Call Search
     

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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License, Code-Free  (Read 953 times)
K4FAU
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« on: January 19, 2004, 05:37:31 PM »

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/01/19/1/?nc=1
Logged
AD6WL
Member

Posts: 181


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #1 on: January 19, 2004, 10:05:04 PM »

I have read the information from the ARRL website and I kind of like the idea.  I would prefer three things different.

1.) They should give the new Novice privileges to current Techs, Tech+ and Novices.  

2.) Current Techs, Tech+ and Novices should have to take the element 3 to upgrade to General.

3.) Current Techs should have to pass element 1 for General class license.

The new Novice class license seems to have a very good amount of HF privileges on the phone, digital and CW portions of the band.  That is why element 1 should be retained for General.  

Overall the ARRL has the right idea with the exception of the above-mentioned changes.  But the current Techs should definitely not be upgraded to General without passing element 3.

My final though is that I wonder what groups like NCI and NCVEC think of the ARRL proposal.

73, Jim
AD6WL
Logged
KJ7XJ
Member

Posts: 34




Ignore
« Reply #2 on: January 21, 2004, 04:37:22 PM »

After reading the proposal, I see that the new Novice CW sub-bands would increase more than what they have now. It appears that even though Novices would get voice on HF, they also would get more space for CW which is a plus in my book. I like it.

     KJ7XJ - Eric Tacoma,WA
Logged
KI4DRA
Member

Posts: 19




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: January 21, 2004, 05:08:48 PM »

Fully support the proposal. CW has been around since the 1800, and was phased out militarily more than 50 years ago. Its departure from the requirements was far over-due.

For those that wish to continue the CW tradition I fully support them, and perhaps one day I will want to indulge myself in this world of substitution alpha-bet. I also empathize with those who worked hard to get their tickets because I know they must feel cheated.

Good move ARRL.
Logged
K3WVU
Member

Posts: 491




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: January 21, 2004, 10:42:01 PM »

K4FAU:

Who are you today?  Mike?  Sam?  Brian?

Are you in the Coastguard today or are you an Army Signal Officer?  Or maybe you're the Tech in Georgia whose call you use to post occasionally.  Are you the K4FAU who got his Extra when he was 17, or are you the K4FAU who got his Extra at 20?

By the way, everyone, K4FAU is the club callsign of the Florida Atlantic University ARC.  They have been notified as of today that someone is posting all over these forums using their call.

73

Dwight K3WVU

Logged
AD6WL
Member

Posts: 181


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #5 on: January 22, 2004, 04:36:10 PM »

>>>>by KI4DRA on January 21, 2004  
"Fully support the proposal. CW has been around since the 1800, and was phased out militarily more than 50 years ago. Its departure from the requirements was far over-due."<<<<<

David, congratulations on getting you Tech license on 15 Jan 2004.  With a little more study you may find that CW is still used in the military.  That is why they still teach it at Fort Huachuca, AZ.  Also, all of the HF radios that we have still have a CW key with them and are used.

At least the ARRL has the sense to keep the CW requirement for the Extra class license.  Even though I would prefer that we keep the CW exam for General and Extra, I can live with the ARRL proposal without any grief.


 
Logged
KI4DRA
Member

Posts: 19




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: January 22, 2004, 04:55:53 PM »

Thanks for the reply AD6Wl. Well, I'm not trying to put out bad information, and I'm not going to dispute what you are saying about CW, but from my own father who spent over 20 years in the Air-Force told me that CW was obsolete, so I'm just passing on what I heard. If I'm wrong then I stand corrected, and I will be the first person to say that I'm wrong. I also remember hearing about the Morse being cut out of the armed forces on the Discovery Channel some time back. Perhaps I can do a little research, and find out what is really going on. I do remember, when I was a kid, my father having a military walkie talkie, that had a CW key, but from what I remember it was never used. Also, it would not surprise me if Army surplus still sold those old walkies with CW. It seems like it takes forever for surplus stores to get new material.
Logged
KI4DRA
Member

Posts: 19




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: January 22, 2004, 05:29:59 PM »

Morse officially ended in United States Coast Guard in the mid 90’s.  --- <A HREF=http://www.rogerwendell.com/morsecode.html> http://www.rogerwendell.com/morsecode.html</A>      

“Britain’s Post Office officially abandoned Morse in 1932, although its use continued in the United States and Australia until the 1960s. In most armed forces today Morse is no longer taught as a standard form of communication, although some operators still learn it as a special skill.”   ---    HREF=http://www.unesco.org/courier/1999_08/uk/connex/txt1.htm >http://www.unesco.org/courier/1999_08/uk/connex/txt1.htm </A>

“the Army keeps a basic Morse capability. "Suppose our
satellites were being jammed? The morse code is the last-ditch method."
Morse code signals can get through because they require much less
broadcasting power to transmit than voice messages.”---
HREF=http://www.faradic.net/~gsraven/morse_misc/morse_rescue.html >http://www.faradic.net/~gsraven/morse_misc/morse_rescue.html </A>
Logged
AD6WL
Member

Posts: 181


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #8 on: January 22, 2004, 11:54:25 PM »

KI4DRA, teaching CW ended years ago for all radio operators.  It is now taught only to Special Forces and some intelligence personnel.  So there has been a great reduction in it within the military but it is still taught.  I only mentioned it because it is a myth that it is no longer used and many people think is true.  

I have one of the keys that we still use; it’s a J-37 with the knee/leg clamp on it.  Neat little straight key but I only have it for show because I mainly use a paddle.

I can feel for you dad with over 20 years in the air force.  I have 21 years in the Marines now and I’m still at it, as long my body can keep up.  I’ve been involved with Recon, SCUBA and airborne as a Comm Tech so I do have a little experience with it.

I will check out some of those websites you posted when I have some time.

73, Jim
AD6WL
Logged
W3NRL
Member

Posts: 32


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #9 on: January 23, 2004, 01:29:46 PM »

hello gent'lman, i served in the army in 173 airborn div in vietnam, i was a RTO, we were taught some code but was never used...cause the time it took to get ememy's F.P.'s would take tooo much time, times was of the essences to get the FO's grid to to our Batteries,...so if they did use code i sure would like to know where and when all my 27 months in country never heard it on any assigments.
1st LT
173 airborn div III c
Logged
NJ0E
Member

Posts: 48




Ignore
« Reply #10 on: January 24, 2004, 05:07:18 PM »

morse code is taught for intelligence gathering at
fort huachuca. if you go to this web site:

http://usaic.hua.army.mil/marines/

in the upper left, under the title 'courses', you
will see 'morse code' listed (the fourth item).

there is an interesting column about it here:
http://aia.lackland.af.mil/homepages/pa/spokesman/Jan01/atc7.htm

the canadian armed forces have an occupational
specialty that teach the radiotelegraph code, to
16wpm proficiency, see:
http://www.recruiting.dnd.ca/html/careers/career_profiles/comm_rese.html
then search in the page for 'morse code'.

73,
scott nj0e


Logged
K4XXG
Member

Posts: 1




Ignore
« Reply #11 on: January 25, 2004, 12:58:03 AM »

AD6WL

Jim,

Those are my thoughts, exactly. If we can find a few thousand more, we might can lobby the FCC into accepting OUR proposal in lieu of the ARRL's.

How does a $39 donation sound ;-)

73,

Allen
K4XXG
Logged
AD6WL
Member

Posts: 181


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #12 on: January 26, 2004, 02:52:36 PM »

I like the idea of the New Novice class. It gives an easy entry level to HF with limited but very adequate power levels. If new Novices want to upgrade to General they should pass element 1 and 3. Since the new Novice can get so much HF space for phone there should be no changes made to upgrade to General or Extra.

Current Techs should be able to either keep their current license privileges but non-renewable or they could get the new Novice class license.

73, Jim
AD6WL
 
 
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!