|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
Restructuring Petition
from
Alan, N5LF
on
January 15, 2000
Website:
http://www.qsl.net/n5lf
View comments about this article!
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KC2FBV on April 10, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Although I look forward to new privileges earned by recently passing my 5 WPM CW, I sincerely hope that the written exams aren't "dumbed down". Keeping standards up might seem elitist to some but it does serve a legitimate purpose.
Lowering ones standards only invites mediocrity. It is when we challenge ourselves that we truly grow.
I can't explain why but privileges EARNED have more value than if they're just given to you without earning them.
As for CW, I understand both sides of the argument. CW (at 5WPM) wasn't easy for me and I wasn't sure that I'd want to use it.
Recently, however, I was talking with a friend while a radio was on in the background and the dits & dahs crept through as letters. It was pleasant feeling ... almost "magical".
It's like hearing someone speaking a foreign tongue and actually catch what they're saying. CW beyond 5 WPM may not be required but give it a shot if you're in the mood for a mental challenge.
If you don't do well, it's not the end of the world. If you do well ... it's another challenge beaten in your favor.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by WA4RYW on February 1, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I could care less about the code requirements, however I strongly agree that we need to get a handle on the written exams. The answers published with the questions, study guides that prompt you for what sections to study and avoid, complete with memorization aids. There's not much left between what we have and enclosing a license card in the radio box. Remember the death throes of CB licensing? Add ZIP code here....
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by VE3UUH on January 31, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Seems that Continuous Whinning knows no boundaries.It appears the same old rhetoric gets bounced around as soon as change is mentioned.nothing wrong with code,it is a method of communicating nothing more nothing less.I wonder if all this back biting,whinning and belly-aching is a North American event.Move ahead the second world war is over,the Titanic sunk and it is the year 2000 not 1900.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KA1EIV on January 26, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I feel like I'm in the middle of this one... I think it's great that it may have gotten easier for me to upgrade to Advanced or Extra, but I also feel like the work involved in getting my General was for nothing! I sympathize with all the Advanced and Extra licensees who worked hard for their Tickets, but I don't mind being given a break either. With less and less time these days to study in this wonderful "hurry up" life style we lead, what the hell?
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KA2NDX on January 24, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Paul N0AH you are right about the guy who thinks we are snobs ,he knows nothing about amateurs we are not snobs just a proud bunch of people dedicated to our hobby and want to preserve it with integerty
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by NC4TT on January 22, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I sure would like to see something saved out of this deal to retain the lower 25Khz
for the present ticket holders of 20 wpm.Where we failed badley was when the fcc asked for comments from all ticket holders a very few answered the call. I fear that it's to late, but i will support the attempt to salvage something
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N3NL on January 22, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hello, I am an Extra Class operator
and I think that the restructuring is
fine. Let's leave it alone and push
ahead to other more important issues
such as restrictive covenants or
encouraging experimentation.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by W4NZC on January 21, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Some folks are asking why they cannot simply trust the VEC coordinators on the Question Pool Committee to maintain standards for technical testing. The answer is largely found in the the FCC's D&O and in the Petition to Reconsider. Here is a short summary of *some* of that evidence: (1) The National Conference of VECs filed formal comments before the FCC in which they argued that "it is not necessary for licensees to understand electronics and other technical subjects in order to properly operate commercially manufactured equipment." (2) In its D&O, the FCC quoted the NCVECs' above comments with favor. (3) The FCC gave the VECs unfettered authority to determine question mix on the Technician and General examinations. FCC also allowed VECs to determine question mix for Extra as well, except that the FCC did require *some* level of technical testing for Extra. However, the FCC specifically declined to require *any* technical questions for Technician and General.
In addition to the above, I'll add my own anecdotal evidence. I mean absolutely no disrespect here, for I appreciate the hard work done by the VECs. Still, VEs and (especially) VEC coordinators are frequently (in my experence, usually) folks whose primary or only ham radio activity is their VEC interest. They are operators who do not operate. They are frequently out of touch with other ham radio activities such as DXing, traffic handling, contesting, ragchewing, homebrewing, and experimenting. Personally, during the time I was testing in the early 1990s, and later, when I went with my wife for each stage of her testing right through Extra, no less than a dozen VEs told me that "no one operates CW anymore." I was shocked when I got on the air and learned that they were wrong, that CW was more popular now than when I was W4NIT back in 1960! I also found that to the VEs, success was measured by the number of licenses, upgrades, and CSCs they handed out. CW and high standards were viewed as getting in the way of success. This may all be anecdotal, but it has happened too often to be mere coincidence. My recommendation is that, if you believe in standards at all - whether technical, CW, or both - then support the parts of the petition you agree with. If the QPC does not "dumb it down" any further, you will have done no harm. If the QPC tries to dumb it down, then your support may help prevent it.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
Anonymous post on January 19, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I can't wait to start razzing and jamming
the codeless morons....I'm going to make them feel real welcome !! Bring em on !
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N0AH on January 19, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Eric Harkins obviously has never felt the rush of working China via morse code at 4 in the morning on a dipole and 50 watts - but he can copy code- big deal-
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KH7M on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Unfortunately, it seems that NCI has
some new objectives:
Larry Klose, NCI Director writes:
"... we have fought the domestic code/no code war. Now it's global war for the right of free-determination of emissions and frequencies in the 21st century."
In other words, now we are out to
eliminate the sub-band divisions.
No more frequency section set-asides
for CW, nor any other mode. What
ever mode we choose, at any frequecny
in any of the present nine HF US
Amateur Radio bands.
Of course, all through the debate,
the NCI participants have said that
is exactly what they would not do;
but now they have the taste of victory,
and they now want it all! And they are
opposing the two petitions for reconsideration alreay submitted. See
the NCI web site: http://nocode.org/
Click on Articles.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KD5GNN on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If hams support this petition they will only be cutting their own throats. Think about it, the less people on the air means less bandwidth the FCC is going to give you.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by NONE on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I think that with all the bickering and fighting that goes on daily, I'm not sure if this would be the right hobby for me. I can talk and see just about anyone in the world with my computer and I don't have to pass a code test to do it.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N0NE on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First of all I want to say that I send/receive code at 25wpm but have not taken any ham tests as I was still brushing up on theory. Having said that, I find that I'm no longer interested in getting my licence or having anything to do with Ham Radio.
I have never seen a bigger group of elitest snobs anywhere. You are obviously not the kind of people I'd want to associate with. I hope the FCC does take away your precious bandwidth and auction it off. You don't deserve it!
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KG2MY on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The restructuring said NOTHING about dumbing down the tests. The FCC doesn't even write the tests. The VECs do it. I have faith in the system. The VECs are hams who went through the old process just like you and me. We need to trust that they will NOT dumb down the tests. Make your opinion known to THEM, not the FCC. The FCC made a fair and wise decision and left the fate of ham radio in OUR hands. Make the best of it!
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KA6VNU on January 18, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The question poll hasen't been made up yet...How do you know it will be easier?
Give the VEC group a little credit....
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KG2ED on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Worked hard to get my extra class ticket there should be a call sign destintion for
5 wpm hf priv.and org.20 wpm extra class any 5wpm extra class no vanity calls issued to keep the data base straight and usfull for band police.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N6YVY on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well I see we have something to cry about again. While we cry, and whine about this there already looking at what they can take away. Maybe 2 more meg's from the 220 band, or maybe 70cm. Who knows what.
The city Of Los Angeles to use some of the 10 mhz band so we cry whine and the SNEAK in and take something else so lets wake up and keep our eyes on what we still have. The fcc took the cb band in the fiftys (11 m Ham Band) well 73 or is it 73's. DO WE STILL NEED TO CRY.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by K4NR on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I’ve already submitted comments to the FCC supporting the majority of this request for reconsideration. Like many other amateurs, I figured the ARRL would represent us on 98-143 and did not file any comments with the FCC. Apparently the FCC was swayed by the large number of comments received from NCI, Kenwood, Icom and other supporters. I just read the NCI homepage and they are opposing this request in its entirety and will file comments in the near future. NCI has always claimed to only want to eliminate Morse code testing. It appears they will not support any request to strengthen the already watered-down technical requirements. How far are we going to let this go? What the must learn from NCI is we need to file in large numbers. Let’s make ourselves heard this time around. Go to the FCC’s homepage and leave comments supporting all or part of this petition.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N9CO on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I support N5LF's et al Petition for Reconsideration.
I am NOT opposed to a 5 wpm cw exam to gain General
class HF privileges, but I am STRONGLY opposed to
lowering ANY requirement for the Amateur Extra class
license. I firmly believe that there needs to be a
license class that presents a real and unique challenge.
No, cw is not for everyone. Neither is the Amateur Extra
Class license. For all who don't care for cw, what
difference should it make to you if you can't legally
transmit on the lower 25 kHz of the bands? You're gonna
get your MF/HF privileges, from 160 to 10. Why do you
care if you can't or won't do what is needed to be an
Amateur Extra? 25 kHz???
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by AA3RR on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The current 20 WPM code requirement for Extra Class licensees does not prevent a Novice, a Tech Plus, a General or an Advanced operator from sending code at 20 WPM or higher. Especially if they are using an electronic keyer or a
computer - now there's a lot of skill! All the 20 WPM requirement does is set aside a few kilohertz solely for use by the Extra Class Licensee. The restructure does not remove any frequency privileges. At some future point when
the FCC addresses this issue I hope we have a bigger response by the amateur community than we did regarding this one - less than one third of one percent of US hams responded to the FCC proposal. If you're a code junkie (I've
done code since 1968) then you'll probably still do code. If you want to "chop dits" at nothing lower than 25 WPM I suspect you'll continue to do so. However, code is a dying art. A 13 WPM and 20 WPM requirement has done nothing
to increase the viability and popularity of CW (code - not country western music). To increase the popularity of code we have to make it interesting and fun to the newcomers. I haven't seen any progress on this front at all.
I hope somebody will think of something soon because the average age of today's ham is in the mid-50's.
The following are from the most recent ARRL Letter and are representative of the success of code requirements in weeding out the "riff raff' in our hobby. NOT! Clearly having a 13 WPM or 20 WPM code requirement did not work
in preventing these folks' unacceptable behavior. Training and education are far more effective. At the same time, we must recognize that not everyone will receive the message and there will always be some bad apples.
"...the FCC wrote Amateur Extra licensee Frederick J. Roll, NU5M, enclosing a tape recording it said was of a November 13, 1999, QSO between NU5M and KC1ZQ on 14.313 MHz that allegedly included harassing behavior."
" The FCC put Amateur Extra licensee Arthur Visser, W9ART, on notice December 30 that it intends to designate his license for revocation if it learns of additional allegations of malicious interference by the licensee."
"...the FCC wrote General licensee Jeffrey J. Pipenur, WA8IKW, in late December, setting aside his license renewal, granted last October 19. Hollingsworth told Pipenur that the FCC had monitoring evidence indicating
that the licensee has "deliberately and maliciously interfered with radio operations of other amateur licensees on 3.865 MHz"
"The FCC sent Advanced licensee Jensen W. Woods, AH6MX, a Warning Notice for alleged interference with the KC6OKA repeater system in the LA area.
and to be fair there were a couple Techs who messed up as well...
"Another Warning Notice went out to Technician licensee Gary R. Dent, KE6JUV, for alleged interference to an ATV repeater.
"...the FCC has received renewed allegations of VHF repeater interference in connection with Anthony J. Barben Jr, N2WNF, of Brooklyn, New York. In June 1997, Barben consented
to a 15-month license suspension as part of an FCC effort to resolve a rash of interference cases in the New York City-Long Island area. The suspension followed accusations
of willful and malicious interference, using obscene or indecent language and failure to identify. On December 28, 1999, the FCC requested that Barben retake his Technician
class Amateur Radio examination under the supervision of FCC personnel by January 30, 2000.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by W4ETN on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To all of you that have said" if you did not like what the FCC did, why did you not say something during the comment period"
I and may like me did, but our comments fell on deaf ears, as we did not have big money behind us like Kenwood and the ARRL. For all you lazy whiners who say "I can't learn the code" listen to 11 meters to all your brother who have said the same thing. Something for nothing is worth NOTHING.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N2NEP on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Where where you whiners when the FCC ask for comments before?
Get a live people. You had your chance.
The FCC will have a hardy laugh at you.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KB6BNX on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Leave it alone. Lazy people will not even
do the 5wpm requirement, so the CB arguement is not valid. Code does not always make for better operators..if this were so there would be no idiots on the air in the HF bands..and we know this isn't the case.
It seems that most of the resistance comes
from people who are extra's and advanced
tickets...the hobby is dying..it needs a shot in the arm..I am going to get my
extra..but keep my call...I want to operate but don't need the ego of the call sign..
Most of all
I am going to get active again in the hobby and try to bring in a few new hams
this year..
73's
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N0TRK on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The closest thing to CB I have heard on the ham bands in on 80 meters. Sure looks like
code makes for good operators. As for the failure of the ARRL, it offered a totally different
plan than the FCC adopted. Last I knew the ARRL did not make FCC policy. Now is the
time for amateurs to band together, take a collective deep breath and WORK at making the new
group of HF's good operators, Restructuring is nothing new, in the past privledges were lost, when
restructuring occured. If you are really unhappy take it to the FCC, don't take it
out on anyone who happened to get a license or an upgrade in a different manner than you did.
Show the world that amatuer radio is a group of mature individuals that adapt to the situation,
not a bunch of whiners. The Designated hitter rule didn't kill baseball, the fair catch
didn't kill football and the 3 point shot didn't kill basketball. This won't kill amatuer radio,
only we can do that.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by WB5PBL on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Ditto Nelson Derks comments. I have been a ham for 25 yrs and the CW requirement has done nothing to help our hobby. I am afraid that this move is too little to late to help revive Amatuer radio.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KC5QYO on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Well, I have seen both sides of the issue. CW is slowly loosing it's grip on air-waves with the advent of the newer (computer aided) digital modes that both increase speed and accuracy. However, with this I still believe that CW falls under the "Radio Art"... so it would have been nice to hold a 10 to 13 level wpm. However, I am curious to see what the new pools look like. If they are kept the same general level, they are still going to keep some people who be more like CBers out of the hobby... and besides with the increase in the number of Cell phones, and the Family Radio Service... I feel that people who are lazy enough to use ham like CB would probably not want to even bother with the tests in the first place. Anyhow, this is just my two cents.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KB5BQM on January 17, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
They could have at least left 13 wpm in we don't need anymore cb bands no offense to newcomers either i support the petition
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by WB7FFI on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
LEAVE the restructuring ALONE. What I would like to know is: how do I prove I was granted my ticket in 1976? I was given the test 5wpm and theory by an extra class license holder.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N0AH on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Industry saved, hobby ruined-
The ARRL has been a total failure here-
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by K3CN on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Thanks for letting me know about this petition. Somewhere between 20 and 13wpm might have flown.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by WA5WHO on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We need to keep the 5, 13 and 20 word per minute code requirements.
Thank you for this letting me have a voice. Sam Gover, wa5who
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by NV7E on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The FCC proposal effectively does away with
the CW requirement for techicians on HF
altogether. If the license database does
not record who has passed the 5 wpm code
test, there is no self-enforcement mechanism
as there are for other rules, i.e., hams
who hear no-code licensees below 28 MHz
won't be able to check on the legal
qualification of licensees to operate there.
Look for a free-for-all on 28 MHz phone
after April 15.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KC5QVV on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Visit the N5LF web page and you'll find Alan is a CW proponent... Nothing wrong with that, but this petition is an attempt by the 'Old Guard' CW Buffs to preserve the Amateur Extra as an exclusive playground for elitist CW die-hards... Look at the history of Ham Radio and you'll find prior to 1951 the old Class A license carried a 13 WPM CW test; prior to 1936 the top CW test was 10 WPM... Curiously odd that during the heyday of CW the requirements for full privileges were lower than they are today.
FCC 99-412 is a return to the tradition of three license classes, a step forward for the hobby, and will open the HF bands to more Hams. I fail to see the harm in this. The N5LF petition is a step backward and last-gasp for CW as an intentional barrier to full privileges.
I hope this petition fails for the good of the hobby. - KC5QVV
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N0RKX on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Why does everybody "assume" the theory tests are going to get easier. You have no idea what's in the question pools as they haven't been written yet. N8KXI, the frequency assighnments will not change and you lose no privileges. You're not going to be a "General" again.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by N8KXI on January 16, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I worked my butt off to get my Advanced ticket......now am I going to be a General again?
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by K9GY on January 15, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
New people? What is the FCC or ARRL goal for new people to join? 10%, 15%, 20%???
Seems like they have determined we need more hams and the way to do it is give away the licenses? That's what CB is for!
How close did the ARRL or FCC come to their goals for new hams when they started the Tech plus license? Must not have met the goal? HOW MANY HAMS IS ENOUGH? I feel sad to see such a fine hobby die a slow death, since it has meant so much to me.
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by W7VPL on January 15, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
keep the restructuring as is because it makes ham radio more attractive to new people. We need more people in the hobby
|
| |
|
Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by W7VPL on January 15, 2000
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
keep the restructuring as is because it makes ham radio more attractive to new people. We need more people in the hobby
|
| |
|
RE: Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by W3DCG on July 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
...add to BENS BEST BENT WIRE /5
4E S E 4E S E
E5 E E
:P
Yea.
|
| |
|
RE: Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by WR8D on October 29, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
REF N0AH: Is ARRL that company that takes those endorsements from all those commercial dealers. You know the ones that go for the buck no matter what the issue is and always say its somebody else that sold amateur radio out?
73
John WR8D
|
| |
|
RE: Restructuring Petition
|
|
|
by KC1BUD on July 21, 2005
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You wouldn't be the guy they caught broadcasting anti-war/anti-Bush over the military frequencies would you? Sounds like your kinda people. After all the rules aren't for him, or his buddies that aided him in getting his station up and running after his first offense. Why should the rules be for you?
While I did get into amatuer radio late I was 52 not 10 as some of the code people here probably were, I am having a tough time learning code. And wouldn't be a ham today if they hadn't no-coded the technician license.
As for dumbing douw the tests, most here, most not all are here partly because they have a background in electronics and if they put their mind to it could build a good reciever and or transmitter. I grew up helping my dad assemble heathkits. He loved amatuer radio and wanted to be a ham but was always stopped by the code requirements. That quality time with my dad is all it took to pique my intrest in electronics and I got my official start with my second enlistment that time in the Navy. This was about the mid 70s and they taught vacuum tube theory, and told us we wouldn't see it. Of course the ship I was assigned to after "A" school had tube amplifiers. After which I studied in electronics college, and if it weren't for the code requirement, Could be already studying for my Extra ticket, if I wouldn't already have it.
Personally I see the collapse of CB licensing is more due to the FCC being overwhelmed when the courts made the license free rather than due to "Dumbing down".
The FCC couldn't police the CB airwaves and the courts made them stop charging for the licenses. This all happened around 1980. I was into CB when you had to pay to get a license. A good friend paid $20 for his. I quit and disconnected my last radio when the cussing got so bad because I had small children. Don't get me wrong, I was in the Army, Navy, I drove truck, and worked in the Factory. If that wasn't enough my father was also in the Navy and Drove truck, and he really knew how to cuss. So I know how to cuss and I do, but it isn't for the airwaves.
One of the biggest things that still impressed me about Amatuer radio is the licensees will help police the airwaves and I believe they should. I read in QST about the Cordless Phone user that was broadcasting on 2 meter with his phone, his chances of facing charges would be a lot less without the triangling work of fellow hams.
There are frequency space provided for SSTV but it isn't required to test in order to get a license. Just as I believe code should no longer be required but the band space should still be there for those that want to use it.
As for me I am still trying to learn code but it is still very foreign to me. I have a program for learning morse code on my pda, cassette tapes, computer programs, a electronic code reader, and more than one website in my favorites and I still can't seem learn code.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:
rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:
Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
|
|
|
