleges for the General exam is lowering requirements.

And it would be. The standards were reduced in the Great Giveaway of
1953.
You want a repeat of that.

Presently, every mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to
General, Advanced, and Extra licensee. That means that the Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

You need to have REAL distinctions is Testing Material VS Priveleges
between the license classes.

Those distinctions do not presently exist.

The knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts of CW at 14.024
is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts
at 14.026

Some years back, QCWA proposed to FCC that all hams who had held
a General, Conditional or Advanced before the changes took place in
1968
should get an automatic upgrade to Extra because they lost privileges
then.
FCC said no way.

Some years back, the ARRL wanted to keep 13 and 20wpm code exams.

FCC said no way.

Sorry you feel that way.

Why?

Is the 50 question Extra written exam too difficult?

With you, it's all about making entry difficult.

If there were only ONE license, there would be no
"upgrading" via licenses, would there?

Right.

And if there were only one license, regardless of
what it would be called, its test(s) would
have to contain everything that is now contained in
the three written tests for the Amateur Extra.
Otherwise the standards would be reduced.

No, it wouldn't. Strawman.

If you're willing to reduce the standards, the testing
could be reduced. It's clear that's no problem for
you.

You think I want a 49 question exam? Hi!

BTW, many of the exams are 49 or 48 or 47 questions because of the bad
questions presently in the QP.

The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

That ended 37 years ago. Why do you live in the past?

You're funny, Jim.

Would you like to go back to the General test of 1968? Testing
at FCC offices only unless you lived more then 175 miles from
an exam point, no CSCEs, no published question pools, 30
day wait to retest. Oh yes, and 13 wpm code, sending and
receiving.

It's always an ultimatum strawman with you, isn't it?

Sorry, but no one proclaimed you King Jim of Amateur Radiodom.

Use the present VE system, 50 question exam (or 49 questions if you
must), no code test.

Thanks for playing.

So what you propose is that all new amateurs would
have to pass the equivalent of all the written tests
for the Amateur Extra all at once, just to get an
amateur radio license.

Is that what you want?

You're the one who loved the Incentive Licensing System which took
priveleges away from fully qualified amateurs.

Who said I "loved" it?

You have defended Incentive Licensing against every challenger.

You're the one who
loves unnecessary licensing requirements.

none of the license requirements I support are
"unnecessary".

General exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Advance exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Extra exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

The Advanced and Extra exams and the Advanced and Extra license classes
are ARBITRARY and REDUNDANT.

You're the one who supports lowering the standards
again and again.

That is merely your jaundiced opinion.

--

So let's see what you're proposing:

- Full amateur privileges for the testing of a General license,
without any code test.

- All existing Generals, Advanceds, and Extras get full
privileges. Some Technicians and Technician Pluses
who passed the Tech written when it was same as
General get full privileges too.

Two questions:

What happens to existing Novices and Technicians who
haven't passed the General written?

What happens to them now???

FCC has repeatedly refused free (no-test) upgrades.

So?

FCC has said that the optimum system for the
future is a 3 level system, but that they'll keep the
closed-out classes until they disappear by attrition.

So?

How will you convince them to do otherwise?

I don't intend to convincee the FCC to give free upgrades. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to accept one class of license. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to do anything other than keep closed-out
classes until they disappear by attrition.

I -expect- good government.

I -expect- the FCC to eliminate arbitrary and redundant licensing
requirements and license classes.

The FCC looks foolish for not having dealt with these issues already.

One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

wrote:

Jimmie just said "major typo alert!"

He acknowledged a MAJOR mistake in posting as a "typographical
error" but that is apparently okay for him to do. It's not okay
for any of us to do it...if we do it, we get reminders of it for
the next five years, negative critique, accusations of "not
following up on 'promises,'" the whole magilla.

The fact of the matter is, Lennie, that more often than not, you
either refuse to admit your errors, or even worse, defend them with
lengthy, windy pontifications intended to obfuscate them.

Jim's character doesn't seem to permit him to act that way.

I see you're still using diminutives that aren't directed at you.
Of course your sock puppet does nothing to suggest otherwise to you,
yet presumes to chastise others for not engaging in such conduct.

What's that term you're always using...."double standard"...?!?!

Seems you NCTA "guys" have more than your fair share! (as if
there was any doubt.....)

Steve, K4YZ

ARBITRARY and REDUNDANT, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

The alternative would be to eliminate all license classes except
the Amateur Extra, and require all new hams to meet all the
requirements of the Amateur Extra without any intermediate
steps.

The ONLY alternative? :-)

If you don't want to lower the written test requirements, yes.

Jim just got through posting that in 1936 the code speed was *increased
and the written exams made *more comprehensive for the three license
classes at the time. Later, all priveleges were granted to the
General class license.

From before 1936, until 1951, full amateur privileges in the USA
required a Class A license. (15 years including the WW2 shutdown)

From 1951 until 1953 full amateur privileges in the USA required an
Advanced or an Amateur Extra license. (2 years)

Did the General license convey the modes and power privs that the
Advanced and Extra licenses conveyed?

If "Yes," then "Arbitrary and Redundant."

From 1953 until 1968 full amateur privileges in the USA required a
Conditional, General, Advanced or Amateur Extra license. (15 years)

(the requirements for full privileges were lowered in early 1953)

From 1968 until the present time, full amateur privileges in the USA
have required an Amateur Extra license. (37 years)

Did the General and Advanced licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the Extra license conveyed?

If "Yes," then "Arbitrary and Redundant."

Then they were taken away.

37 years ago. I lost privileges. You and Len did not.

The entire USA amateur service lost in a big way, but you find a way to
personalize it.

Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Yes, it would be.

Does the Advanced and Extra licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the General license conveyed?

If "Yes," then "Arbitrary and Redundant."

Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher.

And FCC was convinced that wasn't a good thing. FCC is still convinced
of the need for at least 3 license classes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Using the same logic, if the FCC were conviced that a
Morse Code exam were still a good idea, they would have a specification
for Morse Code in the regulations.

Just because no one at the FCC is paying attention doesn't mean that
the present rules are worthwhile.

You might want to read the current NPRM. Pay particular attention to
footnote 142...

Asleep at the wheel.

Then the FCC
implemented the Incentive Licensing System which you loved, took away
priveleges, and the rest is history. Now you say that going back to
all priveleges for the General exam is lowering requirements.

And it would be. The standards were reduced in the Great Giveaway of
1953.
You want a repeat of that.

Presently, every mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to
General, Advanced, and Extra licensee. That means that the Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

You need to have REAL distinctions is Testing Material VS Priveleges
between the license classes.

Those distinctions do not presently exist.

The knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts of CW at 14.024
is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts
at 14.026

If "Yes," then "Arbitrary and Redundant."

Some years back, QCWA proposed to FCC that all hams who had held
a General, Conditional or Advanced before the changes took place in
1968
should get an automatic upgrade to Extra because they lost privileges
then.
FCC said no way.

Some years back, the ARRL wanted to keep 13 and 20wpm code exams.

FCC said no way.

Sorry you feel that way.

Why?

Is the 50 question Extra written exam too difficult?

With you, it's all about making entry difficult.

If there were only ONE license, there would be no
"upgrading" via licenses, would there?

Right.

And if there were only one license, regardless of
what it would be called, its test(s) would
have to contain everything that is now contained in
the three written tests for the Amateur Extra.
Otherwise the standards would be reduced.

No, it wouldn't. Strawman.

If you're willing to reduce the standards, the testing
could be reduced. It's clear that's no problem for
you.

You think I want a 49 question exam? Hi!

BTW, many of the exams are 49 or 48 or 47 questions because of the bad
questions presently in the QP.

The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

That ended 37 years ago. Why do you live in the past?

You're funny, Jim.

Would you like to go back to the General test of 1968? Testing
at FCC offices only unless you lived more then 175 miles from
an exam point, no CSCEs, no published question pools, 30
day wait to retest. Oh yes, and 13 wpm code, sending and
receiving.

It's always an ultimatum strawman with you, isn't it?

Sorry, but no one proclaimed you King Jim of Amateur Radiodom.

Use the present VE system, 50 question exam (or 49 questions if you
must), no code test.

Thanks for playing.

So what you propose is that all new amateurs would
have to pass the equivalent of all the written tests
for the Amateur Extra all at once, just to get an
amateur radio license.

Is that what you want?

You're the one who loved the Incentive Licensing System which took
priveleges away from fully qualified amateurs.

Who said I "loved" it?

You have defended Incentive Licensing against every challenger.

You're the one who
loves unnecessary licensing requirements.

none of the license requirements I support are
"unnecessary".

General exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Advance exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Extra exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

The Advanced and Extra exams and the Advanced and Extra license classes
are ARBITRARY and REDUNDANT.

You're the one who supports lowering the standards
again and again.

That is merely your jaundiced opinion.

--

So let's see what you're proposing:

- Full amateur privileges for the testing of a General license,
without any code test.

- All existing Generals, Advanceds, and Extras get full
privileges. Some Technicians and Technician Pluses
who passed the Tech written when it was same as
General get full privileges too.

Two questions:

What happens to existing Novices and Technicians who
haven't passed the General written?

What happens to them now???

FCC has repeatedly refused free (no-test) upgrades.

So?

FCC has said that the optimum system for the
future is a 3 level system, but that they'll keep the
closed-out classes until they disappear by attrition.

So?

How will you convince them to do otherwise?

I don't intend to convince the FCC to give free upgrades. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to accept one class of license. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to do anything other than keep closed-out
classes until they disappear by attrition.

I -expect- good government.

I -expect- the FCC to eliminate arbitrary and redundant licensing
requirements and license classes.

The FCC looks foolish for not having dealt with these issues already.

If "Yes," then "Arbitrary and Redundant."

One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

K4YZ wrote:
wrote:

Jimmie just said "major typo alert!"

He acknowledged a MAJOR mistake in posting as a "typographical
error" but that is apparently okay for him to do. It's not okay
for any of us to do it...if we do it, we get reminders of it for
the next five years, negative critique, accusations of "not
following up on 'promises,'" the whole magilla.

The fact of the matter is, Lennie, that more often than not, you
either refuse to admit your errors, or even worse, defend them with
lengthy, windy pontifications intended to obfuscate them.

But I thought the discussion was Jim's error?

Jim's character doesn't seem to permit him to act that way.

What character is Jim playing today?

I see you're still using diminutives that aren't directed at you.

Len is kidnapping diminuitives? Call the FBI!

Of course your sock puppet does nothing to suggest otherwise to you,
yet presumes to chastise others for not engaging in such conduct.

Why would a person be chastized for NOT engaging in such conduct?

You presume to have such great command of the "King's Engwish."

That's Quitefine. Hi, hi! ;^)

What's that term you're always using...."double standard"...?!?!

No, that is what you are always using. It is what I am always
claiming. Do you see now?

Seems you NCTA "guys" have more than your fair share! (as if
there was any doubt.....)

Steve, K4YZ

"Raped an Old Friend" is OK in the Emergency Room?

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

Considering that Len hasn't even started, that's hardly a surprise...

The alternative would be to eliminate all license classes except
the Amateur Extra, and require all new hams to meet all the
requirements of the Amateur Extra without any intermediate
steps.

The ONLY alternative? :-)

If you don't want to lower the written test requirements, yes.

Jim just got through posting that in 1936 the code speed was *increased
and the written exams made *more comprehensive for the three license
classes at the time. Later, all priveleges were granted to the
General class license.

That's the history.

Sad, but true.

From before 1936, until 1951, full amateur privileges in the USA
required a Class A license. (15 years including the WW2 shutdown)

From 1951 until 1953 full amateur privileges in the USA required an
Advanced or an Amateur Extra license. (2 years)

Did the General license convey the modes and power privs that the
Advanced and Extra licenses conveyed?

Look it up.

Hi!

From 1953 until 1968 full amateur privileges in the USA required a
Conditional, General, Advanced or Amateur Extra license. (15 years)

(the requirements for full privileges were lowered in early 1953)

From 1968 until the present time, full amateur privileges in the USA
have required an Amateur Extra license. (37 years)

Did the General and Advanced licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the Extra license conveyed?

I think you know the answer.

I think you are right.

Then they were taken away.

37 years ago. I lost privileges. You and Len did not.

The entire USA amateur service lost in a big way,

How? Extras did not lose any privileges back then. Others could
get back the "lost" privileges by taking a test or two.

Nobody lost any bands, power or modes except Novices, who
lost 2 meter 'phone.

Was it necessary to punish amateurs?

but you find a way to personalize it.

The rules changes of 1968 and 1969 affected me at the time.

They affected everyone after you as well.

They did not affect you and they did not affect Len.

You're simply wrong on that one, Quitefine.

Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Yes, it would be.

Does the Advanced and Extra licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the General license conveyed?

What do you think?

I think you know what I think.

Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher.

Which is one reason the rules were changed in 1968 and 1969.

Which is another reason that those license classes were arbitrary and
redundant at the time. They remain so today.

And FCC was convinced that wasn't a good thing. FCC is still convinced
of the need for at least 3 license classes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Using the same logic, if the FCC were conviced that a
Morse Code exam were still a good idea, they would have a specification
for Morse Code in the regulations.

Nope.

Yep.

FCC specifically mentions the need for a 3 level license system in the
NPRM.

The FCC specifically excludes any definition or specification for Morse
Code.

Just because no one at the FCC is paying attention doesn't mean that
the present rules are worthwhile.

"No one at the FCC is paying attention"?

Just because they disagree with you?

It was just a guess. Why else would they allow such arbitrary and
redundant rules, exams, and license classes to exist?

You might want to read the current NPRM. Pay particular attention to
footnote 142...

Asleep at the wheel.

FCC's not asleep.

Coma?

Then the FCC
implemented the Incentive Licensing System which you loved, took away
priveleges, and the rest is history. Now you say that going back to
all priveleges for the General exam is lowering requirements.

And it would be. The standards were reduced in the Great Giveaway of
1953. You want a repeat of that.

Presently, every mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to
General, Advanced, and Extra licensee. That means that the Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

In your opinion, yes, but not in my opinion. And not in FCC's opinion.

You could be correct. And if you're correct then it is the General and
Advanced licensees that are getting a nearly free ride. They must be
stripped of privs.

But let's explore your statement there a bit.

"Presently, every mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to
General, Advanced, and Extra licensee."

That's true, as far as it goes. But it's also true that, presently,
every
mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to Technician,
Technician Plus, General, Advanced, and Extra licensees.

I understand the reason for the split in privs between the Tech/Tech+
and the G/A/E licensees. The reason for that barrier no longer exists,
but the exam and licensing schema has not kept pace. Time to perform a
top-down review, starting with basis and purpose.

So by *your* logic (not mine), the General, Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

The Technician exam is weak on HF issues. What do you think?

You need to have REAL distinctions is Testing Material VS Priveleges
between the license classes.

There are real distinctions in the tested material. The distinctions
in privileges are less clear.

As I said.

Those distinctions do not presently exist.

Sure they do. The trouble you perceive is that they're not directly
related to the
additional privileges granted.

Time to reconcile.

The knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts of CW at 14.024
is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill required to operate 1,500 watts
at 14.026

How do you know? Have you ever done it? I think not!

The knowledge and skill required to operate 1500 watts of CW on 14.024
includes Morse Code skill, too.

But let's suppose your claim about 14.026 is true.

Let's not for the moment. You now need to explain how it is different.
Provide detail.

Then wouldn't it also be true that the knowledge and skill required to
operate
1,500 watts of CW on 144.026 MHz is EXACTLY the same knowledge and
skill
required to operate 1,500 watts on 14.026 MHz?

There are differences in the behavior of RF at VHF frequencies. An
environmental assessment will begin to expose that.

And wouldn't it also be true that the knowledge and skill required to
operate
1,500 watts of CW on 14.026 MHz is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill
required to operate 1,500 watts on 13.976 MHz?

Different service, but you're getting the point. Bravo!

I don't know if you really want to be a freebander, though.

Why can't Technicians operate on 14.026? Why can't hams operate on
13.976?

And there you go with the ultimatums and strawmen.

And while we're on the subject....

Why are hams only allowed 1500 watts output? Why not 3000, or
5000, or 10,000?

Go to Italy. They may have waivers.

Up until about 20 years ago, all US hams were allowed up to
1000 W input on AM voice. With plate modulation and a
final amplifier efficiency of 75%, that could mean 750 watts
of carrier output, and 3000 watts peak output at full modulation.
The 1500 watt rule cut that in half. Why?

Physics?

Some years back, QCWA proposed to FCC that all hams who had held
a General, Conditional or Advanced before the changes took place in
1968
should get an automatic upgrade to Extra because they lost privileges
then.
FCC said no way.

Some years back, the ARRL wanted to keep 13 and 20wpm code exams.

FCC said no way.

Actually that's not true.

The 1998 ARRL proposal would have eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code
tests
and replaced them with a 12 wpm code test. IIRC, General code test
would have
gone to 5 wpm in their proposal.

And moments prior to that proposal, the ARRL had NO proposal. But they
saw Carl and the NCI walking up the steps to the FCC office...

Sorry you feel that way.

Why?

Is the 50 question Extra written exam too difficult?

With you, it's all about making entry difficult.

Not at all. It's about reasonable and attainable standards.

Then why do you bring up difficulty?

Is the 50 question Extra written exam too difficult to be
considered "reasonable and attainable"? After all,
that exam is all that separates a General and an Extra
anymore (since April 2000).

Again you bring up difficulty. Why?

Arbitrary is not reasonable.

Redundant is not reasonable.

Superfluous is not reasonable.

What is necessary?

If there were only ONE license, there would be no
"upgrading" via licenses, would there?

Right.

And if there were only one license, regardless of
what it would be called, its test(s) would
have to contain everything that is now contained in
the three written tests for the Amateur Extra.
Otherwise the standards would be reduced.

No, it wouldn't. Strawman.

If you're willing to reduce the standards, the testing
could be reduced. It's clear that's no problem for
you.

You think I want a 49 question exam? Hi!

I think you want the licensing standards lowered even more than
they have been already.

I want the necessary amount of regulation required, without arbitrary,
redundant, or superfluous license exams, license classes, and
privileges.

BTW, many of the exams are 49 or 48 or 47 questions because of the bad
questions presently in the QP.

That should be fixed.

We are self-regulating, after all.

The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

That ended 37 years ago. Why do you live in the past?

You're funny, Jim.

Would you like to go back to the General test of 1968? Testing
at FCC offices only unless you lived more then 175 miles from
an exam point, no CSCEs, no published question pools, 30
day wait to retest. Oh yes, and 13 wpm code, sending and
receiving.

It's always an ultimatum strawman with you, isn't it?

I'm simply pointing out where your line of reasoning leads.

You saw where it leads. It leads to the elimination of arbitrary,
redundant, and superfluous licensing exams, classes, and privileges.

You want to go back to the past for one little piece but not
the rest.

No. I've already shown that the VE system could implement the exam.
No one would have to travel 175 miles to their nearest FCC office.
I've already shown that the FCC plan to leave presently licensed
Novices and Advanced amateur to the actuarial tables is OK with me.

Why do you say otherwise?

Sorry, but no one proclaimed you King Jim of Amateur Radiodom.

I've never claimed to be an expert, king, or anything other than
what I am.

You like arbitrary, redundant and superfluous exams, classes, and
privileges?

Apparently my knowledge and skills intimidate you, so that you
have to attack me personally rather than argue facts and opinions.

Apparently they do not. The mode chosen to provide the example of
arbitrary privs was done for your ease of understanding, not mine. And
you quickly grasped the concept and took it to its logical extension,
which would mean a freefall of your prestige and stature in the amateur
community. That scared you.

No one proclaimed you king either.

Remember, I am not the one seeking power and prestige through amateur
radio. I've been a proponent of the one license (classless) service
for a long, long time.

Is someone who expresses an opinion here somehow claiming a
royal role?

I'm glad that you easily grasp the concept that these are, after all,
only our opinions. Not "Statements of Fact," nor "Assertions of Fact."
Expressing an opinion does not make one a liar.

However, you need to realize that I advocate a review of ALL government
that presently exists, not just amateur radio. The review should start
with, "What is the purpose of government?" Refer to the U.S.
Constitution and the Bill of Rights often.

Use the present VE system, 50 question exam (or 49 questions if you
must), no code test.

Thanks for playing.

IOW, you want to lower the standards from three written tests totalling

120 questions, and one code test, to just one 50 question written test.
For all US Amateur Radio privileges.

The 50 question (or 49) exam was your proposal.

What is necessary?

Are 200 questions necessary?

So what you propose is that all new amateurs would
have to pass the equivalent of all the written tests
for the Amateur Extra all at once, just to get an
amateur radio license.

Is that what you want?

You're the one who loved the Incentive Licensing System which took
priveleges away from fully qualified amateurs.

Who said I "loved" it?

You have defended Incentive Licensing against every challenger.

I've defended the concepts. Is that not allowed?

Love is allowed. John Lennon said, "All we need is love."

You're the one who
loves unnecessary licensing requirements.

none of the license requirements I support are
"unnecessary".

General exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Advance exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Extra exam earns all legal modes and all legal power.

Technician exam earns all legal modes and all legal power, too.

Helluva ENTRY level license, huh?

See where your line of reasoning leads?

Yes, I do. And the Technician class is an artifact left over from an
ITU rule that was kluged together when the Novice Class went bust.

The Advanced and Extra exams and the Advanced and Extra license classes
are ARBITRARY and REDUNDANT.

To you - but not to FCC.

You now speak for the FCC?

You're the one who supports lowering the standards
again and again.

That is merely your jaundiced opinion.

"Jaundiced"? Or accurate?

Necessary rules. Necessary exam(s). Necessary license classes all
tied to privileges granted.

The testing standards have been lowered again and again in the past
25-30 years.
But that's not enough for you - you want them to be lower still. I
disagree, that's all.
But it's not me you have to convince - it's FCC.
--

So let's see what you're proposing:

- Full amateur privileges for the testing of a General license,
without any code test.

Actually not - what you want is full amateur privileges for
*less* written testing than is currently required for a General
license, without any code test.

You could probably drop the rhetoric about code tests.

- All existing Generals, Advanceds, and Extras get full
privileges. Some Technicians and Technician Pluses
who passed the Tech written when it was same as
General get full privileges too.

Two questions:

What happens to existing Novices and Technicians who
haven't passed the General written?

What happens to them now???

I'm asking what your one-class-of-license plan would do
for them. It's your plan, not mine.

Why? The FCC is presently dealing with it fairly.

FCC has repeatedly refused free (no-test) upgrades.

So?

So you have to convince FCC to reverse that policy if you
want your plan put into effect.

Why? Why must I do what you say???

You are acting very king-like.

FCC has said that the optimum system for the
future is a 3 level system, but that they'll keep the
closed-out classes until they disappear by attrition.

So?

So you have to convince FCC to reverse that policy if you
want your plan put into effect.

The plan can be put into effect without harassing people who don't want
to do anything with their existing licenses.

You want the FCC to intern these folks? I understand that Ft Chaffee
is underutilized.

How will you convince them to do otherwise?

I don't intend to convincee the FCC to give free upgrades. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to accept one class of license. I don't
intend to convince the FCC to do anything other than keep closed-out
classes until they disappear by attrition.

Then please don't expect FCC to give free upgrades.

Did't state that, didn't suggest that. Why do you keep putting your
scarecrow out there?

Don't expect FCC
to implement less than 3 classes of licenses. And don't expect
FCC to lower the testing standards any more than is already proposed.

What is proposed is the elimination of the code exam. You're welcome
to confine your discussions on rrap to that.

I -expect- good government.

Aren't you getting it? Your party has controlled the White House
for 17 of the past 25 years. The same party that gave us a B-movie
actor for 8 years and now a failed oilman for another 8.

IIRC, the White House nominates the FCC Commissioners....

Angry white male? Is that you?

I -expect- the FCC to eliminate arbitrary and redundant licensing
requirements and license classes.

IOW, you expect the FCC to agree with you on everything without
you having to convince them.

You expect the FCC to agree with me even if I should put forth a
convincing proposal?

Hi! You angry white males are all the same.

The FCC looks foolish for not having dealt with these issues already.

To whom? Perhaps you should tell the FCC they look foolish...

You thought the '98 NPRM was clearly written?

You thought the '03 RO dealt with reorganization sufficiently?

You think the present Code question is able to be dealt with in a
vacuum?

You think the present inconsistencies in the amateur regulations,
exams, licenses, and privileges is healthy for the ARS?

Yeh, the FCC looks stupid to me.

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

From: on Dec 13, 7:32 pm

wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message

I'm not convinced that a "starting path" is necessary.

Considering that Len hasn't even started, that's hardly a surprise...

Duhhhh...like I've never, ever operated a radio transmitter?!? :-)




37 years ago. I lost privileges. You and Len did not.

The entire USA amateur service lost in a big way,

How? Extras did not lose any privileges back then. Others could
get back the "lost" privileges by taking a test or two.

Nobody lost any bands, power or modes except Novices, who
lost 2 meter 'phone.

Was it necessary to punish amateurs?

Jimmie has a persecution complex?


but you find a way to personalize it.

The rules changes of 1968 and 1969 affected me at the time.

They affected everyone after you as well.

Nobody counts but Jimmie.


They did not affect you and they did not affect Len.

You're simply wrong on that one, Quitefine.

Lots of us radio pros without amateur licenses just didn't bother
to get an amateur license...not necessarily as a result of
"changes of 1968 or 1969." What the heck, I'd already started
15 and 14 years before in HF comms where the operating
environment was a HELLUVA LOT TOUGHER on all concerned than any
amateur activity.


Now, one license class with the equivalent of the General Class exam is
"lowering the requirements."

Yes, it would be.

Does the Advanced and Extra licenses convey the modes and power privs
that the General license conveyed?

What do you think?

I think you know what I think.

Jimmie thinks he KNOWS what everyone thinks? :-)


Why does one have to "upgrade" through license
classes?

One doesn't. Anyone can "go for the Extra right out of the box".
You haven't.

One doesn't have to upgrade at all. At one time the General conveyed
all amateur priveleges, and few amateurs tested higher.

Which is one reason the rules were changed in 1968 and 1969.

Which is another reason that those license classes were arbitrary and
redundant at the time. They remain so today.

Not "arbitrary and redundant" for Jimmie. He made it. He loves it.

Problem is, Jimmie doesn't think that others can think differently
so he doesn't think about the thousands of newcomers who MIGHT want
to get into amateur radio.


And FCC was convinced that wasn't a good thing. FCC is still convinced
of the need for at least 3 license classes.

Yeh, yeh, yeh. Using the same logic, if the FCC were conviced that a
Morse Code exam were still a good idea, they would have a specification
for Morse Code in the regulations.

Nope.

Yep.

Yes.


FCC specifically mentions the need for a 3 level license system in the
NPRM.

The FCC specifically excludes any definition or specification for Morse
Code.

NPRM 05-143 is SOLELY regarding the elimination of the code test
from the Commission's regulations for licensing in U.S. amateur
radio.

NPRM 05-143 DOES NOT CONCERN ITSELF with ANY NEW PROPOSALS for
license classes, rank, status, title, privilege, prestige, or
honor and glory in the amateur service.


Just because no one at the FCC is paying attention doesn't mean that
the present rules are worthwhile.

"No one at the FCC is paying attention"?

Just because they disagree with you?

It was just a guess. Why else would they allow such arbitrary and
redundant rules, exams, and license classes to exist?

POLITICS. The present system of U.S. amateur radio regulations, at
least up to the year 2000, was lobbied for by the ARRL. The
Reading Room at the FCC is full of documents attesting to that.

But, Jimmie is a PARTY MAN. The league can do no wrong.


You might want to read the current NPRM. Pay particular attention to
footnote 142...

Asleep at the wheel.

FCC's not asleep.

Coma?

No to all the above. FCC just doesn't think that amateur radio
deserves their maximum-mission attention in their Congress-law-
mandated task of regulating ALL United States civil radio.

When the Commission does get around to regulating amateur radio,
it does so in Memorandum Reports and Orders which are extremely
detailed and explicit (and sometimes lengthy) to their task of
regulating all U.S. civil radio.

A problem with folks like Jimmie is that they are way too focussed
on their own agendas and their own personal desires to look at it
from the perspective of an agency governing for ALL the people,
not some smaller special-interest groups favoring morse code.

Jimmie sees only what he WANTS to see. Such as "footnotes" which
he once thought were "wrong-format" things in other arguments.



That's true, as far as it goes. But it's also true that, presently, every
mode and every power limit privilege is permitted to Technician,
Technician Plus, General, Advanced, and Extra licensees.

I understand the reason for the split in privs between the Tech/Tech+
and the G/A/E licensees. The reason for that barrier no longer exists,
but the exam and licensing schema has not kept pace. Time to perform a
top-down review, starting with basis and purpose.

The time may not be ripe just yet, Brian. Let's wait until the
FCC decides what to do about NPRM 05-143 and issue a Memorandum
Report and Order on it.

There's been two whole years of 18 Petitions commented on at length
since the end of WRC-03 and now NPRM 05-143 which can settle the
morse code testing for a license issue.


So by *your* logic (not mine), the General, Advanced
and Extra exams are arbitrary and redundant.

The Technician exam is weak on HF issues. What do you think?

The VEC QPC is responsible for generating written exam
questions and answers. VEC QPC is NOT an FCC department.



And wouldn't it also be true that the knowledge and skill required to operate
1,500 watts of CW on 14.026 MHz is EXACTLY the same knowledge and skill
required to operate 1,500 watts on 13.976 MHz?

Different service, but you're getting the point. Bravo!

Jimmie is just doing his "message-points wordplay" thing. It is
(or should be) absolutely NO difference in OPERATING any radio
transmitter physically. The only difference is in the human
regulations in regard to technical requirements.



Why can't Technicians operate on 14.026? Why can't hams operate on
13.976?

And there you go with the ultimatums and strawmen.

Jimmie with newsgroup wordplay again. About this point, Hans will
jump in saying you are "simply mistaken" and babbling about how
the "IARU and ITU" are different or other semi-sweet non-sequitur.


And while we're on the subject....

Why are hams only allowed 1500 watts output? Why not 3000, or
5000, or 10,000?

Go to Italy. They may have waivers.

The next World Radiocommunication Conference is in 2007. I don't
know if the location is fixed yet (WRC-03 changed location from
it's originally planned place). There's an FCC 8th Meeting on
WRC-07 changed to 25 Jan 2006...see the Federal Register of
today on details and contact person.

If Jimmie wants to really go high-power, it's his electric bill.
And his real estate broker's bill and re-locating his station.



Actually that's not true.
The 1998 ARRL proposal would have eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code tests
and replaced them with a 12 wpm code test. IIRC, General code test would have
gone to 5 wpm in their proposal.

And moments prior to that proposal, the ARRL had NO proposal. But they
saw Carl and the NCI walking up the steps to the FCC office...

Actually, it was Carl Stevenson and Bill Sohl making an ex-partite
(?) presentation before the FCC. :-)

Regardless, "the 1998 ARRL proposal" is OLD HISTORY. It doesn't
apply to anything NOW. The current NPRM is 05-143 and concerning
the elimination of the code test for license testing. The ONLY
ARRL "proposal" is their Petition RM-10867 which was "granted in
part" as mentioned in NPRM 05-143.

But...Jimmie is a Believer in the league and thinks the league can
do no wrong.



I think you want the licensing standards lowered even more than
they have been already.

I want the necessary amount of regulation required, without arbitrary,
redundant, or superfluous license exams, license classes, and
privileges.

Sounds reasonable to me for what is essentially a HOBBY activity.


BTW, many of the exams are 49 or 48 or 47 questions because of the bad
questions presently in the QP.

That should be fixed.

We are self-regulating, after all.

Absolutely...by law in fact. The generation of ALL license test
questions and answers is performed by the VEC. Says so in
Part 97.


The General License used to convey ALL AMATEUR PRIVELEGES.

That ended 37 years ago. Why do you live in the past?

You're funny, Jim.

Jimmie lives in the past. Period. He has been bringing up
1998 "proposals" when he should be bringing up 2004 Petitions
on the current NPRM 05-143.

By WRC-07 Jimmie might STILL be babbling about "the ARRL
1998 proposal!" :-)


I'm simply pointing out where your line of reasoning leads.

You saw where it leads. It leads to the elimination of arbitrary,
redundant, and superfluous licensing exams, classes, and privileges.

Jimmie doesn't WANT to see where anything leads. shrug




Apparently my knowledge and skills intimidate you, so that you
have to attack me personally rather than argue facts and opinions.

Apparently they do not. The mode chosen to provide the example of
arbitrary privs was done for your ease of understanding, not mine. And
you quickly grasped the concept and took it to its logical extension,
which would mean a freefall of your prestige and stature in the amateur
community. That scared you.

Holy Judas H. Cottonpicker, but lil Jimmie done made hisself
more pompously arrogant (and egotistical) than anyone else!

The elimination of the code test for any U.S. amateur radio
license WILL REDUCE BRAGGING RIGHTS OF MORSEMANSHIP BY THE
PCTA MORSEMEN. Logical extension.

NO PRIVILEGES ARE REMOVED by the adoption of NPRM 05-143 as an
R&O intact.

ALL that is left is the bragging rights to those who ONCE
passed a high-rate code test for their license.


No one proclaimed you king either.

Remember, I am not the one seeking power and prestige through amateur
radio. I've been a proponent of the one license (classless) service
for a long, long time.

Ah, but Jimmie NEEDS the nobility of title and status and
prestige.


Is someone who expresses an opinion here somehow claiming a
royal role?

Only those who still believe in a feudalistic system of
rank-status-title-privilege in what is essentially a HOBBY.

If I want better peerage, I go to my opthalmologist for an
eyeglass exam...so that I can "peer" at things better. :-)


I'm glad that you easily grasp the concept that these are, after all,
only our opinions. Not "Statements of Fact," nor "Assertions of Fact."
Expressing an opinion does not make one a liar.

...unless you are in a "discussion" with Dudly the Imposter.

However, you need to realize that I advocate a review of ALL government
that presently exists, not just amateur radio. The review should start
with, "What is the purpose of government?" Refer to the U.S.
Constitution and the Bill of Rights often.

I'm with you on that, Brian.

Unfortunately, some in here wish to abrogate those Rights in
favor of what They want... :-(



You could probably drop the rhetoric about code tests.

WHAT?!? Jimmie drop rhetoric about code testing?!? NO WAY! :-)


- All existing Generals, Advanceds, and Extras get full
privileges. Some Technicians and Technician Pluses
who passed the Tech written when it was same as
General get full privileges too.

Two questions:

What happens to existing Novices and Technicians who
haven't passed the General written?


What happens to them now???

I'm asking what your one-class-of-license plan would do
for them. It's your plan, not mine.

Why? The FCC is presently dealing with it fairly.

Jimmie trying to paint you in a corner there. His brush is dry.


FCC has repeatedly refused free (no-test) upgrades.

So?

So you have to convince FCC to reverse that policy if you
want your plan put into effect.

Why? Why must I do what you say???

You are acting very king-like.

I know...some extras get like that...




Then please don't expect FCC to give free upgrades.

Did't state that, didn't suggest that. Why do you keep putting your
scarecrow out there?

His scarecrow must be there. His corn is green.


Don't expect FCC
to implement less than 3 classes of licenses. And don't expect
FCC to lower the testing standards any more than is already proposed.

What is proposed is the elimination of the code exam. You're welcome
to confine your discussions on rrap to that.

Jimmie was trying to read the secret writing between the lines.


IOW, you expect the FCC to agree with you on everything without
you having to convince them.

You expect the FCC to agree with me even if I should put forth a
convincing proposal?

Hi! You angry white males are all the same.

:-)

Sigh...Jimmie is finally seeing the dawning of a new age and he
is vainly trying to shut everyone out of (his) sight. Now, if
everyone could just accept Jimmie as the God-granted Ruler of
Ham Opinion, he wouldn't get so upset. Alas, others aren't so
inclined. The hissy fits continue...

Reasonable and unique, was One Class of Amateur Radio License?
 

wrote in message
ups.com...
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
From: on Dec 7, 5:28 pm
wrote:
From: Bill Sohl on Dec 6, 6:11 am
wrote in message


[snip]


You need to have REAL distinctions is Testing Material VS Priveleges
between the license classes.

There are real distinctions in the tested material. The distinctions
in privileges are less clear.

Those distinctions do not presently exist.

Sure they do. The trouble you perceive is that they're not directly
related to the
additional privileges granted.


Why does the test material need to be directly related to the privileges
granted? It is quite common in life that they are not directly related but
is instead, something that is very desireable. In ham radio, that would be
spectrum and power. The goal of the FCC is, based on their comments in
various NPRMs and the goals and purpose stated in Part 97, is that hams
continue to increase their knowledge and engage in self training. So they
tie increase technical knowlegde to increase spectrum and power privileges.

[snip]

I -expect- the FCC to eliminate arbitrary and redundant licensing
requirements and license classes.

To achieve that, the FCC would need to totally redefine the basis and
purpose of amateur radio. One of the elements is self training and
technical knowlegde. You encourage that by using increased privileges
(spectrum and power) to get people to study and take additional tests.

IOW, you expect the FCC to agree with you on everything without
you having to convince them.

The FCC looks foolish for not having dealt with these issues already.

To whom? Perhaps you should tell the FCC they look foolish...

They do not look foolish when you view the tests and privileges in terms of
the basis and purpose of amateur radio.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

One Class of Amateur Radio License?