| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Reply comments
On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote:
Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. John Kasupski, Tonawanda, New York Amateur Radio (KC2HMZ), SWL/Scanner Monitoring (KNY2VS) zIRC #monitor Admin |
Reply comments
John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: Technician: Entry-level license. All VHF/UHF, no HF General: Mid-level license. All VHF/UHF, most HF/MF Extra: Top license, all privileges. Novice, Tech Plus, Advanced: Old license classes that will disappear with attrition. No free or automatic upgrades. No HF for Technicians who haven't passed a code test. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Reply comments
|
Reply comments
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? All the FCC proposes to do in the NPRM is to drop Element 1 from the requirements. Nothing else - in fact, other changes have been specifically denied. If that is done, the following will be the inevitable result: Technician: Entry-level license. All VHF/UHF, no HF With no Element 1, the only way for new hams or existing noncodetested Techs to get any HF will be to go for General. General: Mid-level license. All VHF/UHF, most HF/MF As it is today, without Element 1 Extra: Top license, all privileges. As it is today, without Element 1 Novice, Tech Plus, Advanced: Old license classes that will disappear with attrition. Which has been going on for the past 5-1/2 years. No free or automatic upgrades. Specifically denied by FCC. Nobody loses privileges and nobody gains privileges. No HF for Technicians who haven't passed a code test. That's what Hans is trying to fix. Unfortunately FCC doesn't seem to see that as a problem. |
Reply comments
wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? by not being right first proble is in asuming the FCC has a vision of the future second that saying such a vision is clear All the FCC proposes to do in the NPRM is to drop Element 1 from the requirements. Nothing else - in fact, other changes have been specifically denied. If that is done, the following will be the inevitable result: Technician: Entry-level license. All VHF/UHF, no HF With no Element 1, the only way for new hams or existing noncodetested Techs to get any HF will be to go for General. the NPRM is anything but clear that is the result they intend. inddeed for the sake the ARS I hope it is what they end up doing. amusingly so Does Jim Heaney (sp?) of the ARRL General: Mid-level license. All VHF/UHF, most HF/MF As it is today, without Element 1 Extra: Top license, all privileges. As it is today, without Element 1 Novice, Tech Plus, Advanced: Old license classes that will disappear with attrition. Which has been going on for the past 5-1/2 years. No free or automatic upgrades. Specifically denied by FCC. Nobody loses privileges and nobody gains privileges. No HF for Technicians who haven't passed a code test. That's what Hans is trying to fix. Unfortunately FCC doesn't seem to see that as a problem. |
Reply comments
wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? All the FCC proposes to do in the NPRM is to drop Element 1 from the requirements. Nothing else - in fact, other changes have been specifically denied. If that is done, the following will be the inevitable result: Technician: Entry-level license. All VHF/UHF, no HF With no Element 1, the only way for new hams or existing noncodetested Techs to get any HF will be to go for General. General: Mid-level license. All VHF/UHF, most HF/MF As it is today, without Element 1 Extra: Top license, all privileges. As it is today, without Element 1 Novice, Tech Plus, Advanced: Old license classes that will disappear with attrition. Which has been going on for the past 5-1/2 years. No free or automatic upgrades. Specifically denied by FCC. Nobody loses privileges and nobody gains privileges. No HF for Technicians who haven't passed a code test. That's what Hans is trying to fix. Unfortunately FCC doesn't seem to see that as a problem. __________________________________________________ _______________________ I don't see it as a problem either. Afterall it will only require that they take the General written test to get on HF. The General test is no harder than the Tech. It just covers some different material as well as repeating some material from the Tech. The new material is no harder just different. The result of the FCC's approach is that everyone on HF will have taken two or more tests of some kind whether they be written or written and code. This is not unreasonable. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Reply comments
Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? one so much your honesty two,the rest I have adressed with jim flush |
Reply comments
BEGIN QUOTE
"an old friend" wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? one so much your honesty two,the rest I have adressed with jim flush END QUOTE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I must momentarily put aside my choice to not respond. You are attributing Jim's statements as if I had written them. This is incorrect. You have cut all my statements. If you will READ Jim's post, you will find that the sentence with the single "" is his. For whatever reason, some postings don't end up marked correctly and that is why I set my comments off with a LINE marking the difference between my comments and Jim's. Please be more careful with your attributions. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Reply comments
Dee Flint wrote: BEGIN QUOTE "an old friend" wrote in message ups.com... Dee Flint wrote: wrote in message oups.com... an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? one so much your honesty two,the rest I have adressed with jim flush END QUOTE ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- I must momentarily put aside my choice to not respond. no you don't have to you choose to do so as is your right but it makes your stament you shun my posts etc a lie plain and simple You are attributing Jim's statements as if I had written them. This is incorrect. You have cut all my statements. If you will READ Jim's post, you will find that the sentence with the single "" is his. For whatever reason, some postings don't end up marked correctly and that is why I set my comments off with a LINE marking the difference between my comments and Jim's. If you are going to use a non standard sysem for attributions then you NEED to make that clear, esp after your coments/demands/insistance that I need to make that clear Please be more careful with your attributions. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Reply comments
an_old_friend wrote:
wrote: an_old_friend wrote: wrote: John Kasupski wrote: On Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:35:06 GMT, "KØHB" wrote: Comments to 05-235 attached. -- 73, de Hans, K0HB Very good, Hans. We're in agreement on the first part, anyway. But I doubt it will make any difference. Many of the 18 petitions included various changes to entry-level license privileges, including the very obvious one of giving Novice/Tech Plus HF privileges to all Techs. Yet FCC repeatedly denied all of them. In the NPRM, FCC makes it clear that their vision of the future looks like this: wrong again How is it wrong, Mark? by not being right Why isn't it right? first proble is in asuming the FCC has a vision of the future The NPRM makes it clear the FCC does have a vision of the future. second that saying such a vision is clear Have you read the NPRM? FCC makes it clear they think a three-level license system is best for the ARS. They also think that the Technician - with no HF privileges - is the right entry-level license. Read the parts where FCC turns down all the proposals for a new entry-level license class. And the parts where FCC turns down expanded privileges for Techs. All the FCC proposes to do in the NPRM is to drop Element 1 from the requirements. Nothing else - in fact, other changes have been specifically denied. If that is done, the following will be the inevitable result: Technician: Entry-level license. All VHF/UHF, no HF With no Element 1, the only way for new hams or existing noncodetested Techs to get any HF will be to go for General. the NPRM is anything but clear that is the result they intend. It's clear what FCC intends. inddeed for the sake the ARS I hope it is what they end up doing. So you agree that the Tech should have no HF privileges? I don't. amusingly so Does Jim Heaney (sp?) of the ARRL Wrong! ARRL has petitioned for more privileges for the entry-level license. General: Mid-level license. All VHF/UHF, most HF/MF As it is today, without Element 1 Extra: Top license, all privileges. As it is today, without Element 1 Novice, Tech Plus, Advanced: Old license classes that will disappear with attrition. Which has been going on for the past 5-1/2 years. No free or automatic upgrades. Specifically denied by FCC. Nobody loses privileges and nobody gains privileges. No HF for Technicians who haven't passed a code test. That's what Hans is trying to fix. Unfortunately FCC doesn't seem to see that as a problem. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:02 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com