well this made me think a bit.

[W2NAP]

We all know how we have these class licenses, with each group having privs here and there.

but this post
http://forums.qrz.com/showpost.php?p=2091885&postcount=4
made me think.

From things i have read in the old days, before this whole "class" crap. pretty much if you passed the test you had the privs all over. (correct me if im wrong, but I heard some old old timers talking about something like that)

whats if we did away with the whole privileges we have now. and change it to a TPO privilege type deal

Techs 200W
Generals 750W
Extra 1500W

I could deal with this. thus it would open up HF to everyone. and considering i know damn well you dont need 1500Watts to talk cross country (as i used 30 watts sunday on 10 meters to california) plus i could always use CW or PSK to nab DX.

I'm quite sure if something like this was passed some people would bitch and moan but lets be fair. everything i have heard about the old days was we didnt have this "oh your a tech you cant talk here or oh your a gen you cant talk here" the bands was open to everyone.

plus after some time IMO it would kill off some of the arrogance I have heard from some people who have extra tickets who look down on generals and gens who look down on techs. only difference we would have between the "classes" would be amount of power you can use.

Also getting the FCC to police the bands better would also help.

[PA5COR]

We just have 2 classes, the Novice with limited acces to HF and 25 watts output, and our F(ull) license with all bands and max power.
Once we had 4 classes, but over the years and harmonisation in the Eu we went back to just 2 classes.
;)

[kc7jty]

One test including Morse probably.

[n6hcm]

plus after some time IMO it would kill off some of the arrogance I have heard from some people who have extra tickets who look down on generals and gens who look down on techs. only difference we would have between the "classes" would be amount of power you can use.

Also getting the FCC to police the bands better would also help.

i'm not sure this would kill off that sour attitude--only time will do that.

i don't t hink the fcc will actively police the bands again. that requires resources that cost money, and so this isn't going to happen.

[kc7jty]

i don't t hink the fcc will actively police the bands again. that requires resources that cost money, and so this isn't going to happen.

That's right! They'd much rather sit on their asses and collect multiple fees from vanity call addicts.....and if you think I'm attacking you personally go watch the Black Betty with Epic Beard Man video.

[WX7P]

We just have 2 classes, the Novice with limited acces to HF and 25 watts output, and our F(ull) license with all bands and max power.
Once we had 4 classes, but over the years and harmonisation in the Eu we went back to just 2 classes.
;)

Cor:

How is the 25 watt power limit enforced in The Netherlands?

Power limits certainly aren't enforced here unless there is some kind of interference to other services. CB and any major contest are proof to that concept.

[PA5COR]

The A.T. ( Telecom offices) do check occasionally if thhe licensee is using his license correctly, but overall we can say there is not much that can be done for a Novice using 100 watts, they can own all kinds of transcievers 200 watt or even an Acom 2000 linear amp....

As Full license holder i can use max 400 watts, i have the Heathkit SB-1000 which will do 900 - 1000 watts with the new tube.
I do put back the power to 400-500 watts, to keep the amp clean after the tune up, and to have the tube spared.
Taking care that the tube can getter ( slightly red).
Filament voltage is 4.95 volts.

The F license holders can have CW included ( the old bunch like me that did CW) or the new guy's after 2003 when CW was abandoned don't have to do CW.
I did CW when i got my novice license, 1977 or somewhere in that time, used it on 2 mmeter and 70 cm's SSB/CW for identifying repeaters ad beacons.

No possibillety now to take an exam in CW, since it is abolished as exam point, the authorities ditched the exams as well.
I have regular contact with our authorties, the 400 watt limit is put in so thhat we do not cause interference in consumer goods since we live in a densly populated counntry, i can apply for a higher power if i live out of the city limits.

The guy i speak told me if i used 1500 watts and caused no interference they actually didn't care.
There are 12 listening posts in our country used by the authorities to monitor all frequencies, they will know if i used more power.
Since i don't cause interference i could crank up the power to 1000 watts, but i don't care.
I rather improve my antenna's so i can work with 100 watts what others do with more power.

The SB-1000 was bought more as a restoration project and to get back in tube amps, not as permanently used fixture.
I know many Full or Novice license holders use more power, the Acom 2000, 1000, AL -80's Emtron DX-1D, homebrew amps with 4 cx 1000a or 3cx1500b amps, up to 5 kW are widespread.

http://home.kpn.nl/mimi71so/index.htm
Webpage of a good friend of me that made a living building P.A's for every power and configuration you wish.


http://home.kpn.nl/mimi71so/eind.htm a few of their amplifiers ;)

It seems the situation over there is about the same as here actually.;)



Cor:

How is the 25 watt power limit enforced in The Netherlands?

Power limits certainly aren't enforced here unless there is some kind of interference to other services. CB and any major contest are proof to that concept.

[W3MIV]

Why don't we just lobby to create a single license and limit everyone's power to 100 watts SSB and 40 watts AM carrier for everyone? World-wide. Uniformly apportion the bands among modes so as to provide adequate space and reduce the inevitable turf battles.

[N2NH]

Seems to me that there ought to be changes made with US amateur radio.
It appears to be a class distinction thing, Get everybody passing a proper radio examination first time which will permit them to work any frequencies, then you won't have what are called "scofflaws "

I agree. One test. One license. You take a combination of the Technician, General and Extra exams, 250 questions at one sitting and if you pass, you get your Amateur License. Much like taking the old 2nd Class Radiotelephone exam. Only there was 3 levels with that. No dumbing down, no answers given, one test and you get 3 hours to do it.

I'll be glad to give classes and AFAIC, I should be able to charge what the market can bear. That way interested parties can get the best information in true free market style. They charge for books and that's okay, what's wrong with charging for classes? And, since we're going to cost the FCC more, they should charge to offset their expenses accordingly. No entitlements, no freeloading, no socialism.

But the CW portions of the band remain exactly as they are. Otherwise fine. It'll be a good way to make some money in the evenings. Should take 3 to 6 months at 20 hours a week 4 nights a week, just like all those FCC License prep courses.

Cash cow.

[W3WN]

Well, we're heading back that way, slowly but surely.

But don't overlook history. Yes, there have been times when General, Conditional, Advanced & Extra (and before them Class A, B & C) all shared the same frequencies... and times they haven't.

And could you imagine what would have happened if the League's proposal for a "dual ladder" -- one set of HF license classes, a matching set of V/UHF classes, with Amateur Extra the overall top dog -- had come into play & then gotten undone? The mind boggles.

Today, we have a group that wants amateur licensing (and license classes) simplified and whittled down further. You have another group that wants Advanced open again to new applicants, and the testing made tougher. And a third group that likes the status quo. With all sorts of small groups in between and all over the place.

We need to determine what is the best way to take Amateur Radio forward, and adjust license exams and classes accordingly. The problem will be figuring that out, because no matter what you say, you will have people with their own vested interests and excessive egos stirring the pot.

With all that in mind, personally, I think that three primary license classes are all we should need today. An entry level, an intermediate level for the vast majority of operators, and an experts level for those who are so inclined. With appropriate power levels and frequency privildges. But nobody listens to me anyway.

[N8YX]

Why don't we just lobby to create a single license and limit everyone's power to 100 watts SSB and 40 watts AM carrier for everyone? World-wide. Uniformly apportion the bands among modes so as to provide adequate space and reduce the inevitable turf battles.
Because...some times...100w simply will not cut the mustard. High summertime QRN on the low bands coupled with the typical low (or NO) gain antennas that most hams are forced to erect almost demands the ability to run elevated power levels.

[suddenseer]

In the USA there may someday be only 2 classes: ARRL member/ Non Member.

[W4RLR]

One test including Morse probably.Why? Morse is just another digital mode. It would be just as relevant to demand proficiency in PSK31.
Unless you're wanting another "keep out the riff-raff" barrier to "make sure that people REALLY want to get an amateur license". That reasoning is not valid now, and with no ITU requirement for Morse proficiency, it's just another useless requirement.

[N2NH]

The thing is, Morse is not useless. There are times (like now) that it is the only mode that will work.

I think Bill has a point. Two classes. One with the Morse endorsement and one without. Must do 5WPM. That can be learned in 2 to 4 weeks even by someone who is language challenged like myself (and it was).

[W3MIV]

Because...some times...100w simply will not cut the mustard. High summertime QRN on the low bands coupled with the typical low (or NO) gain antennas that most hams are forced to erect almost demands the ability to run elevated power levels.

At times, no power may cut that mustard, but all excess power contributes more to the noise, whether usefully or not. "If you can't hear..." as the saying goes. For most amateurs, I would wager that the amplifier is more an appurtenance of the ego than necessary gear for the shack. I hardly use the thing.

[W3MIV]

If we return to a Morse endorsement of any sort, it should probably be across the board -- a single license still.

[kc7jty]

Why? Morse is just another digital mode. It would be just as relevant to demand proficiency in PSK31.
Unless you're wanting another "keep out the riff-raff" barrier to "make sure that people REALLY want to get an amateur license". That reasoning is not valid now, and with no ITU requirement for Morse proficiency, it's just another useless requirement.

http://www.ian-brown.co.uk/forum/images/smilies/applause.gif

[W3MIV]

The discussion is hypothetical. As well, it is moot. The FCC is not going back to Morse under any circumstances. That die was cast.

I would suggest, if there is to be another step in the licensing parade, that step will likely be the elimination of the Tech license.

[W2NAP]

Maybe just have 1 class and thats it. combined the current tests together in some way

[n2ize]

Why don't we just lobby to create a single license and limit everyone's power to 100 watts SSB and 40 watts AM carrier for everyone?

Because it would obsolete a lot of vintage AM gear. Plus, on the lower bands, 75 and 40 in particular, you need at least 100 watts carrier (and usually more) modulated 100 - 150% positive to get a respectable signal out under the noisy conditions we frequently operate under. Stations running under 100 watts are often very hard to hear when the static and/or made made QRM is rolling in. A large part of AM ops is running 50+ year old gear.

[ab1ga]

I can imagine a use for three license classes.

The first would be the "standard" license, sufficient to operate in FCC jurisdiction with full privileges. The exam would be written "as to prove that the examinee
possesses the operational and technical qualifications required to perform properly the duties of an amateur service licensee." This can cover a lot of ground if you carefully consider what those duties might be, and the exam would have to be far more than 100 questions to cover all that ground. But it would not require any more than is necessary to fulfill those requirements. After all, we're talking about getting a ham license, not collecting merit badges to show off in public.

At the bottom would by the "introductory" license, intended to give the operator easier access to the bands by reducing privileges. Spectrum would be limited so that inadvertent out-of-band operation is minimized. Power would be limited to minimize the geographical extent of the devastation wrought by the untamed tyro, and to eliminate the need to perform an RF exposure assessment for the station. There might be other sensible limitations to apply, but this would take some skull sweat to work out completely.

At the top would be a license level which would allow the operator to meet the HAREC requirements for ham licenses. Since it is possible for a full privilege US license in this new system to require less of the applicant than other countries would accept for full privileges, US hams wanting to use full privileges overseas would need a license class which was coordinated with international requirements. Not too hard to do, since I believe the IARU already plays a role in the HAREC (?) license standards.

This approach explicitly abandons incentive licensing as a driving force in upgrades; if someone can't find the incentive to improve their skills within themselves, then why should anyone else provide that structure for them?

I would also make adjustments to the testing process. Instead of a single passing percentage, I'd require that each individual section (technical, operating, regulatory, etc.) be passed separately, and I'd require that each section be made long enough to reduce the probability of passing by guessing to a small number, say one in 1000 or so. I'd also require that operators be retested every five years to ensure they still know what they need to know.

Of course, there's more to say than space in which to say it, so I'll get off the soapbox here.

[n2ize]

Why not broing back the old system. Novice -> tech -> general -> advanced -> extra and conditional class.

[W2NAP]

eh, im not a fan of the re-testing crap. I dont need to be arsed with it.

1 test is enough

[n6hcm]

That's right! They'd much rather sit on their asses and collect multiple fees from vanity call addicts.....and if you think I'm attacking you personally go watch the Black Betty with Epic Beard Man video.

nah. i wasn't concerned about that, as i have only one call sign.

[PA5COR]

We don't pay anything, changing my callsign would be done as easy as logging in with my digital ID and change it, and the new papers will arrive mostly within 5 working days.
The license does not need to be renewed, it stays as long i live.
No yearly payment for the license.
I can see my details on line using the digital ID.
I can request additional callsigns extra, no extra cost.
etc...

2 licenses seem adequate here, Novice, Full, the older ones that did Morse code, new ones without.
Both our licenses are complying with CEPT, N class: ECC/REC 05/06, F Class: CEPT T/R 61-01

[ab1ga]

2 licenses seem adequate here, Novice, Full, the older ones that did Morse code, new ones without.
Both our licenses are complying with CEPT, N class: ECC/REC 05/06, F Class: CEPT T/R 61-01


It would be preferable to simplify and get by with two license classes, but I couldn't find a way to work in the US amateur licensing context.

One could imagine doing away with the lowest license class and giving everyone full privileges right off the bat, but this would require newcomers to pass the full exam, which as I envision it would be daunting for the rank beginner. One could require all potential licensees to take a course from an accredited instructor, but self-teaching has been a large part of amateur radio in the US from it's inception, and I'm reluctant to demolish that process. I do think the FCC had it right when they made the Novice license easier to get, but restricted the privileges to allow on-the-air learning while causing minimal disruption to others.

I am not a fan of the top level license, but the relatively recent removal of full privileges in CEPT countries from General class license holders highlighted the fact that there is no explicit process here to ensure equivalence of license standards. The loss of the full privileges in CEPT countries came as a bit of a surprise. To keep this from happening again requires either the third license class or making the current General class license more challenging than it is, which might prove to be unpopular. It would also be difficult to justify since in the US there are no activities performed by Extra Class licensees that cannot be performed by Generals, with the exception of some test session functions.

[PA5COR]

The Novices here still have to learn the basics of electronics antenna's and digital techniques.
As well the law and legal implications of being an ham.

The F license handles all electronics, tube to digital techniques, antenna calculations and understanding and making several antenna's for a specific band,understand several building blocks of electronics, like detectors, P.A's and their class, etc.
You can find the demands of what someone needs to know if he wants to do the exam in the EEC recommendations, the level is kept high, due to the several EC countries that had a high level required knowledge for Full license examinations,

It seems the general class from the USA didn't match the Novice class or Full class level of knowledge.
I had hoped there would have been a bit more leniency for you guy's, though i understand the reasons.

I made a few on line exams for the USA for fun, just some differences in power restriction and bands were to be counted with, but the level of knowledge required was not really high.

The Novice license here i taught several people in 6 months time, demanding 1 - 2 hours of self study every day, and 2 times a week i came over for an evening of answering questions and to do the next chapter.

The F license requires a year of study, all for people without prior knowledge of electronics, rules and regulations.

In that time i will let them build some basic electronics, so that soldering and knowledge of the different parts becomes clear.
In that time after a basic course i introduce them in the shack where they are taught how to call cq and handle a qso.
The group doing the F license also is introduced by me into Morse, not an exam demand, but just to show them it is still a very active and useful mode.
Including digital modes introduction rounds off the course.

Hope that sheds some light on our level of licensing.

[KC2UGV]

Meh, the only thing I find irritating are the gaps in the middle of the band for licensees. That would be the only thing I would change. Of, just two licenses: Tech and Extra.

Extra stays the same, to keep CEPT compliance, except they get all bands, all modes. Techs keep their current privileges, maybe add FM and AM voice to 10 meters.

This keeps "newbs" from mucking up things that can be heard world-wide (Most of the times), but gives them enough HF to cut their teeth on, and hopefully upgrade.

[ab1ga]

Corey, I'll let you tell the Generals they either have to upgrade to Extra or drop down to Tech! :-)

[w2amr]

Why don't we just lobby to create a single license and limit everyone's power to 100 watts SSB and 40 watts AM carrier for everyone? .Congrats Albie, you just turned 95% of my vintage transmitters into worthless junk.

[NQ6U]

Why don't we just restrict everybody to spark gap transmitters on frequencies below 200m? That would put us back to where were were one hundred years ago, just like the Teabaggers want.