Killexams.com VCE of 310-152 will pass exam. | braindumps | Great Dumps

Worried about 310-152 Test? We are here to help! Just download our 310-152 Practice Test - Read and Take Test You will get good marks - braindumps - Great Dumps

Killexams 310-152 braindumps | Pass4sure 310-152 VCE exercise Test | http://www.sraigalleries.com/



Killexams.com 310-152 Dumps | real Questions 2019

100% real Questions - Memorize Questions and Answers - 100% Guaranteed Success



310-152 exam Dumps Source : Download 100% Free 310-152 Dumps PDF

Test Code : 310-152
Test designation : Sun Certified Backup and Recovery Engineer (emphasis on Solstice Backup)
Vendor designation : SUN
braindumps : 115 real Questions

Download 310-152 braindumps with cogent real questions.
killexams.com 310-152 Exam PDF consists of Complete Pool of Questions and Answers and Dumps checked and certified along with references and explanations (where applicable). Their target to accumulate the 310-152 Questions and Answers is'nt only to pass the 310-152 exam at the first attempt but Really help Your erudition about the 310-152 exam topics.

If you are really worried about the 310-152 exam dumps. You should just download 310-152 real questions from killexams.com. It will rescue you from lot of problems. It makes your concept about 310-152 objectives crystal clear and merit you confident to mug the real 310-152 exam. merit your own notes. You will see that some questions will looks very effortless to answer, but when you will try at vce exam simulator, you will see that you concede them wrong. This is just because, those are tricky questions. SUN specialists merit such questions that looks very effortless but actually there are lot of techniques inside the question. They back you understand those questions with the back of their 310-152 questions and answers. Their vce exam simultor will back you to memorize and understand lot of such questions. When you will concede those 310-152 dumps again and again, your concepts will exist cleared and you will not fuddle when SUN change those questions to merit inevitable techniquest. This is how they back candidates pass their exam at first attempt by actually boosting up their erudition about 310-152 objectives.

Sometime, pass the exam does not matter at all, but understanding the topics are required. This is situation in 310-152 exam. They provide real exam questions and answers of 310-152 exam that will back you accept pleasurable score in the exam, but issue is not just passing the 310-152 exam some time. They provide VCE exam simulator to help your erudition about 310-152 topics so that you can understand the core concepts of 310-152 objectives. This is really important. It is not at plenary easy. Their team has prepared 310-152 questions bank that will actually deliver you pleasurable understanding of topics, along with surety to pass the exam at first attempt. Never under estimate the power of their 310-152 VCE exam simulator. This will back you lot in understanding and memorizing 310-152 questions with its braindumps PDF and VCE.

You can download 310-152 dumps PDF at any gadget fancy ipad, iphone, PC, smart tv, android to read and memorize the 310-152 dumps. spend as much time on reading 310-152 Questions and answers as you can. Specially taking exercise tests with VCE exam simulator will back you memorize the questions and concede them well. You will acquire to recognize these questions in real exam. You will accept better marks when you exercise well before real 310-152 exam.

Features of Killexams 310-152 dumps
-> 310-152 Dumps download Access in just 5 min.
-> Complete 310-152 Questions Bank
-> 310-152 Exam Success Guarantee
-> Guaranteed real 310-152 exam Questions
-> Latest and Updated 310-152 Questions and Answers
-> Verified 310-152 Answers
-> Download 310-152 Exam Files anywhere
-> Unlimited 310-152 VCE Exam Simulator Access
-> Unlimited 310-152 Exam Download
-> worthy Discount Coupons
-> 100% Secure Purchase
-> 100% Confidential.
-> 100% Free Dumps Questions for evaluation
-> No Hidden Cost
-> No Monthly Subscription
-> No Auto Renewal
-> 310-152 Exam Update Intimation by Email
-> Free Technical Support

Exam Detail at : https://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/310-152
Pricing Details at : https://killexams.com/exam-price-comparison/310-152
See Complete List : https://killexams.com/vendors-exam-list

Discount Coupon on plenary 310-152 braindumps questions;
WC2017: 60% Flat Discount on each exam
PROF17: 10% Further Discount on Value Greatr than $69
DEAL17: 15% Further Discount on Value Greater than $99



310-152 Customer Reviews and Testimonials


I want to pass 310-152 exam, What should I do?
Found out this pleasurable source after a long time. Everyone here is cooperative and competent. Team provided me very pleasurable material for 310-152 preparation.


How much salary for 310-152 certified?
I chose killexams.com because I did not want to pass 310-152 exam but I wanted to pass with pleasurable marks so that I would merit a pleasurable impression on everyone. In order to accomplish this I needed outside aid and killexams.com was willing to provide it to me. I studied over here and used 310-152 questions to prepare. I got the magnificient prize of best scores in the 310-152 exam.


Actual exam questions updated 310-152 exam! wonderful source.
Great thanks buddies. You rock. I acquire just passed my 310-152 exam with 93% marks. Though it was tough but I already memorized plenary the answers. You helped me lot. I will recommend you to everyone who fancy to pass 310-152 exam in quick and effortless way.


Where must I badge in for 310-152 exam?
Like many others, I actually acquire currently handed the 310-152 exam. In my case, widespread majority of 310-152 exam questions came precisely from this guide. The answers are accurate, too, so if you are preparing to win your 310-152 exam, you could completely rely on this internet site.


The route to read for 310-152 exam in shortest time?
passed 310-152 exam a few days in the past and got an model score. however, I cannot win complete credit score for this as I used killexams.com to prepare for the 310-152 exam. two weeks after kicking off my exercise with their exam simulator, I felt fancy I knew the Answers to any question that will approach my manner. and I actually did. every question I exam at the 310-152 exam, I had already seen it at the identical time as practising. If now not each, then tremendous majority of them. the gross thing that turned into in the practice% turned out to exist very relevant and beneficial, so I can not thank enough to killexams.com for making it manifest for me.


Sun Certified Backup and Recovery Engineer (emphasis on Solstice Backup) exam

Storage Certifications - section I | 310-152 real Questions and VCE exercise Test

any individual involved within the certification trade will divulge you that these are complicated instances. in the days before the dot com bust, IT certifications acquire been a route for any individual with a technical inkling and a itsy-bitsy money to accept licensed and, without doubt, accept a job. because of this, hoards of agencies producing a hardware or application product jumped on the bandwagon and started providing a certification application (or two) to any one willing to step as much as the plate and certify.

As with just about every other a section of the IT trade, storage providers acquire been brief to recognise that they too might offer certifications, and they too could profit because of this. The most efficient problem become, simply as probably the most storage carriers started merchandising their certification classes, the bottom fell out of the economy and the certification market that fed off it. could exist certification candidates genesis searching more toward preserving the job they had in residence of taking a ogle at getting licensed and stirring on to a new job.

nowadays, youngsters, with many forecasting an upturn in IT recruitment over the next few years, the certification market is as soon as once again showing signs of lifestyles, and one of the vital areas tipped to exist scorching over the arrival years is storage networking certifications.

What's obtainable?The latitude of certifications accessible can merit identifying one a tricky task. most of the dealer inevitable certifications will, rather reasonably, focus on that companies products and it exist related applied sciences. whereas this might possibly exist an excellent issue for getting up to pace on that company's items, you should believe the portability of the certifications when you approach to a determination to run to an additional enterprise that uses diverse items. The draw back is that one of the vital more typical certifications can exist viewed as less advantageous through an business enterprise who's looking for a specific capabilities set and so a extremely specific certification. during this admire, there are basically no arduous and quickly rules - you exigency to simply device out which route you are looking to Go after which head in that course. Of direction there's nothing to pretension that you can not just win multiple certification, which could exist the reply to the conundrum.

https://o1.qnsr.com/log/p.gif?;n=203;c=204660765;s=10655;x=7936;f=201812281308090;u=j;z=TIMESTAMP;a=20400368;e=i

One factor they did locate at the identical time as learning storage certifications is that many companies classes are nevertheless below construction. This means that the first step towards certification can exist possible, but after that you're at the whim of the supplier as to when extra exams or curriculum are made purchasable. here's a vital ingredient for anyone who may accept pissed off at having to linger up for a dealer to accept their house so as.

TestingNearly plenary of the certification suppliers pick to expend the tried and validated verify delivery mechanisms offered through either Vue or Prometric checking out. For any one who has taken an exam for an additional certification program (CompTIA, Microsoft, Novell, Cisco, Oracle and so on.), the system will exist general sufficient. If this might exist your first certification ogle at various the process is elementary. After registering with one of the two suppliers, that you may booklet a pc based mostly examine which may besides exist taken at certainly one of lots of trying out facilities worldwide. checks achieve from 45 minutes to about 2.5 hours and are normally closed e-book assorted option affairs. In nearly plenary situations your effects are given at the conclusion of the ogle at various enabling you instant gratification (or commiseration) on your efforts.

The fees of exams disagree drastically between certification providers however are frequently between $a hundred and $200 per test. If the enterprise makes expend of both testing suppliers, the imbue and content of the check could exist the equal for both, so the alternative of testing company will rotate into one in every of convenience (which one has a checking out middle closest to you), or personal preference.

The Certifications.When each of the certification courses discussed right here, it's faultfinding to stand in intellect that now not every certification is going to exist acceptable to every grownup. in case you are just genesis out in storage certification, exist positive to ogle against one of the vital greater favorite skills so that you can provide you with extra breadth than depth. if you're a seasoned storage administrator, you are in a plenty improved residence to merit an informed resolution a few really expert certification.

The certifications discussed listed below are in alphabetical order and through no means represents a complete list of the entire certifications purchasable.

AdaptecWhen it comes to specialized certifications, there aren't too many who are more particularly concentrated than Adaptec's licensed Storage skilled. despite the fact the program covers confidential storage concepts, there is a very ponderous stress on RAID and in selected Adaptec's items. apart from the simple ACSP cert, Adaptec additionally presents a program for Durastor / exterior Storage Certification practicing. For more assistance, visit the ACSP homepage.

BrocadeStorage swap vendor Brocade has a longtime certification application that specializes in inevitable technical areas comparable to server and storage consolidation, LAN-free and serverless backup, remote information replication, and dynamic storage management.

at present available are the assessments for Brocade certified textile skilled, Brocade licensed SAN designer and Brocade licensed SAN supervisor. The cloth professional examination is definitely a pre-requisite for the other certifications and so exigency to exist taken first. The Brocade certification roadmap, which is purchasable at Brocade's website, besides comprises tips about the premier Brocade licensed SAN Architect certification, even though particulars are scant on precisely when the faultfinding tests to attain this stage should exist obtainable.

EMCOf plenary of the corporations discussed here, EMC has possibly the most developed, involved and complete certification software obtainable nowadays. No shock from the enterprise generally regarded as the number 1 storage dealer.

earlier than even starting into one of the most 'tracks', candidates should pass the EMC business Storage Fundamentals exam, which covers simple storage networking ideas along with a suitable dose of EMC product capabilities. After passing that examination, candidates can then pursue considered one of four tracks specifically Operator, Builder, Architect and instructor.

For each tune, there's an associate and master flat accreditation, the change being the flat of skills required to gain certification. more guidance on the EMC certification is attainable on the EMC site.

GadzooxUnlike the other certification courses mentioned here, the Gadzoox certifications for licensed professional and certified Technical professional require that candidates finished practicing courses instead of win a certification exam. even if this makes the Gadzoox certs as efficient as others will depend on your personal viewpoint or that of your existing or potential corporation. extra information on the certifications may besides exist discovered on the Gadzoox website.

IBMAs IBM's product portfolio includes many different things as well as storage products, it's going to approach as no dumbfound that their certification choices are well developed. current IBM storage linked certification offerings encompass a smattering of storage inevitable certs similar to IBM TotalStorage Networking options and immoderate conclusion Disk options to identify just two. each and every territory has a sole exam associated with it. For extra tips quest recommendation from the IBM certification website.

McDATASAN Director and switch brand McDATA acquire an in depth contour for his or her certification application, notwithstanding at current, just one certification, the McDATA certified Storage network clothier is purchasable. In general with many other seller offerings, the McDATA programs coalesce a commonplace skills of storage networking with a attention of product linked focus. win a ogle at the McDATA site for the latest tendencies on the McDATA certs.

community ApplianceStorage concede manufacturer network apparatus has created a certification software with two diverse tracks designed to focus the candidates consideration on community apparatus items. the two tracks are NetApp licensed associate (Filer) certification, which requires three tests to exist taken earlier than candidates can movement on to the NetApp licensed knowledgeable (Filer) cert which requires a further two tests. The identical benevolent of path (with diverse checks) exists for the NetApp licensed affiliate (NetCache) and NetApp licensed expert (NetCache) certifications. For more guidance on network apparatus certification argue with the certification homepage on the network appliance web page.

Storage Networking industry association (SNIA)Being a seller independent company, the SNIA is capable of present certification software free of the product orientation that many of the other certifications tracks take. even if you consider is a pleasurable or a foul constituent depends on your perspective.

latest SNIA choices involve the Fibre Channel Storage Networking expert, Practitioner, professional and knowledgeable. exams for the first two certifications are at present accessible, with the others scheduled to celebrate someday later this year. The certifications can besides exist taken in any order. The Fibre Channel Storage Networking skilled is, by means of SNIA's personal admission, designed for non-technical personnel. extra tips can besides exist organize at the SNIA website.

solar Microsystems solar's enormously developed storage certification application includes three discrete tracks together with sun certified records management Engineer, solar certified Backup and recovery Engineer and sun certified Storage Architect. each certification requires the passing of a sole examination, and the certs can besides exist taken in any order. For extra counsel quest recommendation from the certification section of solar's web page.

Veritas introduced previous this yr, the VERITAS certified knowledgeable software is designed to certify individuals on VERITAS products. in keeping with press recommendation the checks cover VERITAS products and their functions for data protection and immoderate availability, though a search of the VERITAS web site yielded no further suggestions on the courses than that.

in section Two......partially two of this text, they are going to parley with some business figures about certifications and accept the concede to at least one very faultfinding query. Are certifications expense your time, funds and energy? they will besides analyze some extra components that you'll want to believe when opting for a certification.


Certification Watch: Microsoft adds .web Developer Credentials | 310-152 real Questions and VCE exercise Test

Certification Watch is supplied through GoCertify.com, a gathering region and resource middle for individuals interested in computing device skilled certification.

it's only February and already the certification marketplace is gearing up for a assiduous year. in this topic they report on 4 new and pending certifications.

Microsoft declares New .internet Developer CredentialsAs a section of the immense Microsoft .internet rollout, Microsoft is launching an entirely new developer credential, plus adding a .internet edition of the MCSD certification. Microsoft certified application Developer (MCAD) for Microsoft .web, fits squarely between the primary certified knowledgeable (MCP) and the advanced Microsoft licensed options Developer (MCSD) titles. It requires passing two core exams specializing in a particular language tune (either visible fundamental or C#) and one optional.

the new MCSD title, Microsoft licensed utility Developer (MCAD) for Microsoft .internet, provides an extra two core tests to the MCAD necessities, including a .net edition of the historic benchmark inspecting necessities and Defining solution Architectures. latest MCSDs are not required to supersede to the .internet music to continue to exist certified. For the complete story, see the GoCertify.com article, figuring out Microsoft's New Developer Credentials.

https://o1.qnsr.com/log/p.gif?;n=203;c=204660774;s=9478;x=7936;f=201812281339040;u=j;z=TIMESTAMP;a=20403972;e=iCompTIA To build New Entry-stage safety CertificationComputer and community security has been this nature of sizzling topic matter in recent months that it can approach as no shock that the Computing expertise business affiliation (CompTIA) is planning so as to add a security certification to its portfolio. CompTIA, sponsor of a family unit of seller-neutral certifications together with the accepted A+, currently introduced an initiative to create a vendor-neutral, groundwork stage protection certification. the new designation will address firewalls, viruses, user authentication and encryption, among different topic matters. The dependable designation of the brand new certification has now not been determined yet, however Certification Watch has discovered that it may not exist protection+. search for a beta exam in topple 2002. computing device Forensics Certification LaunchedGuidance utility has created a software to certify potential in the enjoyable container of recuperating desktop-based mostly proof, using EnCase computer forensic application and reform forensic methodology. The EnCase licensed Examiner (EnCE) title is rarely an entry-stage title: prerequisites encompass monstrous event and training requirements. applicants who meet the necessities Go on to win two exams. the first exam is in the time-honored, desktop-primarily based format administered by Prometric testing centers. The 2d is a win home useful examination that requires analyzing proof info and producing a document. see the plenary details on this fascinating addition to the certification marketplace.

solar certified Backup And recuperation Engineer Goes LiveAll of the checks that qualify as requirements for the sun certified Backup And restoration Engineer designation are actually are living. Candidates can current either the VERITAS NetBackup and Solstice Backup exam to merit the designation. The tests are designed to measure erudition of professional backup methodology, restoring records and meeting design requirements and value $150 each and every. They can exist organize through Prometric checking out centers.

The complete present problem of Certification Watch will besides exist discovered at GoCertify.com.

Anne Martinez is the author of low-cost internet tricks: construct and Promote a successful net web page totally free and accept certified and accept forward. She besides is the founder of GoCertify.com.

related intelligence AND evaluation
  • synthetic Intelligence in Healthcare: How AI Shapes drugs

    characteristic |  by using Lisa Morgan, March 08, 2019

  • properly computer studying solutions

    feature |  with the aid of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Google computing device learning Engine: Product Overview and insight

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by route of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Alteryx: Product Overview and insight

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by using Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • SAP Leonardo: Product Overview and perception

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • RapidMiner: Product Overview and insight

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  via Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Microsoft Azure machine discovering Studio: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • IBM Watson Studio: Product Overview and insight

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  with the aid of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • SAS visual computing device gaining erudition of: Product Overview and perception

    characteristic |  by route of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • AWS SageMaker: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  via Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • synthetic Intelligence in business: the usage of AI on your business

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s job Debater might repair fb

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  with the aid of Rob Enderle, January 21, 2019

  • IBM broadcasts strongest AI effort Yet: The start of judicious HR

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by using Rob Enderle, December 07, 2018

  • IBM Spectrum discover: AI at Scale

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by Rob Enderle, October 26, 2018

  • The accurate Cloud-based mostly AI services

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by using Andy Patrizio, September eleven, 2018

  • synthetic Intelligence Salaries: Paychecks Heading Skyward

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  through Andy Patrizio, August 28, 2018

  • artificial Intelligence expend cases

    characteristic |  by using Samuel Greengard, August 13, 2018

  • 25 exact AI Startups

    function |  by using Andy Patrizio, July 18, 2018

  • CIOs Leveraging AI and computing device gaining erudition of For ITSM goals

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by route of Jeff Kaplan, July 03, 2018


  • Certification Watch: community Storage Certifications | 310-152 real Questions and VCE exercise Test

    Certification Watch is supplied by means of GoCertify.com, a gathering district and useful resource middle for individuals interested in desktop professional certification.

    1. Microsoft Cancels Plans to Decertify home windows NT 4 MCSEsIn a theatrical reversal of their previous plans, Microsoft has cancelled plans to decertify plenary MCSEs who don't help to the windows 2000 song by means of the conclude of this yr. in its place, the MCSE title will develop into music inevitable - for example, "MCSE on windows 2000" or MCSE on windows NT 4.0. The accelerated exam option for Win2k candidates is unchanged. read Microsoft's dependable FAQ on this alternate at: http://gocertify.com/redirect/msftMCSENT.html

    2. Microsoft Launches New Administrator DesignationA few days ago Microsoft introduced the launch of its new Microsoft certified programs Administrator (MCSA) on Microsoft home windows 2000 credential. people should pass three core assessments and one optionally available to merit the new title. The core exams can besides exist chosen from home windows 2000, .internet, or XP skilled working apparatus checks. The non-obligatory alternate options consist of the accustomed Microsoft alternative, masking such issues as Proxy Server, alternate Server, SQL Server and others. Microsoft will additionally accept a amalgam of COMPTIA certifications in residence of the optionally available - both A+ and community+ OR A+ and Server+.

    https://o1.qnsr.com/log/p.gif?;n=203;c=204660774;s=9478;x=7936;f=201812281339040;u=j;z=TIMESTAMP;a=20403972;e=i

    3. sun Rolls Out network Storage CertificationsSun Microsystems has simply launched the first of three certifications that will merit up its new network Storage skilled software. The solar certified facts administration Engineer covers the erudition required to attach into effect, configure, operate and administer a disk array storage gadget. Two further certifications are in the works. individuals who're accountable for design and implementation of backup methods in a data headquarters might exist attracted to the solar certified Backup and healing Engineer designation. Storage enviornment network (SAN) designers and administrators will are looking to try the solar licensed Storage Architect. the first two certifications deliver a determination of paths: either Solstice DiskSuite or VERITAS extent supervisor utility. tests are at the benchmark solar rate - $150.

    four. Linux+ LiveCompTIA formally launched its Linux+ certification previous this month. This one exam certification is conjectural to demonstrate foundation degree Linux working gadget talent. based on CompTIA, Linux+ is a stepping stone toward bigger degree Linux certifications from LPI and Sair. The examination carries ninety five questions and lasts up to 2 hours. The U.S. exam cost is $one hundred ninety (CompTIA participants accept a reduction). trying out is obtainable by the expend of Prometric and VUE.

    5. CIW Simplifies ScoringProsoftTraining, vendor of the certified web Webmaster (CIW) application, has changed the scoring formula for the 1D0-410 Foundations examination. Candidates ought to merit at the least a seventy five% their complete exam ranking. There is no minimal rating for each and every of the three examination sections, as there was during the past. The foundations exam is the first step toward plenary superior CIW titles.

    6. Microsoft certified coach application Now Requires Annual RenewalAs deliberate, the Microsoft licensed trainer (MCT) enacted new necessities as of October 1st. current and new trainers acquire to renew yearly, which contains paying an annual charge. MCTs acquire to convey as a minimum 10 days of Microsoft official Curriculum (MOC) and merit carrying on with schooling credits, as well as preserve a premier Microsoft certification (MCSE, MCSD, or MCDBA). becoming a member of the MCT software fees $four hundred ($300 if you labor for a Microsoft CTEC).

    7. Oracle 8 tests to retire March 31, 2002All Oracle eight DBA and DBO checks could exist retired on March thirty first, 2002, except for the SQL and New aspects checks. people who already dangle the certification will continue to exist certified. Most checks required for Oracle8 certification can besides exist applied to the Oracle 8i music. youngsters, when you consider that Oracle is likely to retire the 8i track through the conclude of 2002 or presently thereafter, candidates should exist would becould very well exist improved served to soar straight to the 9i track.

    The comprehensive existing issue of Certification Watch can exist organize at GoCertify.com.

    Anne Martinez is the creator of low cost net tricks: construct and Promote a successful net web site free of imbue and accept certified and accept ahead: Millennium version she is besides the founder of GoCertify.com.

    connected information AND analysis
  • artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: How AI Shapes drugs

    characteristic |  by route of Lisa Morgan, March 08, 2019

  • suitable computing device studying options

    feature |  with the aid of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Google computing device gaining erudition of Engine: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Alteryx: Product Overview and insight

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  with the aid of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • SAP Leonardo: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  via Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • RapidMiner: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  via Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • Microsoft Azure laptop discovering Studio: Product Overview and insight

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  through Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • IBM Watson Studio: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  with the aid of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • SAS visible laptop learning: Product Overview and perception

    function |  by means of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • AWS SageMaker: Product Overview and insight

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by means of Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

  • synthetic Intelligence in company: using AI to your enterprise

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by route of Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s venture Debater may fix facebook

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by route of Rob Enderle, January 21, 2019

  • IBM declares strongest AI effort Yet: The delivery of smart HR

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  by using Rob Enderle, December 07, 2018

  • IBM Spectrum discover: AI at Scale

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  with the aid of Rob Enderle, October 26, 2018

  • The proper Cloud-based mostly AI functions

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by route of Andy Patrizio, September eleven, 2018

  • artificial Intelligence Salaries: Paychecks Heading Skyward

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Andy Patrizio, August 28, 2018

  • synthetic Intelligence expend circumstances

    characteristic |  through Samuel Greengard, August 13, 2018

  • 25 accurate AI Startups

    characteristic |  by using Andy Patrizio, July 18, 2018

  • CIOs Leveraging AI and desktop learning For ITSM dreams

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by Jeff Kaplan, July 03, 2018


  • Obviously it is arduous assignment to pick solid certification questions/answers assets concerning review, reputation and validity since individuals accept sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets concerning exam dumps update and validity. The vast majority of other's sham report objection customers approach to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams cheerfully and effectively. They never trade off on their review, reputation and property because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer conviction is vital to us. Uniquely they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report grievance, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. In the event that you see any wrong report posted by their rivals with the designation killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com dissension or something fancy this, simply recall there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of pleasurable administrations because of their advantages. There are a worthy many fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams hone questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their specimen questions and test brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.


    CBCP sample test | 190-610 braindumps | P2080-096 brain dumps | PSP exercise test | 650-126 braindumps | 210-455 real questions | E20-655 free pdf | C2050-219 exercise questions | C9050-042 VCE | 1T6-215 dump | HP2-H05 real questions | 000-433 dumps questions | C2150-614 study steer | AXELOS-MSP questions and answers | C9010-252 exercise test | EE0-515 exercise exam | 3305 bootcamp | 000-N16 exam prep | C2150-596 braindumps | JN0-346 free pdf |



    HP2-B71 brain dumps | 642-457 dumps | C2180-271 free pdf | 2B0-104 questions and answers | HP0-417 sample test | 00M-512 exercise questions | 1Z0-935 exam questions | C2180-606 exercise test | DNDNS-200 free pdf | 1Z0-066 examcollection | SAT study steer | 1K0-001 study steer | 1T6-222 dump | HP2-K21 questions answers | CTAL-TTA-001 test prep | PTCB test prep | VCS-323 exercise questions | A2040-910 exam prep | CLAD study steer | 000-633 questions and answers |


    View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


    HP2-Z28 dump | 9A0-063 exercise questions | 3308 cram | 7241X braindumps | 9A0-156 VCE | 9A0-039 free pdf | FM1-306 study steer | 00M-244 cheat sheets | HP0-S34 exam questions | M70-301 exercise test | ADM-201 mock exam | CFEX test prep | HP3-X10 dumps questions | 000-R01 test prep | C2140-820 exercise exam | C2040-410 sample test | HP2-E45 braindumps | HP0-M33 exercise test | 642-457 real questions | ISO20KF questions and answers |


    Sun Certified Backup and Recovery Engineer (emphasis on Solstice Backup) exam dumps

    Pass 4 positive 310-152 dumps | Killexams.com 310-152 real Questions | http://www.sraigalleries.com/

    Radioactive Wounds of War | killexams.com 310-152 real Questions and VCE exercise Test

    Tests on returning troops imply solemn health consequences of depleted uranium expend in Iraq

    Gerard Matthew thought he was lucky. He returned from his Iraq tour a year and a half ago alive and in one piece. But after the New York condition National Guardsman got home, he scholarly that a bunkmate, Sgt. Ray Ramos, and a group of N.Y. Guard members from another unit had accepted an offer by the New York Daily intelligence and reporter Juan Gonzalez to exist tested for depleted uranium (DU) contamination, and had tested positive.

    Matthew, 31, decided that since he’d spent much of his time in Iraq lugging around DU-damaged equipment, he’d better accept tested too. It turned out he was the most contaminated of them all.

    Matthew immediately urged his wife to accept an ultrasound check of their unborn baby. They discovered the fetus had a condition common to those with radioactive exposure: atypical syndactyly. The right hand had only two digits.

    So far Victoria Claudette, now 13 months old, shows no other genetic disorders and is healthy, but Matthew feels guilty for causing her deformity and irate at a government that never warned him about DU’s dangers.

    U.S. forces first used DU in the 1991 Gulf War, when some 300 tons of depleted uranium–the fritter product of nuclear power plants and weapons facilities–were used in tank shells and shells fired by A-10 jets. A lesser amount was deployed by U.S. and NATO forces during the Balkans conflict. But in the current wars in Afghanistan and, especially, Iraq, DU has become the weapon of choice, with more than 1,000 tons used in Afghanistan and more than 3,000 tons used in Iraq. And while DU was fired mostly in the desert during the Gulf War, in the current war in Iraq, most of DU munitions are exploding in populated urban areas.

    The Pentagon has expanded DU beyond tank and A-10 shells, for expend in bunker-busting bombs, which can spew out more than half a ton of DU in one explosion, in anti-personnel bomblets, and even in M-16 and pistol shells. The military loves DU for its unique penetration capability–it cuts through steel or concrete fancy they’re butter.

    The problem is that when DU hits its target, it burns at a elevated temperature, throwing off clouds of microscopic particles that poison a wide district and remain radioactive for billions of years. If inhaled, these particles can lodge in lungs, other organs or bones, irradiating tissue and causing cancers.

    Worse yet, uranium is besides a highly toxic ponderous metal. Indeed, while there is some debate over the risk posed by the element’s radioactive emissions, there is no debate regarding its chemical toxicity. According to Mt. Sinai pathologist Thomas Fasey, who participated in the New York Guard unit testing, the constituent has an affinity for bonding with DNA, where even trace amounts can occasions cancers and fetal abnormalities.

    Dr. Doug Rokke, a health physicist at the University of Illinois who headed up a Pentagon study of depleted uranium weapons in the mid ’90s after concerns were raised during the Gulf War, concluded there was no safe route to expend the weapons. Rokke says the Pentagon responded by denouncing him, after earlier commending his work.

    No one knows how many U.S. soldiers acquire been contaminated by DU residue. Despite regulations authorizing tests for any military personnel who suspects exposure, the U.S. military is avoiding doing those tests–or delaying them until they are meaningless.

    “When they asked to exist tested at Ft. Dix, they wrongly told us they didn’t acquire to worry unless they had DU fragments in their body,” says Matthew. His buddy, Sgt. Ramos, who exhibits symptoms resembling radiation sickness and ponderous metal poisoning, adds that at Walter Reed Medical headquarters he was grilled for hours about why he wanted to exist tested and was then branded a troublemaker by his own unit. Matthew says Walter Reed “lost” his sample.

    At the war’s start, the United States refused to allow U.N. or other environmental inspectors to test DU levels within Iraq. Now the United Nations won’t even Go near Iraq because of security concerns.

    “It doesn’t look right that they are poisoning the places they are conjectural to exist liberating,” Ramos says.

    The Pentagon continues to insist, on the basis of no territory evidence, that DU is safe. To date, only some 270 returned troops acquire been tested for DU contamination by the military and Veterans Affairs. But even those tests, mostly urine samples, are useless 30 days after exposure, because by that time most of the DU has left the cadaver or migrated into bones or organs.

    Gonzalez and the Daily intelligence paid for costlier tests for nine Guardsmen–tests that could pinpoint uranium inside the cadaver and identify the special isotope signature of man-made DU. Four of the nine tested positive for DU; plenary had symptoms of uranium poisoning.

    Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut condition Representative Pat Dillon (D-New Haven), a Yale-trained epidemiologist, has crafted state-level legislation that Connecticut and Louisiana acquire unanimously passed, authorizing returned National Guard troops to request and receive specialized DU contamination tests at the Pentagon’s expense. This approach bypasses the Pentagon’s feet-dragging because National Guard troops topple under state, rather than federal, jurisdiction.

    “This was not a Democratic or a Republican issue,” Dillon says. “These are their kids and someone needs to protect them.” She says that since passage of her bill, which takes consequence this October, military groups and family organizations, condition legislators, and even National Guard unit commanders acquire contacted her for copies of her bill to promote in their states. Bob Smith, a veteran in Louisiana who got hold of Dillon’s bill and spearheaded a successful effort to pass similar legislation in Louisiana, claims that 14 to 20 other states are considering similar measures.

    If enough Guard troops avail themselves of the testing–and start testing positive for contamination–it seems likely that reservists and active duty troops and veterans will demand similar access to rigorous tests, which can cost upwards of $1000 per person.

    One route or another, the Pentagon will pay a price. “DU is a war crime. It’s that simple,” Rokke says. “Once you’ve scattered plenary this stuff around, and then refuse to antiseptic it up, you’ve committed a war crime.”

    Dave Lindorff, an In These Times contributing editor, is the author of This Can't exist Happening: Resisting the Disintegration of American Democracy. His labor can exist organize at This Can't exist Happening.

    if you fancy this, check out:

    Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years | killexams.com 310-152 real Questions and VCE exercise Test

    Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years from Len Anderson, AF6AY on December 6, 2009View comments about this article!

    Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years

    A comprehensive examination of USA dilettante radio demographics requires a reference as to the numbers of the various classes of license. There is only one upright reference, the public FCC database. Other sources of statistics are plenary derived from this. Two such sites used here are Hamdata and ARRL. ARRL statistics array only those licensee numbers within their 10-year efficient period. Hamdata shows plenary licensees including their 2-year Grace epoch plus a number of other data as to new licensees, expirations, and class changes.

    For purposes of examination of trends, six dates were chosen at 6- month intervals, the 18th of May and 18th of November, for years of 2007, 2008, 2009. The option of date was arbitrary, picked to initiate 3 months after the cessation of license examination code test requirements.* New license classes of Technician-Plus, Novice, and Advanced would not exist granted after USA dilettante radio Restructuring. Those three are lumped as one group under the acronym TPNA.

    The expected influx of new license applicants did not happen right away after the morse code test was eliminated from license testing on 23 February 2007. Looking at two specific dates, just before 23 Feb 07 and roughly 10 days later:

    22 February 2007 4 March 2007 ---------------- ------------ Technician 311,851 311,115 general 142,031 142,951 dilettante Extra 111,464 111,559 TPNA 145,886 145,438 Total Individual 711,232 711,063

    Majority of number changes look to exist due more to license class changes made workable by new regulations that eliminated the code test. This is not proven but justified by the reduce in Technician class numbers as well as the TPNA group and a step-increase in general class numbers.

    Longer-term class numbers can exist examined by the tabulation following. Each month column is taken from the 18th day of that month.

    May 07 Nov 07 May 08 Nov 08 May 09 Nov 09 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Technician 305,982 309,338 316,662 323,478 336,713 343,256 General 151,409 155,099 155,791 156,223 157,082 158,082 Amateur Extra 113,383 115,200 117,103 118.665 120,205 121,417 TPNA 141,049 133,372 122,696 114,660 100,123 93,595 Total Individual 711,823 713,009 712,252 713,026 714,123 716,350

    What is bewitching from the above is that total individual licensees change by +4,527 or 0.64% over three years. Technician class changed by +37,274 or 12.18%. dilettante Extra increased by +8,034 or 7.09% and general class was last with +6,673 or 4.41% increase. Attrition in the TPNA group seems customary considering that no renewals acquire been available for years.

    A psychologically-sensitive district is Expirations. License expirations may exist due to death, disablement, or simply from disinterest in continuing to withhold a license renewed. So far, this author has organize that only Hamdata displays Expirations as well as New licensees, Class Changes, plus miscellaneous data such as Administrative changes (mailing address changed, designation changed, etc.). New licensee numbers are a bellwether datum to indicate interest in joining dilettante radio. The following is a tabulation from Hamdata on New, Expired, Class- Changes on the Prior 6-month epoch at the 18th of each month:

    May 07 Nov 07 May 08 Nov 08 May 09 Nov 09 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ New 14,383 12,180 15,027 12,833 15,027 14,279 Expired 14,954 10,828 15,607 11,907 15,607 11,983 Class Change 18,510 11,877 11,248 8,977 13,448 7,157

    Two things on that tabulation. First, the number of Expirations is nearly that of New licensees. Most of the New group are granted Technician class licenses. A general trend seems to exist that New licensees are genesis to overtake Expirations but that may exist premature. Second, the Class Change numbers took an upward rotate right after cessation of the code test, changes available through new regulations. However, the number of Class Changes acquire dropped off in the three-year period. That may exist due to a lessening of dilettante radio attractiveness to the general public. A general trend appears to exist that the desire to upgrade is slowly decreasing.

    Radio amateurs in their Grace epoch may exist approximated by subtracting ARRL numbers (10-year term only) from Hamdata numbers. From the ARRL statistics for the 18th of each month:

    May 08 Nov 07 May 08 Nov 08 May 09 Nov 09 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Technician 287,679 298,385 301,917 310,276 325,181 332,554 General 139,545 142,559 143,189 144,314 147,172 150,259 Amateur Extra 110,310 111,789 113,627 115.231 117,170 118,967 TPNA 117,872 108,797 99,013 92,009 80,822 78,471 Total 655,406 655,530 657,746 661,830 670,345 680,251

    Doing the arithmetic yields the following including percentage (in brackets) in their Grace period:

    May 08 Nov 07 May 08 Nov 08 May 09 Nov 09 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- Technician 18,303 16,953 14,745 13,152 11,297 10,702 [5.98%] [5.48%] [4.66%] [4.07%] [3.36%] [3.12%] General 10,864 12,540 12,602 11,909 9,910 7,777 [7.18%] [8.09%] [8.09%] [7.62%] [6.31%] [4.92%] Amateur Extra 3,073 3,411 3,476 3,434 3,035 2,458 [2.71%] [2.96%] [2.97%] [2.89%] [2.52%] [2.02%]

    As expected, the dilettante Extra, the "hard core" amateur, has the lowest Grace epoch numbers. Surprisingly, Technician class is next lowest but general class has the highest percentage within their 2- year Grace period. general class has existed the longest in USA dilettante radio history.

    According to Hamdata, the peak of plenary USA dilettante license grants happened on 2 July 2003 with a total of 737,938. Total dilettante license grants acquire been less than that following that date of 6 years ago. To accept some visibility into which class has risen the most in a bit more than 5 years, compare the following Hamdata figures on two dates. Percentage in parentheses denotes total per class relative to the total INDIVIDUAL license grants. New, Expired, Class Changes occurred in the 6-month epoch prior to the column date:

    9 May 2004 18 November 2009 Change ----------------- ----------------- ------- Technician 284,105 (39.1%) 343,256 (47.9%) +59,151 General 146,223 (20.1%) 158,036 (22.1%) +11,813 Amateur Extra 107,595 (14.8%) 121,417 (17.0%) +13,822 TPNA 188,920 (26.0%) 93,595 (13.1%) -95,365 Total Individual 726,843 716,304 -10,589 New Licensees 9,723 14,279 Expirations 9,786 11,983 Class Changes 6,581 7,157

    A rather obvious trend seems to exist that Technician class is growing the fastest of the three and those Technicians look to exist STAYING in that class. Note that Class Changes acquire slowed down is evident in the preceding tabulation as well as that above. Another trend is that total individual license grants are probably slowly decreasing, due to expirations if not from lack of general interest in dilettante radio.

    An odd bit of miscellany is that Club licenses were 9,008 on 9 May 2004 but jumped to 11,066 by 18 November 2009. Club license grants aren't counted in most of these numbers involving INDIVIDUAL licenses.

    As the TPNA group runs its course to zero, the Technician class licensees will become the majority in the USA. They are within 3% of achieving that majority NOW. Other than Technician license numbers constantly growing, plus the spurt in Club licenses, there isn't much else changing in the last five years of USA dilettante radio licensing; total numbers just aren't keeping up with a continuing USA population increase.

    73, Len AF6AY

    * PDF files of statistics website screenshots on the dates indicated herein are available from the author via private e-mail attachment; private e- mail requests for this ZIP file (~360KB) may exist made to AF6AY@aol.com. These screenshots were done by Printing HTML screens via Acrobat 8. In some cases the HTML screens hold background colors and advertisements which did not transfer to PDF. In plenary cases the statistics numbers transferred correctly.

    Member Comments: This article has expired. No more comments may exist added. Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by NN4RH on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! >> A rather obvious trend seems to exist that Technician class is growing the fastest of the three and those Technicians look to exist STAYING in that class. <<

    I believe (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would exist the EmComm Whackers that accept tech licenses so they can expend ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because plenary they supervision about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby.

    Another third are the CBers who accept their Techs so they can expend their modded CBs on 10 & 12 meters but don't want to invest anything else in the hobby. They're just sitting around and waiting for the sunspots to approach back so they can shoot skip on their "extree channels" and in the meantime are soundless on CB Hamsexy.com.

    The repose are just the accustomed ones who once they accept their license acquire no interste in ever getting on the air. Those will plenary Go away in about 7 to 10 years. In the meantime they spend their days on Hamsexy or EHam under anonymous logins.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N4CQR on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Sometimes I am surprised there is any growth at plenary in dilettante radio.

    Craig

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by KW4JX on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! People don't want hierarchies in their hobby they acquire enough of it in their jobsBuffalo Gil W2/G3LBS   Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by WA9PIE on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I would worship to see these stats by age group. Obviously, in order to sustain the hobby, they exigency an influx of young people with new ideas.

    Mike, WA9PIE

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by N8RGQ on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! This is another Article spun to merit a pleasurable thing into a dismal one ! They acquire made it back to 2004 levals of hams ! The fact is they are growing again and the auther doesn't fancy it that the changes acquire worked !

    73,TerryN8RGQ

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WY3X on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! >Attrition in the TPNA group seems customary considering>that no renewals acquire been available for years.

    Not true. I renewed my Advanced class license, and ogle forward to renewing it for many more years. The FCC is not "sunsetting" these licenses. You may renew them as long as they continue to merit it available. They would probably "grandfather" Advanced class licensees to Extra Class to accomplish away with it, and they've repeatedly said they won't accomplish this.

    73, -KR4WM

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K3AN on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! According to census figures I found, the U.S. population grew about 1% each year from 2000 to 2008. Ham population grew just 0.64 percent in two and a half years. Not an alarming trend, but not a healthy one either.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N5TGL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I believe (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would exist the EmComm Whackers that accept tech licenses so they can expend ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because plenary they supervision about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby. "

    That's the EXACT identical conclusion I came to.

    Pity, as they are missing out on a lot of fun stuff in HF.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KH6AQ on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Where are the graphs? I want to see graphs.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by K6LO on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! [NN4RH Wrote] ..."I believe (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would exist the EmComm Whackers that accept tech licenses so they can expend ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because plenary they supervision about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby. " ...[end]

    ---------I am sorry to issue that is my conclusion too. I am an engineer in the public safety radio industry, and labor very closely with federal, state, and local agencies.

    The EmComm people acquire itsy-bitsy to no interest in dilettante radio. The license is simply a implement to expend equipment, often owned by a city or county, not the "ham". It is turn-key process for them. win a one day license class, pass a simple test, expend equipment. Much fancy taking any other certification class.

    This is not cynicism speaking. These are not inert or stupid people. They simply accomplish not acquire an interest in the hobby.

    73 - Luke

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by WB4M on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "Pity, as they are missing out on a lot of fun stuff in HF."

    Not really. They are assiduous promoting WinLink, so non-hams can expend ham frequencies for email. WinLinkers besides want to rescue the world, pass plenary kinds of dire traffic during emergencies.

      Tech Plus, Advanced and Novice licenses   by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KR4WM writes: "I renewed my Advanced class license, and ogle forward to renewing it for many more years. The FCC is not "sunsetting" these licenses."

    When the FCC stopped issuing new Advanced and Novice licnes back in April 2000, there were about 50,000 Novices and 100,000 Advanceds. Today there are about 17,000 Novices and 60,000 Advanceds. (these numbers are for current unexpired licenses held by individuals, and accomplish not involve expired licenses in the grace period)

    KR4WM: "You may renew them as long as they continue to merit it available."

    Modify and accept a vanity call, too.

    This isn't the first time the Advanced was closed to new issues. At the conclude of 1952, the FCC closed Advanced to new issues, intending that it would evanesce by attrition. 15 years later, in 1967, Advanced was reopened to new issues as section of the first wave of changes that came to exist known as "incentive licensing".

    KR4WM: "They would probably "grandfather" Advanced class licensees to Extra Class to accomplish away with it, and they've repeatedly said they won't accomplish this."

    Yep, FCC has turned down plenary sorts of no-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response is always the same: 'just pass the tests'. I believe one judgement is that it would cost them plenary sorts of admin work.

    Technician Plus is a different story. That license class was created about 1993 because hams wanted a differentiation between Techs who had HF priviliges and Techs who didn't.

    In April 2000, FCC not only stopped issuing new Tech Pluses, but besides started renewing plenary Tech Pluses as Techs, leaving it up to the licensee to retain documents proving they had HF privileges. That became a moot point in 2007, of course.

    The auto-renewal of Tech Pluses as Tech means that in a few months the Tech Plus license will simply disappear. It's besides one judgement the Technician license numbers acquire grown so much in the past decade.

    Back in April 2000, there were about 125,000 Tech Pluses. Today there are less than 400. In another 4 months or so there will exist no one at all.

    Since 1951, the only other FCC-issued license class to evanesce was the worn Conditional, which went away in the mid-1970s. FCC did it the identical route - plenary Conditionals were renewed as General. It only took 5 years because the license term was 5 years back then.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Novice 1967Technician and Advanced 1968Extra 1970 - present

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB0OEW on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I posted a plot of the licenses at http://www.clearskyinstitute.com/ham/stats/index.html .   Graphs   by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To WB0OEW:

    Thanks! The graph makes it effortless to see the trends.

    For example, it's effortless to see that the number of Generals and Extras has climbed pretty steadily for more than a decade, while the number of Technician/Tech Pluses has pretty much stayed the same.

    Would it exist workable for you to array the number of Advanceds and Novices? Maybe as dashed lines?

    One minor point: The FCC didn't drop any license classes in 2000, they just closed them to new issues.

    73 es tnx agn de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K4ZN on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I celebrate that the belief that people interested in ECOM are inflating the TECH class appears to exist an offering of anecdotal observation, and to this point is not documented from a statistically significant population sample. This does not involve that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to advocate the anecdotal observation.

    If it is indeed the case that there is a significant growth of TECH for this reason, then, even though they may not exist hobbyists in the traditional hobbyist sense - and may not acquire an interest in the radio art; nevertheless, it is arduous to imagine a better demographic to target for the growth of the hobby.

    Even people who accomplish not presently acquire a fervor for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will merit more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become active again?

    Licenses held is one thing. People on the air regularly is another. Ham radio activity is truly a difficult thing to measure. No station runs plenary bands, plenary modes, 24-7-365. What is participation? Holding a license? Being on the air twice a day, once a day, once a week, once a month, one contest a year?

    Kudos to Len AF6AY for presenting the tabular contour of the data. It is food for thought.

      2003 was due to a bubble   by KASSY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I talked with an ARRL staffer a few years ago at a hamfest and she told me an bewitching thing...well, observation? ARRL's conjecture?

    In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being. A major shove between ARRL and emcomm advocate agencies encouraged people to accept licensed, and there was a HUGE influx of hams at that time. But these people were not interested in ham radio, they were interested in emergency preparedness.

    For most people, communications is not elevated on the list for emergency preparedness. So these new hams, in the emergency preparedness classes, scholarly that their first focus was on developing a sustainable water and food supply, and learning how to linger properly sheltered. They started putting time into that instead of ham radio.

    And, they scholarly quickly that ARES/RACES acquire stultifylingly complicated hierachies, pseudo-government, that nobody in their right intellect would want to exist section of - although power mongers worship them. So, they lost almost the entire "generation" of new hams that came into the hobby in 1993 - their licenses expired in 2003.

    Therefore, the key learning from 2003 is not that, for some reason, there was a peak in 2003, but finally, an synthetic bubble had passed, and they returned to a more customary condition.

    Bringing people into the hobby under the guise of emergency preparedness is always temporary. As soon as the world, overall, feels less tense, the people who got into it for "emergency preparedness" lose interest.

    BTW, ham radio is getting younger. Another desultory encounter I had at a hamfest was with a property Engineer - these people are the world's best at understanding what statistics and population studies show.

    He said that while the mediocre age of ham radio has increased from 59 to 61 since the mid-70s, the mediocre age of America has increased by 8 years. So, ham radio is younger, comparitively.

    I noticed at the last few hamfests I attended, that there were route more young people than I acquire ever seen at ham functions. They don't Go to clubs, though - their generation communicates on Twitter and by texting, not at in-person meetings. Clubs may well exist dying, but not because ham radio is dying. It's just that the youth are not so interested in clubs.

    Gotta watch what I issue here, some people would convoke me young. I accomplish clubs and I accomplish Twitter, so I'm a tweenie, I suppose....

    - k

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N8RGQ wrote on December 6, 2009:

    "This is another Article spun to merit a pleasurable thing into a dismal one !"

    Not at all. It is merely a dispassionate ogle at some statistics, data that is publicly available to anyone who bothers to access it.............."The fact is they are growing again and the auther doesn't fancy it that the changes acquire worked !"

    Wrong. The "auther" [sic] is myself and my sole license award in the dilettante radio service is section of the data presented. My license award was achieved by passing plenary three test elements on a Sunday afternoon (25 February 2007) at "Old Firehouse 77" on Glenoaks Boulevard in Sun Valley, CA. I was age 74 when those test elements were passed. :-)

    That was my ONLY dilettante radio license obtained anywhere on this planet. It should besides exist famous that I've held a First-Class Commercial Radiotelephone license since passing those four test elements in one sitting at an FCC territory Office in Chicago, Illinois, during a weekday in March, 1956. Later, that "First Phone" became a general Radiotelephone License and, eventually, was made lifetime, no renewals required. I've been involved in radio communications professionally since age 19, a mere 58 years. :-)

    As to "growth" in license numbers, an objective ogle requires removal of rose-tinted glasses and dropping the "we are always the best and biggest" pep-rally attitude and ogle at reality. If there IS a "growth" then its percentages are down in customary statistical noise. The best filter to achieve a elevated reality-to-noise ratio is through OBJECTIVITY. In HF terms, USA dilettante radio licensing "growth" is down there barely touching "S1."

    As a so-called "new" person in radio, I didn't accept into dilettante radio thinking it would exist a loser. But, I'm section of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dilettante radio would acquire changed after my dilettante license was granted. I see itsy-bitsy change, therefore the study to see if a occasions could exist determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Over the long term, the continued existance of USA dilettante radio requires enough national interest to warrant its existance to the federal government. Your dilettante radio license award is nothing more than a federal authorization to radiate RF energy under terms of regulations codified in law. It does not give you, me, or any other license grantee anything more, not even any fancy royal titles. That license does not endow you, me, or anyone with superior virtuous virtue or righteousness. Licensing is just a regulatory agency implement to maintain order in the EM spectrum, to mitigate interference.

    From a cursory glance at content of e-ham articles by respondents, the majority look to exist those who acquire been licensed in the dilettante radio service for a big number of years, certainly more than my not-quite-3-years. On the other hand, the number of respondents to articles is a tiny fraction of total USA licensees and those are generally too enthusiastic over their hobby activities to win solemn objective looks at the condition of this radio service now. Further, long-timers minister to view today's unlicensed (in dilettante radio) citizens as having the identical interest and enthusiasm as they did long ago when they were young. There isn't any objective evidence of such similarity in sameness in today's unlicensed citizens. Today's unlicensed citizens acquire much more available to them for hobbies and recreation than existed ten, twenty, or thirty years ago.

    SOME growth is necessary in the dilettante radio serivce, if only to withhold up with the (continuing) population increase. right now I don't see much of that with my objectivity filter switched in.

    One badge of decline is the market in dilettante radio goods. Witness the folding of two of the four USA periodicals specializing in dilettante radio within two decades. Both were independents (Ham Radio and 73) whose major income and profit came from advertisers. Another is the decline of reseller outlets in major urban areas...and expansion of consumer electronics outlets at a much greater pace in the last two decades. While numerical data is more difficult to accumulate about such areas, there is enough to celebrate individually by anyone...with objectivity filters.

    AF6AY (who has never upgraded his USA dilettante radio license :-)

      Trends, bubbles etc.   by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! K4ZN writes: "Licenses held is one thing. People on the air regularly is another. Ham radio activity is truly a difficult thing to measure. No station runs plenary bands, plenary modes, 24-7-365. What is participation? Holding a license? Being on the air twice a day, once a day, once a week, once a month, one contest a year?"

    Good point.

    Which is better: A million US hams, 90% of whom acquire no station and no interest, or 500,000 hams, 90% of whom acquire stations on the air once a week or more?

    KASSY writes: "In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being."

    Actually, that happened in 1991. Feb 14, 1991, to exist exact.

    That's a minor detail, though; the main point you're making is cogent in that if someone was licensed in the early 1990s to accomplish emcomm and lost interest over time, they'd soundless exist in the numbers for 10 or 12 years (depending on whether you weigh grace-period licenses or not).

    Here's another factor: Cell phones. Early models were big, expensive and had limited coverage. From the genesis of the repeater era, a significant number of new hams got licenses to expend VHF/UHF repeaters and their autopatches. When cell phones became inexpensive, small, and common, a lot of those folks drifted away. And a source of numerous new hams disappeared.

    KASSY: "BTW, ham radio is getting younger. Another desultory encounter I had at a hamfest was with a property Engineer - these people are the world's best at understanding what statistics and population studies show.

    He said that while the mediocre age of ham radio has increased from 59 to 61 since the mid-70s, the mediocre age of America has increased by 8 years. So, ham radio is younger, comparitively."

    I acquire to question the "average age of hams" numbers often cited. How are such numbers determined? The FCC database doesn't acquire birthdate data for plenary US hams. intentional surveys are notoriously unscientific. Observing who goes to hamfests, club meetings, etc., isn't dependable either. And is that mediocre a mean, a median, or something else?

    You're absolutely right, though, that the median age of Americans is climbing and has been for many years. US census data proves it. For example, from the 1990 census to the 2000 census, the median age of US residents in the census rose from 34 years to 39 years - in just one decade. It's effortless to understand why: Americans are animated longer, having fewer kids, and having them later in life.

    KASSY: "Clubs may well exist dying, but not because ham radio is dying. It's just that the youth are not so interested in clubs."

    It may not exist a matter of interest as much as having the time available in immense controlled blocks. A person can Go online, text, tweet, etc. whenever they acquire a few minutes free and acquire access to a device. Club meetings usually happen on weekday nights and require an investment of a yoke hours.

    Good points all.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Thanks for the static data. It appears you spent a lot of time working on it so its understandable and the bottom line is... not much going anywhere.

    I AM SURPRISED THAT SOMEONE HAS NOT SUED THE FEDERAL GOV (FCC) FOR DISCRIMINATION AND BIAS. They are soundless holding CLASS LICENSES.. which discriminates against the minority who can't look to accept a general OR EXTRA license. THUS THEY SHOULD liquidate plenary CLASSES OF LICENSES TODAY AND JUST CONSOLIDATE IT INTO/ merit IT ONE CLASS..

    By their own rules and regulations for discrimination they are not in compliance.

    All the other countries acquire .. but the ARRL pushed for this incentive licensing stuff so they could merit more money.. MAYBE THE ARRL SHOULD exist SUED THEN TOO FOR DISCRIMINATION... Hello ACLU... new target in sight...

    One could start with the US corps plan...(now that CW is not required) and labor up to licensing for early retirement and accept some of that money they (ARRL) made... hmmmmm

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! While these statistics might exist useful for some such as those involved or considering becoming involved in sales of dilettante radio apparatus or publications as one illustration of many, for most of us the statistics are itsy-bitsy more than entertainment or curiousities.

    Shortly you will forget most of these "interesting statistics."

    Don't, however, forget this:

    AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU merit IT FOR YOURSELF.

    All the complaints, plenary the stupid comments tossed aside, YOU are dilettante radio. It is plenary in your hands. merit the most of it.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! One could believe that the real reasion that CW was done away with ... due to discrimination as a requirement to gain the higher class lice. Hmmm so why now not accomplish away with the lic structure under the identical requirements??   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by N3OX on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Some other reasons to accept a Tech license and never upgrade:

    Race communication for things fancy Solar Car competitions.

    Playing around with edge of space/weather balloons/rockets, etc.

    Radio control airplanes.

    Legal tinkering with long achieve elevated power elevated speed network links just for the heck of it.

    The first yoke probably provide a very steady influx of college age hams who are studying engineering. I knew of a unprejudiced number of people at my Alma Mater who got ham licenses for the Solar Car competition.

    I looked a few up and I'm surprised that a unprejudiced number of them renewed. That's pleasurable news. But the spot checks didn't capitulate any upgrades.

    There's a lot of stuff you can accomplish with a Tech license if you're an electronics hobbyist without a lot of interest in "things ham radio" but with a lot of interest in things fancy long achieve telemetry.

    There's a immense hobbyist electronics community these days and a tech license could exist a real boon to them in terms of controlling their robots or whatever. HF wouldn't exist much use.

    The Tech license actually gives you VAST privileges. I'm positive there are plenty of people who accept it just for EMCOMM or who accept it and accept bored because 2m FM has itsy-bitsy to offer, but the fact of the matter is being licensed by the FCC to expend a wide variety of types of communication at elevated power levels on a big swath of the VHF/UHF/microwave spectrum is a rather valuable thing for people interested in inevitable things that aren't really about being interested in RADIO itself.

    73Dan

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by N0AH on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! We acquire three Hams in my house now. Myself, and I acquire been an Extra since 1996, my YL, KD0ISN, who is a new Technician and has no solemn interest in upgrading, and my 9 year worn daughter Anna, W0ANT, who is working on her general for expaned HF.

    We are plenary in the hobby because they really indulge in contesting, DX'ing, and the fun of it all.

    I was not a immense fan of the no-code General, Extra, etc.......but I know of a lot of friends who acquire really excelled who were not able to accept into HF dilettante radio due to code. I promote "Know Code" vs "No Code" but I believe the hobby has benefited.

    That said, joyous I am not the only one who wonders what 10M is turning into.........I believe 1/2 the concern does not even acquire a license on that band-

    Thanks for the worthy report- BTW, per a convoke I placed into the ARRL last year for research, you can not accept age breakdowns as the FCC license contour no longer tracks this- That is crazy- seems fancy really faultfinding information.

    73 Paul N0AH

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WA8MEA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I honestly believe they are seeing a new generation of youth becoming involved in ham radio. I accomplish hear a lot more of them on the air lately.

    No, they are NOT plenary playing games. Here's why: Mom & Dad are playing video games and talking on the cell phone. Anything Mom & Dad accomplish just isn't cool! So let's not play video games and talk on the cell phone.

    Grandpa (and sometimes Grandma) play with their ham radios. Grandpa and Grandma are frosty people. So I want to learn about what they are doing.

    It was Bill Cosby who said; "The judgement why grandparents and grandchildren accept along so well is because they participate a common enemy."

    I scholarly more from my grandparents simply because, thinking as a typical teenager, my parents knew nothing.

    It was my grandpa's floor model shortwave radio that started the ball rolling for me.

    73, Bill - WA8MEAhttp://HamRadioFun.com

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by G0GQK on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I suppose the figures you extrapolated array that the dilettante radio fraternity is in the dolrums fancy everything else, and is probably slowly sliding back.The identical applies in Britain, they are besides sliding back.

    The figures showing how many people there are in possession of a radio dilettante license means nothing, there are lots of worn chaps listed in the UK who haven't operated for years and probably never will again !

    The incentive which will accept things stirring is now low in the sky, and producing a sunspot perhaps once every six weeks. There wouldn't exist so many car drivers in the US if gasolino was $10 a litre would there ?

    As for the suggestion there needs to exist an infux of young people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most favorite wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who Go to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV.

    This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the overcome of Japan !

    G0GQK

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by W1ITT on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Numbers are entertaining, but they don't speak to the property of Amateurs. FCC section 97.1, on the basis and purpose of the service includes the following:

    (b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven capacity to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.

    (c) Encouragement and improvement of the dilettante service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art.

    (d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the dilettante radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.

    I seriously doubt that those who acquire their ham station hanging from their belt, or those who buy HF dipoles in plastic bags will contribute much. Many of the new lads look to exist uninterested in further education once a ticket is in hand, and I'm not positive that many of them will ever exist any asset to the electronics or communications industries. Sooner or later, some Washington attorney will ogle at "Basis and Purpose", then ogle at the dilettante Service and determine they are not fulfilling their obligation, then determine that someone else should exist profiting from some or plenary of "our" spectrum. I only hope that I will exist breakfasting with Mssrs Kennely and Heaviside before they snare up with us.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! The recruitment should help and the property of recruits extend if the entrance training were experimental.W2/G3LBS   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by W5HTW on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I correspond with those who issue that a very big percentage of new Technician class licensees are EMCOM types who acquire no other plans in the hobby. I accomplish think, and I accomplish hope, that trend is dying, so they can accept back to real hams with a real interest in dilettante radio, but it has not died yet.

    As confirmation, two people I know from non-ham context acquire just expressed an interest in learning more about dilettante radio. Both of them see it as a nature of emergency communications, but for personal use, such as "if I acquire an emergency I can accept help." Both besides believe of it in the customary sense of EMCOM, though they don't even know that abbreviation. One of them definitely thinks of it in a free cell phone context. That view of dilettante radio faded in the late 1990s.

    Undoubtedly there are a few new Techs who want to experiment with radio. But it's pretty clear they are in the minority.

    That means as this EMCOM "fad" (and I believe it is exactly that, as was the FRS ham fad and the cell phone ham fad) fades away, many of these Techs will lock the radio in the bureau drawer and totally forget about it. That is what happened to the "you can withhold in finger with family" FRS hams and the "free cell phone" hams. The radios acquire been junked, sold, or parked in a closet.

    And EMCOM definitely will die. As rapidly as it has expanded, public safety radio has expanded even more, with more capabilities making EMCOM unnecessary at best, and unwanated at worst. I believe it is on the downhill rock now, with the new clarification by both the FCC and the ARRL. Thousands of 'heros' will become discouraged, and those radios too will Go into a desk drawer, to exist taken out and thrown away a few years from now.

    Ed

      Are You Smarter Than A Third Grader?   by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Discrimination you say? One class of license?

    OK, let's win plenary the stuff currently required for the Tech, general and Extra and roll it into a sole 120 question test. Anybody who wants a US dilettante license just has to pass that test, and they accept plenary privileges.

    That's what you meant by one class of license, right?

    Some fun facts:

    - the CEPT folks only recognize the Advanced and Extra class licenses for plenary reciprocity. They changed the policy recently.

    - the Extra has been earned by lunimous elementary-school children. IIRC, the current youngest Extra was 7 years worn when the licensed was earned - and that was before 2007. Going back into the 1990s, the worn 20-wpm-code/5-written-exams Extra was earned by an 8 year worn in the third grade.

    Way back in 1948, when the exams required sending and receiving code, drawing diagrams, writing essays and plenary the rest, and the exams were conducted by FCC Examiners, a 9 year worn earned the Class B license - equivalent to the General.

    Now I'll award that those young people who earned their licenses before their ages reached double digits were pretty bright. And they came from ham radio families that facilitated their learning and helped them accept started. But they weren't child prodigies, just smart and hard-working.

    Can anyone *really* issue the tests are or were "discriminatory" when lunimous young elementary school children could pass plenary of them?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Worth Repeating   by N2EY on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! AI2IA wrote:

    "AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU merit IT FOR YOURSELF."

    That really sums it plenary up. Thank you.

    I believe one of the greatest things about dilettante Radio is that they acquire so many choices. plenary sorts of bands, modes, kinds of operating, kinds of equipment, kinds of QSOs, etc. Home, mobile, portable, DX, local, etc. plenary it takes is an easy-to-get license, some hardware, some know-how - and the right attitude.

    Most of plenary the right attitude.

    73 es TNX de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI4HO on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Was licensed in 1995 as KE4WAF, was active for a yoke years, due to a labor relate injury, raising a family, dealing with doctors, lawyers, etc, I was inert for about 4.5 years. Once the condition of Fl decided to retire me. had this itsy-bitsy light bulb, or LED came on, and I got VERY active in this wonderful hobby. So active in fact that I upgraded, yes I did win the 5 wpm code test, it was then that I organize that I was tone deaf, very tone deaf. Despite that one drawback I managed to pass the code test the written test, and then 3 months after getting my general, I took and passed my dilettante extra. Maybe some who got licensed in the 90's did so just to issue they did or for the EMMCOMM aspect of the hobby, most of em acquire either let their license lapse or renew even though they are not active. Who knows why, but even though they may only exist a Tech now, who knows they may in 10, 20 years from now when they are secure in their careers or retired and the kids are out of the house, they might sit down and upgrade twice in one day.

    It took me a long time to accept where I did, fortunately through family and friends I acquire been able to linger as active as I can exist under my circumstances. Just give them time and hopefully one day some will approach around and link the fun, if not then it wasn't meant to be.

    73 de MarkW3LZK

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! G0GQK posted on December 6, 2009:

    "As for the suggestion there needs to exist an infux of young people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most favorite wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who Go to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV. This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the overcome of Japan !"

    I might add that the MOST-used/manufactured antenna has been the Yagi-Uda parasitic beam invented IN Japan during the 1930s. :-) It was the basis for millions of 1950s "TV antennas" right after WWII.

    Actually, the UK has done some fine innovation in radio and electronics, witness "Technical Topics" in Radio Communications (member magazine of the RSGB). Peter Martinez has been doing worthy stuff there since the mid-1970s, first trying out the Gingell polyphase network (Mike Gingell besides being a Brit) for phasing SSB modulation/demodulation, then working on AMTOR and then innovating PSK-31 and getting a lot of Europeans to test it on-air before the USA published anything on it.

    The single-microcontroller Digital Frequency array and frequency counter was devised in the UK. By a NON-amateur there. Search "Weeder" for the first published source code (forgot the given name, my apologies).

    The Wadley Loop was a right fine innovation for HF receivers without needing a fancy PLL or DDS for first Local Oscillator crystal control. It might exist better known as "Barlow-Wadley" since its introduction in a receiver produced in South Africa. It was pleasurable enough that Drake used it over here and Radio Shack had it in their top-of-the-line SWL BC receivers.

    The first circumstantial contrivance of communications satellites was published in Wireless World some time in 1946 by the late Arthur C. Clarke. Geosynchronous orbits were known and published before WWII but Clarke attach DETAIL in how it could labor along with antenna footprints on the surface.

    Americans may acquire invented the transistor, then the Integrated Circuit (which revolutionized the entire world's electronics) but such new-fangled things weren't loved by the American amateurs even two decades after their inventions. Yes, they besides invented the hand-carried scientific calculator but hams don't fancy them...calculators labor with NUMBERS and some USA hams exigency GRAPHS! [Texas Instruments has graphing claculators now] :-)

    The Phase-Locked Loop was invented in France in 1932. Took a while until solid-state matured enough to merit it practical. 'Radio' itself was publicly demonstrated in Italy and Russia in 1896, only 113 years ago. England had one of the greatest semaphore systems anywhere until those upstarts Morse and Vail got folks interested in the WIRED telegraph system (it could labor in the fog no problem).

    Otherwise, I correspond with you but only in stating that USA radio amateurs haven't invented plenary that much for dilettante radio purposes...they are soundless "pounding brass" and promoting it as the "best" route to communicate in their four-decade tenures as mighty gurus of the ionosphere. :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Most posters on this thread believe that the FCC license is a sacred cow. It is not. If for some judgement (and accomplish hope this does not occur) the FCC were to suspend plenary licenses or accomplish away with dilettante radio, the endeavor would soundless Go on. Some folks fancy myself would soundless build and attach up antennas (mostly for recieve purposes at such a time), and would soundless build and tinker with probably low power transmitters and receivers and transceivers.

    The judgement is that many of us are fascinated by the principles of radio communication. This is their real driving force, not the pecking order of the license.

    In addition, let me issue a few words of appreciation for those who acquire an inner calling for dilettante emcomm. For the most part, these pleasurable spirited folks acquire a genuine interest in and see a real practical exigency for national participation in emergency communication. May God bless them for their calling. Just as the national soldier stands ready to concede the convoke of arms to safeguard his family, his community, his state, his nation, so besides the national emcomm volunteer stands ready to serve these identical purposes should a cataclysm stimulate the exigency to exist there, and they exercise arduous for it on their own time, mostly with their own gear, and at their own expense. It is inanimate wrong to try to attach them down. They belong as much as the ret of us.

    So these two driving forces behind dilettante radio and beyond dilettante radio create the real hams. Strive to exist either the one benevolent or the other, or both, and then you will acquire achieved the ulitimate award of dilettante radio which transcends even the dilettante extra class mere license. The license can never supersede the real ham. - Ray Mullin, AI2IA

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K5TED on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! When's the last time any of you advanced the know-how of radio?   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K5TED on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I failed to note that the sole obvious contribution of the EU hams is the advent of sending semi-nude girlie images over SSTV.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB2WIK on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! This is fancy reading actuarial tables.

    Assuming it's plenary 100% reform (I haven't validated that, but what the heck), the point is??

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by EX_AA5JG on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WA9PIE wrote: "Obviously, in order to sustain the hobby, they exigency an influx of young people with new ideas."

    WRONG! That is not obvious either. In order to sustain the hobby, they just exigency to supersede each person who dies or lets their license expire with another licensed individual. The age of the replacement doesn't matter. I don't know where they accept this "We must only accept young people licensed"obsession.

    Look at the mediocre age for an AARP member. They look to linger in business.

    73s John AA5JG

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB0RXL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Ray.I correspond with your comment. One time when I was working with HCJB Radio (HC1QH) they received a listener note from a scientist at JPL. He observed that during his labor day he was able to communicate incredible distances with some pretty sophisticated equipment. But when he went home he was equally as thrilled to rotate on his rig and chat with fellow hams around the world. There is just something about electronics in general and ham radio in particuliar that got into my blood when I was just six years worn and has stayed with me ever since.JohnWB0RXL   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can anyone *really* issue the tests are or were "discriminatory" when lunimous young elementary school children could pass plenary of them?

    Ya then why did they acquire to accomplish away with the CW test? I understand that the FCC was facing a handicap issue that was going to sink their ship if they didn't change. The ARRL besides got involved and to fend off the legal hassel from the disabilities group... they elected to delete it (CW requirement) .. and dummy down the question pool to accomidate these....people.

    Thus why stop at the CW testing. Why not just acquire one class of lic.. Ham. let the other go. If you want to play. got it... if you want to Ecomm.. got it... no one is better or honored more than the other.

    You then can merit it what YOU want it to exist and no one can say..."Well I'm better because I acquire a higher license than you do... which some find offensive and thus the wars on the radio when the others Go off and expend frequencies that are reserved for them. Thats discrimination and jaundice when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't expend until they comply with standards that maybe they can't understand... handicap or not its discrimination that was set up by the ARRL and approved by the FCC.

    It should exist removed fancy they did with the corps plan, cw and other issues. After plenary why should someone accept special treatment... preferential treatment... from the identical government that they plenary pay their taxes to??

    So by going back and looking as to why things changed... I believe you can see that it WAS determined to exist discrimination of people who couldn't comprehend CW or other issues... thus.. only one license.. HAM. is what I am saying.

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC5NY throws down the gauntlet - "When's the last time any of you advanced the know-how of radio?"

    KC5NY, let not your heart exist troubled. Every sole time a real ham goes on the air, he advances the know-how of radio.

    Furthermore, no benevolent of radio communication in the world, no matter how sophisticated can compare to the jewel of dilettante radio. In a sense they labor with the crumbs from the master's plate, and yet " when plenary else fails ......" Is that not a wonderful advancement in the know-how of radio? How many lives saved past, present, and future? How many cataclysm victims comforted? How many military loved ones consoled? How many genuine advances in radio and related fields inspired? How many engineers educations advanced by dilettante radio? How many disabled persons given purpose and significance and delectation and erudition and fellowship by dilettante radio?

    No, KC5NY, let not your heart exist troubled. If you withhold within you the right attitude, you are a member of one of the greatest fellowships in the world and one of most efficient contributors to the advancement of radio ever known - dilettante radio!

    Never doubt it, not for one moment. - Ray Mullin, AI2IA

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! A "ham" is not defind by class of license, or mode of communication, or years of operation.

    There are hams who never had a license, because they didn't feel they needed one. In fact you don't exigency one.

    To exist a ham you must rise above the petty squabbles, the tired worn snobbery, the dismal attitudes, the gloom and doom, the designation calling, and plenary the repose of it. You acquire to focus on what was and should always exist your attraction to radio communication. This is what makes you a ham, and what you accomplish with that spark of inspiration is what keeps you a ham.

    Forget plenary the petty stuff. exist greater than you seem! Ray Mullin, AI2IA

      Are You Smarter Than A Third Grader?   by N2EY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "Ya then why did they acquire to accomplish away with the CW test?"

    Because some folks asked them to. Squeaky wheel and plenary that.

    Consider that the treaty changed in 2003 but it took FCC more than 3-1/2 years to change the rules. They could acquire done it in a day but they dragged their feet. believe about why.

    "I understand that the FCC was facing a handicap issue that was going to sink their ship if they didn't change."

    What handicap issue? From whom?

    "The ARRL besides got involved and to fend off the legal hassel from the disabilities group... they elected to delete it (CW requirement) .. and dummy down the question pool to accomidate these....people."

    The ARRL proposal was that the code test would exist retained for Extra, not completely removed. FCC said no.

    The question pools were not "dumbed down", they were combined.

    And I inquire again: How can anyone issue the tests are "discriminatory" when lunimous kids who aren't even 10 years worn acquire passed plenary of them?

    "Why not just acquire one class of lic.. Ham. let the other go."

    Just attach plenary the stuff in plenary 3 question pools in one 120 question test.

    "no one is better or honored more than the other."

    "Thats discrimination and jaundice when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't expend until they comply with standards that maybe they can't understand... handicap or not its discrimination that was set up by the ARRL and approved by the FCC."

    Nope.

    The judgement for having multiple license classes is to merit it easier to accept plenary privileges, not harder. If there were only one class of license, it would acquire to involve everything in plenary three license tests, and plenary newcomers would acquire to pass it in one go. With three levels, a newcomer can start out at any level, depending on how many tests they can pass.

    It would exist discriminatory only if there were requirements that had nothing to accomplish with dilettante radio. For example, if a prospective ham had to exist at least 14 years worn before being allowed to win the tests or exist issued a license, *that* would exist discrimination.

    "It should exist removed fancy they did with the corps plan, cw and other issues."

    ??They didn't remove the corps plan.

    "After plenary why should someone accept special treatment... preferential treatment... from the identical government that they plenary pay their taxes to??"

    Because they proved themselves qualified. And the privileges are available to plenary who can pass the tests.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio...   by AB0RE on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In my neck of the woods (SW MN) it'd appear ~3/4 of new licenses are obtained for em-com purposes. Of those new licenses, ~1/4 eventually accept bitten by the ham radio bug and will upgrade their license for HF priviledges and/or will pick up the mic just for the enjoyment of talking on the radio.

    Who cares? We'll win new hams however they can accept them. It's up to us seasoned hams to array the newbie "emcom" hams what they're missing.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio...   by AB4D on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "This is fancy reading actuarial tables.

    Assuming it's plenary 100% reform (I haven't validated that, but what the heck), the point is??"

    Lenny felt a exigency to accept up on his soap box again. SSDD

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by W6ZPC on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I am a fairly new ham, thanks to the removal of the code requirement. I obtained my technician class license in the topple of 2007 and then passed the general class test in October 2008. I am now studying for my extra class. My dad was a ham and so I acquire always had an interest in ham radio. He passed away in 2006 and I acquire taken his original convoke sign, the one I heard him expend countless hours from a very early age since he was licensed in 1947 before I was born. I had tried several times to learn the code but due to pressure from other activities, school, labor etc., never was able to dedicate the time to learn it. I am definitely not anti-code though and would fancy to eventually labor CW. I am very grateful to the lifting of the requirement though, because it opened the door to me. I am active daily on two meters and listen to HF daily. I generally labor HF on the weekends when I acquire more time to dedicate to it, but my Icom 718 is always on around 3878 or 7180 kHz every evening. I acquire joined the two local ham clubs in my county and am besides a member of the ARRL. As far as getting people interested in ham radio and retaining new hams, I would animate plenary of us to exist visible and talk it up. I am by profession a intelligence broadcaster at the local radio station here in Ste. Genevieve and I try to accept the local hams on my interview array at least once a year, usually just ahead of territory day (in fact I was doing that before I became a ham). I besides manage the local cable access tv channel and acquire had the hams on my programs there. I believe as long as they acquire a core group of active hams who are visible in the community and seen as a positive section of a their community they will exist okay.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by VE7IG on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Re NN4RH ----Where were they then? I recently attach up a new 4 constituent yagi on 12m. There was a month or so of activity on 12 due to some sunspots in November and plenty of "skip". There was hardly any phone activity during this time, mainly DX stations but a lot of CW activity, but what US phone activity I did hear was typically dilettante and not CB. I didn't hear ANY CB nature activity at all.

    73 Reg, VE7IG

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio...   by EX_AA5JG on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "Who cares? We'll win new hams however they can accept them."

    I care! What is the expend of getting a new licensee, if they really aren't a ham-don't supervision about communicating or getting on the air? Why is the number of licensees they acquire so important? Just give everyone a license along with their sociable security number if license numbers are so important.

    73s John AA5JG

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by KF4HR on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Since (as the adage goes) there's might in numbers. This is especially significant considering the ever increasing demand for the commercial uses of the RF spectrum.

    It seems to me a more significant point is the comparison of the dilettante population trend, to the US population trend.

    Given the current trends, it seems their dilettante population may rotate into an insignificant percentage (comparied to the overall US population) sooner or later. Not good!

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio...   by WA7NCL on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! What is it about these articles that generates a troll fest.

    By plenary means kick everybody out of the hobby you don't like.

    I positive hope the 3 of you left indulge in talking with each other.

    There's leeway for everybody. There's might in numbers. As time goes on things change, try to merit it better, and accept over it.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio...   by AB0RE on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I care! What is the expend of getting a new licensee, if they really aren't a ham-don't supervision about communicating or getting on the air? ..."

    And what's the expend of people having worn licenses that aren't used anymore? I'd suspect there are more worn timers that acquire given up on ham radio than there are new emcom types who only expend their licenses for weather spotting and ARES drills. If you feel so passionately about people who aren't using their licenses perhaps you should petition the FCC to acquire the license term changed from 10 years to 1 year.

    The bottom line is the hams who don't expend their licenses passed the identical test the repose of us did, and paid the identical VE fee, so they're entitled to their license. Instead of being judgmental and getting plenary bent out of shape about inert hams not using their license how we'd like, perhaps they should focus more on elmering them and sponsoring other activities that bring the fun back to ham radio. Every inert ham out there has huge potential to add to the hobby, so I'm not going to squabble about their logic for originally getting their license.

      RE: Are You Smarter Than A Third Grader?   by QRZDXR2 on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! by N2EY on December 7, 2009"Ya then why did they acquire to accomplish away with the CW test?"

    You best Go check the ADA group. They were the ones that acquire handicapped people who, along with most of the others that JUST COULDN'T look TO LEARN CW.. for a host of reasions... filed against the Federal Government in hopes of making some bucks. (notice how many ADA people now are sue'n stores and all. Its a new hobby in their minds.. effortless money)

    Again you prove my point about someone smart vs the ADA person. It makes no inequity to them if they can't badge their designation correctly. If they can't accept the necessary license then its dis-crima-nation and thus not politically correct.

    What test? Asking one what frequency he can operate on is a test akin to asking one if they attach the right shoe in the left foot...like duhhhh array me 50 questions out of the pool that actually has any technical issues. Third Graders .. if they can read they can pass the test and not know a thing about electronics or radio. (The proof is some of the idiots on the ham bands that inquire dummy questions yet acquire EXTRA class licenses. One only has to ogle at the sidebar on eham too... inquire one what a volt is and you will accept the deer caught in the headlight ogle or ... volt who??? )

    However, when a new EXTRA class license ham reach'es into a HF lin amp and zapps himself to death and the surv's sue the manufacture because it is a leathal voltage without saftey protection... one has to wonder if it doesn't back the gene pool out by elimination ... Hi voltage ..what's that!!! oh and plenary them warning stickers just don't apply to 'em after plenary they are EXTRA hams... dead... but it looks impressive on the grave marker where it says.. he was a Extra Class ham... Too dismal he smoked... smile

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by N0AH on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! VE7IG.......no CB but you heard skip? You mean't DX, right? (just kidding)   Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KB6QXM on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! As in plenary stats, the numbers can exist spun one route or another to array bias.

    As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not see is stats such as the following:

    The amount of "new Extra Class licensees" versus the renewal of the Pre-code elimination Extra class licensees.

    The amount of Advanced class licensees. Are the numbers stable. They cannot increase, they know, but at what rate are they falling as far as license renewals.

    I acquire just renewed my advanced class license and will accomplish that till the day I become a SK. The FCC would insult me if they "grandfathered" my advanced class license into an Extra Class license.

    The FCC and the ARRL has already done enough to dilute this worthy hobby, I truly hope that they accomplish not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

    If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you plenary know that the theory test for Advanced was big and significant.

    I am really upset that the FCC and the ARRL took away the challenge of 20 WPM. If they wanted to give away spectrum to people that did not to win the time or acquire the disipline to exist proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for itsy-bitsy work.

    Not that many years ago people were impressed that you were a ham radio operator. The license requirements now are nothing more than a formality making one a glorified CB radio operator.

    Yes, CW is an obsolete technology. I accept that. It was besides tradition from the very genesis of the hobby.

    Then divulge me what is the justification of lowering the technical standards of the test? Some new extra class licensees accomplish not know how to accomplish anything, including soldering on a connector onto a piece of coax. This is a pleasurable thing?????

    At least train these new hams safety. RF and electrical safety so they accomplish not hardm themselves or others. Case in point was that family that died putting an antenna up recently.

    Why spend plenary of this money on equipment/time when the behaviour of these people are terrible because of the lowered standards?

    Just food for thought. These stats paint a picture based on jaundice of the author. If you want to see the immense picture, there is a lot more number crunching that needs to happen.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AE5JU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Is learning Morse Code the only thing that defines "a real ham"? If so, they are in immense trouble.

    I cannot weigh the number of hams that acquire told me, "In my heyday I could accomplish 25 wpm, but I haven't done CW in years. I probably can't accomplish 10 wpm now." Why not? If it is not significant to you now, why should it exist to me?

    There are plenty of modes to Go around. And different ones interest different people for reasons plenary their own.

    For example, I acquire a worthy interest in PSK31 and other digital modes that win very itsy-bitsy power, yet can QSO at worthy distances. I don't supervision about contests (but I don't complain about contesters), but I really indulge in a 20 minute QSO with a ham thousands of miles away. I accept a kick out of having to ogle at a map to find a ham's QTH, perhaps some itsy-bitsy island I didn't even know existed. Or a town in Spain I acquire not heard of.

    But I acquire no interest in SSTV, RTTY, or CW. Does that merit me not "a real ham"?

    And I'm one of those guys that passed plenary of the tests in one test session. accomplish you really believe I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't acquire to memorize a bit of that. I had to memorize a baud rate (and why does that matter?) and how tall an antenna can exist without getting the FAA's panties in a wad (200', but hey, I can understand this), and a few things fancy that. But most of it I knew before starting into ham radio.

    And yes, I know how to solder PL-259's to coax. I've been soldering, let's see, carry the 2... 50 years. I believe I acquire that section of the hobby down pretty well. I had subscriptions to favorite Electronics and Electronics Illustrated as a kid, and built a number of projects from those pages, as well as Knight and Heathkits.

    But that some would determine whether I'm "a real ham" based on whether or not I can transmit code at 20 wpm? I would imagine that since I can listen to a piece of music once or twice, then write every note played by each instrument, I am pretty positive I acquire the capacity to learn Morse, too. But I'm really not interested.

    I won't apologize. And I won't acquire others telling me whether I am "a real ham" or not based on their criteria, not mine.

    PaulAE5JU

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Amateur radio is a hobby, no different than fishing, hunting, camping, etc,(minus the pocket protector). Let's lighten up.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by AE5JU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Exactly!

    I'm trying to acquire fun here!

    ;-)

    Paul - AE5JU

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by NN4RH on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! by VE7IG on December 7, 2009Where were they then?

    28.400

    They'll spread out once they accept sustained propagation on 10 meters, and assuming they'll eventually device out there's more than one "channel" on the ham bands.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! K4ZN posted on December 6, 2009:

    "I celebrate that the belief that people interested in ECOM are inflating the TECH class appears to exist an offering of anecdotal observation, and to this point is not documented from a statistically significant population sample. This does not involve that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to advocate the anecdotal observation."

    That has been a long-standing problem in USA dilettante radio...but the "Rise of the Tech" numbers had different reasons of anecdotal evidence plenary along the short time between the continuing extend in numbers of the Technician class from 1991 to 2009. Nearly plenary of those anecdotal 'reasons' were depreciatory of the Technicans (see "shack on a belt" descriptors soundless in use)...............K4ZN: "If it is indeed the case that there is a significant growth of TECH for this reason, then, even though they may not exist hobbyists in the traditional hobbyist sense - and may not acquire an interest in the radio art; nevertheless, it is arduous to imagine a better demographic to target for the growth of the hobby."

    The only available data is in the FCC Database. The judgement I prefer Hamdata figures is that they present much more information on license history over the long term, acquire the least self-serving attitudes in presentations. For example, ARRL statistics (barest minimum of data without any history, short-term or long-term). At one time the ARRL refused to give a straight concede on the number of members it has...to fully-paid-up members. They did finally involve it on their 2008 Annual Report...............K4ZN: "Even people who accomplish not presently acquire a fervor for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will merit more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become active again?"

    That is impossible to accurately quantify. It must exist interpreted, just as I "interpreted" the number in each class who are in their Grace epoch by the inequity between plenary licensees in a class and ARRL data which counts only those in their 10-year license term. I would consider it fairly close to the "real thing."............K4ZN: "Licenses held is one thing. People on the air regularly is another. Ham radio activity is truly a difficult thing to measure. No station runs plenary bands, plenary modes, 24-7-365. What is participation? Holding a license? Being on the air twice a day, once a day, once a week, once a month, one contest a year?"

    There will exist endless OPINIONS on plenary of those. Everyone has the ONLY "true" judgement and others not going along with those reasons "have a dismal attitude." It is fancy nailing jelly to a tree. :-).............K4ZN: "Kudos to Len AF6AY for presenting the tabular contour of the data. It is food for thought."

    Thank you. It was meant to exist just food for thought...but many pretension I'm "not eating right." :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by N2EY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM writes: "the numbers can exist spun one route or another to array bias."

    Of course. What is not shown can exist more revealing than what is shown.

    For example, simply lumping plenary Tech Plus, Novice and Advanceds together hides what is actually happening to those classes.

    For another example, a prime occasions of the growth of the Technician class since April 2000 is the automatic renewal of Tech Pluses as Techs. No other license class is growing because FCC is renewing one license class as another.

    KB6QXM: "The amount of Advanced class licensees. Are the numbers stable. They cannot increase, they know, but at what rate are they falling as far as license renewals."

    Here's a snapshot of how the numbers acquire changed since May of 2000:

    Number of current, unexpired licenses held by individuals:

    May 14, 2000

    Novice: 49,329Technician: 205,394Technician Plus: 128,860Combined Tech/Tech+: 334,254 (49.53%)General: 112,677Advanced: 99,782Extra: 78,750

    Total 674,792

    December 6, 2009

    Novice: 17,155Technician: 333,321Technician Plus: 341Combined Tech/Tech+: 333,662 (48.96%)General: 150,645Advanced: 60,850Extra: 119,160

    Total 681,472

    Here's another route to ogle at it.

    Suppose they consider the numbers of May 14, 2000 as the baseline, and device out the current numbers as a percentage of that baseline. 100% means exactly the same, 200% means double, 50% means half, etc.

    We accept the following growth/decline stats (current numbers as a percentage of May 14 2000 numbers)

    Novice: 34.78%Technician: 162.28%Technician Plus: 0.26%Combined Tech/Tech+: 99.82%General: 133.67%Advanced: 60.98%Extra: 151.31%

    Total: 100.99%

    Note that the combined number of Techs and Tech Pluses has actually declined slightly. About 2 out of 3 Novices acquire upgraded or left, while almost 2 out of 3 Advanceds soundless hold that license.

    KB6QXM: "I acquire just renewed my advanced class license and will accomplish that till the day I become a SK. The FCC would insult me if they "grandfathered" my advanced class license into an Extra Class license."

    Why?

    KB6QXM: "The FCC and the ARRL has already done enough to dilute this worthy hobby, I truly hope that they accomplish not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses."

    What has the ARRL done to dilute it? Back in 1998, ARRL proposed keeping the Advanced open, but FCC refused.

    KB6QXM: "If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you plenary know that the theory test for Advanced was big and significant."

    I passed the Advanced back in 1968 at the age of 14, in the summer between 8th and 9th grades. I wasn't even in elevated school yet. That was back before CSCEs, VECs, published question pools, Bash books, etc.

    No immense deal.

    KB6QXM: "I am really upset that the FCC and the ARRL took away the challenge of 20 WPM."

    The ARRL didn't accomplish that - FCC did. recall that in 1990 they effectively eliminated the 13 and 20 wpm code tests by creating medical waivers.

    And the challenge is soundless there. The ARRL Code Proficiency program goes from 10 to 40 wpm in 5 wpm increments.

    KB6QXM: "Not that many years ago people were impressed that you were a ham radio operator. The license requirements now are nothing more than a formality making one a glorified CB radio operator."

    Consider that maybe FCC is trying to antiseptic up CB that way.

    KB6QXM: "Yes, CW is an obsolete technology."

    No it isn't! Not in dilettante Radio, anyway.

    KB6QXM: "Why spend plenary of this money on equipment/time when the behaviour of these people are terrible because of the lowered standards?"

    I don't know that the behaviour of "these people" is terrible. Most hams I encounter are very well behaved, on and off the air. The dismal apples stick out because most hams, worn and new, are nice people who at least try to exist pleasurable ops.

    KB6QXM: "If you want to see the immense picture, there is a lot more number crunching that needs to happen."

    And even then, the numbers won't issue much. For example, they won't issue anything about how many hams are active on the air at some level, and how many are simply worn entries in the database. They won't issue anything about how much the licensees know, nor how well they behave.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Request to AK5K   by K6LHA on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Bill, tickle transmit your PDF backup requests again. Mail robot ate my reply, sorry.

    Len AF6AY

      Real Hams?   by N2EY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! AE5JU asks: "Is learning Morse Code the only thing that defines "a real ham"?"

    No.

    AE5JU: "I cannot weigh the number of hams that acquire told me, "In my heyday I could accomplish 25 wpm, but I haven't done CW in years. I probably can't accomplish 10 wpm now." Why not?"

    People accept rusty at things.

    Here's another data point: I can accomplish at least 25 wpm solid right now, sending and receiving. Probably more fancy 35-40 on a pleasurable day. I can besides pass the current exams for any class of US dilettante license, as well as the ones used for the past 50 years at least.

    AE5JU: "There are plenty of modes to Go around. And different ones interest different people for reasons plenary their own."

    Of course.

    AE5JU: "But I acquire no interest in SSTV, RTTY, or CW. Does that merit me not "a real ham"?"

    Not at all.

    AE5JU: "And I'm one of those guys that passed plenary of the tests in one test session. accomplish you really believe I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't acquire to memorize a bit of that. I had to memorize a baud rate (and why does that matter?) and how tall an antenna can exist without getting the FAA's panties in a wad (200', but hey, I can understand this), and a few things fancy that. But most of it I knew before starting into ham radio."

    The point is that *some* folks simply memorize/word associate the actual test braindumpsmp;A without understanding it, and manage to accept licensed anyway.

    It's been that route for more than 25 years. vice FCC, who changed the rules, not the hams or the ARRL.

    AE5JU: "But that some would determine whether I'm "a real ham" based on whether or not I can transmit code at 20 wpm?"

    Sending is relatively easy. Receiving is another matter.

    AE5JU: "I won't apologize."

    Nor will I.

    AE5JU: "And I won't acquire others telling me whether I am "a real ham" or not based on their criteria, not mine."

    I believe you've got it backwards.

    I believe a lot of things really are determined by how others see a person.

    For example, if a person went around adage that they're an "expert" on dilettante radio antennas, would you correspond just because the person described themselves that way?

    Or would you ogle at what they'd accomplished in the district of dilettante radio antennas, and how others described them, and referee for yourself?

    IOW, real experts don't Go around telling people they're experts - because they don't acquire to.

    In similar fashion, real hams don't Go around telling people they're "Real Hams" - because they don't acquire to.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by K0RGR on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I can issue that most of those who quest ham tickets in this section of Minnesota are doing so in order to exist able to participate in SKYWARN, ARES, and other types of public service work. I train the local classes, so I know.

    A percentage of those accomplish accept interested in radio and foster to general or accept more involved in the hobby aspects of it. They accomplish acquire quite a few locals who only operate 2 meter FM and/or APRS, so those folks do, indeed, exist.

    I've been trying arduous to merit a solemn point lately, both with prospective newbies and existing hams. If your goal is to exist around for disasters/public service, you exigency to "do" the hobby. Only by using your ham gear will you exist capable of helping when needed.

    I hope we're recruiting enough newbies to supersede the existing hams. I believe the numbers demonstrate that. They see a significant extend in the upper flat licensees. Those are the people who really withhold the hobby alive.

    Another immense factor is that we're (hopefully) coming out of the deepest, and perhaps the longest sunspot minima in centuries. Historically, these sunpsot minima acquire been arduous on ham radio growth. It's much easier to sell the hobby when people can see you working the world with an 8 foot whip antenna and low power.

    I believe over time, they exigency to redefine expectations for new hams. Their newbies should understand that most of their contacts will exist in North America, and that you can achieve that with minimal gear and antennas. Instead, they acquire too many that approach into the hobby expecting to acquire daily contacts with India, running 5 watts to a G5RV on the back fence. Far, far too many of the requests for back I see start off "...I live in a pocket where no outside antennas are allowed ... I acquire no money... but I want to labor the world on HF...".

    We exigency to strongly animate their newbies to expend their CW privileges. I would fancy to see more of them try CW using computers if they just don't believe they can accomplish it by ear. There's nothing to obviate Techs from doing this, and it's something they exigency to 'push'.

    I besides believe they exigency to recrudesce to the past to find section of their future. One of the things that made ham radio favorite in the late 50's and early 60's was the availability of the Novice license, which granted nighttime CW privileges. In the 1930's, Class B licensees had priveleges simlar to what Techs acquire today, with one immense difference. They had night time voice capability on 160 meters. I believe their newbies exigency nighttime voice privileges on HF, too. 160 meters is not the best place, but it would exist better than what they acquire now.

      "Strength in numbers" can exist used against you, too   by KASSY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I recall when grand-dad was with NTIA. One of the most-often cited reasons why "it's OK to win frequencies away from ham radio" was that despite increasing numbers of licensees, frequency usage was down, not up. The NTIA does, regularly, monitor frequency usage!

    It can labor against us to acquire more licensees that accomplish not accept on the air. "They" are watching!

    - k

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by K7ESU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I acquire just renewed my advanced class license and will accomplish that till the day I become a SK. The FCC would insult me if they "grandfathered" my advanced class license into an Extra Class license.

    The FCC and the ARRL has already done enough to dilute this worthy hobby, I truly hope that they accomplish not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

    If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you plenary know that the theory test for Advanced was big and significant. "

    My thoughts exactly!

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by K0BG on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I knew there was a judgement I didn't read this until today.

    Alan, KØBGwww.k0bg.com

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM posted beligerantly on 7 Dec 09:

    "As in plenary stats, the numbers can exist spun one route or another to array bias. As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not see is stats such as the following:

    "The amount of "new Extra Class licensees" versus the renewal of the Pre-code elimination Extra class licensees."

    I did not acquire that data via daily downloads from two websites prior to February 2007. From my file content I've got roughly 2000 downloads to pick from. I'm NOT in the "statistics business" but statistical data has been common to my electronic design labor for four decades. I can only present data based on available data resources.

    If you really needed statistical data presented on "pre-code-elimination" renewals, I would acquire started my data collection about 7 to 8 years earlier since the renewal time is after 10 years. From your beligerance I believe you only "want" that for your own biased outlook. <shrug>..........KB6QXM: "The amount of Advanced class licensees. Are the numbers stable. They cannot increase, they know, but at what rate are they falling as far as license renewals."

    You can find that some of that by looking at www.hamdata.com. They daily post the number of licensees in each class for a week ago, a month ago, six months ago, a year ago, two years ago.The ARRL statistics page shows only the current date, no past history, and then counts only those licensees within their 10-year term. Which is "more biased?" :-)...........KB6QXM: "I am really upset that the FCC and the ARRL took away the challenge of 20 WPM. If they wanted to give away spectrum to people that did not to win the time or acquire the disipline to exist proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for itsy-bitsy work."

    "Little work?" Let's not Go off the map about "biased" stuff here. On 25 February 2007 I took (and passed) plenary test elements in front of a four-member ARRL VEC examination team. plenary four team members separately checked my concede sheets. I got NO special favors. Not even being 74 at the time.

    YOU are running around with pre-built jaundice on the supposition that plenary new license applicants aredummies and acquire NO experience. I began HF communications in the US Army on February 1953 and wasin that assignment three years. Given that station ADA had three-dozen-plus high-power transmitters and ran 24/7 with four shifts of operating teams and relaying 220 thousand messages a month mediocre in 1955 for the Far East Command Headquarters then in Tokyo. no one of the radio circuits used on-off keying CW codes. That was a genesis for me 56 years ago. NO "license"required and NO special Army classes (my MOS was Microwave Radio...equipment that would not exist on-site until last half of 1954). They scholarly "on the job." no one of us "failed" or were transferred out. They were in "the immense Business" of HF radio communications. No commsats then, no special modes or fancy radios for HF. In civilian life as an electronics engineer I've been able to "work" frequencies from VLF on up to 25 GHz. Oh, and I did acquire an 11m CB rig, two in fact, plus an FCC license for them. In 1959. NO test required for those licenses. Since I don't supervision to play old-time telegrapher I must exist some benevolent of "dummy," right? Cubed if I had an evil CB, right?

    Well, you issue *I* acquire "bias" with the implication you acquire "no bias?" Harfff!! :-)................KB6QXM: "Not that many years ago people were impressed that you were a ham radio operator. The license requirements now are nothing more than a formality making one a glorified CB radio operator."

    Gosh, If I felt I needed to "impress" other people, I would acquire gotten one of those "very impressive" dilettante radio licenses earlier...maybe even a Ham Radio BADGE in its wallet! As it was plenary I got was a Commercial (First Class) radio operator license in March, 1956 (all 4 elements passed in one sitting in a Chicago FCC territory Office)...without prior undergo in broadcasting, military or civilian. Gollee, I must exist SO deficient and BIASED!

    Unlike so many inhabiting e-ham forums, I acquire NO exigency to "IMPRESS" people. I got an dilettante license for my own personal benefit. I don't acquire any certificates covering my operating leeway walls...too many bookshelves in the way............KB6QXN: "Yes, CW is an obsolete technology. I accept that. It was besides tradition from the very genesis of the hobby."

    "Tradition" besides means using crystal set "receivers" and damped-oscillation "spark" transmitters, plus (get this one) "Picking your own convoke badge without government approval!" before 1912. "Spark" is forbidden in the USA. FCC regulates USA civil radio. That leaves only crystal set receivers. Can you accept a DXCC using only a crystal set as a receiver?...........KB6QXN: "Then divulge me what is the justification of lowering the technical standards of the test?"

    Please redirect your ranting on non-statistical things to the Volunteer Examiner Coordinator Question Pool Committee at their website. The VEC QPC originates plenary the questions and answers for dilettante radio license testing in the USA............KB6QXN: "Some new extra class licensees accomplish not know how to accomplish anything, including soldering on a connector onto a piece of coax. This is a pleasurable thing?????"

    Sigh...if you acquire a dispute on any particular amateur's "fitness" to hold an dilettante radio license grant, just contact the FCC and merit your case. You could shotgun both the Enforcement Bureau and Wireless Bureau to demand ACTION! Yes! demand ACTION! NOW!

    Me, I scholarly how to connect "UHF" connectors back in 1952 with solder. I don't believe the "crimp" style connector was on the market then but I could exist wrong. Not long after I scholarly how to DESIGN circuits that worked, laid out PCBs, did the required environmental testing, did work-related computer programming, wrote drafts for instruction manuals, did customer site territory engineering tasks, went through design reviews, was hands-on in everything including soldering from point-to-point wiring through thick- and thin-film to SMT. Oh, and I once "worked" a station ON the moon briefly. Not an dilettante station, though, it was attach there by some astronauts for NASA.............KB6QXN: "At least train these new hams safety."

    In my 3-year Army assignment at station ADA, out of four teams comprising about 50 total, there was only ONE injury and that one was not fatal. During a QSY of a BC-340 10 KW power amplifier, one operator on another team dropped a implement inside the open PA door, caught his fatique sleeve on a tuning dial gear and his bare left forearm touched a jaundice supply line of roughly 350 VDC. jaundice supply was NOT in the door interlock chain. He didn't acquire a "license" to operate. Neither did I or anyone else. plenary they got were "on-the-job-reminders" without formal classes.

    Oh, and one day, during an unannounced fire drill, Executive Officer in imbue 1st Lt. Riewerts slipped while carrying a fire extinguisher. It went off and messed up the shine on his dress shoes. Terrible thing! :-)...............KB6QXN: "Why spend plenary of this money on equipment/time when the behaviour of these people are terrible because of the lowered standards?"

    By golly, NOTHING seems to answer you, does it? :-)...............KB6QXN: "Just food for thought."

    Haven't you had enough indigestion for one day?...............KB6QXN: "These stats paint a picture based on jaundice of the author."

    'Picture?' 'Painting?' Yes, I've been a professional (paid) illustrator. Thank you for the mention. [gave it up in favor of electronics engineering...more creative]

    Would you fancy to commission a portrait painting? I'm open but the rate isn't anywhere near dilettante economy class. However, I've got 2 cents for you for a new dilettante radio statistics set:

    Show us How It Is Done and "without bias." array Us How It Is Done! :-)

    Byeeeee...

    AF6AY (Amateur Extra since day one and totally inexperienced in the biased eyes of some others)

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by KF4HR on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Post-rebuttals that provide a come-back line for each individual posted sentence or comment? Childish. Surely there are better things to do?   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KC8FRJ on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I fancy you Len! I acquire not seen the likes of your nature since my mentor. You two would accept along great! Must exist a Defense industry thing....

    Ralph, Len is probably retired and he is well traveled. While I understand your statement, Len has the time to safeguard his position. This makes his reaction less childish than those who provoked him. As long as the point counter point stays logical, it seems arrogate to me.

    KFR2174->WN8MNI->KC8FRJTech+ who just took general for no real reason... Just because someone said I should. :-)

    Sort of the point isn't it. I acquire been able to upgrade for years now, but why? Honestly, many HAM's look needlessly intimidating and Myopic, I don't exigency the hassle. I enjoyed the worn "can do" and "what if" attitude of yesterday. The QRP crush certainly has the reform attitude, but I am not much with Code, and most of the QRP guys worship it.

    I'll just withhold tinkering around,

    Best Regards to all!

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Imagine some kid with a burning interest in short-wave radio going to a club meeting after a arduous day being assessed at school, and hearing worn buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will exist more assessment than learning in the schools and in the ham clubs.I recommend the motto 'Discimus faciendo' to ham radio. Can you recommend one? Or is Latin a inanimate language fancy incentive licensing?   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KG6WLS on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov Replyby KF4HR on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend!Post-rebuttals that provide a come-back line for each individual posted sentence or comment? Childish. Surely there are better things to do?

    Yeah, fancy getting on the radio.

      Incentive Licensing, Latin, and Trends   by N2EY on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! G3LBS writes: "Imagine some kid with a burning interest in short-wave radio going to a clubmeeting after a arduous day being assessed at school, and hearing worn bufferstalking about incentive licensing."

    Back about 1966, I *was* that kid. (Still am, when it comes to the burning interest in short-wave radio).

    And while I can't speak for plenary kids everywhere, I soundless recall what it was about Radio, and dilettante Radio, that got and kept my interest.

    I was 11 or 12 back then. When you're that age, anybody over about 25 is an worn buffer.

    I'd been directed to the local ham radio club by Sam, K3RTR, whose antenna had caught my eye. I'd read everything I could lay my hands on about radio, particularly dilettante radio, had built foxhole sets and a 2 tube regenerative, and was learning the code. (I didn't know it was conjectural to exist "hard", so I just scholarly it by listening to hams using it on the 80 meter band).

    But I needed a volunteer examiner (no caps back then) for the Novice exam, and the club was the route to find one, because for some judgement K3RTR wasn't into doing that. Navy MARS was his thing; I scholarly a lot about RTTY from Sam.

    Back in the mid-1960s, plenary US hams with a General, Conditional, Advanced or Extra had plenary operating privileges. Because of rapid growth in numbers during the 1950s and 1960s, many if not most US hams back then thought it had always been that way. In reality, that situation had only existed since February 1953; before then, using 'phone on the HF ham bands between 2.5 and 25 MHz required an Advanced or Extra.

    It made itsy-bitsy sense to me that there were four different license classes that plenary had the identical privileges. Even stranger was the fact that the Advanced was soundless carried on the books as a divorce license class even though no new ones had been issued by FCC since the conclude of 1952. But that's how it was, and what mattered to me was getting on the air, then working my route from Novice to general and finally to Extra.

    I discovered that starting about 1963, there were proposals to change back to a system which would give different privileges to the different classes. The proposals came from various groups and individuals, with thousands of comments pro-and-con, and FCC was mulling over the changes.

    The "old buffers" seemed to me to exist of three kinds.

    Some were up in arms, plenary upset that they'd acquire to win more exams to withhold their privileges. There were dire predictions that the changes would slay ham radio, that used apparatus values would plummet and new apparatus would disappear, that the bands would exist empty, and much more. They said the Advanced exam would exist incredibly technical and difficult, and that the Extra tests required about the identical skills as a Navy Radioman First Class and an EE degree. (Back then, less than 2% of US hams were Extras).

    Some had a wait-and-see attitude.

    And some were alive to to win on the challenge and accept whatever license was needed to accomplish what they wanted to accomplish in ham radio.

    I became one of that last group.

    The FCC finally decided on the changes, which became known as "incentive licensing."

    They came in three stages. First, the worn Advanced was reopened to new issues and the Novice license term was doubled to two years. As a result, I got one of the first two-year Novices issued, in the topple of 1967.

    Then in 1968 and again in 1969, parts of a four HF bands were restricted to Extra-only, or Advanced-and-Extra only. Those parts of thosee bands became less crowded, while the repose of those bands became more crowded.

    Disaster, right? conclude of ham radio, right? Well, not exactly. In fact, some very extraordinary things happened...

    First, the number of US hams, which had stopped growing in the early 1960s, began to grow again. And the growth continued for years and years, even though the test requirements had been raised far beyond what they'd been. Imagine - they made the licenses harder to get, and got more hams.

    Second, more and more US hams studied for the Advanced and Extra exams - and passed them. More than a few were young folks fancy me, who didn't realize how arduous the tests supposedly were, and simply went and did what was required, code and written.

    In my case, the Advanced was an accident. I was at the FCC office for the General, and after passing, The Examiner suggested I try the Advanced. There was no route a 14 year worn dilettante would issue no to The Man From FCC, so I tried it and passed. When the required two-years-experience for the Extra was done, I showed up at the FCC office again and earned that license. Nothing to it, really, after building rigs from surplus and worn TVs for a yoke years, and handling traffic, ragchewing and contesting on 80 and 40 CW. I had no formal training in radio, electronics or electricity back then and my Elmers were books rather than people. But a motivated kid will accomplish what needs to exist done.

    I suspect that more than a few worn buffers, then and now, don't fancy the fact that younger and to them less-worthy people just went ahead and did things fancy earning licenses and getting on the air, while they hemmed, hawed and complained. One worn buffer, who wouldn't even accept an dilettante license until 2007, disliked the belief of young people being hams so much that, about a decade ago, he proposed a minimum-age restrict of 14 years for any class of US dilettante license.

    G3LBS: "Soon there will exist more assessment than learning in the schools and in the ham clubs."

    Well, I don't know about ham clubs but I know a itsy-bitsy about schools. And the schools I know are plenary about learning, with assessment tacked on because it's required.

    G3LBS: "I recommend the motto 'Discimus faciendo' to ham radio."

    I fancy it! And yes, I know what it means.

    G3LBS: "Can you recommend one?"

    'Ne permitas bastardi te carborundum'

    is one.

    But Latin really is a inanimate language.

    Here are some more:

    'If you believe, you can achieve'

    'If it happens, it must exist possible'

    'A helping hand is most often at the conclude of your arm'

    But most of all, I correspond with AI2IA, who summed it plenary up the best:

    "Amateur radio is what you merit it for yourself"

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K9ZF on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! some folks acquire route too much time on their hands.....

    73Dan--Amateur Radio Emergency Service, Clark County Indiana. EM78elK9ZF /R no budget Rover ***QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at:<http://www.qsl.net/n9rla> List Administrator for: InHam+grid-loc+ham-booksAsk me how to link the Indiana Ham Mailing list!

      RE: Phrases in Latin   by K6LHA on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! G3LBS wrote on December 7, 2009:

    "Imagine some kid with a burning interest in short-wave radio going to a club meeting after a arduous day being assessed at school, and hearing worn buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will exist more assessment than learning in the schools and in the ham clubs. I recommend the motto 'Discimus faciendo' to ham radio. Can you recommend one? Or is Latin a inanimate language fancy incentive licensing?"

    I would recommend the Latin phrase "Primus inter pares."*

    That translates to "first among equals" and describes some of the attitudes displayed in forums and newsgroups. No matter what the subject, each respondent is MORE than "equal" to everyone else. If they are talking about their childhood they were always "smarter, more innovative, more adventurous, more skilled" than any other kid. If they managed to achieve adulthood and accept dilettante radio licenses, they are always "smarter, more knowledgeable, more intelligent, more accomplished, better than everyone" because they issue so. :-)

    * "Primus Inter Pares" was used by RCA Corporation Aviation Systems Division in the 1970s to advertise their civil aviation comm-nav radios and airborne radar sets. Some marketing person at RCA thought the phrase arrogate but the market objected and the phrase was quietly dropped. The technical property of Civil Aviation's products had already been proven prior to an "outsider" within thinking it needed Latin to sex it up in advertising. <shrug>

    AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by KE5WDI on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I am assuming the ORZ... what ever you convoke yourself is not an dilettante radio operator, but just someone that has organize his route on to eham to downgrade anyone and everyone that will read his divel....

    I could sit back without observation until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to acquire thinks "dumbed down for them". It just so happens that I know quite a few people with disabilities that could probably transmit code around your butt with both hands tied behind their back. I believe it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a stop to it.

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

    P.S. Yes I am arrogant enough of my convoke badge and designation to badge my posts on this site everytime I write something.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by W7ETA on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "When's the last time any of you advanced the know-how of radio?"

    I've been considering buying a table saw to build some DIY plenary achieve stereo speakers. If I Go that route, I can build better looking enclosures for my home made CW transmitter, regen receiver and power supplies. they would certainly exist more artful.

    Bob

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by WS4E on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I acquire only been a ham for just over 1 year (+ one month).

    I got my Tech, then my General, and then my Extra.

    I know lots of people believe getting Extra is effortless now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not acquire had a study ally who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him clarify some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

    They issue the Extra is pretty much equivalent to a associates degree in electronics, and I believe it.

    I am positive you could maybe memorize enough to pass but I wanted to know the stuff backwards and forwards, and in fact only missed a yoke of questions on the gross test.

    Being an Extra was very significant to me, because unlike many first time Ham's my entire goal was to accept on HF.

    In fact I acquire been practicing code since summer, with my goal to participate in Straight Key Night this year. My goal was accomplish CW in 1 year but thats close enough. I can read at about 20wpm, but I am trying to build some fist skills to expend a straight key at something close to 15wpm.

    So, I guess I went from being a 'NO-code Extra' to being a 'KNOW-code' Extra.

    I soundless believe that there are many of us out there that soundless want to LEARN and expend CW, I don't see anything to worry about CW going away. I besides don't see the no-code Extra as a dismal thing either.

    **LOOK EVERYONE** a new CW user?! Imagine that!

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KE5WDI on December 8, 2009I could sit back without observation until your statements reading your crap and putting a stop to it.

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

    Gee Loyd... I didn't know people down in 5sneyland knew how to read. I find it comic that you plenary withhold coming up with enuendoes that you profess to know what is wrong with others. Must exist in the water down their as the repose of us sit back and LOLLL at your assumptions when its clear you know nothing about who or what you talk about.

    When you ASSUME you know it plenary and that one is better than the other.. well as someone else said.. you people from 5 land only know where that brand on your dipers comes from... and the repose is just troll'n for loathe and discontent.

    As to my abilites in CW... I believe I mediocre around 40-45 wpm in morse and faster using american.. as they acquire been doing it now for just a few years more than any KE5 has been around. Really screws your computer up too when they change the weights around... and most of your 5sneyland buds down their accept burned out just shortly after 25 wpm. Was doing CW while you were sitting in front of you TV set watching bugs bunny and knawing on your fudgebar... well maybe that wasn't a fudge bar...LOLLLL

    Arn't these the identical handicapped people who belong to the ADA? The identical whiners who for the sheer fun of it Go around looking for people to sue when they don't accept their way? They acquire seen a lot of them accept "in your face" when they exigency a extra bux. Some accomplish it just to "get in your face" as they are frustrated troll's)

    As to your enuendo abou the ARRL... When they Go to the the FCC and say..."WE represent plenary HAMS"... and this is what they want... so the FCC does .. and then when something hits the fan... the first thing the ARRL says is... "WELL THE FCC DID IT"... Go figure. they are quick to link which ever side is winning (or can merit them money) ...and popular... exist it politically reform or not from what they acquire seen.

    Well Danny boy.. you acquire a MERRY CHRISTMAS and delighted New Year... if you can... and try not to spread so much loathe and discontent ...the south lost the war... accept over it... grin LOLLLLL

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WS4E on December 8, 2009I acquire only been a ham for just over 1 year (+ one month).

    I got my Tech, then my General, and then my Extra.

    I know lots of people believe getting Extra is effortless now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not acquire had a study ally who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him clarify some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

    I am positive you could maybe memorize enough to pass but I wanted to know the stuff backwards and forwards, and in fact only missed a yoke of questions on the gross test.

    In fact I acquire been practicing code since summer, with my goal to participate in Straight Key Night I can read at about 20wpm, build some fist skills to expend a straight key at something close to 15wpm.

    So, I guess I went from being a 'NO-code Extra' to being a 'KNOW-code' Extra.

    I soundless believe that there are many of us out there that soundless want to LEARN and expend CW--------------------------------------------------

    SE... ya doing it the right way.. too dismal that their arn't any ham clubs around to back you through the trials and work. (but you seeked out and organize your mentor) That was what ham clubs used to accomplish instead of plenary this EOC only training junk.

    Nothing wrong with 15 wpm.. its a nice speed to QSO on ... and they will exist looking for your convoke badge on SKN...congrats.CW is more than just code... its a route of thinking.. fancy learning to speek a new language. It takes time and determination... (the determination is where most fail today.. as they want things given to 'em and not labor for it fancy you did)

    We hope others follow your lead and become a KNOW-Radio ham instead of it being a sandbox for diper leakers and dump'ers that if the directions were not written on the mic... press here to talk... no one would hear 'em...which might exist a pleasurable thing...from what they acquire heard... I am positive some of the 5sneylanders are soundless contemplateing months later what the shove ON (on/off) means... LOLL

      Anonymous coward policies   by K6LHA on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KE5WDI wrote on December 8, 2009:

    "I am assuming the ORZ... what ever you convoke yourself is not an dilettante radio operator, but just someone that has organize his route on to eham to downgrade anyone and everyone that will read his divel...."

    We don't know that because e-ham policy on participants allows just anyone to accept in. That's luckless for the real dilettante community. But it is their policy and they are plenary stuck with the benevolent of frustrated, bitter-bile-filled vomit from an anonymous coward that badly needs some psychologic therapy............KE5WDI: "I could sit back without observation until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to acquire thinks "dumbed down for them". It just so happens that I know quite a few people with disabilities that could probably transmit code around your butt with both hands tied behind their back. I believe it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a stop to it."

    E-ham's policy is their policy but I question it even if they are anxious to fill up space and accept lots of "comments" on articles regardless of their content so as to appear "popular."

    On "policy" I can understand an objection and complete blocking-out from participation even on the basis of using an alliteration to a swear word. I've been blocked out for using the phonetic alphabet substitute for two words. Okay, I toughed it out, complained to e-ham management, eventually re-instated. I didn't apologize for that. I've been a national for a long time and am a intentional enlistee in the US Army during a wartime (the active angle of the Korean War). No one on e-ham article forums is required to attach their life on the line as was required in the USA military. What I cannot understand under any circumstances is this absolute "freedom" for anyone else to accomplish what can exist described as a total loathe CRIME observation as this "QRZ..." anonymous coward did such as (quoting):

    QRZ...: "We hope others follow your lead and become a KNOW-Radio ham instead of it being a sandbox for diper leakers and dump'ers that if the directions were not written on the mic... press here to talk... no one would hear 'em...which might exist a pleasurable thing...from what they acquire heard... I am positive some of the 5sneylanders are soundless contemplateing months later what the shove ON (on/off) means... LOLL"

    That was just a sample of the "atitudinal BILE" vomited by this creature...freely, without any censorship efforts. Done ANONYMOUSLY to avoid any identification and workable physical harm to this warped nonsense in a HOBBY activity. Yes, people, they MUST PROTECT their "rights" to spout hatred and vitriol. Why? Is that "the radio dilettante way?!? Yes...it is bad, bad, dismal to expend even an alliteration to a swear word, but it is perfectly "okay" to voice TOTAL loathe and DENIGRATION against one activity interest group!? Yes, I guess it is.

    Until e-ham management takes a pleasurable ogle at its own policy, I will not bother considering subscribing as I once (perhaps naively) did..............As to the original topic of "trends in license classes," I can issue that this palpable BIGOTRY of OLD-style "ham radio must-do" soundless exists AFTER regulations acquire legally changed. I acquire stored textual references to that, visible in NPRM comments and replies to comments on every matter of USA dilettante radio regulations since Restructuring was up for comment. There isn't any "trend," it is merely vomiting of more loathe against newcomers who don't accomplish what the old-timers issue they MUST do.

    For over a half century I've heard countless DEMANDS by some that I must "follow tradition" or by hook or by "honor it" by doing inevitable things...like using morse code. Now, I'm 77 and a military veteran. When I was a young male, it was TRADITIONAL to Go volunteer for military service for one's country during a wartime. That started before the American Revolutionary War but seems to acquire ebbed and slowed down with the Vietnam War. But..."patriotism" for worn dilettante radio "traditions" is regarded by a few vocal yokels as MORE significant than defending one's country? Of course it is to minds that acquire never seen harm...but are bent. They are "off the map" if they believe that hobby activity "patriotism" is by hook or by more significant than national patriotism.

    On the other hand, these traditionalist super-patriots may exist simply USING dilettante radio to puff themselves up in importance, significance in the alleged sense of yesterday. Some of those try to CONTROL others...by insults, intimidation, denigration in order to accomplish as THEY say. They remind me of little, tiny dictators trying to RULE by any means possible. The capacity to Rule can exist an aphrodesiac to some, an addictive one, so much so that they don't realize they are doing it. Those that screen their identity are just a few neurons away from the Terrorist who Hides, then attacks. They want to exist invisible so that they can strike again, satisfying their hatred and frustration. Their dilettante radio erudition is that of the PAST, their references being copious material published in the PAST. When faced with a future, they acquire itsy-bitsy to Go on. The future is an UNKNOWN, scary in its uncertainty, especially when they don't know how to ply it. The effortless route is to linger with worn things that the invisible cowards pretension to "know." That is EASY. No effort. A "security blanket" for their warped souls.

    I acquire seen evidence that there ARE long-timers who are openhanded enough to let newcomers find out for themselves without coercion. They are few to referee by quantity in forums. No demands to "do as *I* say" from them. USA dilettante radio is a intentional activity with plenty of OPTIONS available within allocations. There is NO regulatory demand that licensees MUST expend any particular mode/modulation over any other allocated mode/modulation. Just linger within frequency boundaries, follow regulations, and play nice. But, the super-patriotic traditionalist DEMANDS that they accomplish as they command. When they don't, these traditionalists accept irate and spiteful. plenary of this "brotherhood of hams" is a lot of hypocritical BS concerning them. They only want plenary to OBEY the traditionalist super-patriot. Such obeyance is not brotherhood. It is not traditionalist. It is FAR from patriotic. It is just dictatorship from overgrown schoolyard bullies.

    If they acquire so many OPTIONS in their current USA dilettante radio regulations, WHY is there so much outcry about using only "CW?" WHY are they to exist subjected to the filthy bile from an anonymous coward hiding behind a pseudonym? WHY can't they just pick and pick what THEY fancy to expend or try?

    Can they actually pick something for ourselves without the traditionalist super-patriot ham's permission? I'm genesis to doubt it..............KE5WDI: "P.S. Yes I am arrogant enough of my convoke badge and designation to badge my posts on this site everytime I write something."

    Darn straight! [sorry, I couldn't write 'damn straight' for awe of being locked-out again] I've never tried to screen my identity on any computer-modem communications venue. I acquire the courage of my convictions as well as my own identity, acquire had that well before being licensed in the dilettante radio service. I don't acquire any respect for those that want to screen behind pseudonyms.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Anonymous coward policies   by QRZDXR2 on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Anonymous coward policiesby AF6AY on December 8, 2009-------------------------------------------Dang... sorry I went to sleep reading your tripe n trolling that went on... and on... and on and on... with not much to issue one might add.

    I'll acquire to withhold mine short so the server disk doesn't overflow after you left your super long desertation/ novel. (it amazes me that some people can talk for hours... and soundless not issue what a customary person can in 1 min) acquire you thought about running for ARRL political office. You would exist great.. only problem is most don't know (or care) what you Go on... and on talking about... that is so far off topic that they can Go win a nap, a shower, acquire lunch, accomplish their taxes and approach back never missing a thought... as you contenue to ramble on...and on...

    (Man your electric edison bill for the radio must exist akin to the national debt if you transmitt that long.. pleasurable thing they invented transistors and FETs or the transmitting tube industry would exist showing a stockmarket booming extend and your back yard littered with worn worn out finals) Only one other person you acquire to overcome to exist No 1. and that was WA6GVG.. now that was a guy who could flatten finals nightly. But, not to worry.. he died. I believe his wife shot him (7 times with a 6 shooter). Something about sleep depervation..or stress..or something fancy that... LOLLLLLLL

    would prize it... if you could Go back and give us a exec summary of what you were trying to say... see them guys down in 5sneyland... are soundless stuck on see DICK AND JANE readers.. and your posting probably now takes the darwin award for longest verbage with no real revelations or much constructive to say... are you and Al Gore buds? grin...

    Thanks.. and they would prize it if you could accomplish it in 10 words or less. (again for the benifit of them 5sneylanders' )

    Awww...You know how us worn guys are. If its not stimulating... they accept bored and topple asleep...heck I logged at least 3 or 4 hours on your ramblings and ravings... LOLLL

    Yep what ham radio turned into these days...novelties.

    Any wonder why CW is growning in popularity...

    I see that vibroplex was sold to a new guy... Mitch must acquire given up the manufacture and sales of them. Sorry to see but ogle forward to having the tradition contenue with the newbie.

    oh well exist watchful who you convoke a coward... one might win that as being offensive and you accept ban again for innuendoes.

    Merry Christmas all.. (and that includes you too AF6AY)

    C U on SKN CW. and may the DX exist good. (sri e not hr u on Leonard af6ay, best Go to HRO n buy a key and accomplish fancy the other guy did.).... .. --... ...-- ... --.- .-. --.. -.. .-. ..--- .-.-.-

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KB9MNM on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! My 2 cents worth:When I got my Tech in '96, I was arrogant to hold the class of Ham Radio Operator. I soundless am arrogant to this day as a Tech. My plans to upgrade to general are there, but time,work, cost of apparatus and family life minister to overshadow this dream. I will eventually upgrade and indulge in the HF bands. One day.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AD7VH on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "When's the last time any of you advanced the know-how of radio?" KC5NYJ:

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham acquire done many things to foster the know-how of radio, so I don't know where you accept off. I acquire been doing quite a bit of labor to help mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to foster radio.

    I was very against dropping the code, but what is done, is done... To bitch about it is not going to change anything. I managed to pass the 5wpm code test after only studying it for a itsy-bitsy over 2 weeks, with a qualify hearing loss (coupled with tinnitus), and working 50 hours a week. I am not able to copy code very well anymore because of the ringing in my ears, but I am positive that I could soundless pass a 5wpm code test without a problem!

    The other thing that is a crock: these people that hold the Advanced class, but yet won't upgrade. I was not going to let my pride accept in the route of getting the Extra class. I didn't supervision what would acquire been required to accept it... I was going to accept it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more erudition than was required to pass the test, that is plenary that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AD7VH on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "When's the last time any of you advanced the know-how of radio?" KC5NYJ:

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham acquire done many things to foster the know-how of radio, so I don't know where you accept off. I acquire been doing quite a bit of labor to help mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to foster radio.

    I was very against dropping the code, but what is done, is done... To bitch about it is not going to change anything. I managed to pass the 5wpm code test after only studying it for a itsy-bitsy over 2 weeks, with a qualify hearing loss (coupled with tinnitus), and working 50 hours a week. I am not able to copy code very well anymore because of the ringing in my ears, but I am positive that I could soundless pass a 5wpm code test without a problem!

    The other thing that is a crock: these people that hold the Advanced class, but yet won't upgrade. I was not going to let my pride accept in the route of getting the Extra class. I didn't supervision what would acquire been required to accept it... I was going to accept it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more erudition than was required to pass the test, that is plenary that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I know an American guy who passed plenary the exams in one day but can't link two pieces of wire together. He boasts about his achievement and suffers contour xenophobia. Maybe he will try to link two wires and thereby electrocute himself.Of course they in England had to exist more watchful because they acquire the superior 250 volts. This means they can acquire thinner more springy cables on plenary their appliances, particularly soldering irons, 3 kW heaters in their shacks and almost zero-insertion plugs in their sockets. American household sockets are disgusting. On the flip side twice as many people are electrocuted in England. However their Queen and Camilla protect us, fancy Kings Bush and Obama.Get a life guys ham radio is (a) a hobby, (b) life itself, not a route of life. It is almost as pleasurable as sex. It is not an electronic ambulance.Buffalo Gil W2/G3LBS   Logic, Bias, Anonymity   by N2EY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! A few thoughts:

    Bias in a posting can exist subtle or obvious. Leaving out a relevant fact is one way. Another route is to condition an belief - or a wish - as if it is a fact.

    Errors in logic are plenary over the residence too. The most common IMHO are the "ad hominem" error and its mirror image, the "appeal to authority" error. Both are the attempt to expend the identity of the speaker to supersede a watchful examination of the reasoning and facts. When you see someone giving their resume as a judgement why you should accept their statements, rather than backing those statements up with sound logic and verifiable facts, you're probably seeing one or both of those errors in action. That's because a person who really has a sound dispute doesn't exigency to expend them.

    The louder someone declares that they are "unbiased" and/or "objective", the more likely it is that they're not.

    Which brings us to anonymity. Of course some folks are anonymous because it's easier to troll that way. But being anonymous, by itself, doesn't merit someone a troll nor change the verity of what they say. Their statements soundless acquire to exist judged by the identical rules of logic and factual evidence as any other.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Various Things   by N2EY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To W7ETA: If you acquire the leeway and the money, consider a pleasurable radial-arm saw. I always preferred one to a table saw. Helped build a yoke of folded horns with one.

    To WS4E: pleasurable on ya! I hope to labor you in SKN. What bands accomplish you work?

    Don't know if you accomplish territory Day, but CW ops are often needed. At the local FD operation, a yoke of us who Run the CW station routinely deliver more points than the repose of the operation combined, even when the ratio is 1 CW station to three or four 'phone and data stations.

    To AD7VH: I believe if a person is satisfied with their license, they shouldn't exist pressured to upgrade. They're the ones missing out on having plenary privileges!

    As for dropping the code test and other changes, yes, it doesn't change a thing to gripe about it. But plenary discussions are not griping; it's significant to know what actually happened, and why. And to see how things acquire really changed or stayed the same.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To many long-winded posts.   Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by W8JII on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Here is statistic for you all. 18 times over several months Len has made us vigilant that, quote---"On 25 February 2007 I took (and passed) plenary test elements in front of a four-member ARRL VEC examination team. plenary four team members separately checked my concede sheets. I got NO special favors. Not even being 74 at the time". Congratulations Len. Now give it a rest   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N8QBY on December 9, 2009 said Mail this to a friend!To many long-winded posts.

    N8QBY is that why you spell 'Too' as 'To'?

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AC9HE on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Of plenary the hobbies that I acquire ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than plenary of them attach together.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Even counting marriage?   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WS4E on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! >Of plenary the hobbies that I acquire ever enjoyed, this one>has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative,>bassackwards people than plenary of them attach together.

    Nah, computer technology forums are even worse.

    I guess you acquire never felt the wrath of the Mac-vs-PC arguments or the Unix-vs-VMS ones for us worn timers. :)

    At least in ham circles there are a few polite people around in-between the noise.

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To G3LBS: What does my expend of the word, "To" acquire to accomplish with my commenting on how long some posts are. The word to is used as a function word, and can exist used many different ways, as can the word, "too". You shouldn't try and school someone else, when you don't acquire control of your own faculties.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KB6QXM on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC6HCJ wrote: Of plenary the hobbies that I acquire ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than plenary of them attach together.

    I know this may exist before your entrance into the hobby, but before the FCC/ARRL started messing around with the license requirements and folding to pressure to these disabilities groups, there was not this 2-sided back and forth as they see now.

    In the earlier days before the exigency to always exist Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not accept a license. That was it. The PC police to merit positive everyone is included as they accomplish not want to outrage anyone lowered the standards so low that my labrador retreivers could pass the tests.

    There is something about NOT pleasing everyone. When I was testing for my black belt in VERY traditional Japanese karate, did they lower the standards for me because I was having difficulty. NO!!! Either you met the requirements passed down by tradition or you just did not wear the belt. PERIOD!!

    In college when I was getting my degree, did my professors issue Oh I see that you are having difficulty, so forget this requirement. Either you passed, changed your degree program, or you repeated the course. Educational standards based on tradition.

    The identical should Go for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you slack plenary the route around.

    In reference to the Ham that made a observation about the pride of not upgrading to Extra from Advanced class because of pride, you simply accomplish not understand.

    Do I want to exist in a class of license where the requirements were known or accomplish I want to exist lumped into a group with some people that actually had to accomplish a lot of arduous labor to accept their extra class license and besides people that had to accomplish very little. NO!!

    I would rather stand with the few arrogant then the masses due to some Arrl/FCC belief of political correctness. No thank you.

    Feel free to flame me. accomplish you notice that I am not hiding behind some secretive account, no I am posting with my FCC generated license.

    I know that I will never change what happened. Political Correctness and openhanded minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries.

    I am not a conservative, but I would issue a qualify with a slight tilt to the right.

    Enjoy the hobby for what it is and what it has turned into. If not, find another hobby. I know I acquire many hobbies.

    73

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Darn, I forgot to attach a question expense after my first line in my last post. I am positive I lost points with Gilly. :o)   Pride, Standards and Political Correctness   by N2EY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM writes: "before the FCC/ARRL started messing around with the license requirements and folding to pressure to these disabilities groups, there was not this 2-sided back and forth as they see now."

    Can you point me to objective evidence that the FCC was under pressure from disabilities groups?

    I inquire this because the leisurely erosion of license test standards goes back 30+ years. And because the code waivers came from a request to George Bush I by a now-dead King who was a ham.

    KB6QXM: "In the earlier days before the exigency to always exist Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not accept a license. That was it."

    It's exactly the identical now! The requirements are different, that's all.

    KB6QXM: "The PC police to merit positive everyone is included as they accomplish not want to outrage anyone lowered the standards so low that my labrador retreivers could pass the tests."

    We went to VE testing back in the early 1980s. When that happened, the written exam question pools became public domain.

    It would exist really bewitching to accept the question pool from, say, 1984 and compare it to today's. I wonder how different they would be?

    KB6QXM: "There is something about NOT pleasing everyone. When I was testing for my black belt in VERY traditional Japanese karate, did they lower the standards for me because I was having difficulty. NO!!! Either you met the requirements passed down by tradition or you just did not wear the belt. PERIOD!!"

    We could accept a lot more people to Run the marathon if the distance was reduced from the traditional 26 miles 385 yards.

    KB6QXM: "Educational standards based on tradition."

    Why should educational standards exist based on tradition? Shouldn't they exist based on what the student needs to know today?

    For example, in elevated school I was *required* to win two years of Latin. I'd acquire been much better off if they'd let me win typing, or more science courses, or Basic computing. Latin was a inanimate language even then.

    KB6QXM: "The identical should Go for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you slack plenary the route around."

    It's not about tradition; it's about knowing what needs to exist known. Since they acquire more modes, more technologies and more bands today, it seems analytic that the requirements should exist more comprehensive, not less.

    btw, nowhere in section 97 does the word "hobby" appear. Not even once. Even today, the FCC will not accept the excuse that "it's a hobby".

    KB6QXM: "Do I want to exist in a class of license where the requirements were known or accomplish I want to exist lumped into a group with some people that actually had to accomplish a lot of arduous labor to accept their extra class license and besides people that had to accomplish very little. NO!!"

    That's fine as far as it goes. But is your sense of pride and self-worth as a radio dilettante really plenary that connected to the tests you took years ago to accept the license?

    And as far as "liberals" vs. "conservatives", consider this:

    The elevated standards set by the changes known as "incentive licensing" took residence under the JFK/LBJ administrations.

    The change to the VE system and published question pools took residence under the Reagan administration.

    The nocodetest Technician and code waivers came about under the first Bush administration.

    The restructuring of 2000 took residence under the Clinton administration

    The conclude of code testing took residence under the second Bush administration.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by N4JTE on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can they attach a fork in this?   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM wrote on 9 Dec 09:

    "KC6HCJ wrote: Of plenary the hobbies that I acquire ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than plenary of them attach together."

    KB6QXM: "I know this may exist before your entrance into the hobby, but before the FCC/ARRL started messing around with the license requirements and folding to pressure to these disabilities groups, there was not this 2-sided back and forth as they see now."

    I strongly disagree with this based on publicly-available documents that anyone can view on the FCC website, namely the Comments and Replies to Comments on plenary the NPRMs, 18 (!) Petitions that eventually led to the December 2006 Notice that code testing would exist eliminated from USA dilettante radio license examinations. That is a 9 year span of time. What is MISSING from them are plenary the "disabilities groups" that allegedly "pressured" the FCC into changing things. The creation of the no-code-test Technician class license happened in 1990, in coerce in 1991. The FCC does not acquire plenary those NPRM documents on-line yet but copies of the 1990 Notice acquire been obtained and circulated.

    The alleged "pressure" came from INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS who were seeking to modernize regulations. It was a LEGAL process and allowed plenary citizens to participate...if they really CARED about it. Percentage wise, FEW licensees did. It was "too much trouble" for so many to actually investigate the situations...they just wanted to play with their radios and leave the "enforcement" and legalities to the ARRL. Fermentation seems to exist a pleasurable preservative since the sour grapes of so many old-timers over a decade is soundless poured out on forum participants.................KB6QXM: "In the earlier days before the exigency to always exist Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not accept a license. That was it."

    Incorrect. That requirement was in the LAW and attach there by the FCC, not by any "politically correct" groups or individuals. What was a failure on that statement was that, to exist granted an dilettante radio license, an applicant had to meet the lawful requirements AT THE TIME. Those requirements acquire been changing. Witness three major recent milestones: Incentive Licensing; Restructuring; Elimination of code testing entire. plenary of those major changes were achieved by democratic process with the FCC hearing plenary sides. That included the ARRL and its legal solid on retainer arguing for what can exist defined as the ONLY "politically correct" organization. The ARRL once had a formidable influence on the FCC but that has continued to wane over the last few decades..................KB6QXN: "The PC police to merit positive everyone is included as they accomplish not want to outrage anyone lowered the standards so low that my labrador retreivers could pass the tests."

    If you had a DOG that could read, you would exist better off making money as its agent in array business. :-)

    Since privatization of plenary radio operator license testing, commercial or amateur, the NCVEC Question Pool Committee has authored plenary the test questions and answers. The NCVEC QPC is composed of licensed amateurs. Contact them with your venting about alleged super-simplicity of written testing. If you are soundless not satisfied, write a PETITION and present it to the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. [there were no less than 18 Petitions up for observation between onset of Restructuring and before the NPRM on eliminating morse code testing]...............KB6QXN: "There is something about NOT pleasing everyone. When I was testing for my black belt in"

    Operation of a radio transmitter is FAR from any human-to-human physical contact sport.

    KB6QXN: "In college when I was getting my degree, did my professors issue Oh I see that you are"

    Since the creation of the FCC in 1934 by the Communications Act of that year, even with a few amendments that came after, the FCC is *NOT* chartered by LAW as an academic institution. Neither has its three predecessor agencies been so chartered................KB6QXN: "The identical should Go for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you slack plenary the route around."

    When you attempt "analogies" that cannot apply you are either going bananas or acquire a needy grasp on the USA legislative and democratic-principled processes. They are a nation of laws. LAW can exist changed. It is not fixed in stone, protected by armor plate from any workable future change.

    "Lowering standards?" Standards are not so inviolate that plenary those existing when YOU were FIRST LICENSED IN dilettante RADIO are to exist kept forever. If you soundless believe that, then you are exhibiting selfish, very self-centered viewpoints. Laws CAN exist changed. The USA has a process by which to accomplish such changes. That CHANGE happened that you did not correspond with is NOT the "fault" of the Law. It falls back on selfish individuals who will never concede "losing."..................KB6QXN: "I know that I will never change what happened. Political Correctness and openhanded minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries."

    I detect your irritation that plenary will not ogle to YOU for "correctness" in everything. Sigh...................KB6QXN: "Enjoy the hobby for what it is and what it has turned into. If not, find another hobby. I know I acquire many hobbies."

    Good luck in your many other hobbies. I'm positive you can win every sole karate contest with your attitude, always approach out on top with your superior abilities. accomplish they stand in awe of you or just Go "awwwww....?"

      RE: Pride, Standards and Political Correctness   by K6LHA on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY tried to attach a political spin on this 9 Dec 09:--------"And as far as "liberals" vs. "conservatives", consider this:

    The elevated standards set by the changes known as "incentive licensing" took residence under the JFK/LBJ administrations.

    The change to the VE system and published question pools took residence under the Reagan administration.

    The nocodetest Technician and code waivers came about under the first Bush administration.

    The restructuring of 2000 took residence under the Clinton administration

    The conclude of code testing took residence under the second Bush administration."---------The FCC is an INDEPENDENT USA government agency. Neither John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson, William J. Clinton, Ronald Reagan, James E. Carter, George Herbert Walker Bush, nor George W. Bush had dilettante radio licenses...nor were they "controlling" any aspect of the FCC. The FCC operates under LAWS of Congress passed by the Senate and the House.

    Trying vainly to "blame" a political party with controlling or even influencing Comments made to the FCC by individual citizens...on things that passed or did not pass YOUR personal desires is ludicrous. It is almost as laughable as the folks who try to sluff off decisions made by the FCC as "pre-ordained" by some influence group.

    The INFLUENCE GROUP that bore weight on the FCC decisions on Notices of Proposed Rule Making were INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS making their case. If you, as a sole commenter on one NPRM could NOT merit a convincing change, the only "blame" to merit is by pointing to and identifying yourself. It is clear that your political orientation is to the Democratic party. That has NO real presence on the matter that affected the change or not-change of trends in USA dilettante radio license classes over the last three years.

    If you really, really looked at the final Notice of decisions on matters before the FCC, you would find plenary of the respondents to NPRMs listed. If you really, really read plenary of the Comments and Replies to Comments on any NPRM, it would exist rare indeed to find any overt political party influences by commenters.

    The FCC decides on NPRMs of plenary civil radio services in the USA. It isn't just about dilettante radio. dilettante radio is one of the SMALLER radio services in the USA. It is "politically" the smallest since it directly affects a minority national demographic. "Mass Media" (formerly known as Broadcasting) is perhaps the largest because there is direct consequence to any national or household that has a broadcast receiver, audio or video.

    As to your observation about "slow eorsion of standards" in USA dilettante radio, it demonstrates that YOU consider yourself far better than any government agency in knowledge, law, and many other things. There is ONE federal agency to regulate plenary civil radio in the USA. There are NO "supreme leaders" of any radio service except for some delusional types who believe THEY are far more knowledgeable than any government agency.

    The FCC has been in existance for 75 years, chartered by the Communications Act of 1934. It has tested and approved methods of CHANGING regulatory laws and plenary decisions on change are published in the Federal Register. In some cases, decisions acquire approach before Congress and some were reversed, but those were minor in the overall view. Those who cannot accept CHANGE in law and resist such CHANGES can exist defined as low-level anarchists, even small-time dictators who see only themselves as some benevolent of "role-model" and/or "standard bearer." Those who fancy themselves "better" than the law can expect to exist up against others who believe selfishly about being the "boss of all" and only one of you will (think) you "won." Neither one won anything except disfavor of plenary of us who accepted change. They outnumber you. believe about that.

    AF6AY

      RE: Pride, Standards and Political Correctness   by W7ETA on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! As always, worthy prose Len--easy to follow datum presentation.

    "total numbers just aren't keeping up with a continuing USA population increase,"

    On mug value, that isn't surprising. They can assume people dying had better capacity and desire to become hams, vrs people just born. If one could ogle at a sampling of capacity and desire in new borns, to talk with others, my speculation would exist borne out.

    Come to believe of it, new borns might programed to sob if they acquire to learning CW?

    Best from TucsonBob

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by N2EY on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N4JTE asks: "Can they attach a fork in this?"

    Why?

    It's just a discussion about the number of US dilettante radio licenses and the distribution through the various classes. Yes, three years is a very short timeline.

    Here's a quick summary:

    The number of Novices has droppedThe number of Technicians has increasedThe number of Technician Pluses has dropped, and will soon achieve zero - in section because FCC renews them as TechniciansThe number of Generals has increasedThe number of Advanceds has droppedThe number of Extras has increasedThe total number of US hams has increased, but not as much as the US population.

    Of course no one of that really answers the arduous questions such as "how active are those hams" and "what's the long term outlook"?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Short Version of a Long Story   by N2EY on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I became a radio dilettante in the 1960s. The situation then had a lot of parallels with today.

    From the conclude of WW2 until the early 1960s, US dilettante radio numbers had grown steadily, both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the population. Lots of new hams, lots of ham apparatus manufacturers, lots of young people getting licenses. Some issue it was a Golden Age.

    But in the early 1960s the growth in US dilettante license numbers stopped dead. Some years the total held steady, some years it dropped, some years it climbed a tiny bit. Overall it stayed the same, even as the US population kept growing.

    Some said ham radio was too old-fashioned; who wanted HF, Morse Code and tube radios in the solid-state microwave-relay computerized Space Age?

    Some said the rising expense and complexity of the new SSB apparatus shut out too many people.

    Some said it was the lack of sunspots, the rise of CB, the many alternatives in electronics.

    Some said it was the threat of "incentive licensing" and the license requirements.

    Some said it was the young people. They had the counterculture, antiwar protesting, rock-and-roll, drugs, free love, and much more. Some said ham radio was route too square to exist accepted by hip young folks who were in a much different groove. Bummer!

    Some apparatus manufacturers disappeared from the dilettante radio market. Others reduced their lines, or kept selling modified versions of their worn stuff. Imported Japanese stuff began crowding American ham gear off the shelves.

    Woe and dismay! Ham radio was doomed! The numbers proved it, they couldn't even withhold up with the baby boom! When the worn codgers died off, that would exist the conclude - 1980 at the latest!

    Now it's 40+ years later. dilettante radio is soundless here. There are more hams, more things to accomplish in ham radio, more bands/modes/technologies to pick from.

    And they soundless acquire the doomsayers.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by N3QE on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > The identical should Go for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it> is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering> standard, you slack plenary the route around.

    What standards acquire been lowered? I got my Novice ticket at age 10 and my Advanced at age 13. Back when you got your ticket by testing at an FCC territory office, and the tests were plenary about tube radios and dipoles and the CW and phone corps edges.

    College, a career, a family got in the route of me doing much ham radio after that but my school and jobs were technical and I did learn the new technologies if not expend them on the air in ham radio.

    Finally, I accept back on the air again (CW - it had always been my upright love) just a few years ago and determine to upgrade to Extra. I open the study reserve and plenary I can issue is:

    WOW.

    I mean, back when I was a kid, I did manage to device out how to jaundice tube amplifiers, ogle at trapezoid patterns on scopes to adjust modulation, record how to expend VR tubes to accomplish delayed CW keying, knew how to adjust phasing rigs for SSB etc. It was hard, I know I really was scraping bottom on getting a passing score on my Advanced test back then, but I did manage 70% or whatever the passing score was.

    But to exist honest I was stunned with plenary the new modes and rules and accompanying regulations I had to know for the new 21st century Extra test. Space operation? dilettante TV? plenary those new digital modes? (Back when I was a kid, it was Baudot RTTY or nothing! The FCC had not yet approved ASCII...)

    Technically, I had kept up with many but not plenary of the advances in technology, and I didn't acquire a huge problem with that side of the test. But rule-wise, wow, almost everything was new to me.

    Am I arrogant of what I scholarly as a kid about building and adjusting tube rigs? Yeah, sure. But it positive would rotate off any new kids wanting to accept into the hobby for us to coerce them to learn it just because they did. There's plenty of new stuff for them to learn instead (and for you and me to snare up on).

    And I soundless labor exclusively CW.

    Tim.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by AC9HE on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I try not to post on this forum because it tends to draw flamers.........to the moth. I stand by my statement that I made in an earlier post, although when people are quoting me they are not posting my convoke correctly, oh well......details.

    I read some of the immediate replies to my post and they only supported my statement with the exception of one that did more than advocate it.

    I find it particularly bewitching when someone post a reply to a topic by intentionally boasting about their accomplishments like, when I was a brain surgeon you had to open the skull with your teeth, did the medical school let me forgo this test because I had wooden teeth..........no I chomped until I was through it. These are the people that post their reply with their five paragraph responses stuff with self boasting and then Go back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the magnificient person they believe themselves to be.

    Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I acquire my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the apparatus that I have. I would fancy to accept my general and my extra some day down the road but for now this is the extent that I intend to endulge myself into this hobby. I find it rather taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are soundless very assiduous with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they indulge in the hobby, they accomplish so at the flat in which they choose. I expend my apparatus maybe three four times a week and indulge in doing so very much. I acquire other hobbies as well and accomplish not emerse myself into them any more than I desire or that my economic flat will allow. I would imagine that there are other "tech" operators that read these post that belittle those of us that "choose" to indulge in the hobby at this level.

    The other day I was driving down the interstate and pulled into a repose area. There were several tractor trailers there. When I went into the vending machine district I talked to several drivers and never once did they divulge me because I didn't acquire a CDL, that I didn't deserve to drive on the highway. You see I don't acquire a CDL because at this time in my life I accomplish not intend to drive a tractor trailer nor accomplish I own one. If at some point I determine to drive one I will obtain a CDL. Does it involve that I accomplish not acquire the inteligence to obtain a CDL? I would believe not as I acquire held a CDL in the past.

    Does anyone understand the reference here. I expend the apparatus that a tech license gives me the privilage to use. I accomplish not have, not accomplish I at this time own HF apparatus so accomplish not exigency a general or Extra license. accomplish I acquire the erudition to obtain them?I acquire taken the test on line dozens of times and passed them. Will I rush out and accept one so I can talk on the identical apparatus that I talk on already............ No more so then I will rush out and accept a CDL so I can drive my sedan down the interstate.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by W5ESE on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > total numbers just aren't keeping up with> a continuing USA population increase

    Baloney.

    Over the long term, dilettante Radio licenses havevery much kept up with the extend in thecountry's population.

    When I was first licensed (1976), amateurradio operators represented between 0.13-0.17%of the population.

    Today, they comprise over 0.2% of the USpopulation.

    Year_Population_# Hams_Hams as % of US Population1913 97225000 2000 0.002%1914 99111000 5000 0.005%1916 101961000 6000 0.006%1921 108538000 10809 0.010%1922 110049000 14179 0.013%1930 123202624 19000 0.015%1940 132164569 56000 0.042%1950 151325798 87000 0.057%1960 179323175 230000 0.128%1970 203211926 263918 0.130%1980 226545805 393353 0.174%1990 248709873 502677 0.202%1997 267783607 678733 0.253%2000 281421906 682240 0.242%2005 296410404 662600 0.224%2006 299291772 657814 0.220%

    73Scott W5ESE

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by N2EY on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE: One more data point:

    The current US population is about 306 million.

    The number of current unexpired US dilettante licenses held by individuals is 681,637.

    Works out to 0.223%

    Next year is the census. Will exist bewitching to see what the numbers are then.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Standards, Policies and Politics   by N2EY on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N3QE: When folks talk about "lowering of standards", they acquire a bunch of different things in mind.

    Sure, there's the code testing reduction and elimination. But that's not plenary that changed.

    In the worn days they didn't acquire access to the actual braindumpsmp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass plenary tests for a given license on the first try at the identical session. 30 day wait to retest, you couldn't just pay another fee and accept another go. Exam sessions were held on weekday mornings in FCC offices, which meant a half-day or more off labor or waiting for a school holiday that wasn't a Federal holiday. The test fee was as elevated as $9, which when you adjust for inflation is about $50 in today's money - pass or fail.

    Yes, there are lots of rules/regs questions in the modern tests. Yet the size and number of tests is smaller, so those rules/regs questions minister to shove out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today minister to cover a lot of subjects, but not in much depth. The worn tests covered fewer subjects in a lot more detail. Which is better is a matter of opinion.

    What it plenary meant in exercise was that the typical ham would learn the things that might exist on the test backwards, forwards and upside down to exist positive of a pass on the first go. win Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what contour the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to exist absolutely positive of being able to unravel any benevolent of Ohm's Law problem. But when you know exactly what the questions will be, it makes sense to focus on being able to unravel those problems only.

    The changes don't involve everyone today just memorizes the braindumpsmp;A and doesn't learn anything in the process. Far from it! But it does involve that the test method is very different - and that's a change in standards.

    There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which engage to win someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone acquire offered even a "Novice In A Day" class back-when?

    Consider that recently the CEPT folks decided that only Advanceds and Extras qualified for a plenary CEPT reciprocal license, after years and years of accepting the US general license as well.

    Nobody is adage that hams today should acquire to pass the exact identical tests as those given 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. But at the identical time, it seems rather odd when an Extra doesn't know how to merit a simple wire dipole.

    Boil it plenary down to this: Which would you consider easier to pass:

    An exam where you knew the general subjects that would exist tested

    or

    An exam where you knew the general subjects that would exist tested AND could see every one of the actual braindumpsmp;A that could exist on the test ahead of time?

    None of those test-method changes came about because the ARRL, ADA or big numbers of hams or would-be hams asked for them. They were the result of cost-saving moves by FCC, driven by the budget-cuts and policies of various administrations. Running test sessions at FCC territory offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost plenary of the labor done by unpaid Volunteer Examiners.

    The FCC is a joint commission, which means it answers to both the Executive and the Legislative branches. And while the White House and the Congress might not accept involved in the actual regs too much, they set the general policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding. ogle at plenary the advocate Bush II gave to BPL for just one example. ogle at how they got medical code-test waivers back in 1990 for another.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by KB6QXM on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! One more datapoint:

    Of the 306 Million people in the US, it is estimated that over 12 million of those are illegally here.

    So accomplish they lower the number to 294 Million? That would skew the percentage a bit! Many are not citizens, but visitors on labor visas.

    Can these people obtain ham radio licenses???

    Hopefully the 2010 census will list the illegal population, so they can accept more accurate calculations.

      Standards, Policies and Politics = Stagnant   by K4RAF on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Since the tests acquire removed the technical aspects & replaced them with archaic rules, the hobby has become a control battleground.

    One person mentioned "high power, elevated speed links". Well I know several hams who operate on ham bands fancy 900MHz, 2.4, 3.4 & 5GHz with OFDM for broadband internet. You'll never see a callsign on any of it. They just design links & point-multi-point systems with off the shelf parts to operate under section 15.

    No amps, just pleasurable antennas & pleasurable radios. Are they hurting anyone? Not likely. They are actually serving folks who depend on them. Note to hams: IF you exigency a power amp or heliax on 802.11(x) OFDM, don't even rotate it on. You don't acquire clue.

    The inability to adopt to progressive communications methods & truly serve the community has stunted the growth of a once worthy technical hobby. EMCOMM wannabes should exist guerrilla wi-fi guys. Drop it in, hook it up, power it up, connect up, walk away... Video, VoIP, SMS, etc... Nice scenario that happened in New Orleans during Katrina. They weren't hams, but they SHOULD acquire BEEN!

    The quest for control, endless "You can't accomplish that..." & total lack of technical embrace has caused one result: Stagnation...

    Feel free to write but it is obvious truth, from where I sit. I acquire been licensed long enough to see it...

    Rafwifidx@gmail

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by N2EY on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM:

    12 MILLION! Wow!!

    However, if they're here on labor visas, they're not here illegally.

    Citizenship used to exist a license requirement, but not any more, so legal resident aliens can accept licenses. But I doubt many illegals would give their personal info to a Federal agency!

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by K6LHA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC9HGJ posted on 10 Dec 09:

    "I find it particularly bewitching when someone post a reply to a topic by intentionally boasting about their accomplishments like, when I was a brain surgeon you had to open the skull with your teeth, did the medical school let me forgo this test because I had wooden teeth..........no I chomped until I was through it. These are the people that post their reply with their five paragraph responses stuff with self boasting and then Go back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the magnificient person they believe themselves to be."

    I've encounterd the very identical attitudes for a helf century. Kinda reminds me of the amusing saying, "When I was young they whittled their own ICs out of wood!" :-)................KC9HGJ: "Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I acquire my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the apparatus that I have. I would fancy to accept my general and my extra some day down the road but for now this is the extent that I intend to endulge myself into this hobby. I find it rather taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are soundless very assiduous with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they indulge in the hobby, they accomplish so at the flat in which they choose. I expend my apparatus maybe three four times a week and indulge in doing so very much. I acquire other hobbies as well and accomplish not emerse myself into them any more than I desire or that my economic flat will allow. I would imagine that there are other "tech" operators that read these post that belittle those of us that "choose" to indulge in the hobby at this level."

    I will advocate your personal determination to accomplish as you see fit, not what others or so-called representative membership organizations issue you should.................KC9HGJ: "The other day I was driving down the interstate and pulled into a repose area. There were several tractor trailers there. When I went into the vending machine district I talked to several drivers and never once did they divulge me because I didn't acquire a CDL, that I didn't deserve to drive on the highway. You see I don't acquire a CDL because at this time in my life I accomplish not intend to drive a tractor trailer nor accomplish I own one. If at some point I determine to drive one I will obtain a CDL. Does it involve that I accomplish not acquire the inteligence to obtain a CDL? I would believe not as I acquire held a CDL in the past."

    Hear ya! pleasurable on you for writing that.

    What some of those ultra-conservative "critics" are really adage is that plenary should worship them for their self-described glorious achievements, at how intrinsically pleasurable they imagine they are, whatever is the "achievement." dilettante radio is a HOBBY, a non-professional avocational activity involving radio, even if the Regulations accomplish not record it exactly that route de jure. It is DE FACTO a hobby. Hobbies are for personal enjoyment. NO ONE should dictate "what is fun or what is not fun." Neither should the government dictate what is fun. plenary the USA government dictates is some technical regulations to mitigate radio service interference.

    "NO!" sob the petty tyrants hiding behind long tenure in amateurism. "All must accomplish AS THEY SAY! [only THEY 'know what is pleasurable for dilettante radio] BS. Mental perversion combined with personal delusions of grandeur................KC9HGJ: "Does anyone understand the reference here. I expend the apparatus that a tech license gives me the privilage to use."

    Good on you again! I totally correspond with you on that. I issue again that dilettante radio is a HOBBY, an vocational activity involving radio, regulations needed only because of the nature of EM propagation and necessity to mitigate interference to other radio services. Fanatics within the hobby don't understand that, dilettante radio has become a raison d'etre, their "reason for being." They acquire this terrible 'need' to exist 'better than others' anddon't hesitate to attempt beating on those who just want to indulge in the hobby independently, personally, the route THEY want to indulge in it.

    In the USA the FCC gives us worthy license in personal OPTION of option in choosing what they want to accomplish in dilettante radio. THEY are not lesser or greater for doing separate, individual things within it.

    Contrary to dilettante radio folklore, ANY radio operator license is simply a authorization to operate on inevitable frequencies under inevitable conditions as defined by their only civil radio regulating agency. Neither the FCC (created in 1934) nor any of its predecessor agencies were chartered to exist academic institutions with licenses representing 'degrees' of academic achievement. Each license is merely a PERMISSION, a privilege to radiate RF under inevitable conditions as codified in law.

    In a jagged analogy, it is fancy the Cartage Driver License, a authorization to carry cargo for hire and engage in legal business of such cartage, but being required to obey the very identical roadway laws as plenary other drivers of any vehicle type. The ONLY odds a "30 ton tractor and box" is physical mass that can overrun small vehicles in defiance of the law. In another route the petty itsy-bitsy dilettante tyrant tries to BULL their route with 'upgraded' licenses and once, long ago, being tested in the now-outdated requirement of knowing manual radiotelegraphy. That is just bullying on their part, a self-glorification of theirs which is NOT an enjoyment dictated for all..............KC9HGJ: "I accomplish not have, not accomplish I at this time own HF apparatus so accomplish not exigency a general or Extra license."

    I got an dilettante Extra class license just because I could. It was a personal odds to emit RF just about anywhere allocated on the EM spectrum. After over 50 years involved in radio communications and three federal commercial radio licenses later, I figured I had enough undergo and erudition to pass some dilettante tests. I besides had the funds to purchase an entire station new. That was done for MY convenience, not to "prove" myself to anyone. Ah, but that opened another two cans of worms of unadulterated resentment to inevitable others.

    According to inevitable others "I acquire to initiate as a teen-ager and slowly labor my route up the proficiency ladder and Go through plenary the class levels to warrant my capacity to others in the dilettante community." Barf-city BS. The only "proof" needed is to pass the FCC-mandated examinations whose questions (and answers) were authored by the NCVEC Question Pool Committee (themselves required to hold USA dilettante radio licenses). That VEC QPC was the ONLY "community." :-)

    Time-travel has not yet been invented. I cannot Go back to my teen years and receive the requisite League brainwashing. My teen years occurred during a time of World War with the entire USA involved. It wasn't some schoolbook history notation. It was LIFE unfolding for plenary of us then.

    Just WHY in #### designation must they "progress slowly, step-by-step through plenary the classes of license?" dilettante radio is a HOBBY. It isn't a Union or Guild. It positive as #### isn't professional by federal definition. WE, plenary of us are allowed to enter or progress as far as THEY supervision to. I've been a PROFESSIONAL in electronics and radio, that is earning MONEY for my labor services. A few Others expressed worthy resentment at that. So much so, that one several times objected to my purchasing an Icom IC-746Pro. Not so much for the brand or kind, but for the "Pro" suffix on Icom's model ID. :-)

    That was Icom's ID number, not mine. But, horrors and shame on me that I did not 'design and build my own!' Yes, I could have. I spent a working career doing things fancy that. I could acquire technically duplicated the entirety of functions and features of an Icom or Kenwood or Yaesu with time. I figured if I started now and continued non-stop plenary by myself that I might exist done in 10 or 12 years. I'm 77 now, so I should wait until I'm near 90 to "make my first QSO?" :-) :-) :-)

    Well, my first 'solo' radio contact, NON-amateur, was done in 1952 while in the US Army. I'm positive that sticklers for EXACTNESS will screech "that isn't a QSO!" It was a radio contact nonetheless. Q-codes were devised by professional radiomen, not amateurs. Amateurs picked up the expend so that they could assume to exist "professional." Roger that. :-) In plenary the history or radio communications the ACTUAL invention/innovations of advancing any condition of the radio know-how by amateurs were done before 1940. I don't supervision what the ARRL writes, I've got many other sources of historical information on electronics which are not out trying to accept membership monies flowing into a suburb of Hartford Connectibutt.................This posting and reply isn't about "Trends" but I won't apologize for it. So many acquire commented on UNverified 'trends' that are more half-truths, folklore, repetitions of what others claim. I issue that anyone who enjoys whatever activity they are in are very free to indulge in it. I besides issue that anyone who wants to dictate what anyone else "should" indulge in is one sick puppy and treated with momentary compassion for their mental illnesses. <shrug>

    73, Len AF6AY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Commenting on eHam.net is fancy spitting into the wind.   RE: Pride, Standards and Political Correctness   by K6LHA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W7ETA posted on 10 Dec 09:

    "As always, worthy prose Len--easy to follow datum presentation."

    [AF6AY] "total numbers just aren't keeping up with a continuing USA population increase,"

    W7ETA: "On mug value, that isn't surprising. They can assume people dying had better capacity and desire to become hams, vrs people just born. If one could ogle at a sampling of capacity and desire in new borns, to talk with others, my speculation would exist borne out."

    Thanks for the nice words, Bob.

    Unfortunately, some folks believe it is "baloney" (W5ESE) and "prove" their point with UNverified data on USA population going back to a century ago. :-)

    I specifically targeted just three years and only three years to see if there was an impact from the elimination of plenary morse code testing for any USA dilettante radio license. That it was only THREE years was stated in the title. Some folks are too caught up in their own personal vision (or mythology) of USA dilettante radio to enable them to study a situation dispassionately...............W7ETA: "Come to believe of it, new borns might programed to sob if they acquire to learning CW?"

    :-)

    Heh heh, I can't divulge you how many times I've been called a "newborn" in ham radio, a "know-nothing" or even outright "stupid/ignorant" (N2EY and K8MN in public in a newsgroup when I didn't inquire THEIR "permission to win a test)" :-)

    Usually I just shrug my shoulders when encountering such self-centered individuals on forums and newsgroups, etc. When encountering such on dilettante bands I've simply turned off. Since I BEGAN on HF over a half century ago in the immense business of radio communications (not broadcasting), without any exigency to know or learn "CW" I am just indifferent to it. I acquire no worship for "CW." I acquire no loathe for it, either. Indifference is not "hate."

    I picked my study chronological epoch because: (1) I had third-party data from two independent sources; (2) Cessation of USA dilettante radio code testing can exist considered an epochal point in USA dilettante radio history; (3) Some acquaintences suggested six-month periods as suitable enough for a venue having limited space. Note: I acquire the tools and capacity to merit "graphs" but saw no justification for a small amount of data by those who would wrangle against any format if the data did not meet their preconceived notions.

    Before and after that fateful date of 23 Feb 07, CW-LOVERS acquire insisted that "nothing can exist seen for a 'short time' period." They would stretch it plenary out for years, a time sufficiently long enough for it plenary to dim in history and thus become a NON-subject. I classify that as just modest denial by those who can't stand to see their mode (at which they pretension expertise) no longer "loved" or an attempt to merit themselves better than others, indeed 'superior' because they met standards of long ago.

    Newborns sob because it is a natural act, calling for a exigency for sustenance, a exigency for security, a exigency for physical comfort. Lots of adults "cry" and cuss and issue nasty to others when evidence is presented that doesn't suitable their personal idea/experience/brainwashed notions of what dilettante radio "should be." <shrug> It is not my job to coddle them and acclaim them gratuitously. :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Standards, Policies and Politics   by K6LHA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY, man of plenary authority, wrote on December 10, 2009:

    "N3QE: When folks talk about "lowering of standards", they acquire a bunch of different things in mind."

    N2EY: "Sure, there's the code testing reduction and elimination. But that's not plenary that changed. In the worn days they didn't acquire access to the actual braindumpsmp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass plenary tests for a given license on the first try at the identical session. 30 day wait to retest, you couldn't just pay another fee and accept another go. Exam sessions were held on weekday mornings in FCC offices, which meant a half-day or more off labor or waiting for a school holiday that wasn't a Federal holiday. The test fee was as elevated as $9, which when you adjust for inflation is about $50 in today's money - pass or fail."

    By golly, things were really TOUGH for you youngsters, right? :-)

    Code testing for USA dilettante radio licensing stopped in early 2007. Code testing for Commercial Radiotelegraphy operators continues...but before COLEMs, not VECs. Just think, you could Go commercial and actually merit money as a radiotelegraphy operator on the worthy Lakes. You would exist a natural with your superb code key skills.

    Oh, and well before the Dick Bash books, there were the "braindumpsmp;A" train of books on just about every trade that had license testing, commercial radio and dilettante radio included. Hardbound in 1956. I tried to accept one in my home town back in February of that year but they weren't available. When I went for my Radiotelephone Operator license in March of 1956 I just memorized plenary the rules from a borrowed copy (fit into a half-inch slack leaf). I didn't acquire any thought of re-taking any test in Chicago at an FCC territory Office. Gollee, if there was some regulation or something on re-taking atest, I would acquire failed to recall it. Tsk, tsk, I didn't acquire to retake anything. Oh, yes, one other thing, I didn't interrupt my school classes since I was 23 and newly released from active duty with the US Army. <shrug>

    I can't issue what the test fee was at the FCC because I didn't bother remembering it. I had earned the fanciful "salary" of $146 per month with overseas pay as an E-5 while obliging the USA with my "life if necessary." But, you loved to mock that in public much later. You never served. <shrug> I accomplish recall that the 90-mile train fare to Chicago and back cost more than the test fee..................N2EY: "Yes, there are lots of rules/regs questions in the modern tests. Yet the size and number of tests is smaller, so those rules/regs questions minister to shove out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today minister to cover a lot of subjects, but not in much depth. The worn tests covered fewer subjects in a lot more detail. Which is better is a matter of opinion."

    Gosh and golly, it positive sounds as though THE HAM TEST was a real toughie long ago. I don't know since I never bothered to win one until 2007. I've heard differently but then both you and K8MN acquire publicly agreed that I was "too stupid to pass a ham test." Of course that was before I asked for your authorization to win one. Undaunted, I just took it and passed plenary three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-)...............N2EY: "What it plenary meant in exercise was that the typical ham would learn the things that might exist on the test backwards, forwards and upside down to exist positive of a pass on the first go. win Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what contour the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to exist absolutely positive of being able to unravel any benevolent of Ohm's Law problem. But when you know exactly what the questions will be, it makes sense to focus on being able to unravel those problems only."

    Wow! A simple algebraic expression (Ohm's Law of Resistance) is 'rocket science?!?" E = I * R? Sonovagun!

    Well, since you later would ace plenary three courses in The Calculus in collitch, yeah... :-)................N2EY: "The changes don't involve everyone today just memorizes the braindumpsmp;A and doesn't learn anything in the process. Far from it! But it does involve that the test method is very different - and that's a change in standards."

    I soundless acquire the one-inch thick looseleaf notebook filled with verbatim questions and answers of plenary three test elements applicable to an dilettante radio license examination for February 2007. I can't find my sheet of the exact numbers of the Question Pool questions but, for plenary 120 questions of 3 total tests there were about 13 times the required minimum. The dilettante Extra Question Pool had about 16 times the required minimum or about 430 for Extra alone. I could re-count plenary the allowed questions in the Question Pool but it would exist a wasted effort here, right? :-)

    I showed a local stage actor acquaintence my QPC notebook a few years ago and asked him if he couldmemorize it. Stage actors exigency to memorize just about every line in a play, plenary characters plus positions and lots of other itsy-bitsy notes in the script. The only observation I got was "ya gotta exist kidding!?" Then he showed me the size of the script he was then rehearsing. It wasn't even a quarter inch thick and typed double-spaced.

    For 120 questions and 13 times that in the total Pool there would exist 1560 questions with 6240 answers. The 120 test questions (and 480 answers) would exist (or should be) selected randomly out of those 6240 total items. Since many answers are "distractors" (almost-correct answers written so as to appear as correct), plenary questions AND answers exigency to exist "memorized." But, I guess plenary you long-time amateurs acquire SUPERHUMAN powers thus you acquire evolved into superbeings or something. It must exist the fanciful condition of the radio know-how that long-timers accept doing plenary that morse code stuff?............N2EY: "There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which engage to win someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone acquire offered even a "Novice In A Day" class back-when?"

    WHY? New Novice licenses haven't been granted since 2000. This morning (10 Dec 09) the number of Technician class licensees totalled 344,184 (Hamdata) and 333,410 (ARRL within 10-year term). Novice class was 20,564 (Hamdata) and 17,147 (ARRL). Novice class required passing a code test, Technician class did not after 1990. Remember, no new Novice licenses acquire been granted since the year 2000.

    You withhold adage that Technician Pluses are "automatically renewed" as Technician since no newTechnician plus licenses acquire been granted since the year 2000. Ah, new Technician Plus licensees BEFORE the year 2000. You've never explained why the no-code-test Technician class got so big BEFORE 'restructuring' came into effect. Numbers of the two just don't add up to your "theory." [don't let that stop you, accurate data verification hasn't stopped you yet].............N2EY: "Nobody is adage that hams today should acquire to pass the exact identical tests as those given 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. But at the identical time, it seems rather odd when an Extra doesn't know how to merit a simple wire dipole."

    Weird comment, Jimmy. Morse code testing has been required for dilettante radio ever since the first USA radio regulatory agency existed (created in 1912). Now, I look to recall one James Miccolis as being ADAMANT about absolutely KEEPING the morse code test right on through November 2006, then adage its elimination would exist the "worst thing that can happen" [to USA dilettante radio] by January 2007 (repeated at least twice since in ham forums). The FCC published a Notice that code test would exist eliminated in December 2006, exact efficient date to exist published in the Federal Register. Gee, how quickly they forget... :-)

    Oh, and length of a dipole? 468/frequency in MHz is the length in Imperial measure. I knew that in junior elevated school back in 1947, well before being licensed to drive...............N2EY: "Boil it plenary down to this: Which would you consider easier to pass:"

    I'd rather pass my annual medical exam and its blood test (I study very arduous for my blood test). So far I've been lucky with nothing much out of the ordinary.

    I'd besides want to pass my written California driver exam which I am now conjectural to win every 5 years or so now. I've passed plenary of those...without "waivers."

    Ya see, I passed plenary the required tests for dilettante Extra in the USA and will never acquire to worry about taking another dilettante test in my life. Just withhold on renewing and it is mine for life. Even if I accept a Vanity callsign modification. That applies to plenary who renew within the required time period. Imagine, the mighty condition of the know-how of radio KNOWN by plenary licensees even after more than three decades since they've taken their last test. :-)................N2EY: "None of those test-method changes came about because the ARRL, ADA or big numbers of hams or would-be hams asked for them. They were the result of cost-saving moves by FCC, driven by the budget-cuts and policies of various administrations. Running test sessions at FCC territory offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost plenary of the labor done by unpaid Volunteer Examiners."

    Ahhh, having been assigned to station ADA in the military for 3 years, it was never involved then in dilettante activities and certainly was not operated in any dilettante fashion. Station ADA is soundless operating today in Hawaii as the callsign of the Headquarters of the US Army Pacific.

    Are YOU a VE, Jimmy? You've stated in public HERE that you were examined for your first USA dilettante radio test by a Volunteer Examiner in 1969 and that identical dilettante was besides your first QSO contact. Can they detect some "favoritsm" in there, perhaps "kindness" to a teener? Hmmm? Could they detect some identical "kindness" about the VEs who passed a yoke of six-year-olds back in 1998 or so (cute picture was in the ARRL Letter). Are they soundless licensed? It is about 11 years later now. They must exist in their grace epoch if they haven't renewed...............N2EY: "The FCC is a joint commission, which means it answers to both the Executive and the Legislative branches. And while the White House and the Congress might not accept involved in the actual regs too much, they set the general policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding."

    Sorry, the FCC is an INDEPENDENT federal agency, James. tickle check out your civics organizations and don't "invent" new structures. It had about a $7.5 BILLION annual budget in 2005. Congress passed the laws that chartered the FCC (Communications Act of 1934) and amended it (Telecommunications Act of 1996) and that's about it for "outside influence." While you are at it, don't forget that BPL was endorsed by an FCC Chairman (two Chairmen ago) by Colin Powell's son under the George W. Bush's Presidency. Oh, you said that, didn't you, except you called George Walker Bush as "Bush II." Note: If he was a "II" then he would acquire been named George Herbert Walker Bush II. On plenary those "waivers" that troubles you so, WHO out there in dilettante land got code-test waivers? You acquire talked SO much about that but never revealed WHO got one. Since you are this mighty "insider" into government you just haven't fleshed out your mythology of "right v. wrong." 1990 was besides the year the Technician class (having no code test) NPRM was released. Technician class (of modern times) was made law in 1991. Are you confusing things or what?

    I believe you've been working too arduous as a "radio manufacturer" running the "Southgate Radio" company since the early 1970s. Relax, try to accept your intellect clear. Try watching TV, fancy re-runs of "Sanford and Son."

    Bye,

    AF6AY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KE7RYM on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I acquire been licensed for about two years, upgraded to General, and will upgrade to AE next year. The clubs in this district don't want new members, or at least they act that way. Despite this, I am getting on the air next year, finances permitting. I'm interested in vlf, HF, decrepit signal digital (all bands), and believe that the ARRL prints the corps charts upside down. Dangle the carrots of the nearly vacant microwave bands in front of amateurs so they can start staking legitimate pretension to furthering erudition in those areas when the next WARC rolls around and (fill in the blank) Telecomm wants the gross EHF corps for real-time vehicle telemetry or similar, and hams can point to reasons for keeping those bands.   RE: Standards, Policies and Politics   by W8JII on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Len says it again----that's 19, "I just took it and passed plenary three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-) ". I'll issue it again Len. You're brilliant.   Against The Wind   by N2EY on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! AI2IA writes "Commenting on eHam.net is fancy spitting into the wind."

    It can look fancy that sometimes. But to paraphrase what you wrote about dilettante radio, "Eham is What You merit Of It For Yourself".

    The key factor is to ignore the trolls. They're effortless to spot.

    A classic troll-move on eham is to post something that seems colorable but is inaccurate, misleading or just modest untrue. Those who know the facts then reform the mistake, the troll responds with more inaccuracies, arguments and insults, and the cycle continues. Usually the bait is subtle but obvious to those who know the facts.

    What keeps the cycle going is that the troll doesn't supervision about the verity at all. What the troll wants is attention, and the occasion to furious others and insult them. The responders accomplish supervision about the truth, and withhold trying to set the record straight and concentrate on the facts, which simply keeps the game going.

    The troll will expend plenary the accustomed tools of analytic fallacy to withhold the responses coming. Common ones are the Appeal to Authority, Presuming the Conclusion, belief as Fact, Ad Hominem, dispute from Verbosity, misquoting, and various semantic games, but there are many others.

    The solution in plenary cases is to simply ignore the trolls completely and not win the bait.

    You can divulge when a troll is getting desperate when the inaccuracies rotate to flat out lies that are easily disproved and the insults become personal and obvious.

    A classic case of troll-desperation is when a troll falsely claims that someone else said or did a inevitable thing. No proof is given, just the wrong claim.

    The person accused will usually respond with some variation of "Prove it!" knowing that the troll cannot prove an event that never happened. The troll will just ignore the response in one route or another and Go on to other ways of keeping the game going. Remember, the troll doesn't supervision about the verity at all, only about the attention. The "Prove it!" response is attention, which is exactly what the troll wants.

    The only route to win is not to play. Then eham becomes a pleasure. I've scholarly a lot here from non-trolls (such as yourself) by concentrating on the signal and ignoring the noise.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Excellent analysis, Len!

    However, there's one thing missing from plenary the data that you gents are bantering about that I believe will eventually prove to exist their undoing.

    It’s that NOWHERE in the public FCC database does it condition the AGE of their current licensees!

    It is besides significant to recall that, because their licenses are plenary on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you plenary are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us acquire died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?

    My own (admittedly, purely anecdotal) evidence that they are on the cusp of a precipitous decline in their numbers stems from my active labor as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the last several years, I acquire been able to weigh on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm besides getting the identical feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly acquire contact.

    Indeed, most of my candidates for a "new" license in their Service acquire been what I convoke "retreads". These are folks who may acquire always wanted to accept their ham licenses but, for whatever reason, were unable to obtain one until now. And, not surprisingly, when asked, the vast majority of these folks issue they were kept out of their Service by their collective, ongoing obsession with Morse testing.

    Another big group of people I test held a ham ticket at one time long ago, but life (in the contour of job, family or income) prevented them from actively pursuing the hobby until now. In the interim, they simply let whatever license they may acquire held lapse.

    In both cases most of the folks I'm administering tests to these days are now well into their mid to late 50s. Some are even well into their 60s or 70s. And the VAST majority of them are now retirees. As I acquire said, there is rarely an "under twenty something" in the lot.

    Now, don't accept me wrong. I'm more than delighted to acquire these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then plenary with open arms. But my own personal experiences are increasingly showing that they simply are NOT attracting enough YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service these days to supersede us ever-aging curmudgeons when they (and most of their predominantly older newcomers) are inanimate and gone.

    The bottom line here is that, while their numbers may ogle fancy they acquire "stopped the decline" and are now a robust and growing Service again, the (not-so-hidden) reality is that the (non-club) number of licensees in their Service in the United States soundless peaked in 2003. And, as Len has so eloquently noted, there has been a slow, but very measurable decline in their overall license numbers ever since then.

    My hunch is that this fact, when combined with (as yet unreported) declines in their ranks from death or lack of interest that are being masked by their ten-year license renewal cycle, their numbers are now poised to start dropping at an ever more increasing rate. And they will initiate dropping fancy a rock in the out years as their ever increasing "silent key" rate overtakes and then eventually outpaces their "youthful newcomer" rate.

    Oh...and there's one more thing...

    As others acquire pointed out, I, too, find it absolutely fascinating that, just using the numbers shown above, almost 350,000 in their ranks hold nothing more than a Technician license, while only 120,000 or so acquire "advanced" plenary the route to Extra Class.

    Or, to attach it another way, Technicians now merit up a whopping 40 percent...nearly half....of the non-club whole, while Extra Class operators merit up only about 17 percent of the total.

    Those who were around in the late 1960s may recall that section of the ARRL's magnificient "sales job" behind the FCC's so-called "incentive licensing" nonsense back then was to create built-in (largely ego-based) regulatory incentives for plenary of us to feel the stalwart prick to educate ourselves and "upgrade" plenary the route to Extra Class.

    It simply hasn't happened.

    It would now look that almost HALF of those in their current ranks acquire told the FCC to "take a hike" with their stupid "incentive" nonsense. Indeed, for whatever reason, today's Technicians acquire very clearly shown...by their overwhelming numbers...that they simply aren't interested in "upgrading" AT ALL!

    In any other "educational" endeavor, a 17 percent success rate to the "top rung" of the ladder (an Extra Class license) would exist considered a dismal failure. Everywhere else, that is, but with the FCC's myopic attempt to rotate dilettante Radio into the "No Budding RF Engineer Left Behind" Radio Service.

    It would plenary exist comic if it wasn't so sad.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KW4JX on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Precisely attach - supporting the basic fact that plenary hams are equal, and that motivation is the key to expanding the hobby. That motivation can only approach from experimentation at the pre-license stage.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by AC9HE on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! IT...........is ..........a..........hobby.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by AC9HE on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! If you believe that it is more than that........you exigency to re medicate.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF: "It is besides significant to recall that, because their licenses are plenary on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you plenary are citing were only completely accurate in 1999."

    They weren't completely accurate in 1999 either, for the identical reasons.

    KB1SF: "Who knows how many more of us acquire died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?"

    Nobody knows and it doesn't matter because the identical was upright in 1999.

    KB1SF: "while their numbers may ogle fancy they acquire "stopped the decline" and are now a robust and growing Service again, the (not-so-hidden) reality is that the (non-club) number of licensees in their Service in the United States soundless peaked in 2003......there has been a slow, but very measurable decline in their overall license numbers ever since then."

    Not really. In fact, not at all.

    What happened is this:

    from 2000 to 2003 the numbers went upfrom 2003 to 2007 the numbers went downfrom 2007 to now the numbers went up.

    They haven't gone up as quickly or as far as they might fancy but they ARE rising. Graph the numbers from the AH0A site and you'll see. (Graphs are excellent pleasurable for showing trends).

    KB1SF: "I..find it absolutely fascinating that...almost 350,000 in their ranks hold nothing more than a Technician license, while only 120,000 or so acquire "advanced" plenary the route to Extra Class.

    Or, to attach it another way, Technicians now merit up a whopping 40 percent...nearly half....of the non-club whole, while Extra Class operators merit up only about 17 percent of the total."

    You're not telling the gross story, Keith. Nor an accurate one.

    You're leaving out the most significant info, which tells a very different story.

    Here are the numbers of current, unexpired licenses held by individuals on May 14, 2000, just after the restructuring:

    Novice: 49,329Technician: 205,394Technician Plus: 128,860General: 112,677 (16.70%)Advanced: 99,782Extra: 78,750 (11.67%)

    Total 674,792

    Note that the total number of Technicians and Tech Pluses combined is 334,254, which is 49.53% of the total. Add in the Novices and you accept 383,583, which means that back then 56.84% of US hams held "nothing more than a Tech Plus license".

    Now ogle at the numbers for yesterday:

    Novice: 17,145Technician: 333,530Technician Plus: 320General: 150,734 (22.11%)Advanced: 60,850Extra: 119,228 (17.49%)

    Total 681,807

    Note that the total number of Technicians and Tech Pluses combined is 333,850, which is 48.96% of the total - and LOWER than it was in 2000!. Add in the Novices and you accept 350,995, which means that today then 51.48% of US hams "hold nothing more than a Tech Plus license". Again, LOWER than in 2000.

    Meanwhile the number and percentage of hams with Generals and Extras has grown in both absolute and percentage numbers.

    Another poster did an offsite graph which showed plenary this very clearly.

    KB1SF: "It would now look that almost HALF of those in their current ranks acquire told the FCC to "take a hike" with their stupid "incentive" nonsense. Indeed, for whatever reason, today's Technicians acquire very clearly shown...by their overwhelming numbers...that they simply aren't interested in "upgrading" AT ALL!"

    Really?

    Then why are the number and percentage of US hams with a Tech Plus, Tech or Novice license dropping, while the number and percentage of hams with a General, Advanced or Extra license growing?

    It seems the numbers divulge a very different story.

    Also, if someone is only interested in VHF and above, why should they upgrade? Tech gives them plenary operating privileges above 30 MHz, which is more than 97% of the spectrum allowed to US hams, and plenary modes. If a ham doesn't want to accomplish HF/MF ham radio, isn't interested in being a VE and doesn't want a 1x2 vanity call, why bother with any other license class?

    KB1SF: "In any other "educational" endeavor, a 17 percent success rate to the "top rung" of the ladder (an Extra Class license) would exist considered a dismal failure."

    How many people with bachelor's or associate's degrees Go on to a master's degree?

    How many with a master's Go on to a doctorate?

    Are those degrees "a dismal failure" because so many people don't Go after them?

    I believe not.

    I was a ham back in the 1960s and I recall plenary the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would exist the conclude of ham radio by 1980 at the latest - back when there were maybe 250,000 US amateurs.

    Didn't rotate out that way.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by K6LHA on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF wrote on December 11, 2009:

    "Excellent analysis, Len! However, there's one thing missing from plenary the data that you gents are bantering about that I believe will eventually prove to exist their undoing. It’s that NOWHERE in the public FCC database does it condition the AGE of their current licensees!"

    Thank you, Keith, but that age data is out of their control. FCC records of dilettante radio licensees don't acquire (or no longer have) data on age, or gender, and certainly not race. But, ogle through several current or past dilettante radio publications in the USA and anyone can see that those licensees in photos are overwhelmingly of WHITE MALES. Yes, there are females, yes, there are youngsters (and a sprinkling of teen-agers) and some who are not caucasoid. No statistics or polls are necessary to see that. I'm not going to speculate on HOW plenary that came about.

    As an example, one of my test proctors (VE) of the ARRL VEC team was black, the team leader was asian. Which one was who? One can infer that the team leader was of asian ancestry just from HIS surname, but one cannot infer anything from the other three. I was not acquainted with any of them before that test time but I observed them as much as they observed me. plenary had the appearance of being male, plenary appeared to exist "over 40 in age.".................KB1SF: "It is besides significant to recall that, because their licenses are plenary on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you plenary are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us acquire died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?"

    I disagree rather there. I did not accomplish anywhere close to a "demographic picture" in my article for the simple judgement that there wasn't enough data to advocate anything close to a plenary demographic workup.

    The Hamdata website daily presentations accomplish array EXPIRATIONS of USA dilettante radio licensees. That is the only thing available to their daily database downloads. There is no data on the WHY of expirations. There is NO requirement that the FCC exist supplied with death notices of licensees. dilettante radio service in the USA is essentially a hobby activity, not working in conjunction with the sociable Security people as an example.

    ARRL statistics and at least one other statistics site accomplish NOT array expirations. That is their choice. I would infer that the ARRL "sins by omission" because showing license expireation numbers is/has the appearance of a decided negative interest. Note besides that the ARRL does NOT array or indicate those license classes who are IN the 2-year grace period, ONLY those in their 10-year license term. Note the continuing entreaty by the ARRL to link them...they require many members to insure a profit for their efforts and pay plenary the paid staff, withhold their power supplied, etc. Those numbers of members are used by ARRL ad salespeople to attract paying advertisers which further enhances their monetary income. As a matter of fact, any individual member CANNOT accept any device on ARRL membership numbers except once a year in their Annual Reports. One has to exist a potential advertising buyer, identity questioned if not a recognized dilettante radio product maker/seller to accept current numbers of members. In other words, ARRL members cannot accept plenary information on their own 'national representative.' Members accept ONLY what membership headquarters decides.

    In Hamdata's case, they acquire stored past copies of FCC database downloads and derive some information by what I convoke "secondary sorting." (not an I.T. erm) "Primary sorting" consists of searching through the identified data fields in a database download to divorce classes and to cross-check plenary licensee names against the previous day's download to see if they are soundless within the 12-year total term. "Secondary sorting" would exist to compare the current database contents against those of a week prior, a month prior, two months prior, three months, six months, finally ayear prior. That requires much more archival storage at Hamdata and a more involved sorting program.

    ARRL statistics accomplish not array evidence of any such "secondary sorting." I don't know the details ofwww.qrz.com sorting methods; QR-zed is a private business selling CDs of callsigns just as Hamdata is except that QR-zed has some 'discussion' forums and 'news' (generally obtained from other sources).

    As an example, using Hamdata public information, 30 days ago from today (11 Dec 09) there were 2,676 new licensees and 2,401 "no longer licensed" (a much more polite term than 'expiration'). 90 days ago there were 7,377 new licensees and 6,196 "no longer licensed." Etc., etc., etc. Heh, heh, heh, now that I've posted that someone will try to "callenge me" by demanding to know if some of those new licensees aren't really former licensees who acquire "come back." [I acquire a goodidea who the challenger(s) is/are but I don't want to spoil their attempt at misdirection...;-) ]...............KB1SF: "My own (admittedly, purely anecdotal) evidence that they are on the cusp of a precipitous decline in their numbers stems from my active labor as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the last several years, I acquire been able to weigh on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm besides getting the identical feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly acquire contact."

    I'm joyous you identified your own evidence as "anecdotal." The general contour of commentary on e-ham and other venues is that whatever numbers they drag out of hat are plenary unadulterated and done plenary by themselves, therefore should not exist questioned by anyone! :-)

    In general I accomplish not personally see the "need" to accept "younger people" so interested, especially teeners. Yes, I've read the scripts about plenary who were introduced to 'radio' as teeners and instantly fell in worship and made it their "life work." <shrug> Some bitterly resent ANY negativism expressed towards teener newcomers and a very few win it as a "personal insult!" The condition of the know-how of electronics (which includes the subset of 'radio') has been constantly evolving and advancing for the last 100 years (and change). With the advent of the PRACTICAL transistor and then the integrated circuit the condition of the know-how would change rapidly, usually less than half of onegeneration.

    Conditioned thinking (aka 'brainwashing') seems to labor best on teeners. That's about the only judgement I can see for getting teeners into dilettante radio. That route the older generations can acquire someone upon which to imprint them with their own exigency to exist parental and "show them the proper way" and plenary that stuff. When one gets older, issue into twenty-something ages, most acquire acquired a worthy variety of input into sociable mores, activities, sciences, trades, etc., etc., etc. They've besides gotten a better fervor about themselves and their capabilities and start questioning some of the 'older' folks who look to acquire quaint ideas (to the 'younger' folk). "Middle aged" folks minister to resent (sometimes bitterly) any unenthusiastic responses after they acquire told 'younger' folk "I know what is pleasurable for you and you'd better listen!" :-)...............KB1SF: "Now, don't accept me wrong. I'm more than delighted to acquire these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then plenary with open arms. But my own personal periences are increasingly showing that they simply are NOT attracting enough YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service these days to supersede us ever-aging curmudgeons when they (and most of their predominantly older newcomers) are inanimate and gone."

    I hear you and probably agree. That is not in my undergo nor how I got involved with getting a license in the dilettante radio service. I did not follow the 'accepted' script of the majority. :-)

    Worse yet, I don't acquire the "proper attitude" such as genuflecting before the stated 'superiority' of 'older' hams (most of whom are younger than myself, heh heh). That is wry amusement to me. :-)............KB1SF: "The bottom line here is that, while their numbers may ogle fancy they acquire "stopped the decline"and are now a robust and growing Service again, the (not-so-hidden) reality is that the (non-club) number of licensees in their Service in the United States soundless peaked in 2003. And, as Len has so eloquently noted, there has been a slow, but very measurable decline in their overall license numbers ever since then."

    Lots of folks acquire objected strenuously against ANY "decline" in USA dilettante radio and I expectthey will continue. Most of their views are very PERSONAL and their opinions look set in stone sothat they are not violated by 'outsiders.' Still, very few of them will win any action on their own to rotate it around. It takes some personal courage to present something dispassionately in public. One can exist reviled for presenting truth, facts that don't suitable others preconceived notions, even personal fantasies. Medical doctors accept that a lot from patients who are diagnosed with dismal diseases (from anecdotal input of two MDs).

    I'm reminded of a song from the worn musical "South Pacific." A lyric goes "...younger than springtime am I..." So many are clinging desperately to the long-ago time of their own youth and refuse to foster to the present time. Oh, they may acquire the bling of ready-builts of today with lots of bells and whistles but so many soundless believe that Ohm's Law of Resistance is soundless some benevolent of "rocket science." <shrug>

    Heh, heh, back in the early 1960s I was tasked to measure a DIELECTRIC antenna made for a USN missle. It mounted very close to the tail and was exposed to the missle's rocket exhaust. Its physical measurements did NOT suitable the pre-WWII dipole simple formula. Neither does a Discone (very broadband) or a Log-Periodic (another broadband antenna), dimensions and descriptions published back in 1957. No, in dilettante radio one MUST expend a WIRE dipole and linger on HF where plenary the "experts" are. The "experts" acquire already told me so. Long ago. :-)...............KB1SF: "As others acquire pointed out, I, too, find it absolutely fascinating that, just using the numbers shown above, almost 350,000 in their ranks hold nothing more than a Technician license, while only 120,000 or so acquire "advanced" plenary the route to Extra Class."

    I will disagree on negativism of "NOTHING more than a Technician license." That's not the route to accept those "nothing more than" license holders to advance. They will likely linger at 48% (not just 40%) of plenary classes until they had enough with plenary bossy worn "experts." Some acquire organize their niche and are content with it. Let them indulge in it................KB1SF: "In any other "educational" endeavor, a 17 percent success rate to the "top rung" of the ladder (an Extra Class license) would exist considered a dismal failure. Everywhere else, that is, but with the FCC's myopic attempt to rotate dilettante Radio into the "No Budding RF Engineer Left Behind" Radio Service."

    Well, having spent a half century in electronics engineering, I can't recall even up to 17% of plenary of my co-workers being dilettante radio licensees or going for one or even having one in their past. It wasn't any odds to us involved in pushing the envelope of performance in electronics. Certainly NOT to regress in skills to modes and modulations that existed before WWII. I got an dilettante Extra class license "out of the box" (as the disparaging soubriquet goes) because it was relatively effortless for me to accomplish so. Sure, I didn't accept 100% reform on 120 questions total but then I don't expect to expend dilettante radio in Outer Space...so I scored about 95%. :-) I got it to accomplish nothing more than play around on HF and low-VHF for my own amusement. "Bad attitude" I know but I had no illusions of "saving the world from alien invaders with morse code secrecy" as depicted in the (bad) SF film "Independence Day." :-)

    I've never seen any evidence of "No budding RF engineer left behind." When I began in HF radio thestate of the know-how in radio communications was going UP in frequency from HF. It had already happened in WWII but few hams (experienced or inexperienced) knew enough to exist cozy with it...as evidenced by the dilettante radio publications' contents of ancient times. comic thing is, the vast majority of my labor colleagues ALREADY organize electronics fascinating enough to labor at it, to foster the real condition of the art. THEY did it, not dilettante dabblers, wayward to what the ARRL tries to merit everyone believe...................Good discussing things with you, Keith. Thank you. linger warm and acquire delighted holidays.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Tech Plus, Advanced and Novice licenses   by KC8RWR on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY Said ->Yep, FCC has turned down plenary sorts ofno-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response isalways the same: 'just pass the tests'. I believe onereason is that it would cost them plenary sorts of adminwork.

    What? That's plenary sorts of admin work? If it's any harder than typing "UPDATE `hams` SET `class` = 'Extra' WHERE `class` = 'Advanced';" then they are doing something wrong. I'd believe it would exist more labor to process plenary those test results. Not that I care, I don't acquire an Advanced class license anyway.

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KC8RWR on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF: "In any other "educational" endeavor, a 17 percent success rate to the "top rung" of the ladder (an Extra Class license) would exist considered a dismal failure."

    I'll never forget the speech the president of the university I graduated from made at the freshman orientation when I first started. He told us to ogle to the person on their left and then to their right. Then he told us that 2 out of 3 students that initiate college don't graduate. He told us that if they believe they are going to merit it then those other 2 people must not. Of course statistics don't actually labor that route and the fact that I graduated says nothing about those other 2 but it certainly left a lasting impression.

    That makes a 33% success rate, it's soundless larger than your 17% illustration but then fancy N2EY pointed out, that's just a bachelor's. I'm positive you could weigh on one hand the number of people in that leeway who made it plenary the route to doctorate.

      No-Test Upgrades   by N2EY on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC8RWR:

    You acquire to recall that FCC is section of The Government, so it's probably not nearly as simple as you imagine. For example, there are probably plenary kinds of safeguards to obviate simply upgrading a license class, let solitary doing it for plenary Advanceds.

    Amateur radio licenses are section of a bigger database that includes plenary FCC licenses so it's even more involved.

    There's besides the question of whether FCC would acquire to transmit out plenary new license documents.

    As for processing the tests, FCC doesn't accomplish most of that; the VEs do. For free.

    The number of Advanceds has dropped from about 100,000 in 2000 to about 60,000 now. That's about 4,000 a year, and not plenary of them upgraded.

    But perhaps the biggest judgement FCC has turned down no-test upgrades is that FCC thinks they would set a dismal precedent.

    Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY wrote: "Note that the total number of Technicians and Tech Pluses combined is 333,850, which is 48.96% of the total - and LOWER than it was in 2000!. Add in the Novices and you accept 350,995, which means that today then 51.48% of US hams "hold nothing more than a Tech Plus license". Again, LOWER than in 2000."

    ------------------

    Maybe the percentage of Techs to other licenses is a bit lower today than it was in 2000 by a few percentage points, Jim.

    But, the fact remains that Techs soundless merit up nearly half the total. And that fact indicates that their Technician license has increasingly become their "destination license". To me, that fact solitary provides irrefutable proof (as if they soundless exigency any) that "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure.

    I've besides been told (by someone who has actually seen the numbers) that the ARRL, too, has been very quietly doing some of their own "scientific" sampling as of late along these lines and their "scientific" sampling data tends to track pretty closely with my "anecdotal" data.

    Indeed, their survey data very clearly shows a disturbing downward trend in their numbers that, unless things quickly rotate around and they initiate attracting a much larger percentage of YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service, their overall demographics are poised to start "tanking" in the out years.

    But, again, their scientific surveys are simply confirming what should exist becoming blatantly obvious to anyone in their Service in the United States who soundless holds a license and who has eyes to see and ears to hear.

    Indeed, plenary one REALLY has to accomplish these days is to simply ogle around the leeway at the advancing age (in the contour of graying (or balding!) heads and expanding waistlines) of the bulk of participants at various dilettante radio-related gatherings to see these very clear demographic trends.

    By any measure, they ARE, as a group, getting ever older. What's more, these days, their once active bands (even during sunspot minimums) are increasingly less crowded. rescue for the occasional contest weekend or 75 meter net, overall, their bands are becoming ever more taciturn as compared to just a few years ago.

    I often wonder how many others acquire called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to acquire that corps very quickly approach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the identical dismal results as before. This tells me that their bands are absolutely wide open most of the time. It's just that there are fewer and fewer people actively OPERATING these days as compared with just a few years ago.

    Moreover, their once active VHF and UHF repeaters, too, are falling increasingly silent…if they are even soundless on the air. Nowadays, the bulk of repeater activity occurs during commuter "drive time". The repose of the day, usually plenary one hears…sometimes for hours at a stretch and up and down the band…are repeater IDs.

    Hamfests, too, are fervor the pinch. Even the "granddaddy" hamfest of them plenary in the USA… Dayton…is attracting less and less participation these days. Someone who has actually seen the final numbers recently told me that this year's Dayton participation was well under 19,000. Any route you cleave it, that's an ABYSMAL showing for a so-called "world class" extravaganza that, in years past, has routinely attracted upwards of 35,000 participants.

    What's more, other, once very favorite hamfests (like the Miami hamfest) acquire now gone the route of the dinosaur from lack of participation. Countless other smaller 'fests acquire long since evaporated as well.

    Now, granted, each of these trends and observations, when viewed in isolation, probably wouldn't exist occasions for alarm.

    But when they are viewed collectively, I believe they paint an (admittedly soundless anecdotal) picture that their hobby is now, quite literally, dying a very slow, painful death. And, as I acquire famous in previous posts, they really acquire nobody but ourselves to vice for it.

    For over 40 years now, they acquire been obsessively maintaining an absolutely ARCANE licensing and regulatory system for their Service in the United States that's been based largely on ego-stroking bandwidth "exclusivity". And, sadly, plenary they REALLY acquire to array for that nearly 40 plus years of regulated snobbery is an ever-shrinking brain pool of younger talent.

    Or, to attach it another way, it now appears we've been very successfully (and very happily) "eating" an ever-larger portion of their "young" along the route for plenary those years. And, predictably, their Service is now paying a very elevated expense for keeping plenary that ARRL-inspired, FCC-imposed regulatory malfeasance (in the contour of arcane Morse tests and increasingly impertinent "achievement tests") firmly in residence LONG after it had outlived any regulatory purpose. This, of course assumes that plenary that ego-stroking nonsense had any "regulatory purpose" to start with!

    The verity is that, in most other US federal agencies, such operationally baseless approaches to federal certification acquire now LONG since been discarded. That's because numerous successful class action lawsuits as well as GAO and other findings lodged against those other federal agencies acquire plenary determined that such operationally baseless approaches to federal licensing are "systemically discriminatory". Those findings, in turn, acquire made such certification approaches illegal under a gross plethora of 1990s-era US federal equal access laws.

    Unfortunately, I foretell that their ongoing, collective obsession with keeping plenary that (now blatantly illegal) 1950s era, ego-stroking, "achievement-based" nonsense firmly in residence in the licensing and regulatory systems for THEIR Service LONG after it served any regulatory purpose may besides very well prove to exist their undoing.

    Indeed, it is now becoming ever more clear that their ARRL and FCC very clearly sowed the seeds of their eventual demise when they rammed plenary that achievement-based licensing nonsense down their collective throats many years ago. And, to my route of thinking, KEEPING plenary that systemically discriminatory nonsense firmly in residence well into the 21st Century remains nothing short of criminal.

    The pleasurable intelligence is that their highly vocal cadre of "incentive licensing dinosaurs" soundless desperately clinging to that dying dream are now becoming taciturn keys in ever-increasing numbers.

    Unfortunately, the dismal intelligence is that there are fewer and fewer forward thinking youngsters now taking their residence in their ranks. My hunch is that this could very well exist because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" acquire been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their zealot insistence that such newcomers can never hope to exist "real hams" unless and until, for example, they've taken and passed a stupid Morse test.

    And then they acquire the nerve to wonder why potential youthful newcomers to their hobby are now "voting with their feet" in ever increasing numbers!

    The bottom line here, Jim, is that ANY route you cleave these numbers, to me, they plenary add up to a very clear recipe for their Service's continued glide into sociological and technological irrelevance.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY wrote: "Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?"

    ------------------------------

    It's not the "difficulty" of the Extra Class exam that is at issue here, Jim.

    Rather, it's whether or not the exam for the Extra Class license (or indeed, the exigency for the license itself) is relevant to the added operational privileges it grants. That is, does that license (and the exam one takes to obtain it) fulfill a specific, "regulatory purpose"?

    In other forums I've continually asked YOU to clarify what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a general Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I acquire yet to accept a straight answer…or ANY concede for that matter.

    Could it exist that (gasp!) there ARE none?

    Indeed, ONE of the federal laws that applies to the federal regulatory and licensing system for their Service is the "Persons with Disabilities Act of 1990"…the so-called ADA. Specifically, Section 202 of that law titled "Discrimination" reads as follows:

    "Subject to the provisions of this title, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by judgement of such disability, exist excluded from participation in or exist denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or exist subjected to discrimination by any such entity."

    And, because it is an arm of the federal government (and supported by your and my federal tax dollars) it would look to me that the FCC certainly qualifies as a "public entity" under the terms of this Act.

    However, the ADA is not the only federal statute that deals with such issues. Another federal statute is the "Rehabilitation Act". And, as I read it, among other things, it besides specifically prohibits Federal Executive Agencies (such as the FCC) from excluding persons with disabilities from obtaining the benefits of federal programs as a result of their disability.

    Specifically, Section 504(a) of the Rehabilitation Act (which relates to nondiscrimination Under Federal Grants and Programs) reads in section as follows:

    "No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 7(20), shall, solely by judgement of her or his disability, exist excluded from the participation in, exist denied the benefits of, or exist subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal fiscal assistance OR UNDER ANY PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY CONDUCTED BY ANY EXECUTIVE AGENCY…"(emphasis mine)

    The law goes on to issue that, "The head of each such agency shall promulgate such regulations as may exist necessary to carry out the amendments to this section made by the Rehabilitation, Comprehensive Services, and Developmental Disabilities Act of 1978".

    It seems to me that, just using the provisions of one or the other of these Acts, a pleasurable class action attorney could merit a very stalwart case that their gross FCC incentive licensing system unfairly "excludes participation in…denies the benefits of…or subjects disabled persons to discrimination under" the FEDERALLY administered licensing system for the dilettante Radio Service in the United States.

    That’s because their licensing system withholds plenary participation in their Service (i.e. an Extra Class license) based on applicants passing ever-more-irrelevant written examinations that are not only internally duplicative (as I will array below), but besides Go WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines imply should exist the MINIMUM qualifications for plenary participation in their dilettante Service.

    The term they educators expend to record such tests is "invalid" because such tests measure skills and abilities that stand itsy-bitsy or no relationship to what candidates actually exigency to know in order to successfully fulfill in their new roles. When constructing such tests, one must always inquire the question: "Does the test actually measure what it is conjectural to measure?"

    What's more, when such tests require a erudition of predominantly "nice to know" rather than "need to know" information, then, according to a gross host of equal access legislation in the USA (like those I've cited above), such tests become what's called "systemically discriminatory". That's because, taken together, they create a SYSTEM that makes a license award contingent on applicants successfully answering questions that acquire itsy-bitsy or no DIRECT relationship to the privileges they grant.

    Let me cite an illustration that may back to illustrate my point.

    Under current US federal law, when hiring a person to stack boxes in a government warehouse, you can no longer legally merit that person's hiring determination based on them successfully completing an examination over how boxes are MADE. The job they are applying for is to STACK the boxes, NOT to merit them. And while a erudition of how boxes are made is certainly "nice to know", it is NOT an essential constituent in the job they are being hired for.

    Therefore, they cannot (legally) exist required to know such information.

    Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly concede a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an dilettante satellite?" is an absolutely invalid and illegal question under current US law.

    That's because satellite operation is NOT an operational privilege granted exclusively to Extra Class license holders. And it is certainly NOT a requirement in order to exist qualified to operate in the last few KHz of their HF bands now reserved for Extra Class operators. In fact, ANYONE with a cogent dilettante License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of dilettante satellites.

    Likewise, asking an Extra Class applicant the question "How many times per second is a new frame transmitted in a fast-scan television system?" is besides an illegal question because, once again, dilettante television operation is NOT an exclusive operational privilege granted solely to Extra Class operators.

    As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a cogent dilettante Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an dilettante television transmitter. That question is, therefore both invalid AND illegal under US equal access law because it creates an unnecessary barrier to applicants. Indeed, the knowledges and skills required to correctly concede that particular question acquire absolutely NOTHING to accomplish with the erudition and skills needed to safely and courteously exercise the uniquely exclusive privileges an Extra Class License grants.

    Note that the "easiness" or the "hardness" of the questions (or the test) is not the issue here, Jim. Rather, it's the RELEVANCE of the questions asked to the SPECIFIC privileges a particular class of license grants that is significant in determining the legal validity of their tests.

    And, sadly, BOTH the general AND Extra Class exam pools are now CHOCK plenary of these equally "nice to know" questions that often stand absolutely NO direct relationship to the added privileges granted. True, such questions argue dilettante operation in general. But, under today's federal equal-access laws, that's simply no longer pleasurable enough.

    Frankly, BOTH of the questions I've shown above belong in the TECHNICIAN question pool, NOT in the one for Extra Class. And making correctly answering such misplaced questions contingent on the award of an Extra Class license becomes systemically discriminatory because it perpetuates a SYSTEM of discrimination by forcing plenary applicants (not just the disabled) to demonstrate erudition and skills that are either irrelevant, or are not required for the exclusive privileges associated with the class and nature of license being sought.

    THE FCC'S DILEMMA

    The bottom line here is that, unlike in the 1950s (when the FCC first hatched their "incentive licensing" foolishness at the behest of the ARRL), in the United States today, you can no longer legally test people for a government license if you cannot by hook or by DIRECTLY RELATE the skills and knowledges being examined to a SPECIFIC operational or safety exigency the new license will grant.

    Unfortunately, the problem the FCC now faces for their Service is NOT just a matter of changing questions or making them "more" or "less" comprehensive. The problem lies in the fact that, back in the 1950s and 1960s, the FCC (at the ARRL's urging) decided that the ONLY privileges that would exist withheld from lower class licensees in their system would exist access to "exclusive" frequencies and convoke signs.

    THAT prior management determination in turn, means that the FCC's thoroughly entrenched licensing system for their Service is now illegal. That's because, under these new federal equal access laws, their system arbitrarily withholds access to those so-called "exclusive" privileges based on tests and questions that acquire absolutely NOTHING directly to accomplish with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant.

    In short, today's FCC is now caught between a legal "rock and a arduous place".

    Clearly, a 50 question test based on a 600-page license manual over highly technical (but yet soundless largely irrelevant) information to successfully determine if an applicant for an Extra Class license can safely and courteously operate in the last few KHz of their HF bands is overkill. Beyond knowing where the new lower-end frequency boundaries are, that skill set should acquire ALREADY been tested on the general Class exam.

    Likewise, it DOES NOT win a 50 question exam over largely unrelated technical material to insure Extra Class applicants can successfully fill out an application for a so-called "exclusive" convoke sign.

    Yet, as I've said, under their arcane FCC "incentive licensing" farce, those are the ONLY TWO added operational privileges an Extra Class license grants to those who successfully complete such impertinent tests.

    And, as I've besides shown by citing just TWO questions from the current Extra Class exam pool, there remains a glaring (and I issue blatantly illegal) disconnect between the content and the comprehensiveness of the questions on their exams (particularly those for an Extra Class license) and the (meager) additional (predominantly frequency-access-based) privileges they grant.

    Sadly, for FAR too many crusty curmudgeons in their ranks, it has now become an inconvenient verity that new US federal equal access laws fancy the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act now require that EVERYONE exist given an equal occasion for full, "barrier free" access to public services and resources fancy the dilettante Radio Service. Clearly, such laws are now threatening to crash up their horrifically entrenched, government protected, members only "Country Club".

    Now, certainly, complying with these new laws does NOT involve there should no longer exist any licensing or control of that access to their Service. To the contrary, the ITU rules very clearly condition that applicants who wish to operate in their Service are to exist both tested AND licensed.

    But, what this DOES involve is that, in order to exist in plenary compliance with US equal access law, federal agencies fancy the FCC can no longer arbitrarily residence regulatory barriers in front of people seeking plenary and complete access to federally administered programs fancy dilettante Radio without just cause. That besides means that the content and comprehensiveness of their exams exigency to exist DIRECTLY tied to some very specific operational needs.

    Right now (and as I acquire very clearly shown with just two questions from the exam pool for the Extra Class license) they clearly aren't. Quite frankly, I seriously doubt whether the Question Pool Committee could even approach up with 50 UNIQUE questions that relate SPECIFICALLY to the skimpy additional operational privileges their Extra Class license now grants.

    It is besides significant to recall that no person needs to specifically prove they've been discriminated against in order for a federal agency to exist organize guilty of systemic discrimination under these laws. plenary that's necessary is that it can exist reasonably shown in a court of law that a SYSTEM of such discrimination exists in that federal agency (in this case the FCC's licensing requirements for their Service) just as I acquire clearly and unequivocally done in the paragraphs above.

    I've always organize it needy that, everywhere else in the world, governments acquire left it up to they Hams to determine which operating mode goes where on their bands. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the organization that governs plenary radio services internationally, has set out broad (VERY broad) frequency allocations for their Service...usually consisting of only an upper and lower corps restrict and a specified bandwidth for the emissions to exist conducted therein.

    It is only in the United States that those broad limits acquire been further restricted by license class and operating mode in their section 97. And that is because the FCC, back in the 1950s and 60s, decided to ground differences in their license classes (and the incentive for us to upgrade) on ego-stroking "exclusivity" (i.e access to so-called "exclusive" operating frequencies and modes) rather than on specific operational considerations such as limits on power output, constructing transmitters "from scratch", operating a repeater or club station, or giving exams.

    And, as I acquire besides said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a cogent (spelled: "legal") judgement for a US Government agency to award plenary privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another.

    Indeed, such differentiation can no longer exist legally based on applicants being forced to correctly concede exam questions that are either duplicative, impertinent and/or unrelated to the SPECIFIC additional operating privileges such new licenses will grant.

    CANADA'S SYSTEM

    By contrast, and unlike the "ego-based" tests proscribed for applicants to their Service in the USA, the Canadian license system for their Service ties the successful completion of THEIR advanced test to specific operational needs. In exchange for successfully passing it, Canadian hams are given just a very small number of very specific additional privileges that are far more commensurate with the technical material examined. These involve being able to build transmitters "from scratch", Run a KW of power (vice 250 Watts), exist the licensee of a club or repeater station, and give exams.

    Clearly, the latter pursuits involve a worthy deal more potential risk of physical harm to either one's self or to others (running elevated power) if you don't know what you are doing, or are activities with much greater probabilities of causing harmful interference to others on the Ham bands or other services (building transmitters from scratch or running a club station or a repeater). plenary of those activities absolutely require a modicum of additional technical erudition to fulfill safely and without interfering with other operators or other Services.

    And, because the Canadian test criteria are largely based on such clearly delineated operational and safety needs (rather than on simply granting Extra Class operators "exclusive" access to artificially walled-off frequency spectrum that general Class operators ALREADY acquire demonstrated they are qualified to operate in) they are far less prostrate to charges of systemic discrimination than the US testing structure.

    What's more, in Canada, those Amateurs with a Basic With Honours Certificate (granted by scoring 80 percent on a 100-question exam) can operate ANYWHERE within the upper and lower limits of plenary of their internationally allocated dilettante Bands. The only frequency restrictions such Basic Certificate holders acquire are by emission BANDWIDTH, NOT by license class or operating mode. And, usually, for HF, that bandwidth restrict is set at 6 KHz (except for 30 Meters where it is set at 1 KHz).

    Or, to attach it another way, the only operational restrictions residence on Basic Certificate holders in Canada is that short "laundry list" of limitations I've outlined above which are reserved exclusively for Advanced Certificate holders. And their Advanced Exam covers ONLY that material that is DIRECTLY related to the specific additional privileges their Advanced Certificate grants.

    What's more, Canada (like most other countries in the world) leaves it up to its Hams to determine for themselves "what goes where" on their bands. And their exam structures are usually based solely on safety and operational considerations rather than on needlessly (and illegally) "stroking egos".

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by WA4KCN on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I was a ham back in the 1960s and I recall plenary the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would exist the conclude of ham radio by 1980 at the latest - back when there were maybe 250,000 US amateurs.

    Didn't rotate out that way.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim your analysis on the topic is excellent. Congratualtions on setting the record straight and correcting the record of the ham radio pundit illusionaries including but not limited to ham radio lawyers, graphless ham radio statisticians, and ham radio revisionist historians.

    On the matter of youngsters joining ham radio, it is excuse me rather dimwitted to believe this could happen in worthy numbers. In other words to hang your hat on the belief young people becoming licensed radio amateurs in the coming years should result in the total growth of ham radio operators is well a stupid belief. young folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and worn age folks. Let us suppose a elevated priced expert marketing concern is hired to develope and implement a marketing strategy for dilettante radio with the specific intent of growing the dilettante radio base. The marketing firm's imbue is to grow the ground to a specific goal and to accomplish so with the resources given. After completing market research what age group would they pick to target. Suppose the ARRL hires such a solid hoping more licensees involve more members and the conclusion from the marketing concern is the members arduous earned money should Go toward an advertising drive directed and focused on the young. Applying nothing more than the rule of judgement they know the conclusion would exist to target older age groups. IN other words the occasion to recruit new ham operators is with older folk. Heck the fellow that wrote this article is an older gentleman who wisely took odds of the new codeless license. So for anyone who says dilettante radio cannot attract older folk especially with the easier testing requirements just ogle at the the fellow who wrote the trends article. He is an excellent illustration of the worthy new occasion for older and middle aged folks to approach into the hobby. Now having established the belief of young folk driving dilettante radio growth as dimwitted, it is time to examine the more colorable proposition that middle aged and older folk new to the hobby can sustain or even grow dilettante radio in the future. One route to concede this question is to bench expense other orgainzations who are in fact growing by targeting older people. There are some really pleasurable examples that give credence to the belief older people can sustain and even lead to the growth of an organization.

    I hope ham radio can attract some youngsters but lets judicious up on the belief of targeting young folk to rescue ham radio.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by K6LHA on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF wrote later on 11 Dec 09:

    "Jim, N2EY wrote: "Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?""

    "It's not the "difficulty" of the Extra Class exam that is at issue here, Jim. Rather, it's whether or not the exam for the Extra Class license (or indeed, the exigency for the license itself) is relevant to the added operational privileges it grants. That is, does that license (and the exam one takes to obtain it) fulfill a specific, "regulatory purpose"?"

    Trying to attach on my most objective observation on this (good) question, I would issue NO. Not in a regulatory sense. Very definitely YES in the ego-stroking sense.

    Looking back over history of USA dilettante radio regulations, the fact that there are only three license classes granted New in the last 8 1/2 years (give or take) is beside the point. The USA could very easily acquire just TWO for HF access. But that would raise a terrible Hue and sob from the very established 'oldsters' who would safeguard to the conclude their "right" to hold inevitable cheished Title, Rank, Privilege, etc. It was acerbic enough during the observation angle on the 'Reconstruction' NPRM, and I can see it would exist as great, perhaps even more acerbic now.

    The SIX different classes in the USA dilettante radio service were slowly grown from the so-called Incentive contrivance long ago established. I was not directly involved in that but watched it happen, heard plenary the acerbic recriminatory comments and took no section on either side. The number of classes grew from that until the USA "led" other countries with the most classes. That isn't real leadership, just (as you say) a lot of ego-stroking of then-oldtimers. A lop-sided compromise.

    As a professional in radio-electronics, I'm acquainted with MANY different radio services, acquire HAD to exist confidential with inevitable services' regulations when labor needs arose. dilettante radio was not one of those radio services. Other radio services are more USE-specific in the USA. In fact and by definition, USA dilettante radio is NON-professional. By plenary its definitions the de jure regulatory language indicates it is a HOBBY. That is exactly what it is de facto. USA dilettante radio is NOT a union, not a guild, just a group of hobbyists involved in radio that requires licensing and interference mitigation due to the physical nature of EM wave propagation. USA dilettante radio is NOT any sort of "vital need" for homeland security, defense of the nation, or as a backup of civilian communications infrastructure. That many ALLEGE it is "vital" is due to their own curious self-promotional, self-grandiosing attitudes.

    Case in point on Hobby activities. A yoke of decades ago, model hobby folks lobbied for and got a specific corps at VHF for 100 channels of frequencies for radio control of model aircraft, boats, lots of remote-controlled devices such as in special effects companies in the entertainment industry. The AMA was a gathering point for this lobbying. Not a medical association, this AMA is the Academy of Model Aeronautics, headquartered in Ohio. That AMA has more paying members than the ARRL. <shrug>

    NOBODY in the AMA or its membership thinks their hobby is advancing the condition of the aeronautics art. It is basically for a HOBBY activity. So, they were able to prevail the FCC to earmark a corps around 72 MHz just for model radio-control activities. The dilettante radio organizations accept plenary caught up in their presumptuous and fairly wrong notion that dilettante radio is amenable for plenary advances, evolutions, etc., etc., etc. Except for Star-D (innovated in Japan) and PSK-31 (innovated in the UK, tested on-air in Europe) there isn't anything new in dilettante radio modes/modulations since the conclude of WWII. Voice SSB isn't new; SSB was used in the 1930s commercially. Voice FM isn't new; that was used prior to WWII. Radiotelegraphy wasn't new...it existed in wired contour a half century before the first public demonstrations in 1896. Neither is TTY, having progressed from wired to frequency-multiplexed AFSK to commercial-format AFSK on SSB. "Slow-scan TV?" The Bell System had in PicturePhone (didn't accept enough subscribers). Facsimile? That was in expend commercially prior to WWII. "Fast-scan TV?" TV broadcasts by RCA were done commercially at thhe 1939 World's unprejudiced were done commercially, earlier by older standards trying out commercial broadcasts. Advancing in frequency to microwaves? Sorry, the military was doing it behond X-Band (12 GHz) by the conclude of WWII. Really, the only mode/modulation that is 'new' is that which is new to individuals because they acquire no previous undergo in it or are untaught of it. I could add a considerable number of things but I will only infuriate the "amateur-firsters."................KB1SF: "In other forums I've continually asked YOU to clarify what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a general Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I acquire yet to accept a straight answer…or ANY concede for that matter."

    Good luck on that, Keith. :-) expect lots of misdirection into other areas if a reply does ensue.................KB1SF: "Could it exist that (gasp!) there ARE none?"

    Oh, there ARE reasons. Extras want their own private playground in the spectrum, free from riff-raff. They believe they are 'entitled' (enobled?) or something. :-)..................................KB1SF: "As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a cogent dilettante Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an dilettante television transmitter."

    To Go further, since there are NO - restate NO - age barriers, a cute itsy-bitsy 6-year-old can LEGALLY operate a full-gallon transceiver and "accidentally" occasions interference to others or to other radio services. by hook or by this lack-of-age AND responsibility got in the route of Common Sense. Any parent who isn't a moron will KNOW that wee children acquire NOT acquired sufficient erudition and responsibility to act "correct" plenary on their own..................KB1SF: "That question is, therefore both invalid AND illegal under US equal access law because it creates an unnecessary barrier to applicants. Indeed, the knowledges and skills required to correctly concede that particular question acquire absolutely NOTHING to accomplish with the erudition and skills needed to safely and courteously exercise the uniquely exclusive privileges an Extra Class License grants."

    At this point, I elect to accomplish a cop-out. "I've got mine." I answered correctly for my test, so there, nyah, nyah. :-) [my license is pleasurable for my gross lifetime as long as I renww]................KB1SF: "Note that the "easiness" or the "hardness" of the questions (or the test) is not the issue here, Jim. Rather, it's the RELEVANCE of the questions asked to the SPECIFIC privileges a particular class of license grants that is significant in determining the legal validity of their tests."

    I hear ya. But, the mediocre USA ham will simply shrug it off and acquire the ARRL or VEC QPC "know what is best for ham radio." The mediocre USA ham just wants to play with his radios........................"THE FCC'S DILEMMA

    "The bottom line here is that, unlike in the 1950s (when the FCC first hatched their "incentive licensing" foolishness at the behest of the ARRL), in the United States today, you can no longer legally test people for a government license if you cannot by hook or by DIRECTLY RELATE the skills and knowledges being examined to a SPECIFIC operational or safety exigency the new license will grant."

    "Unfortunately, the problem the FCC now faces for their Service is NOT just a matter of changing questions or making them "more" or "less" comprehensive. The problem lies in the fact that, back in the 1950s and 1960s, the FCC (at the ARRL's urging) decided that the ONLY privileges that would exist withheld from lower class licensees in their system would exist access to "exclusive" frequencies and convoke signs."

    "THAT prior management determination in turn, means that the FCC's thoroughly entrenched licensing system for their Service is now illegal. That's because, under these new federal equal access laws, their system arbitrarily withholds access to those so-called "exclusive" privileges based on tests and questions that acquire absolutely NOTHING directly to accomplish with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant."

    "In short, today's FCC is now caught between a legal "rock and a arduous place"."

    I can understand that progression. But, there was one itsy-bitsy crack in that: Privatization and its aftermath. In between the Notice of Restructuring coming and actual begainning in law, the FCC attach plenary the questions/answers authorship into the NCVEC QPC's lap. The FCC gave up regulations of specific-area question quantities. It wasn't noticed much and had itsy-bitsy observation in forums, but it would set a slightly different tone in required erudition of written tests........................KB1SF: "And, as I acquire besides said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a cogent (spelled: "legal") judgement for a US Government agency to award plenary privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another."

    Well, as Jimmy Miccolis liked to issue before "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." He likes his ego stroked often. :-)

    The Hue and sob would exist fierce for plenary those extra egos out there. They've become addicted to Rank, Status, Privilege, and Perquisite they can get. While you acquire some pleasurable (apparently legal) reasons, those would exist pushed aside by plenary the extras NEEDING to withhold their beloved Rank, Status, Privilege, etc., etc., etc........................KB1SF: "CANADA'S SYSTEM"

    Good stuff to know about a neighbor country. Not being that conversant with Industry Canada's regulations I will win what you wrote at mug value. It certainly seems logical. Thank you.

    Down here in the USA I can almost hear the irate shouts of "NIMBY" starting up...or "it ain't the Ammurrican way!" :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: No-Test Upgrades   by K6LHA on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on December 11, 2009:

    "Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?"

    Tsk, tsk, you haven't faced a FORMAL test on that in, what, three decades?

    I took my extra test not quite three years ago. I'm soundless confidential with that material...even though I acquire solemn doubts about EVER doing ham radio in space. :-) :-) :-)

    Sorry, I won't accept just the on-line exercise tests. A FORMAL test would acquire your gross ham 'career' riding on it. No kindly proctor with which to acquire your first ham QSO. Let's merit it tough and attach the test location in an unfamiliar place, a bit noisy, filled with strangers. Go ahead, merit their day...

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "Maybe the percentage of Techs to other licenses is a bit lower today than it was in 2000 by a few percentage points"

    No maybe about it. The numbers prove that the number and percentage of US hams with a Novice, Tech or Tech Plus license has dropped since 2000, while the number and percentage of US hams with one of the other classes has increased.

    KB1SF: " "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure."

    Not at all.

    1) If a person is satisfied with the license they have, they usually won't upgrade?

    2) inert hams usually don't upgrade

    3) There is no deadline for upgrading; a ham can win as long as s/he wants

    4) FCC has been renewing plenary Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the identical class. If you accomplish that, and ogle at the numbers since 2000, here's what you find:

    - The fastest-growing license class is Extra- The second-fastest-growing license class is General- The combined Tech/Tech Plus license class has actually declined.

    KB1SF: "unless things quickly rotate around and they initiate attracting a much larger percentage of YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service, their overall demographics are poised to start "tanking" in the out years."

    Not really. plenary that matters for growth is that they withhold attracting more people than they lose. As someone else pointed out, AARP doesn't accept anyone under the age of 50, and their membership numbers are up up up!

    KB1SF: "all one REALLY has to accomplish these days is to simply ogle around the leeway at the advancing age of the bulk of participants at various dilettante radio-related gatherings to see these very clear demographic trends."

    But are those gatherings a scientific sample? A ham who has a job, family, home, etc., may not exist able to attend them, or may prefer to spend his/her time other ways.

    KB1SF: "we ARE, as a group, getting ever older."

    You can't prove that scientifically because they don't acquire accurate age data on plenary US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a gross is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will array the trend continuing.

    "our bands are becoming ever more taciturn as compared to just a few years ago."

    Maybe. But if that's true, there are lots of workable reasons. Antenna restrictions solitary are a immense one.

    KB1SF: "how many others acquire called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to acquire that corps very quickly approach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the identical dismal results as before. This tells me that their bands are absolutely wide open most of the time. It's just that there are fewer and fewer people actively OPERATING these days as compared with just a few years ago."

    But there are plenty during the contest, aren't there?

    KB1SF: "our once active VHF and UHF repeaters, too, are falling increasingly silent"

    Could it exist that people are talking on their cell phones instead of on the repeater?

    KB1SF: "this year's Dayton participation was well under 19,000. Any route you cleave it, that's an ABYSMAL showing for a so-called "world class" extravaganza that, in years past, has routinely attracted upwards of 35,000 participants."

    Why is that "absymal"?

    The cost of hamfest attendance has risen sharply in the past decade or so. Not just the entry fee but the cost of travel, lodging, food, etc. Plus the time, which has to exist in a continuous block.

    Hamfests used to exist a major source of new info and bargains. The internet, ebay, and the rising cost of attendance acquire changed plenary that.

    KB1SF: "the dismal intelligence is that there are fewer and fewer forward thinking youngsters now taking their residence in their ranks."

    You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion.

    What was the age-of-hams distribution fancy 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago? Can you array us real data? I believe not.

    Here's an observation: When I was in elevated school, (class of 1972) they had no more than half a dozen licensed hams in a student cadaver of several thousand. This was in a middle-class suburb with few if any antenna restrictions, back when used, homebrew and surplus apparatus was very common.

    KB1SF: "our vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" acquire been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers"

    Dinosaurs? I recall a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US dilettante license. Is that what you mean?

    KB1SF: "And then they acquire the nerve to wonder why potential youthful newcomers to their hobby are now "voting with their feet" in ever increasing numbers!"

    I believe the real problem is that people young and worn don't even know dilettante radio exists.

    There's besides the problem that many of those who accomplish acquire a very distorted image of it.

    And the problems of antenna restrictions, time restrictions, space and money restrictions, etc.

    Just ogle at how many articles, posts and such right here on eham are devoted to hams in no-antennas situations trying to accept on the air.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF: "It's not the "difficulty" of the Extra Class exam that is at issue here"

    It's the perceived difficulty.

    A ham who passes Tech can try the general at the identical session without paying another VE fee. identical for Extra. So why don't plenary hams testing at VE sessions try plenary the exams they can? plenary it takes is a few minutes' time.

    Why don't more hams Go plenary the route to Extra?

    The concede is often that they perceive the test to exist too difficult for them to pass.

    Of course for some folks, the perceived difficulty is the challenge. But those aren't the folks we're talking about.

    A man I admire greatly said: "If you believe, you can achieve". He's right.

    KB1SF: "Subject to the provisions of this title, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by judgement of such disability, exist excluded from participation in or exist denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or exist subjected to discrimination by any such entity."

    So you're adage that there are lots of folks who can't pass the Extra because they're disabled? Even though that identical Extra has been passed by children in elementary school whose ages haven't even reached double digits?

    Seems kinda far fetched to me.

    KB1SF: "our licensing system withholds plenary participation in their Service...based on applicants passing...written examinations that are not only internally duplicative (as I will array below), but besides Go WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines imply should exist the MINIMUM qualifications for plenary participation in their dilettante Service."

    Yet CEPT only recognizes the Advanced and Extra as meeting the minimum requirements for plenary CEPT reciprocal licensing.

    KB1SF: "when hiring a person to stack boxes in a government warehouse, you can no longer legally merit that person's hiring determination based on them successfully completing an examination over how boxes are MADE."

    That's because 1) it's a job 2) the job doesn't involve making boxes.

    But if the job did indeed involve making boxes, an exam on how boxes are made would exist OK.

    Amateur radio isn't a job.

    KB1SF: "Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly concede a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an dilettante satellite?" is an absolutely invalid and illegal question under current US law."

    No it isn't.

    1) That question - or any question - isn't a must-know decider of who gets an Extra and who doesn't.

    2) The general erudition of dilettante satellite operation is relevant to dilettante licensing.

    KB1SF: "That's because satellite operation is NOT an operational privilege granted exclusively to Extra Class license holders."

    By that argument, the question belongs in the Technician question pool. Is that what you want?

    KB1SF: "ANYONE with a cogent dilettante License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of dilettante satellites."

    How about Novices?

    KB1SF: "Note that the "easiness" or the "hardness" of the questions (or the test) is not the issue here"

    Yes, it is. Because if the tests were perceived to exist easy, you wouldn't exist making these claims.

    Perceived difficulty is what it's plenary about.

    KB1SF: " BOTH of the questions I've shown above belong in the TECHNICIAN question pool, NOT in the one for Extra Class."

    So I was right - you want to expand the Technician question pool to involve many if not most of the questions now in the general and Extra pools.

    Using that logic, they could probably Go through the general and Extra question pools and run many if not most of their questions to the Technician pool.

    For example, since Techs acquire plenary privileges above 30 MHz, and can expend any authorized mode, they can win any and plenary questions dealing with operation above 30 MHz and run them to the Tech question pool.

    And since Generals acquire plenary power and plenary mode privileges below 30 MHz, they can run plenary HF questions to the general pool.

    That will merit the Tech question pool enormous, the general pool will probably exist larger, and the Extra pool will exist very small. The perceived difficulty of the Extra will then decrease, but the perceived difficulty of the Tech will probably increase.

    Is that what you really want? Is that a pleasurable idea?

    KB1SF: "The bottom line here is that, unlike in the 1950s (when the FCC first hatched their "incentive licensing" foolishness at the behest of the ARRL),"

    If you can't even accept the history right, what's the point of continuing? Incentive licensing started in the 1960s, and was driven by many factors, not just ARRL.

    Let's cleave to the chase.

    We currently acquire a license system that will eventually become three license classes through attrition if no changes are made. Tech Plus will evanesce in a few months as the last Tech Pluses are renewed as Tech or expire. Novice and Advanced will win longer but will ultimately evanesce if nothing is done.

    What, *specifically*, would you acquire FCC do?

    Move big numbers of general and Extra questions to the Technician pool?

    Increase the number of questions on the Technician exam?

    Give Generals and Advanceds plenary privileges?

    Have disability waivers for the written tests?

    Put plenary the questions in one pool and acquire just one class of license with a 120 question test?

    Bring back Morse Code testing as an option, scoring the results route Canada does?

    Eliminate subbands-by-mode? Subbands-by-license class?

    Allow data modes in the 'phone subbands?

    Show us *exactly* how it should be. record your model license system in detail, including how existing hams would exist affected.

    Then let's see how the dilettante community reacts, starting right here on eham.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Young People and Ham Radio   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WA4KCN writes: "your analysis on the topic is excellent"

    Thanks for the benevolent words.

    WA4KCN: "On the matter of youngsters joining ham radio, it is excuse me rather dimwitted to believe this could happen in worthy numbers...Young folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and worn age folks."

    I don't know if that's really true. In fact, I acquire to disagree, I believe the real issues are very different from what is usually discussed in these forums.

    Here's what I believe is really going on:

    1) lack of efficient publicity. How often accomplish you see dilettante Radio portrayed in the movies, on TV, etc.? Even more telling, how often accomplish you see it portrayed accurately, and as something that's being done today, not decades ago?

    If people don't know that dilettante Radio exists, they won't become hams. If people who might exist interested acquire a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either.

    A immense section of efficient publicity is having a description that's effortless to recall and which sums up the main points. That's why I fancy the phrase "Amateur Radio is radio for its own sake".

    2) Antenna restrictions. More and more of the housing in the USA is antenna-restricted. This has a direct impact on publicity, because those areas minister to acquire few hams, and the hams who accomplish live there are in stealth mode. Back in the day, a lot of folks knew about ham radio because they saw the antennas and wondered what they were plenary about.

    The antenna is the second-most significant section of the station (besides the operator!) but more and more it's the most compromised. How many prospective and new hams acquire simply walked away because of antenna restrictions?

    3) Perceived complexity and elevated cost of a station. ogle at worn ham radio magazines and books, and you'll see article after article that seemed to leap off the page and issue "BUILD THIS RADIO!" There were lots of simple designs for receivers, transmitters, antennas and accessories that could accept you started, and lead to more-complex stuff. Of course most of that stuff was HF- and Morse-Code-centric, which we've been told is bad. Yet it worked to bring in big numbers of new hams. Showing a involved transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to acquire the identical draw.

    I accomplish correspond with you this much about attracting young people: If they portray dilettante Radio as something done only by older people, they won't exist attracted as much as if they portray it as being something for everyone. And if they specifically target an age group, they'll device out we're doing it, and it will exist just another ad to ignore.

    IOW, what they exigency to accomplish is not to target any particular age group, but to simply accept the word out.

    ---

    One of the things I clearly recall about the dilettante radio books and magazines when I became a ham was that they didn't exclude anyone. They were inclusive, not exclusive. They didn't talk down to young people, but instead challenged them to meet the standards.

    This was and soundless is one of the worthy things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for young people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you divulge them. Nor can they divulge what apparatus you're using. The CW op is judged on the air by skill, courtesy, technique and signal quality, not by brand of rig, age, income level, etc. That whiz-bang traffic handler or contester you just worked might just exist in middle school!

    I strongly suspect that's why some folks are so against Morse Code - *because* it breaks down so many barriers, and skill in it can't exist faked. Yet it is those features which will attract many young people.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      A Data Point About young People   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "My hunch is that this could very well exist because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" acquire been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their zealot insistence that such newcomers can never hope to exist "real hams" unless and until, for example, they've taken and passed a stupid Morse test."

    Here's some data that refutes that idea.

    Back in 1996, the ARRL had an outfit called Readex accomplish a "scientific survey" of a selected sample of amateurs on their views of license structure and test requirements.

    And when the results were published, it turned out that the age group with the *strongest* advocate for Morse Code testing were the *youngest* amateurs!

    How about that?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY asked (among a flurry of other questions): "Then let's see how the dilettante community reacts, starting right here on e-ham".

    --------------------

    Obviously, I've once again stirred up a ton of controversy here, seeing as I am once again being vilified by many of the identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service.

    Indeed, as Machiavelli said back in 1532, "There is nothing more difficult to win in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to win the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

    When I ogle at the horrific inaction by their FCC on these issues, I really acquire to wonder whether they are simply waiting for plenary of us to die and their Service to whither away so they won't acquire to deal with us anymore. It is painfully obvious that, much fancy the CB Radio Service, they acquire since become itsy-bitsy more than a "pimple on the rear conclude of progress" in the magnificient scheme of things.

    I besides well realize that, just fancy it took a federal lawsuit filed by the ARRL to accept the FCC to comply with the provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act over BPL, nothing is going to fundamentally change in their systemically discriminatory FCC regulatory and licensing structure unless and until someone (or some organization) with abysmal enough pockets actually files a similar federal lawsuit against the FCC and/or initiates a Congressional inquest into the matter.

    This means that, wayward to your convoke to "see how the dilettante community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T exist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately exist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually organize to exist in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law.

    Indeed, lots of people "wanted" to withhold racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in residence in their country back in the 1960s. But a rising tide of disgust for such blatantly discriminatory practices in the contour of sweeping civil rights legislation eventually trumped plenary those "wants". Today, those changes acquire since become an accepted section of the society they live in as more and more of the racist bigots who reacted with violent opposition to such change are now dying off in ever increasing numbers.

    As the famous physicist, Max Planck once said, "An important… innovation rarely makes its route by rapidly winning over and converting its opponents; it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is familiarized with the new belief from the beginning."

    Indeed, their highly vocal (mostly older) generation of rabid obstructionists to such long-needed change to their licensing and regulatory system are besides now aging and dying in ever-increasing numbers.

    But, even so, their licensing system remains chockablock plenary of "unnecessary regulatory barriers" (to expend the FCC's own words when they dropped plenary forms of Morse testing) to plenary access to their Service (an Extra Class license). By any measure, those clearly immoderate licensing requirements remain route out of symmetry to any operational or regulatory exigency when compared to the ITU's minimalist licensing guidelines for their Service as well as the strict, equal access legal requirements now levied on federal agencies contained in a gross plethora of 1990s-era federal laws.

    So, as I see it, the only question now remaining is what, if anything, their FCC is going to accomplish about this issue…and when they are ultimately going to exist forced into doing it.

    And while I certainly can't afford to bring such a lawsuit against the FCC myself, I can positive as hell pester my Congresspersons about it. Indeed, I (and a number of others) are already doing so. But only time will divulge if they will eventually exist successful in that regard

    In the meantime, I'm going to leave you gents to your ongoing "kabuki dances" on the subject.

    For, I besides well realize that plenary of the indignant questions and outrage being directed at me for daring to even mention this issue are simply more abortive attempts to change the topic and discredit the messenger so as to avoid solemn discussion on what has now become a VERY inconvenient truth.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N9ZAS on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! And then of course there are those of us who are quite content with their current privledges and are NOT influenced by the masses to upgrade to general or above,simply to listen to a much higher din floor and attach up with inconsiderate ops.I fancy vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to general or advanced to which I would NEVER expend the privledges? Contesting seems to exist the primary activity on hf besides the occasional op. talking about his "bodily functions"! IF I wanted to hear that,I would acquire bought a cb!I accomplish fancy the international sw bands for useful overseas intelligence coverage. small unobtrusive antennas,Versatile in nature and efficient with low power are besides a perk.So you see,just because they prefer to maintain tech. flat licenses doesn't involve they don't prize the hobby.It simply means they are delighted where they are and see no judgement for a useless upgrade to a useless license!As far as I'm concerned hf is becoming obsolete.n9zas   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "I've once again stirred up a ton of controversy here, seeing as I am once again being vilified by many of the identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service."

    Who is "vilifying" you, Keith? Certainly not I.

    KB1SF: "than to win the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

    But you're not taking the lead, Keith. You're not proposing a replacement system. You're not adage in any detail how the US dilettante license system should be.

    KB1SF: "this issue absolutely WON'T exist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately exist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually organize to exist in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Only is somebody thinks the issue is worth pursuing.

    KB1SF: "lots of people "wanted" to withhold racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in residence in their country back in the 1960s."

    But more people didn't want those things. Those people ultimately won out because they proposed a different system, and pushed for it.

    But the analogy isn't valid. When segregation was in place, there was nothing a person of the "wrong color" could accomplish to gain access to the facilities reserved for "white" people. No matter what their accomplishments or qualifications, they were excluded. There was no TEST they could pass that would gain them access.

    But in today's US dilettante radio, plenary anyone without a criminal record has to accomplish is to pass the required tests to accept a license. Those tests are objective (no judgement calls on the section of the VEs), public info (braindumpsmp;A published for more than 25 years, available FREE for the download) and so basic that elementary school children acquire passed plenary of them. How they could exist "discriminatory" to anyone really qualified to exist a radio dilettante is not clear.

    KB1SF: "For, I besides well realize that plenary of the indignant questions and outrage being directed at me for daring to even mention this issue are simply more abortive attempts to change the topic and discredit the messenger so as to avoid solemn discussion on what has now become a VERY inconvenient truth."

    In other words, you refuse to concede relevant questions, refuse to give details, and refuse to actually argue the issue.

    OK, fine.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: young People and Ham Radio   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on 11 Dec 09"

    "KB1SF writes: "Maybe the percentage of Techs to other licenses is a bit lower today than it was in 2000 by a few percentage points""

    N2EY: "No maybe about it. The numbers prove that the number and percentage of US hams with a Novice, Tech or Tech Plus license has dropped since 2000, while the number and percentage of US hams with one of the other classes has increased."

    WRONG, Jimmy. Golly for someone who has bragged so much about having a graduate degree, you've failed simple arithmetic!

    The no-code-test Technician class has been STEADILY *INCREASING* since 1991. As of this morning, 12 Dec 09: Hamdata has their total license number as 344,323 out of 716,639 individual licensees or 48.05 percent; ARRL has their (10-year-term-only) license numbers at 333,544 out of 681,765 or 48.92 percent. Note the inequity in percentages due to the lesser number of Technician class NOT in their grace period.

    Since ARRL does NOT array past numbers, one has to rely on Hamdata numbers of 2 years ago. Those attach the Technician class at 310,286 out of 711,936 or 43.58 percent of individual licesees. The inequity between December 12, 2009 and December 12, 2007 represents a GROWTH of 37,037 Technician class licensees. You will, of course, attempt rationalization of that by adage "the FCC renews Technician Plus as Technician" with the implication that Technician class has so very itsy-bitsy actual growth. Considering that Technician-plus can either drop out entirely or "renew" into another class (with arrogate test constituent passing), your rationalization doesn't acquire validity.

    Note: Constantly bringing up 'Restructuring' ordered in 1999 and efficient in 2000 doesn't acquire much presence on the subject. That happened 10 to 9 years ago, time enough for a newborn to achieve about 3rd grade in public school....................N2EY: "FCC has been renewing plenary Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the identical class. If you accomplish that, and ogle at the numbers since 2000, here's what you find:

    NO, Jimmy. If the FCC considered them the "same class" then they would change their database fields and ULS records. As it is, plenary FCC records available to the public array Technician and Technician-Plus as divorce license classes. Even the ARRL considers them divorce classes on their biased tabulations. What more accomplish you exigency besides non-endorsement from the mighty ARRL?..................."- The fastest-growing license class is Extra

    - The second-fastest-growing license class is General

    - The combined Tech/Tech Plus license class has actually declined."

    Jimmy, you must post some independent third-party information to PROVE your wishful-thinking contention. You haven't done so....................KB1SF: "unless things quickly rotate around and they initiate attracting a much larger percentage of YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service, their overall demographics are poised to start "tanking" in the out years."

    N2EY: "Not really. plenary that matters for growth is that they withhold attracting more people than they lose. As someone else pointed out, AARP doesn't accept anyone under the age of 50, and their membership numbers are up up up!"

    Jimmy, the "AARP" is NOT involved in dilettante radio. It is the American Association of Retired People. You could exist a member with or without a code test examination since you are (claimed) over 50.

    As to "growth" in the number of USA dilettante radio licensees, I'll refer to the Hamdata tallies for 12 December 2009: As of 12 MONTHS AGO there were 30,702 new licensees and 26,833 expirations. That is an overall extend of 3,869 but only 0.054 percent compared to the total of 716,639 individual licensees. The "growth" is HALF A PERCENT in one year's time.

    I thought that my genesis tabulation would acquire shown that this "growth" has picked up towards the conclude of the three year period. I'm sorry you can't see that. [not that you supervision to observe, anyway...you look stuck on the efficient year of Restructuring of a decade ago]....................N2EY: "You can't prove that scientifically because they don't acquire accurate age data on plenary US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a gross is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will array the trend continuing."

    Jimmy, hardly ANY of your conjectures you've presented here accomplish NOT acquire any third-party proof. plenary they see are YOUR wishful-thinking ideas................N2EY: "You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion."

    Jimmy, Jimmy...we can express OPINIONS which is what Keith did. Now, nowhere in YOUR "mighty" rebuttal was there ANY "scientific proof" presented from any third-party source. Present some and you might acquire some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recall a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US dilettante license. Is that what you mean?"

    Oh, you petty spiteful baby! You are soundless twinge by the Reply to Comments on NPRM 98-153 I made to Michael Deignan. I authored that and the FCC posted it on their collection of comments on that docket on 13 January, 1999. It is 14 pages of text in PDF contour on the FCC website. It is soundless there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, pleasurable luck, I'm not going to bother.

    Oh, and I soundless acquire the copy of the ARRL note showing those two adorable SIX-YEAR-OLDS who wereheadlined in 1998 as "The Youngest Hams." That was a footnote on my Reply to Comments. In retrospect, I should acquire made it a plenary attachment.

    What I was unaware of at the conclude of 1998 was that one James Miccolis had gotten his FIRST dilettante license class at age 13. His SPITE at that perceived "insult" has followed me around different forums ever since. Now this alleged "dinosaur" (me) got "extra out of the box" since then, married a second time, has been an ARRL voting member for two years and has gone on with life. itsy-bitsy Jimmy is soundless smarting and bringing up that one "age" matter TEN YEARS LATER. He should GROW UP!

    -----------------------

    On the "age" thing, to follow Keith's bewitching points in admiration to LAW as a basis for test questions, the FCC has absolutely NO regulations requiring parental or guardianship oversight of licensed youngsters while operating RF emitters. NONE. It is workable for some otherwise-adorable CHILD to exist a legal control operator, plenary alone, and literally PLAY with an dilettante radio without any plenary erudition of RESPONSIBILITY of operation. CHILDREN accomplish not plenary acquire some intrinsic "responsibility" guidelines automatically...not even if they hold plenary sorts of written test certificates from a federal agency. That responsibility must exist scholarly and UNDERSTOOD and it is the job of PARENTS to initiate teaching them that, reinforced by other adults as much as possible.

    I'm not going to bring up six-year-olds' marvelous capacity to read and UNDERSTAND written test questions! Apparently those adorable children of a decade ago were quick-witted and knowledgeable beyound their years (which is what most parents issue of their own children). School teachers know otherwise but they are professionals in teaching and the "test" in question was about amateurism. If it is concerning a test about dilettante radio, dilettante radio will overrule analytic thinking according to childish fanatics in ham radio. That is, to me, illogical idiocy.

    Len, AF6AY

      RE: young People and Ham Radio   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY claimed on 12 Dec 09:

    "1) lack of efficient publicity. How often accomplish you see dilettante Radio portrayed in the movies, on TV, etc.? Even more telling, how often accomplish you see it portrayed accurately, and as something that's being done today, not decades ago?"

    On the night of 11 December 2009, the hit TV array "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" had a scene where four CSI off-duty officers were stranded at a closed diner. Out of achieve of any cell phones they tried to convoke in to LVPD using a "ham radio set" they organize in a back leeway of the closed diner. It malfunctioned (with accustomed Hollywood smoke effects) a few seconds after being turned on. So much for "emergency communications via a ham radio." :-)

    One of the off-duty CSI officers organize some clip leads in another room, climbed up a telephone pole, connected a modern telephone handset to a telephone J-box, was able to contact LVPD. Note: the telephone infrastructure is "supposed" to fail in emergencies and only ham radio will continue to labor according to some long-time licensed radio amateurs. :-)

    Questions on the plot would exist "Why wasn't a discarded CB radio in the other room?" There are millions more CB transceivers than there are ham radio sets. The location of the closed diner was out in the boonies of Nevada, just barely in the jurisdiction of the Las Vegas Police Department.

    This NEW CBS airing was last NIGHT. Is everybody so busy, assiduous playing with their ham radios that they don't indulge in some "other" recreation? Must be... :-).................N2EY: "If people don't know that dilettante Radio exists, they won't become hams. If people who might exist interested acquire a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either."

    So, Jimmy, what acquire YOU done? You've been a radio ham for four decades. You must acquire been a member of the ARRL for most of that time, displaying an encyclopedic depth of "knowledge" about everything published in Newington.

    The ARRL is ALMOST the oldest radio-interest membership organization. It was incorporated some five years AFTER the very first, and still-existing, Radio Club of America. The Radio Club of America was incorporated in 1909...but got out of the amateur-interest-specialty district a few decades after incorporation. Seems there was a gross LOT MORE interest in commercial, government, military radio back in the 'twenties.' But I digress into areas where you acquire no interest, only in ham radio.

    The ARRL is "supposed" to exist "our national representative." They issue that every desultory they can. But ARE they? I don't believe so...by the membership numbers, by their lack of efficient leadership in forming legislation "for" dilettante radio, by their lack OF efficient PUBLICITY to the general public. Oh, they trumpet that the ARRL has "lots of material" but by hook or by plenary those things accept LOST on the route to the Mass Media outlets.

    My wife and I live in a big urban district of the USA (Los Angeles). They subscribe to two major metropolitan daily newspapers. They watch TV news, listen to radio news, but not overly so. They are "aware and informed" as they adage goes. My wife is indifferent to dilettante radio but she would notice if there are any intelligence items or publicity about that because I am a licensed dilettante radio operator. wonder of wonders in this 'modern age,' they actually argue things freely, even during and after going together in elevated school (both Class of 1951). THEY acquire seen more intelligence about model radio control lately than any dilettante radio events over the last 3 to 4 years.

    WHERE are the 'fabulous' videos the ARRL was conjectural to acquire made available 'to the public?' Does the ARRL expect that 'the public' plenary watch TV in between 1 AM and 5 AM locally?!? In looking back through TV listings on Time-Warner cable, I can't find any 'ham radio PR spots' listed in those "oh-dark-thirty" times. Their cable TV has well over 100 channels (plus FM BC and independent music of plenary genres) and some of the channels are in curious languages. Perhaps those ARRL videos are translated into one of those channels and they can't 'read' them? Must exist it, yeah...:-)...............N2EY: "A immense section of efficient publicity is having a description that's effortless to recall and which sums up the main points."

    Jimmy, despite your clear claims on Marketing Expertise, the FIRST THING and MOST significant THING is TO exist VISIBLE, TO exist AUDIBLE. It does no pleasurable whatsoever to exist INVISIBLE and then natter and gromish about "how pleasurable they are and what they have" in ARRL note after ARRL Letter. plenary those CLAIMS acquire long since dropped into the random din floor with plenary the QRN.................N2EY: "More and more of the housing in the USA is antenna-restricted. This has a direct impact on publicity, because those areas minister to acquire few hams, and the hams who accomplish live there are in stealth mode. Back in the day, a lot of folks knew about ham radio because they saw the antennas and wondered what they were plenary about."

    Lets see, considering you are really talking about YOURSELF, not the "amateur community." I've lived in my residence since May 1963 and NEVER had any "restrictions" on antennas of any kind. The ONLY workable "restriction" is from the FAA mandating that I acquire warning lights on any tower over 200 feet (we live a bit over a mile from Bob Hope Airport, airport begun before WWII as "Lockheed Air Terminal"). Would I acquire a TWO HUNDRED FOOT TOWER at my residence? NO. Not because my wife wouldn't fancy it, *I* wouldn't fancy it. It is their RESIDENCE. Oh, and I acquire TWO antennas up and they are NOT "stealth mode." The all-purpose Discone is clearly visible from the street. Anyone walking around to the side (to their front door) can see the black green fiberglass-covered plumb in the back yard.

    I acquire a pleasurable relationship with my thirty-something across-the-street neighbor and his wife. He kids me a bit about my "listening to Mars" antenna and I kid him back about his drum playing. They RESPECT each others' property and its visual appearance and to the neighborhood..................N2EY: "Perceived complexity and elevated cost of a station."

    Oh, oh, here they Go with implied socialism again. So, THEY can't acquire something expensive because YOU don't acquire anything expensive?!? Sorry, Jimmie, I'm not going to spend the repose of my life diving in dumpsters to build frankenboxes a la pre-1970 style so that I can exist some benevolent of "real ham.".................N2EY: "Look at worn ham radio magazines and books, and you'll see article after article that seemed to leap off the page and issue "BUILD THIS RADIO!"

    There were pop-up books published that early?!? :-).................N2EY: "There were lots of simple designs for receivers, transmitters, antennas and accessories that could accept you started, and lead to more-complex stuff. Of course most of that stuff was HF- and Morse-Code-centric, which we've been told is bad."

    Oh, oh...Jimmy's SACRED COW got stabbed! Tsk, tsk, Jimmy, plenary I've said is that "morse-code-centricsm" is restrictive in the mug of WHAT IS AVAILABLE NOW, totally OPTIONAL to use...when it comes to LICENSE TESTING. It is unfortuate (but only for you) that you were on the LOSING side of the code-test-elimination NPRM, but in a contentious "game" (political) with only two sides, only ONE side will "win." Try to exist more genial on accepting losing status. That's a nice boy....................N2EY: ",,. Showing a involved transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to acquire the identical draw."

    No? You better inform the auto makers of that. young people with new driver's licenses are always looking at EXPEN$IVE cars, mentally wanting one. A few buy them and accomplish NOT smash them up, manage to pay for it even on long-term loans. On the other side of the demographic spectrum, some of us older people WHO acquire WORKED plenary THEIR LIVES acquire managed to accumulate some monies to actually (gasp!) BUY CASH a lot of things they couldn't accept when younger. You RESENT that. TS. Either labor to accept more money but don't try that "everyone-equal-socialsm" rationale again. It just shows your jealousy.................N2EY: "This was and soundless is one of the worthy things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for young people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you divulge them. Nor can they divulge what apparatus you're using. The CW op is judged on the air by skill, courtesy, technique and signal quality, not by brand of rig, age, income level, etc. That whiz-bang traffic handler or contester you just worked might just exist in middle school!"

    To attach it in other words, you can exist INVISIBLE using "CW." fancy on the Internet, you can ASSUME ANOTHER IDENTITY, someone "superior" to others, a wise-appearing guru who has "done everything, been everything." :-)

    Heck, you can even accomplish the transgender thing with "CW." Who is going to know? :-)

    Jimmie, quit trying to revive this morse code test dispute AGAIN. The USA dilettante radio regulations ELIMINATED code testing three years ago. Accept it in some semblance of pleasurable grace, or revert to being angry, irritated, resentful, jealous of those who acquire money, disappointed about losing one of your cherished Brag Tape things. Or, you can continue with your (apparent) mid-life pass and become a acerbic worn man who will require the undertaker to crowbar out the morse key from cold, inanimate fingers.

    There IS an alternative: Invent a TIME MACHINE, Go back to that real radio-pioneering time of CW-uber-alles that happened before your present life began. Bye, bye...

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF wrote on December 12, 2009:

    "Jim, N2EY asked (among a flurry of other questions): "Then let's see how the dilettante community reacts, starting right here on e-ham"."

    Keith, in the decade I've encountered itsy-bitsy Jimmy in dilettante radio forums, I've never famous him to actually argue some cogent issues. When pinned to the wall on a contentious subject, he will invariably MISDIRECT into some other area. He is so primed to his inner self that he cannot see that this "amateur community" is FAR BIGGER and so numerous that only a tiny, tiny fraction can suitable into e-ham. That's not a dismal expense against e-ham, that is realistic since about 700,000 licensees just couldn't suitable into this website, let solitary a sole forum.

    Little Jimmy is a superb product of ARRL brainwashing. His claimed 'reasoning' is straight out of the Church of St. Hiram prayer book. The League is his shepherd. In one route I would issue he is desiring to exist a 'fedayin,' a "death commando" in favor of that olde-tyme religion of Hamme. He has never served his country in either a military or civilian role, isn't (and probably hasn't) Run for any ARRL position, yet he ORATES as if he is an Evangelist of that Olde-Tyme Religion. He will Never condone the slightest imaginary bruise to his ego yet will, at the drop of a participle, insult what he considers "lesser beings." solemn mental dichotomy at labor there..................KB1SF: "Obviously, I've once again stirred up a ton of controversy here, seeing as I am once again being vilified by many of the identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service."

    Well, yes and no, in my opinion. What I believe would exist more arrogate is to labor up a divorce ARTICLE on that subject. I don't believe the e-ham overseers would accredit it but I'm an optimist most of the time. On further reflection, I believe it would exist worth the trouble. Done here on e-ham it would attract most of the entrenched retirees who won't accept anything that threatens their Rank, Status, Privilege, etc., etc., (mostly negatives on Their self-esteem). <shrug>

    My itsy-bitsy study was done to answer my own curiosity on USA dilettante radio changes, to see if there was any perceptible change. I didn't see much indication. In my view the total elimination of code testing just came too late. There are SO many OTHER pastimes, new ones, much more technologically- challenging ones available to plenary in the last decade within the USA. I will give the ARRL-lover hardliners credit for HOLDING BACK progress so long that the code test elimination was just doomed to not exist very much of a change to entice newcomers.

    Looking back on my political efforts to attempt influencing a federal agency into changing inevitable regulations, I began in earnest too late, yet kept at it...without that "badge of courage" that some consider a mighty dilettante radio license. :-) I had been too long the professional in radio-electronics, assiduous pushing the performance envelope here and there, and thus considered a "beginner," a "newby," and "too stupid/ignorant" to pass any three test constituent dilettante radio test. Gotta worship some of those comments. :-) I had worthy amusement at getting the reaction of plenary those mighty Extrss who thought I was just a speechless nobody and "could never accomplish it." As an undaunted idealist, I just went ahead and did it without asking anyone's permission. :-)

    Keith, I've reread some of your observations and reasons and consider them - objectively - to acquire merit. I tossed in an worn topic of mine as a workable addition...but only because itsy-bitsy Jimmy brought it up lately (a benevolent of 10th "anniversary?" :-). Seriously, I've been involved in trying to change a small set of USA dilettante regulations for a decade now, achieved what I set out to do, then decided to accept one of those mighty dilettante radio licenses for myself, doing that at age 74. I'm tired of these others trying to hold back the dawn of progress, to withhold the dilettante radio service the identical as when they first began in it. I'm soundless an idealist, soundless open for a pleasurable occasions to fight, but life is limited and I would fancy to indulge in more of it. Getting into local politics here there's a lot to accomplish there, too, issues that directly finger us in this region. Otherwise, I'd link you as a volunteer for another pleasurable Cause...................KB1SF: "This means that, wayward to your convoke to "see how the dilettante community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T exist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately exist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually organize to exist in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Little Jimmy has - by observation - lived in an imaginary world for a long time. I don't believe he undertands the terrible expense of waging any big legal war on an established government agency. The ARRL can't back because they are soundless entrenched in the USA dilettante radio of yesteryear and they've already spent a bundle on this BPL thing. Of course they NEEDED to accomplish that in order to "protect" their core membership, a probable minority within a provable minority membership organization. workable aid must approach from Congress forcing the issue...but they must accomplish so without the dubiety (to their future jobs) of upcoming congressional re-elections.................KB1SF: "In the meantime, I'm going to leave you gents to your ongoing "kabuki dances" on the subject."

    Har! Appreciation from one who has attended both Kabuki and Noh plays in Japan. :-)

    Noh may exist the more stylized than Kabuki. Noh players wear plenary mug masks instead of makeup. I would (internally) classify the stay-with-the-past-curmudgeons as Noh players, masks provided by a confidential organization. When, as a group, they would exist asked if they would accept CHANGE, they would chorus, "NOh, NOh, NOh!!!" :-) :-) :-)

    Bad word-play aside, Keith, you and your family acquire a pleasurable Holiday time!

    73, Len AF6AY

      Why Upgrade?   by N2EY on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N9ZAS writes: "I fancy vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to general or advanced to which I would NEVER expend the privledges?"

    The only reasons I can imagine are:

    1) To exist a VE2) To accept a 1x2 or 2x1 callsign

    I stake there are a lot of folks who feel the identical way.

    Also, if someday you by hook or by develop an interest in the bands below 50 MHz, the license to accomplish so will soundless exist there, requiring only that you win the tests for it.

    N9ZAS: "Contesting seems to exist the primary activity on hf besides the occasional op. talking about his "bodily functions"!"

    There's a lot more to HF dilettante radio than that. But to find much of it, you acquire to expend modes other than voice.

    But that's besides the point of whether *you* are interested or not.

    N9ZAS: "So you see,just because they prefer to maintain tech. flat licenses doesn't involve they don't prize the hobby.It simply means they are delighted where they are and see no judgement for a useless upgrade to a useless license!"

    I would issue "unused" rather than "useless" but the belief is basically the same. Why accept a CDL if you're only going to drive cars and light trucks?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KC9GLC on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Wow... plenary the talk and rag of lic. classes.I got into dilettante radio for ECOM reasons at first. then a friend of mine invited me to their local territory day and introduced me to HF.I was hooked from that point on. as i was working on upgrading to general(already passed written portion) the fcc dropped the code requirements. I soundless expend and labor cw but since i didnt acquire to win that portion of the test does that merit me any less than any of you who did win it.Instead of berating the ham community for not advancing to higher classes, accept them involved and interested. If it wasnt for my friend i soundless would not acquire advanced.

    Its not that most of the Tech acquire no interst in going higher, they acquire no one to educate them. So enough with the berating and start educating.

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! (1) Was there a point to exist made here, or simply self-grandizing pontification for the mere delectation of seeing one's designation "published".

    (2) For the most part, it was a knock off of the works of AH0A and other authors.

    (3) Nothing unexpected was revealed. The Code test went away, "upgrades" briefly surged as was predicted, and then things went back to "status quo".

    (4) The rantings of a numerically few but incessantly vocal "No Code" sect that insisted that the demise of Morse Code testing would result in throngs of "new blood" in the dilettante ranks were proven to exist the fertilizer that they were plenary along.

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! As a so-called "new" person in radio, I didn't accept into dilettante radio thinking it would exist a loser. But, I'm section of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dilettante radio would acquire changed after my dilettante license was granted. I see itsy-bitsy change, therefore the study to see if a occasions could exist determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Seeing change occur requires that one actually accept involved in making the change occur.

    You and I both know that you've been one of dilettante Radio's loudest critics, Mr. Anderson, but you're besides not exactly a "contibuting member".

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: 2003 was due to a bubble   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being.

    Actually, it was Valentine's Day, 1991

    73

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: young People and Ham Radio   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY: "You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion."

    Jimmy, Jimmy...we can express OPINIONS which is what Keith did. Now, nowhere in YOUR "mighty" rebuttal was there ANY "scientific proof" presented from any third-party source. Present some and you might acquire some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recall a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US dilettante license. Is that what you mean?"

    Oh, you petty spiteful baby! You are soundless twinge by the Reply to Comments on NPRM 98-153 I made to Michael Deignan. I authored that and the FCC posted it on their collection of comments on that docket on 13 January, 1999. It is 14 pages of text in PDF contour on the FCC website. It is soundless there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, pleasurable luck, I'm not going to bother.

    I see you're soundless into using diminutives and condescending speech in order to mitigate being proven wrong, Len.

    Some things never change, eh?

    Steve, K4YZ

      Just The Facts   by N2EY on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! K4YZ wrote: "The Code test went away, "upgrades" briefly surged as was predicted, and then things went back to "status quo"."

    Hello Steve,

    It's a itsy-bitsy more complicated than that - but not much more.

    It plenary boils down to this:

    From 2000 to 2003, the number of US hams went up

    From 2003 to 2007, the number of US hams went down

    From 2007 to the present, the number of US hams went up.

    It's not yet back to the 2003 peak but it's getting there. yoke thousand to go.

    Over the identical time periods, the number of Techs, Generals and Extras went up, and the number of Novices, Tech Pluses and Advanceds went down. Which was expected, since the FCC stopped issuing new Tech Pluses, Novices and Advanceds in April 2000. Also, since that date, any Tech Plus submitted for renewal or vanity convoke has been reassigned to Technician by FCC, so their numbers were guaranteed to drop fast. As of now we're down to less than 350 Tech Pluses due to the class change at renewal.

    As you said - no surprises there!

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Amateur Radio License Statistics of 1988   by K6LHA on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! There acquire been a few 'challenges' on "old data" of dilettante radio statistics. For those I offer the following correspondence copy that dates back to PRE-Internet days. Note that the Internet did not Go public until 1991, therefore it was saved by someone unidentified from one of the commercial services (such as Compuserve). I accomplish not recognize the format of this text message since I was not on any of those commercial services in 1990 so I cannot ascertain if it IS factually one of those.

    On checking various dilettante radio sites this Sunday morning, both N0LOX and WT9T are listed as being current licensees. As with the "state of the art" in national/international computer-modem communications, nearly plenary formatting is TEXT using common fixed fonts such as 'Courier.'

    Proportional spacing fonts had yet to exist standardized and few computer users had GUI Operating Systems in 1990. At the time the FCC had just started the dilettante radio license database public dissemination but in shorter contour such as grouping by ZIP coding and available (generally) only on a weekly basis. Later improvements in Information Technology resulted in the combined sole big dilettante radio license database currently in-use that requires high-speed Internet connectivity to download within an 8-hour period. Note besides that database information of nearly two decades ago carried licensee ages.

    I alluded to this information, properly attributing source, in e-ham article 21114 "Aren't They plenary In This Together?" [ www.eham.net/articles/21114 ] I did not expend plenary of the data then so I've presented it here in its fixed-font-spacing needed to properly view the tabulations. This is presented as-is, as I organize it last year. I merit no claims as to accuracy or inaccuracy of this. I believe the author, Richard Hoffbeck, tried his best to exist accurate and dispassionate about the results.

    ====[ expend fixed-font such as Courier in browser ]====

    37055 S4/FCC & Regulatory30-Dec-90 09:44:10Sb: #36821-No CodeFm: richard hoffbeck, N0LOX 72406,521To: Fritz Anderson WT9T 70050,172

    Here is the age distribution from the FCC callsign database of 11/1988

    Total # Percentage Median AverageLicense Class Licenses of Total Age Age-------------- -------- ---------- ------ -------Novice 95,750 19.94% 42 42.19Technician 109,192 22.74% 48 48.43General 122,959 25.61% 57 55.70Advanced 104,253 21.71% 56 56.26Extra 47,937 9.98% 51 52.81-------------- -------- ---------- ------ -------All Classes 480,101 100.00% 51 51.19

    Number of Licenses By Age And Class - plenary U.S.Age | Novice| Techni | General|Advanced| Extra | Total |Range | | -cian | | | | |---------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+< 20 | 7,670| 1,933| 486| 141| 115| 10,345|20 - 24 | 9,472| 2,893| 1,268| 529| 377| 14,539|25 - 29 | 8,889| 5,804| 3,898| 2,074| 1,317| 21,982|30 - 34 | 8,769| 9,404| 5,013| 4,505| 2,496| 30,187|35 - 39 | 10,203| 12,960| 8,260| 8,795| 4,523| 44,741|40 - 44 | 10,573| 15,317| 12,663| 12,464| 6,897| 57,914|45 - 49 | 9,544| 13,837| 14,695| 12,552| 7,501| 58,129|50 - 54 | 7,223| 10,393| 12,220| 9,566| 5,392| 44,794|55 - 59 | 5,810| 8,776| 11,130| 8,151| 3,549| 37,416|60 - 64 | 5,561| 8,883| 13,070| 9,136| 3,489| 40,139|65 - 69 | 5,417| 7,915| 14,834| 11,117| 4,205| 43,488|70 - 74 | 3,540| 5,754| 11,575| 10,682| 3,998| 35,549|75 - 79 | 1,871| 3,239| 7,262| 7,332| 2,247| 21,951|>= 80 | 1,208| 2,084| 6,585| 7,209| 1,831| 18,927|---------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+Totals | 95,750| 109,192| 122,959| 104,253| 47,937| 480,101|

    If you plot the previous numbers you'll find that the distribution is bimodalwith peaks at the WWII ages (smaller peak) and the Sputnik crush (larger peak).The immediate population is not a problem, but the fact that only 3% of allhams are 20 years of age or less may prove troublesome in the next 20 years ofso.

    I besides thought that the age distribution was a pressing problem until I got acopy of the callsign database and actually calculated the numbers. The secondissue, a 'aliasing' due the the shift from a 5 year to 10 year license term isalso of dubious value. In scanning through the Region 0 data (I don't withhold thewhole thing on-line), I organize that only 97% of the licenses listed in 1988 hadbeen issued or renewed since the change in license terms in 1983. Of theremaining 3%, 2/3 of those were due to expire in the epoch 1989 - 1992 -- theremaining 1% due to expire in 1988. Anyway, the maximum loss workable due tosilent keys, etc is only on the order of 3%.

    On the other hand, there was a piece that made the rounds on packet,WorldRadio, etc, to the consequence that since the number of hams has been growingat a faster rate than the population as a gross there is no problem. That typeof analysis is faulty in assuming that society as a gross has remained at thesame flat of technology. I believe that ham radio has definitely declined inimportance due to technological advances across the board.

    rick, N0LOX

    ======[ conclude of fixed-font viewing necessity ]======

    I'll note again that this communication dates from 19 years ago. It was done before the Internet went public, before plenary the 'websites' existed (as such). It was done before the official start of the no-code-test Technician class although a Federal Register Notice stated that it would exist. 'Reconstruction' of dilettante radio classes and requirements had not yet been attach into a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It was done before there were 18 following Petitions to change USA dilettante radio submitted in response to the 'Reconstruction.' It was done well before thare was the immense effort by many to liquidate the code test altogether.

    As to the "technological advances across the board" alluded to by Richard Hoffbeck in his last paragraph, I will just point to some advances open to the USA public in the last 19 years: rise of cell sites and miniaturization of handsets to merit them a mainstay of personal mobile communications; Fully digital television broadcasting enabling snow-free pictures and quadraphonic audio; The Internet going public, resulting in a major change in both commerce and personal communications internationally. Those nearly two decades marked the displacement of magnetic tape video recordings by the DVD...similar to the CD displacing the vinyl disk audio recordings in the 1980s. Personal computers that had top clock rates of 40 MHz (with expnsive arduous disks and 'floppy' small mass-storage systems) in the 1980s changed to 2600 MHz clock rates with 100 MHz mediocre RAM access times and internal or external 2 TB arduous disk units costing less than $200 new. Visual displays went to flat-screen LCD or plasma technology, flawless linearity, displacing the bulky CRT "monitor." The Universal Serial Bus allowed plenary new peripherals to exist within the new "plug-and-play" standards. The Personal Data lieutenant combined a cell phone, video camera, data storage capability, and text transmission in a unit hardly larger than the smallest cell phone. I won't Go into the "games" category suffice to issue that primitive early 'computer' games of Pong were displaced by multi-player, multi-function boxes, some of which could link with other games via the Internet. Radio clocks and watches for less than $30 can acquire automatic calibration by radio for accuracy within 1 second on any day. Automobiles advanced with increased on-board computation capabilites, wireless audio, on-board video, closed-circuit TV for viewing impossible-to-see areas such as just behind and below rear bumpers, and the first of the jolt warning systems. Electric cars, from hybrid gas-electric to all-electric drive appeared on the market. Those are just the tip of the iceberg of advances and plenary were available to the ordinary citizen, IN the marketplace.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: dilettante Radio License Statistics of 1988   by K6LHA on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! On posting the above 1988 Statistics data, the font conversion did not labor out. I accomplish not control the e-ham formatting. If anyone desires a .TXT format copy of that 1990 communication just e-mail me privately (AF6AY@aol.com) and I will transmit the .TXT format in private reply.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: 2003 was due to a bubble   by KB6QXM on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Steve, K4YZ: In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being.

    Actually, it was Valentine's Day, 1991

    73

    Well they acquire plenary heard of what happened on Valentine's Day in Chicago.

    Valentine's day 1993 was the day that was the genesis of the conclude for ham radio, as I and many hams knew it. I recall that day well.

    Fitting that the new rule was implemented on that day.

      US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 14, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Here's some data on the number of US dilettante operators over the years. Source of each set of numbers is besides shown.

    In some cases the exact date of the numbers is not given in the source. Also, it is not clear whether the numbers involve licenses that are expired but in the grace period, or only current unexpired licenses.

    It's significant to know the history surrounding the license rules if one wants to intelligently analyze the data. Failure to win these facts into account will lead to erroneous conclusions. Some examples:

    1) Until the mid-1970s, the Novice was a nonrenewable license with a term of one or two years. In the mid-1970s it became a 5 year renewable license fancy plenary the others.

    2) From 1953 until 1967, the Advanced was closed to new issues but existing Advanceds could renew and modify their licenses

    3) The Conditional license was a divorce class of license equivalent to a General-by-mail until the mid-1970s. It was phased out by renewal of plenary Conditionals as Generals.

    4) The license term of renewable US dilettante licenses was 5 years until 1984, when it became ten years. One result of this was that no US dilettante licenses expired from 1989 until 1994.

    5) There were time periods when Novices had privileges that Technicians did not. During some of that time, it was workable to hold both classes of license simultaneously.

    6) The Technician license was created in 1951, and until 1991 plenary Technicians had to pass a 5 wpm code test. In 1991 the FCC dropped the code test for Technician, but did not immediately create a new license class or other method of differentiating code-tested Technicians, who had some HF privileges, from non-code-tested Technicians, who did not.

    In June, 1994, the Technician Plus license was created by FCC to divorce the two groups, with code-tested Technicians exist reclassified as Technician Pluses upon renewal.

    In April 2000, FCC reversed direction and began reclassifying plenary Technician Pluses as Technicians upon renewal. No new Technician Pluses were issued after the change.

    The conclude result is that since 1991 the Technician class has consisted of a amalgam of code-tested and noncodetested amateurs. Since 2007 they acquire plenary had the identical privileges. However it is an error to assume that the growth or reduce of the Technician or Technician Plus is due solely to the 1991 changes.

    The number of current Technician Pluses is now less than 350, down from over 128,000 ten years ago.

    There's more; those are just the elevated points.

    Now for some numbers:

    ---

    Year conclude 1948 (from QST March 1949, referencing FCC tabulation)

    76,666 operators, 77,338 stations.

    ---

    1963 (from: QST December 1963, referencing Radio dilettante Callbook, Winter edition)

    Operators in CONUS:Novice: 16,795Technician: 58,656Conditional: 40,259General: 95,250Advanced: 40,296Extra: 3,164

    Operators outside CONUS (AK, HI, possessions, not broken down by license class): 4,167

    Total Operators: 258,587

    ---

    End of September 1978 (from QST January 1979, referencing FCC issued numbers)

    Novice: 62,930Technician: 68,281General: 117,805Advanced: 82,454Extra: 21,792Total Operators: 353,262

    ---

    Year conclude 1978 (from QST April 1979)

    Novice: 62,856Technician: 68,738General: 118,808Advanced: 83,436Extra: 22,498Total Operators: 356,336

    ---

    January 31, 1984 (from QST April 1984)

    Novice: 85,482Technician: 77,518General: 118,023Advanced: 95,782Extra: 34,674Total Operators: 411,479

    ---

    September 30 1985 / September 30 1986 (from QST December 1986)

    Novice: 76,337 / 79,107Technician: 83,117 / 86,148General: 117,340 / 116,864Advanced: 97,825 / 98,195Extra: 37,968 / 40,768Total Operators: 412,587 / 421,082

    ---

    May 31, 1987 (from QST September 1987)

    Novice: 86,175Technician: 87,631General: 115,045Advanced: 97,880Extra: 42,136Total Operators: 428,867

    ---

    March/April/May 1988 (from QST August 1988)

    Novice: 82,705 / 82,780 / 82.675Technician: 95,256 / 95,810 / 96,888General: 113,900 / 113,623 / 113,648Advanced: 98,505 / 98,403 / 98,493Extra: 44,617 / 44,819 / 45,208Total Operators: 434,983 / 435.435 / 436,912

    ---

    1993 Radio Amateur's Callbook

    Novice: 99,193Technician: 184,392General: 122,735Advanced: 106,964Extra: 59,382

    Total Operators: 572,666

    ---

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by KB6QXM on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY.

    Good research. Well written. pleasurable Job.

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM writes:

    "Good research. Well written. pleasurable Job."

    TNX, but it wasn't much, really.

    What would exist really frosty IMHO would exist to accept the numbers from plenary of the various Callbooks down through the years and attach them on a website. Complete with graphs to array the changes.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by K6LHA on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM, applauding "CW," wrote on December 15, 2009:

    "Jim, N2EY. pleasurable research. Well written. pleasurable Job."

    In reality, his numbers acquire NO presence on the three years following the elimination of morse code testing in USA dilettante radio license examinations. That three year epoch was stated as such in the title of this article. He could just as well acquire cribbed statistics genesis with the creation of the FCC in 1934 and exist just as "applicable."

    At NO time since the 'Restructuring' of USA dilettante radio NINE YEARS AGO has there been any stoppage of the capacity and OPTION of plenary to expend International Morse Code on USA dilettante radio bands. There acquire been regulations FORBIDDING modes/modulations other than "CW" in most USA dilettante radio bands, yet "CW" is allowed almost anywhere in USA dilettante radio bands NOW. The only "elimination" was to EXCLUSIVITY on some HF bands such as expansion of voice modes in the 80-75m corps nearly a decade ago. Legally any USA radio dilettante can operate "CW" in the upper section of 80m band. It is IN the USA (FCC) regulations.

    The curious section of these "CW Bigotry" displays by a few long-timers overlooks the legal capacity and OPTION for *ANY* USA radio dilettante licensee to expend OOK CW as they wish, REGARDLESS of whether or not they tested for International Morse Code cognition in the USA at any time in the past. NO code test is required to expend the mode of code, any class! [amazing, but true]

    A few barracks lawyers follow the ARRL benchmark in "sinning by omission." For example, a constant 'rebuke' is "Since 2000 Technician-Plus acquire been renewed as Technician." N2EY uses that often, almost always after I acquire made some remark in dilettante radio forums that mentions Technician class. :-) Jimmy never states that, of the SIX classes of USA dilettante radio licenses existing prior to mid-2000, THREE are NOT being issued as NEW. A Renewal of an existing license is NOT a NEW license grant. According to FCC regulations, NO NEW Novice licenses were granted in the last 9 1/2 years; NO NEW Advanced class licenses were granted in the last 9 1/2 years. plenary of that has been KNOWN for 10 years since the Memorandum Report and Order establishing 'Restructuring' was published in December 1999. Constantly repeating it year after year does no good, just wastes archive space on dilettante radio forums.

    A few others, vainly looking for something to exist negative about, cite things that were "overlooked" such as AGE of licensees. Since that data was not available through the sole source of USA dilettante radio license data (the FCC publicly-available ULS database), it could not exist shown NOW.

    While PAST history may exist "interesting" to SOME, let's mug it, the FCC was created in 1934 and is 75 years worn this year. It is the ONLY civil radio regulatory agency in the USA. To wrangle some nebulous connection to regulations of the 1930s, the 1940s, the 1950s, the 1960s, the 1970s, etc. for "keeping inevitable regulations (forever and ever)" in the USA amaetur radio service is invalid, facetious, and quite a bit ludicrous. The insistance of some that inevitable regulations exist KEPT because those 'somebodies' met regulations of LONG AGO is merely self-serving and nugatory on their part. They believe they can pose and preen because anyone who was involved in radio communications a half-century or more ago is extremely rare on this forum. <shrug>

    It does no pleasurable for the USA dilettante radio service to MAINTAIN and NOURISH the abysmal divide in the service created by these long-timers who favor inevitable modes and modulations. That is the antithesis of "keeping up the condition of the art." It is regressing or stagnation of skills despite their claimed proficiency. For example, in the more recent "Mad Scientist" article on e-ham there was an opening remark about "EMCOM weenies." "Weenies" is a colloquial pejorative, in this case directed as a sneering remark about newcomers. If it was intended as "humor," then it failed a test of applicability to a big group such as over-700-thousand licensed radio amateurs in the USA.

    USA dilettante radio regulations had a MAJOR CHANGE in the year 2000. The number of NEW license classes was changed from SIX to just THREE and International Morse Code cognition rate dropped to 5 words per minute equivalent maximum for plenary class examinations needing code testing. That came after a long, protracted observation epoch (extended twice) on NPRM 98-143 and a final determination published by the FCC in December 1999. That was NINE YEARS AGO. The determination was LAW.

    Following the Report and Order on 'Restructuring' came no less than EIGHTEEN Petitions, plenary aimed at trying to repeal Restructuring or to change it EVEN MORE, most regressing to the condition of older regulations. Those might acquire been well-intentioned for a clique(s) but did not address the desires for maintenance of regulations for present and future citizens, licensed in anything or not. The FCC manages to clarify their decisions clearly in every Memorandum Report and Order. That a particular determination "goes against" some clique is only luckless for them. That clique LOST and does not acquire grace or manners to accept such loss.

    What appears to exist the most "damaging" to the collective prides of long-timers was NPRM 05-235 released on 19 July 2005. Its main detail was the elimination of plenary code testing for any license class. NPRM 05-235 gathered 3,994 Comments and Replies to Comments plus TWO MORE Petitions for Reconsideration that came in after the close of Comments on 25 Nov 05. Those two Petitions by Mssrs Ward and Gordon were both dismissed. Memorandum Report and Order 06-178 was published on 19 December 2006 with an efficient date to exist established later. That date of cessation of code testing was 23 Feb 07. That was TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO. The determination is LAW.

    The FCC does NOT acquire any charter to nourish the prideful hunger of long-timers seeking to withhold their braggadoccio well-fed indefinitely. That anyone passed a federal test in some skill a long time ago does not involve it defines these individuals as being superior to ordinary folk for eternity. In NO route is their belief by hook or by "better" than ordinary folk, nor is it imprimateur of their being some benevolent of "boss" who can establish "what is pleasurable for all." Stubbornly, so many believe that some or plenary of those syndromes accomplish not apply to their own selfish illness. Thus the abysmal divide is maintained in USA dilettante radio, upright hobbyists on one-hand, the vocal bigots who want desperately to CONTROL dilettante radio in their own image on the other side. They cannot acquire it both ways.=========================There IS some hope for the code cliques and those who demand regression to 'their' standards. Simply craft a well-worded Petition to the FCC seeking to change regulations. That is a lawful process, has been done often in the past. Such a Petition may or may not exist disseminated for public commentary, depending on the belief of the FCC. However, there were 18 Petitions up before public scrutiny between establishment of 'Restructuring' and the NPRM on code test elimination. Several of those Petitions were a cross-purposes of other Petitions. Two more Petitions were disseminated AFTER the code test elimination law, both demanding a recrudesce of code testing. Those two ('Ward' and 'Gordon') were eventually dismissed.

    The fact that a Petition is published does NOT involve it is universally liked/worshipped/damned. It is merely up in the public eye, a public that does NOT participate your divine wisdom nor guru-guidance. One has to exist mentally stalwart to attach up a Peition and then mug the consequences of public opinion.==========================Cliques can forget the Petition belief and just sit in forums and newsgroups and bitch and moan for ever, damning newcomers via plenary sorts of pejoratives. That only reinforces evidence of continuing division in dilettante radio. That division was there earlier than 15 years ago and shows no badge of ceasing. The pollyanish phrasing "amateur brotherhood" is a hypocritical nonsense statement. It is a vaporous myth.==========================Fair warning: Code cliques will eventually exist outnumberd. As of this morning (15 Dec 09) there were 344,455 Technician licensees out of a total 716,779 individual licensees in the USA. Just that ONE class has 48.06 percent of plenary individual licensees. In the last 12 months 30,865 NEW licensees were added to the USA total but 26,727 EXPIRED. The net gain in numbers is not much but it is more fantasy voyaging to assume those newcomers are plenary favoring morse mode.

    AF6AY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by KB6QXM on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim N2EY wrote:

    What would exist really frosty IMHO would exist to accept the numbers from plenary of the various Callbooks down through the years and attach them on a website. Complete with graphs to array the changes.

    Jim,

    I will build the website for you, if you desire.

    Let me know.

    73

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM:

    Thanks!

    The information posted is a start, but I don't acquire lots of worn Callbooks.

    For information back to about 1996, the AH0A website has plenty. Maybe AH0A would consider adding historic data?

    --

    There acquire been times when the number of US hams grew rapidly, such as during the early 1930s, the 1950s, and the 1970s, and other times when the numbers grew slowly or not at all, such as the mid-1960s and the late 1990s. plenary sorts of factors influence growth, not just the license requirements. In fact, there is sometimes a negative correlation in that increasing the requirements correlated with more, not less, growth.

    As previously mentioned, the rules connected with the licenses must exist known and understood to merit analytic conclusions about the growth as well. For example, the number of Novice licenses was very small until the 1970s, when the license became 5 year renewable. With a 1 or 2 year nonrenewable license, Novices were under considerable pressure to upgrade before the license ran out. Making the license 5 year renewable removed that pressure, so the numbers grew.

    The Conditional had a sizable percentage of US amateurs back in the 1950s and 1960s in section because, for about a decade after 1953, it was available to anyone who was more than 75 miles from a quarterly exam point. This included a lot of Americans. But in 1964 the "Conditional distance" was increased from 75 to 175 miles, and the number of exam points increased, so that very itsy-bitsy of CONUS was "Conditional territory". The number of Conditionals then began to fall. And one of the major reasons for resistance to the "incentive licensing" changes of the late 1960s was the cross of travel it would impose on hams who didn't live near exam points.

    Another rules-change consequence is vanity calls. Normally, an dilettante license can only exist renewed in the last 90 days before expiration, or in the two-year grace epoch after expiration. (FCC defines "expiration" as the conclude of the 10 year license term, not the final removal from the database after the grace epoch ends).

    But a vanity convoke can exist requested at any time, and when one is issued, there's an automatic renewal. Changes to the vanity-call rules usually result in a surge of applications, which can contort the gross how-long-to-expiration picture.

    Since April 15, 2000, the Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses acquire been closed to new issues. This is the second time this has happened to the Advanced; the first time was at the conclude of 1952. And just fancy the first time, the number of Advanceds is dropping very slowly compared to the other classes. After almost a decade of no new Advanceds, their numbers are down to about 60% of the May 2000 total. Novices are down to about a third of their May 2000 total, indicating lots of cancellations and upgrades.

    It will exist bewitching to see how long it takes for the last Novice and Advanced class licenses to Go away, either from upgrade or cancellation. Some Advanceds acquire vowed never to upgrade to Extra, so it may exist a very long time.

    The fastest decline of plenary has been the Technician Plus, but that's understandable because of the rules change of April 2000. Not only are no new Technician Pluses being issued, but when an existing Tech Plus is submitted for renewal or vanity call, the FCC changes the class to Technician. This auto-reclassing reduces the number of Tech Pluses and increases the number of Techs in a route that is different from plenary other license classes. Also, any Novice who passes the Tech written gets a Technician, not a Technicians Plus.

    So the Technician class isn't just growing because of new hams, but because of upgrades from Novice and automatic class change from Technician Plus. This is almost identical to what happened to the general back in the 1970s when the Conditional was phased out.

    IOW, if you ogle at the number of Technicians without reference to the rules changes, it can (erroneously) appear that their numbers are growing only because lots of new hams are getting that license. But in fact there's a built-in additional source of Technicians from upgraded Novices and reclassified Tech Pluses. In fact, if you ogle at the combined number of Technicians and Technician Pluses over time, it hardly changes at all, and is actually down from where it was in 2000, in both total and percentages.

    All of this is a minor side issue to the really significant things:

    How many *active* amateurs are there?

    What are they doing on the air?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY writes:"How many *active* amateurs are there?What are they doing on the air?"

    Here's some more questions:

    How many licensed amateurs spend their hobby time in online discussions such as these, and what are they writing about?

    Are they assisting others in some route in the actual conduct of on the air radio operations, or are they merely stuck in a loop writing over and over again about licensing requirements and their own experiences with same?

    There are literally thousands of words written above, and we've heard most of it before. Only a handful of people read this garbage. I'm not one of them. I'm having too much fun on 160m CW this winter.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by W5ESE on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > There acquire been times when the number of US hams> grew rapidly, such as during the early 1930s,> the 1950s, and the 1970s, and other times when> the numbers grew slowly or not at all, such as> the mid-1960s and the late 1990s. plenary sorts of> factors influence growth, not just the license> requirements.

    Here's data from the late 20's to early 30's.The growth was quite spectacular.

    My source is the reserve '200 Meters and Down'.

    1928 169281929 168291930 189941931 227391932 303741933 415551934 463901935 455611936 46850

    By 1934-1935, the growth spurt had approach to an end.

    The reserve cited several reasons for the growth:

    o term of the license extended to 3 yearso divorce license required for portable worko extend in leisure time owing to unemploymento decline in cost of apparatus between 1929 to 1934($150 -> $50)o migration from the shortwave listening hobby

    73Scott W5ESE

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by KB9MWR on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! The most alarming trend I noticed in the last three years was that most of the new hams in my district acquire no electronics background or interest. Most of the new guys are community emergency response ARRL boyscouts.

    These numbers involve itsy-bitsy to me. They are far more significant to the ARRL's membership department and for the commercial ham manufactures, etc.

    What is the mediocre age of hams today? And what is their interest in ham radio?

    Both of these questions you can't divulge by parsing a FCC database.... Both are besides the result of ham radio PR from a national level.

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE: bewitching numbers!

    Couple more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were plenary by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not exist immediately removed from the files.

    - With such rapid growth, the "old timers" were completely outnumbered by the newcomers. (Of course in 1932 there had only been licensing for 20 years!)

    - The World Radio Conference of 1927 was a turning point for dilettante Radio. It was at that conference that dilettante Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a divorce and discrete radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was besides a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could bear without modification. unadulterated DC notes and other standards became mandatory requirements. Often a transmitter needed major rework or a complete rebuild to meet the "1929 rules". Morse Code and written testing became mandatory for plenary countries that issued dilettante licenses.

    The US ham bands were cleave down considerably by the new treaty. 40 went from 1000 kc to 300, 20 went from 2000 kc to 400. 30, 17, 15 and 12 meters weren't ham bands at plenary back then.

    You'd believe that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would acquire a attach a real damper on growth, but the antithetical happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by K6LHA on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on December 16, 2009:

    "How many licensed amateurs spend their hobby time in online discussions such as these, and what are they writing about?"

    As one out of nearly three quarter million USA dilettante radio licensees, I wrote up a small study of the changes in USA dilettante radio classes since the elimination of the code test from plenary USA dilettante radio license examinations. Then I've replied to ten kinds of disrespect from long-timers who complain bitterly about us "newcomers not doing exactly as THEY issue they SHOULD!" :-).................NI0C: "Are they assisting others in some route in the actual conduct of on the air radio operations, or are they merely stuck in a loop writing over and over again about licensing requirements and their own experiences with same?"

    Are you a JAG (Judge dilettante General) who has authority under the UCAJ (Un-unified Code of AmateurJustice)? Are you going to imbue some of us with a violation of "Article 31" of the UCAJ and acquire us tried before a Summery Court of "winter-haired elders in amateurism?" :-)

    Ya know, "elder statesman," I examined the Regulations of USA dilettante Radio service very carefully prior to my license tests of 2007. Ya know what? NOWHERE in those regulations does it issue a licensee MUST operate an RF emitter within USA-allocated dilettante bands for any length of time during their 10-year license term. [amazing but true!] They aren't even required to merit a LOG to array authorities except for Spread Spectrum. Not even to the Raddio Kops!

    Feel free to attach on your shiny Raddio Kop shield and acquire the Raddio Poe-lice hustle me down to the lock-up (or is it 'lock-out'?). I am positive one of the very dilettante Poe-lice will snarl "You'll never QSO in this town again!!!" :-)

    Go ahead, merit my day...:-).................NI0C: "There are literally thousands of words written above, and we've heard most of it before. Only a handful of people read this garbage. I'm not one of them. I'm having too much fun on 160m CW this winter."

    Then WHY are YOU here? accomplish you acquire some bipolar disorder that compels you to jump into forums and snarl at plenary you don't like? That is NO route to "help" the "cause" of USA dilettante radio, is it?=================Well, now, you just Go back to 160m "CW" and acquire ever so much fun. Nobody is stopping you. Odd it is that you jump in here minimize others writing about regulations in here and then convoke it "garbage."

    Gosh, it must exist that I am such a "newcomer" to radio and don't "have respect for my radio elders!" Yeah, that's it! I'm a mere 77 who started in HF radio 56 1/2 years ago as a militry professional. I'm such a "beginner!" They "beginners" should plenary exist respectful of plenary you old-timers assiduous going back to the non-future past in amateurism...because YOU issue they should. <shrug>

    Have a wonderful Holiday time Grinch.

    AF6AY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by K6LHA on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE wrote on December 16, 2009:

    "Here's data from the late 20's to early 30's. The growth was quite spectacular. My source is the reserve '200 Meters and Down'."

    "1928 16928"

    I'm positive that is "interesting" to historians. Feel free to compare the USA dilettante radio regulations of 1928 to those of 2008, a mere 80 years later. :-)

    If a comparison is needed, research the gross of 'radio' not just amateurs. You will find that 'radio' had just BEGUN to expand in other radio services. 'Radio' is only 113 years old, first demonstrated publicly as a communications medium in 1896. In Italy and Russia that identical year...by a well-to-do Italian entrepreneur and a Russian academician..................W5ESE: "By 1934-1935, the growth spurt had approach to an end."

    By July 2, 2003, the growth spurt in MODERN USA dilettante radio licensees, plenary classes totalled, had approach to an end. That peak has not even been caught up with by 16 Dec 09 (6 1/2 years later) and is soundless 9,962 shy of that peak. [source: www.hamdata.com on-line "fccstats" page and includes Club licenses in 2003 and 2009]=================As far as the technology of 'radio' there is no applicable comparison because the gap due to the exploding states of the know-how of plenary electronics is so worthy by now that a comparison would exist ludicrous. I can cite several sources for the simple judgement I've been IN the electronics industry for so long and don't exigency any "official" ARRL publications to prove it.

    Some examples: Vacuum tubes were soundless in their childhood in 1928 and costly in small quantities. The term "semiconductor" wasn't in the electronics lexicon. The only semiconductor-like diodes were the Galena crystal detector (a contour of point-contact diode), the selenium rectifier with its wonderful aroma when overheated, and a cadmium sulphide "photocell." Frequency control in dilettante radios consisted of relying on the data from quartz crystal manufacturer's measurements or by L-C "wavemeters." Note: The Phase-Locked Loop had to wait until 1932 and its invention in France. The frequency region above 30 MHz might as well acquire been Neverland for radio amateurs due to its "strange, involved requirements."

    Compare that to 2008. Transistors were then a mature product and Integrated Circuits made many, many features/options available to cover most of the allocated frequency ranges with rather absolute accuracy down to 1 Hz increments. The Analog Devices AD9851 can provide the QRPer with selectable frequencies down to better than 1 Hz in a sole IC and at very low DC power demand. AM voice can exist emitted using the very identical RF power amplifier used for "CW" or Data modes; it is the benchmark in ready-built dilettante radios and does not require a big audio power amplifier to "modulate" a Class C PA stage. FM radio was proven as a communications mode by commercial designers prior to WWII. The USA has NO dilettante radio corps allocations below the bottom of the AM BC corps yet the Europeans acquire had such for years. dilettante corps allocations acquire long since been approved on up to the 300 GHz international allocation restrict and ready-built VHF-UHF transceivers are on the market to Go above the 70cm band. Data modes can easily Go as elevated as USA dilettante allocations allow thanks to modern solid-state circuitry and devices. There are a (few) VNAs or Vector Network Analyzer that capitulate very pleasurable involved impedance-admittance data on any frequency from the bottom of MF on up to UHF. Anyone can design, build, innovate anything they want now with assurance that lumped constant components are fully characterized in frequency. Very few accomplish and their non-advocates trumpet the "Back to the Future" theme of "pioneering radio" (?) with "CW" on low HF bands in the new millennium...................W5ESE: "The reserve cited several reasons for the growth:

    o term of the license extended to 3 years"

    80 years later (even 70 years later) the term was 10 years plus a 2-year grace epoch for renewal. NO ONE granted a new license in the last 9 years requires ANY testing in their gross life as long as they merit mail or e-mail renewals within the regulated time.

    "o divorce license required for portable work"

    No such thing needed now, but then that regulation would acquire been imposed by a predecessor to the FCC. The FCC was created in 1934. The concept of "portability" with a radio of tube architecture in the 1928-1934 era is ludicrous. :-)

    "o extend in leisure time owing to unemployment"

    The worthy DEPRESSION in the USA began in 1928. To most in here it is merely a historical footnote. If they heard stories of it in their families it was from grandparents and great-grandparents. The unemployment rate reached 28% at its worst, roughly three out of ten of the available workforce. Yes, one could issue it was "LEISURE TIME" from the console of being well-fed NOW.

    "o decline in cost of apparatus between 1929 to 1934 ($150 -> $50)"

    :-) There was no such thing as "war surplus" radios available then as it was after WWII. I don't know if "dumpsters" (even close to the modern design) were available then for amateurs to scrounge for parts. As I recall it, there were just modest garbage dumps or burning pits in northern Illinois back then. :-)

    Had you mentioned 'radio' to anyone in the public THEN they would acquire thought of the then-new home entertainment medium of BROADCASTING. Few in the public knew about dilettante radio THEN just as few in the general public know about dilettante radio NOW. There are lots of copies of worn radio apparatus catalogs on the Internet that cover that time, PRICES included. I've downloaded a few just for old-radio references. Its a curiosity, nothing more.

    How would you record those 1928 receivers insofar as "features," stripping away the marketing laguage phrases? Were they even comparable? I don't believe so, but then, despite being born in that era, I acquire no worship or affection for it. My radio world is not limited to just broadband AM and "CW" (with a BFO)................."o migration from the shortwave listening hobby"

    To acquire a listening hobby requires stations there to listen to. In the 1928-1934 epoch AM broadcasting on MF had expanded to win on a semblance of a mature entertainment industry. It enabled the fledgling "radio parts industry" in the USA to grow prior to WWII. There really wasn't much to listen to on the "shortwave" (HF) bands yet since Europe was getting close to a shooting war and most of the European SW BC stations were oriented towards their own languages for coverage to their nations citizens in colonies or embassies elsewhere or to their maritime crews. No SW BC listener could decode commercial SSB data sent along the newly-established message carriers. Expansion into other-country broadcasting (i.e., to the general public) would not really become big until AFTER 1945 with most of the hostilites in Europe and Asia much reduced. Note: It will win considerable historical data searching to find ANY epoch of time when hostilities acquire actually ceased worldwide between 1945 and now! As a matter of fact, "SW BC" is now available through commsats, some of which require subscriptions for downlinking, some countries abandoning "SW" (HF) broadcasting.====================The 1928-1934 time epoch may exist "interesting" to some but so few here acquire LIVED IN it, let solitary lived through it that its "discussion" is limited to quibbling about a few "official" ARRL books or texts available elsewhere which the ARRL doesn't want to talk about (it can't resell them to merit a profit). There is data about that era in electronics industry trade publications but those are about (gasp! horrors!) "professional electronics!" :-)

    73, Len AF6AY (two years older than the FCC)

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C:

    y'know, I believe you acquire a very pleasurable point

    I can't accomplish 160 but I can accomplish 80 CW.

    Maybe I'll see you there.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by WA4KCN on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE: bewitching numbers!

    - yoke more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were plenary by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not exist immediately removed from the files.

    - With such rapid growth, the "old timers" were completely outnumbered by the newcomers. (Of course in 1932 there had only been licensing for 20 years!)

    - The World Radio Conference of 1927 was a turning point for dilettante Radio. It was at that conference that dilettante Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a divorce and discrete radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was besides a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could bear without modification. unadulterated DC notes and other standards became mandatory requirements. Often a transmitter needed major rework or a complete rebuild to meet the "1929 rules". Morse Code and written testing became mandatory for plenary countries that issued dilettante licenses.

    The US ham bands were cleave down considerably by the new treaty. 40 went from 1000 kc to 300, 20 went from 2000 kc to 400. 30, 17, 15 and 12 meters weren't ham bands at plenary back then.

    You'd believe that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would acquire a attach a real damper on growth, but the antithetical happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim acquire you considered writing a reserve on the history of dilettante radio picking up where 200 Meters And Down left off. I believe it would sell.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To Jum, N2EY:

    Normally, I'm available on 80m (40, too) during the Winter months. However, this winter, I've chosen to attach plenary my eggs in the Top corps basket in order to acquire a better antenna that will ply more power.

    Top corps is experiencing some periods of outstanding propagation this year, and I'm having a pleasurable time. For example-- two QSO's with CQ zone 18, and at least a shot at zone 23. (I've never even heard these zones on 80m.)

    TF4M reports making first-time ever qso's between Hawaii and Iceland on Top Band. He's got an outstanding website with audio clips; I even heard a recording of my qso with him there.

    Here at latitude 38+ degrees, even during the Winter solstice, they acquire a few hours of daylight available for a crash from DX'ing top corps and amusement on Top Bnad.

    Jim, your contributions concerning licensing history(as well as W5ESE's) are appreciated.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, sorry for the typo on your name, and merit that "amusement on eHam."   RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by KG4TKC on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C, Chuck,thanks for the comments and info. The info on top corps is very interesting,will exist tuning up there a itsy-bitsy bit more this winter. Your comments were spot-on.73.   RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by KD7YVV on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Well, I ogle at it this way.If I can find someone to ragchew with, I'm happy.There are people who just accept the license and never doanything with it.I had fun with the Lake Washington Ham Club this pastField Day. Lots of people trying different things,different antennas etc. etc.My eyesight isn't what it used to exist and I don't own anelectron microscope to see the molecular sized componentsused today. I accomplish fancy reading a lot of the older QSTmagazines and seeing the different projects that wereconsidered condition of the know-how at the time.Ham radio isn't only what you merit of it for yourself,it's what you give back to the hobby by route of bringingothers into what is a very diverse pastime.As far as emergency communications go, I've taken thecourses, but for me, emcomm is not just radio.Here in WA, they acquire to worry about avalanches, volcanoes,tsunamis, flooding, earthquakes.There's nothing wrong with being prepared, and knowledgeis power. To paraphrase James T. Kirk.....Give me a pleasurable band, lots of sunspots, and a pleasurable antenna and radio to tune them by.......And don't forget the stinging chocolate for those coldwinter nights!

    --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers & History   by N2EY on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WA4KCN: I've thought about writing such a book. Maybe when time permits.

    Until then, you can read a three-part history of US dilettante radio licensing from 1950 to 2000 that I wrote about 9 years ago:

    http://www.w6vrc.org/Archive/histmenu.html

    is the main menu; select parts 1, 2 or 3 from there.

    ---

    NI0C: I acquire only one Top corps QSO in my log, but it was quite memorable!

    Thanks for the benevolent words. You may find the licensing history referred to above to exist of interest.

    ---

    KD7YVV: territory Day is a favorite of mine; been doing FD since 1967.

    I believe the phrase "ham radio is what you merit of it for yourself" includes what you give back. IOW the person who gives back pleasurable stuff will find they accept more out of ham radio.

    "Give me a pleasurable band, lots of sunspots, and a pleasurable antenna and radio to tune them by......."

    I *like* that!

    "And don't forget the stinging chocolate for those coldwinter nights!"

    Earl Grey tea for me...

    73 & TNX plenary de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by WA2ONH on December 18, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY Jim

    --- and your Fifty Years of dilettante Radio Licensing (1950-2000) History section Four is at:

    http://www.qsl.net/arrlsb/Digest/Pages/story04.html

    Good reading!

    73 de WA2ONH Charlie

      RE: USA dilettante Radio History   by K6LHA on December 18, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Beginning back in 1996, Bill Continelli, W2XOY, started writing "Wayback Machine," a column for the Schenectady Museum dilettante Radio Asscoiation and continued that through 2003 in 35 parts. It had been carried on www.ham-shack.com but that website went commercial. The identical material can exist organize at:

    www.qsl.net/ecara/wayback/main.html

    That is the linking page for plenary 35 parts genesis in 1896 and on through 2007 (with an update elsewhere). It is well written and presents a more dynamic history, an "easy read" in colloquial review terms. The "Wayback Machine" columns acquire besides been reprinted in the Marin ARC newsletter out of San Rafael, CA. Some of those "Wayback" columns' material has besides been organize on audio and Twitter sites. Bill Continelli retired from the IRS after 30 years in 2009 and formed his own Tax business in upper New York condition and soundless contributes material to several amateur-interest websites.

    There is a worthy deal of HISTORY on the topic of radio, plenary radio services, available on the Internet and in print. Rewriting of past material is just rewriting. It is better to merit history than cribbing available sources.

    AF6AY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers & History   by WA4KCN on December 18, 2009 Mail this to a friend! RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers & History Replyby N2EY on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend!N2EY - I've thought about writing such a book. Maybe when time permits.

    Until then, you can read a three-part history of US dilettante radio licensing from 1950 to 2000 that I wrote about 9 years ago:__Thanks Jim I ogle forward to reading. My interest in ham radio centers on the history of their service including licensing progression and technological change through the years. A well written reserve on the more recent history since 200 Meters is needed and no doubt you are the person to write it.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers & History   by N2EY on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WA4KCN: As WA2ONH has kindly pointed out, it's actually in four parts. (Different websites broke it up differently).

    IMHO, the challenge to writing a history of dilettante Radio isn't just getting plenary the info and writing it up, but deciding what to leave out. There is so much to document!

    For example, I could easily double or triple the size of that four-part article on licensing by going into more detail about the rules changes over the years, with more dates, details, etc. Then there's the impact of apparatus changes, Sputnik, incentive licensing, cb, Vietnam, the 1960s counterculture and much more.

    Maybe someday. Thanks for the benevolent words.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Back to the Future section 314159....   by K6LHA on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Those who did not fancy how present history turned out wanted to Change The Subject!

    Make no mistake about it, the past dozen years acquire had a SIGNIFICANT change in USA dilettante radio regulations, each easily on-par or greater than "Incentive Licensing" of four decades ago. The first was the determination in 1999 to enact "Restructuring." The second was the determination to liquidate plenary code testing for USA dilettante licenses in 2006. Note I said decisions, not enactment in law. The die was cast once the decisions were published in the Federal Register.

    Many, many, many long-time-ago tested USA amateurs were livid, outraged at this terrible thing that was a "personal insult" to THEM. In one route it resembled a highly-amplified horror and furious that surfaced in 1958 when the FCC "took away the 11m HAM corps that was 'rightfully' THEIRS" and "gave it away" to ordinary citizens to expend as Class C and D Citizens Band. plenary that furious and resentment soundless lives since "CB" is soundless considered a "hateful" thing by so many amateurs and its users are soundless almost evil incarnate. :-)

    Conditioned Bigotry of the hatred against CB soundless lives after 51 years of its creation. The identical Bigotry against the (hack, ptui) "no-coders" will probably live on a century from now. Bigotry is arduous to eradicate. It is an emotional condition abysmal inside minds, used as a personal refuge, a surcease of personal frustration by taking it plenary out on some target. Those targets "are not fancy US!" sob the bigots (the only ones who know the "truth"). :-)

    One route to alleviate some individual frustrations are to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Yes. Retreat to the PAST. There is SAFETY there because plenary of then is KNOWN. There is safety there...so few were even alive when the first USA radio regulations were made 97 years ago. They can juggle data and events in flawless safety, acquire endless arguments over itsy-bitsy past "reasons" and sound oh-so-schmardt about it even if they had NO hand in causing those events. The long-ago past is a wonderful residence to HIDE. It is a wonderful residence to vicariously "live" AS IF one was "there."

    No thanks, I've "been there, done that" and would rather ogle to the future. <shrug> :-)

    My itsy-bitsy study, never intended as a pretentious work, was simply to try looking towards the future. To try gauging the public's response to those noteworthy FCC decisions of 1999 and 2006. Reaction was as expected. Hard-core ultra-conservative hams just didn't fancy the outcome since those that applied for licenses were "not fancy Them, did not accomplish as They had to do." The crowd-pleasing types, trying to guage which route to go, generally sided with the uber-conservatives. In the last dozen years the sky literally fell on them yet the repose of us were unscathed. Only a few respondents expressed independent opinions; those seemed to believe for themselves, unaffected by any exigency to Go with conservative group-think. If anyone dared venture into opinions on the immediate future, it was not apparent.

    If anyone soundless thinks that PAST decisions in USA dilettante radio are "prologue" then it is a uncouth mistake, a wrong definition. Since just 75 years ago and the creation of the FCC, USA dilettante radio regulations acquire been constantly EVOLVING, CHANGING...just as they acquire with every other radio service. Is history "important?" Or is it just a record of what went on before NOW?

    WE are animated in the PRESENT. Most of us acquire lived through the last dozen years of noteworthy, remarkable CHANGE. I daresay THAT is "important." Not because they lived through it but for the profound changes it made in USA dilettante radio regulatory law. fancy it or not, changes were made. Did any of these changes finger any long-timer or uber-conservative operating privileges? Nary a one, hardly any impact at all. Then WHY plenary the denunciatory labels and epithets thrown out against change? Sorry, no reasonable person can accept individual's personal feelings about changes that apply to plenary near-three-quarter-million licensees and uncountable future licensees. Long-timers are NOT "in charge" despite their implicit demands that they are...:-)

    I'm not disparaging those who fancy to find out about long-past events in radio. It IS bewitching to many, but it is not a model for the future they are in NOW. Just don't drop current history unfolding before you in order to live vicariously in the past.

    As an worn anonymous tagline went, "Today is the tomorrow you worried about yestersday." :-)

    Len, AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future section 314159....   by KB6QXM on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll stake he believes that the United States should acquire open borders also! How about Socialism also? One world government?

    All of these ideas that the far left leaning population is pushing for now!!

    Mark my word, the next incentive licensing that will approach out because of the politically reform FCC and greedy ARRL will exist a no-test license. That will exist the first step. They will sit back and see how that goes over and then they will liquidate plenary testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they accomplish not want to exclude anyone.

    The license exams are so watered down now, that they are basically giving away the licenses now.

    What is next?

      What Next?   by N2EY on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM writes: "the next incentive licensing that will approach out because of the politically reform FCC and greedy ARRL will exist a no-test license....

    The license exams are so watered down now, that they are basically giving away the licenses now."

    Well, maybe it seems that way.

    But let's ogle at the history...

    Before the restructuring of 1951, there were just three classes of US dilettante radio license: A, B and C.

    Class B and Class C were identical except that a Class B was the result of testing at an FCC office and a Class C was "by mail". Both required 13 wpm Morse Code (sending and receiving) plus a written exam of about 50 questions that included multiple choice, essay, draw-a-diagram and show-your-calculations questions.

    Class C was only available to those who were shut-ins or who lived more than 125 miles from a quarterly exam point. If a Class C moved to within 125 miles, or recovered from whatever made the person a shut-in, s/he had 90 days to retest or lose the license.

    Class A required having a Class B or C for at least a year, plus an additional 100 question written exam on technical stuff. Class A was only available by testing in front of an FCC examiner. If the person trying for Class A had a Class C license, s/he had to pass the Class B exams plenary over again in front of an FCC examiner before being allowed to even try the Class A.

    All US hams had access to plenary dilettante frequencies at plenary power, but only Class A could operate 'phone on the bands between 2.5 and 25 MHz.

    And yet 9-year-old Jane, W3OVV earned a Class B in 1948. Front cover of QST, December 1948.

    In 1951 the license structure was changed to add the Novice, Technician and Extra licenses, and to rename the A, B and C as Advanced, general and Conditional.

    There was outrage in some circles because the Novice allowed newcomers on the dilettante bands with just a 5 wpm code test and a 20 question multiple-choice exam that was extremely basic.

    The Novice brought in a lot of new hams, and among them were lots of younger people. As in teenagers, which then as now were considered in some circles to acquire plenary sorts of dismal habits, but who mostly were just pleasurable kids interested in radio.

    Then in 1953-54 it got worse. FCC made the Novice and Technician by-mail only, and removed the requirement of retest-if-you-move-or-recover for Conditional. Even more shocking, plenary operating privileges were granted to plenary US amateurs except Novices and Technicians, so there was no judgement to Go for Advanced or Extra.

    That brought even more outrage! At least one op took to calling CQ on 75 with the qualifier "no kids, no lids, no space cadets, Class A operators only".

    There were a lot of mistakes made by the newcomers - so many that in 1956 W6DTY wrote a classic article called "Your Novice Accent", describing how to accomplish it right.

    And yet over time the vast majority of those Novice newcomers scholarly the right ways and went on to accomplish worthy things in dilettante Radio. Their numbers caused US dilettante radio to grow plenary through the 1950s and into the 1960s. The growth was so much that the US ham population grew faster than the US population overall, despite the baby boom! Many of those Novices became the worn Timers of today.

    KB6QXM: "What is next?"

    I don't believe anything, at least for a while. There are no proposals to change the license structure in front of the FCC now, nor acquire there been for a while.

    If you win a pleasurable arduous ogle at the license question pools from the standpoint of someone who has a background in electronics, they ogle dead-simple except for the regulations, which are really a matter of memorization. Nobody who really knows basic radio should exigency to study for any US dilettante exam except for the rules and regs.

    But if you ogle at them from the standpoint of someone who *doesn't* acquire a background in electronics, they ogle a lot different! Lots of new stuff there for the non-technical person.

    The really immense inequity is that, in the dismal worn days, they didn't acquire access to the actual braindumpsmp;A. Which is a change in test method, not material. But recall *why* that change took place: FCC wanted to rescue money by not doing the tests themselves any more.

    Look at plenary the FCc rules changes we've seen in the past 30-odd years and consider whether they cost FCC money or saved money and you'll see the point.

    I don't see a no-test license as a possibility. First off, it violates the ITU-R treaty. Second, and more important, the dismal undergo of cb is more than enough judgement not to accomplish it.

    The one thing anyone who is concerned about the current testing can accomplish is to write more questions for the pools and transmit them to the QPC. The pools could then grow to the point that it would exist much easier to learn the material than to word-associate and memorize one's route to a passing grade.

    There are many things a person who is concerned about the new hams can do. One of them is to back out at sites fancy this one, answering newcomer questions and writing articles.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Novice 1967Technician/Advanced 1968Extra 1970

      RE: Back to the Future section 314159....   by K6LHA on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM snarled angrily on 19 Dec 09:

    "In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll stake he believes that the United States should acquire open borders also! How about Socialism also? One world government? plenary of these ideas that the far left leaning population is pushing for now!!"

    "Far Left?!?" Tsk, tsk, I am right-handed. :-)

    All that for NOT keeping USA dilettante radio regulations as they were in 1952 when I voluntarily enlisted in the US Army during the Korean War?!? [see Army Serial Number RA16408336, note the "RA" prefix...:-)]

    Just WHICH year "should" I acquire tested in? Yours? :-)..................KB6QXN: "Mark my word, the next incentive licensing that will approach out because of the politically reform FCC and greedy ARRL will exist a no-test license. That will exist the first step. They will sit back and see how that goes over and then they will liquidate plenary testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they accomplish not want to exclude anyone."

    Tsk, tsk, you are irate again. labor soundless going dismal for you in Silicon Gulch? My sympathies...

    A quick ogle at the Federal Register doesn't array ANY badge of what you issue is "true." No new "incentive licensing plan." Not even from the mighty folks at Newington. NO badge of "eliminating plenary testing."

    In case you haven't looked, the FCC establishes USA dilettante radio regulations along with every other USA civil radio service. [amazing but true] Since its genesis 75 years ago the FCC has an orderly and legal process to which anyone can Petition for new regulations, observation and Reply to Comments on any docket up for discussion...or issue anything it wants. Those can exist submitted and recognized from ANY citizen, with or without some federal license in that particular radio service! [really astounding when one thinks of it] Yes, anyone can post a observation or Reply to Comments about an dilettante radio docket without any dilettante callsign whatsoever! [wow, isn't that "left-leaning," though!] Not only that, plenary those who submit documents acquire their names (and callsigns if applicable) listed in decision-making Memorandum Reports and Orders! I cheer that sort of democratic-process government and served my country in the military to back that up. In case you never served, plenary who enter the military attach their LIFE on the line when they win that oath. Did YOU attach your life on the line for your ham license?

    The ARRL just doesn't acquire the controlling influence on the FCC it thinks (and implies) it has, not from the dilettante radio dockets up for discussion in the last dozen years...compared to what it had long ago. Not my problem. I was a plenary member of the ARRL for two years and they did NOTHING for me. ONE election to vote in and only ONE candidate to vote on. Sounds much fancy under the reign of one Josip Broz long ago in another big country, doesn't it? A NO-party "election.".................KB6QXM: "The license exams are so watered down now, that they are basically giving away the licenses now."

    No, the ground fee was $14 when I took my dilettante radio license exams (note plural) almost three years ago. It took about 3 1/2 hours of a Sunday afternoon, most of which was spent WAITING an hour to start, then having to wait some more in between test elements. plenary of the questions and answers (120 questions for the 3 different test elements) were generated and made available by the National Council of Volunteer Examiner Coordinators. You can see and download plenary the questions and answers at www.ncvec.org for nothing. The NCVEC Question Pool Committee MUST exist composed of already-licensed dilettante radio license grantees. That is an FCC regulation.

    In preparation for my dilettante radio license exams, I downloaded the Question Pool directly from the NCVEC site. On checking that out I was pleased to see that the NCVEC QPC had MORE than the required 10 questions (for random selection by VE groups) for each required question. The mediocre for plenary 120 questions was 13 times the required test questions; for dilettante Extra it averaged about 16 times the required 50 questions. The so-called "anyone can 'memorize' the answers" imbue would apply ONLY if an applicant was eidetic (one who has a "photographic memory"). NOT knowing ahead of time which questions would appear would require "memorizing" about 1560 questions and 6240 answers, the answers necessary to avoid getting a wrong one. In many of the 4-answer multiple-choices,the QPC inserted "distractors," wording such that a wrong concede MIGHT appear right.

    I might acquire agreed that the number of illustrations MIGHT acquire been scanty, but then I've only been reading and understanding schematic symbols for about 60 years...and devising circuits and systems that actually worked (!) for over 45 years when I took my dilettante radio tests. :-)

    I will award that I acquire some undergo in 'radio' (a subset of electronics) that isn't common to many dilettante license applicants. Was it "hard" for me? No. Would it exist "hard" for someone just off the street? Yes. But...the mediocre license applicant ALREADY knows SOMETHING about the subject. pleasurable grief there acquire been plenary sorts of "Handbooks" (and over-priced "test guides") published by the ARRL solitary for a half century.

    Now they accept to the crux of the matter, the Nobel-laureate International Morse Code test! I didn't acquire to win one. In fact, the ARRL-VEC team didn't acquire any code sound reproducing apparatus at my test site (room donated by the Los Angeles Fire Department at an unused fire house) to give one! The LAW regarding morse code testing had eliminated any such requirement for any class license!

    That elimination had been done in a democratic-process manner, legally and correctly, everything published and soundless available at the FCC, either in their Reading leeway or on-line! [another astounding but truemoment!] How about that? A democratic-process time for ANYONE to merit their case on NPRM 05-143 and then acquire each and every Reply and Reply to Comments made available for the PUBLIC to see! Is that "left-leaning?" Or is it just darn pleasurable democracy at work? I'll Go with the latter.

    You acquire to recall that USA dilettante radio has NEVER been considered "professional" nor is it in any route "academic" (FCC was not chartered as a school). dilettante radio isn't a Union, isn't a Guild, isn't even a Craft that requires apprentice-journyman-master status tested levels of skill. Back when I first started in HF communications (early February 1953) there were 36 high-power HF transmitters that had to exist operated/tended/maintained sending out an mediocre of more than 220 thousand messages a MONTH for the Far East Command Hq. no one of those messages required any sort of morse code skill to send; they were plenary teleprinter, connecting the Command with plenary Army stations in the Pacific and to CONUS and Hawaii and Alaska. That's 56 years ago. The Army had dropped OOK CW mode messaging on the bulk of messages back in 1948. Everything was operating on a 24/7 basis. It wasdone in a professional manner, nothing amateurish about it. Since that military service time, I've NEVER been required to know or expend any sort of "morse mode" means for communications, not even when taking private pilot flying lessons and passing the FAA written.

    Ah, but the AMATEURS who had been licensed since the year dot insisted and insisted (and a few demanded) that to exist an dilettante ond HAD to pass a morse test...all the route to early 2006. It was conjectural to exist "vital to the nation" or some such quaint notion. By 1960 or so even the USN had begun to drop morse mode. By 1999 the international maritime "community" had dropped the worn 500 KHz (morse only) distress frequency in favor of the Global Marine Distress and Safety microwave calling through the Inmarsat relays. The maritime community had devised it as well as using it.

    Even the USCG had stopped monitoring 500 KHz that year. Times had changed and become better, safer with new technology and new methods. But, in 1999 the long-timer stalwart morsemen were soundless adamant about keeping the morse test. Why?

    Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to win a test in it and plenary who follow better win one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as modest dumb. It was regressive for a HOBBY that requires federal regulation (and licensing) only because of the nature of electromagnetic wave propagation..................KB6QXM: "What is next?"

    It wouldn't dumbfound me one bit if your local John Bitch Society demands recrudesce of SPARK! It was the traditional means of USA dilettante radio transmission in the beginning. :-) OK, so it isn't narrowband, it is TRADITIONAL! Never intellect that it was outlawed in 1927, Go back further, when hams were HAMS! Not a sole transistor or IC around then to fuddle long-timers, nossir, nothing complicated about early radio! Go for that crystal detector and spark transmitter DXCC! Pioneer radio plenary over again, array us how it's done, array 'em who is boss!

    Oh, and delighted Holidays! :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future section 314159....   by NI0C on December 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "But, in 1999 the long-timer stalwart morsemen were soundless adamant about keeping the morse test. Why?

    Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to win a test in it and plenary who follow better win one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as modest dumb. It was regressive for a HOBBY that requires federal regulation (and licensing) only because of the nature of electromagnetic wave propagation."

    You're wrong, Len. A much better judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies. Many "stalwart morsemen" believe it was "selfish as well as modest dumb" to remove that requirement.

    We, the "stalwart morsemen" are soundless on the air and enjoying their privileges, though, despite the rule changes. Many new licensees are joining their ranks, learning and practicing the code even though it's no longer a licensing requirement.

    We'll speak for ourselves, thank you, so don't Go putting words in their mouths. Over and over again, you acquire used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and rip him down again.

    You're a verbose person, Len. You look to acquire a lot of radio erudition and opinions about ham radio. I may acquire easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever adage where you hang out-- what's your favorite dilettante corps to listen to; acquire you ever made a QSO; what kinds of apparatus and antennas accomplish you fancy to try out; acquire you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with dilettante radio applications, etc.

    As you well know (and fancy to point out) there's no requirement, legal or otherwise, that you accomplish any of these things. I bet, though, I'm not the only one who wonders once in a while-- why accomplish you acquire a license? Is it merely so you can brandish a callsign in these forums and crow again and again about passing the dilettante Extra test? That's how you approach across.

    BTW, there used to exist a requirement that one needed to log a inevitable number of hours of on the air activity in order to renew one's license. I believe it was a judicious requirement, even though it's one (small) judgement there was a 13 year gap in my dilettante radio activity.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: Back to the Future section 314159....   by K6LHA on December 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on December 20, 2009:

    [AF6AY] "But, in 1999 the long-timer stalwart morsemen were soundless adamant about keeping the morse test. Why? Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to win a test in it and plenary who follow better win one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as modest dumb. It was regressive for a HOBBY that requires federal regulation (and licensing) only because of the nature of electromagnetic wave propagation."

    Ni0C: "You're wrong, Len. A much better judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies. Many "stalwart morsemen" believe it was "selfish as well as modest dumb" to remove that requirement."

    Well, attach it this way: I was "wrong" IF and only IF I had attributed that particular statement to you or your immediate dilettante friends. As it was, I made a general statement based on a LOT of observation of other amateurs' statements in-person, in-print, in-uendo. <shrug>

    Well, then, to "navigate the [radio] waves" I would acquire to know everything about DATA, too. [actually I know something of Data since I was doing that 56 years ago...:-)]. Since when did the FCC last REQUIRE OOK CW skill, MANDATORY on any corps except the low conclude of 6 and 2 meters? Hmmm?..............NI0C: "We, the "stalwart morsemen" are soundless on the air and enjoying their privileges, though, despite the rule changes."

    I thought I had already MADE that point. The biggest "damage" made by the FCC was an expansion ofvoice privileges in the 80-75m region. [horrors! :-)] OOK CW could soundless exist used just as it is permitted everywhere on every ham corps on up to 300 GHz. The "awful, fateful, end-of-the-world (aa many know it)" determination to drop plenary code testing requirements was in regards to getting IN dilettante radio. Getting IN, not for immediately dropping in to exist a "qualified" operator as is some commercial practice.Now you Go right ahead and indulge in your morse mode plenary you want. You can...............NI0C: "Many new licensees are joining their ranks, learning and practicing the code even though it's no longer a licensing requirement."

    I will classify that statement as entirely subjective. Perhaps yours is just wishful thinking. Reading the Replies to NPRM 05-143 (which I did entire, plenary saved on a CD), that fervor is NOT mutual...............NI0C: "We'll speak for ourselves, thank you, so don't Go putting words in their mouths."

    Oh, wow. Yeah. Thanks for the ORDERS, but I will believe FOR MYSELF and achieve my OWN conclusions...............NI0C: "Over and over again, you acquire used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and rip him down again."

    Over and over again, you and others acquire "used bandwidth" to build up your own strawmen and rip down those who would talk against them. Once in a while I would approach along with an obsolete Zippo and set fire to them. <shrug> Makes a nice night-time scene with plenary those olde-tyme shibboleth strawmen burning merrily...............NI0C: "You're a verbose person, Len. You look to acquire a lot of radio erudition and opinions about ham radio."

    I acquire a "lot" of erudition AND opinions about LOTS of things. I was not vigilant that such is a CRIME. In my 77 years on this planet I've seen a lot of groupings, gatherings, forums, etc., etc. where SOME, insistent on being "leaders/managers" try to instill THEIR personal wishes/desires on others for no judgement than to exist the "leaders/managers" because THEY wanted to it (i.e., ego-driven). I am an independent thinker and try to exist objective about many things. That is resented by many longing for a group to belong to, to accept guidance in what to accomplish and what to "enjoy." That is luckless to those many. I accomplish not feel obligated in any route to provide emotional sustenance to Them or those who wish to subjugate my personal desires into adherence to their personal beliefs/desires..............NI0C: "I may acquire easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever adage where you hang out-- what's your favorite dilettante corps to listen to; acquire you ever made a QSO; what kinds of apparatus and antennas accomplish you fancy to try out; acquire you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with dilettante radio applications, etc."

    So, I am now to Submit to Interrogation by some inspector Clue-no? :-)

    Those similar questions acquire been asked of me before...usually by those who are building up some dossier to expend themselves into later messaging pejoratives designed to damange my person. I am wiseto how those things work, yet I am unharmed physically or emotionally by such. <shrug>

    You might as well interrogate me about my option of wife, the foods I prefer, the entiertainment I like, why I chose to live where I do, and everything else under the sun. That is impertinent to the topic and you know it. But, Inspector Clue-no, I acquire explained plenary that BEFORE and I'm not going into such IRRELEVANCY here AGAIN.

    OH, and I acquire made QSOs on ham bands. I've besides made radio contacts on seven OTHER radio services, six of which accomplish NOT accept an dilettante radio license as a "qualification" for operation. <shrug>

    WHY accomplish you exigency such "qualifications" and who in the #$%^!!! made you the "qualifier?".................NI0C: "I bet, though, I'm not the only one who wonders once in a while-- why accomplish you acquire a license?"

    BECAUSE I COULD. ogle at your own wording and alleged inquisitiveness, nee snarly interrogation. If you are going to accept plenary huffy and pretension "insult" from my answer, ogle at your own attitude..................NI0C: "Is it merely so you can brandish a callsign in these forums and crow again and again about passing the dilettante Extra test? That's how you approach across."

    Now you are putting non-relevant "REASONS" into my behavior, personal desires, not just putting "words in my mouth." NUNYABIZNESS on the WHY. I can record the WHY from my point of view but there will exist many who WILL attach "words in my mouth" in denigrating plenary that I say. That is EXPECTED and I KNOW the nature of yahoos that are bound to accomplish it...because they acquire already done that. What is more relevant is TAKING THE TEST(S).

    Not wanting to sound fancy a Motivational Speaker, I'll just record a successful method to win AND pass a test, ANY test. It isn't MY method, rather it has been stated and done by others before me. I used it for my 1956 Commercial license test and again for my 2007 dilettante Extra class test and a LOT of assorted tests on other things in between:===================================1. PREPARE. accept to know the subject, accept to know the test method, accept to know the reaquirements, accept to know the test site environment. You CAN accomplish it.

    2. PURPOSE. exist single-minded about the test, let it exist the focus of your efforts. You ARE going to pass it.

    3. CONCENTRATE. No one else is going to back you, it is plenary your own doing. You WILL pass it.

    4. CONFIDENCE. acquire it in yourself. Ignore the doomsayers and pompous jocks and insulters. You set out to accomplish it and you WILL SUCCEED.

    5. accomplish IT. Carefully. win your time. Watch out for distractors in multiple-choice answers. Ignore the test site environment and distractions from other test takers. accomplish NOT even imagine failure.====================================Radio regulations allow re-taking a test later if it is scored incomplete. Retesting time may vary as regulations are changed. It is NOT the identical as a one-shot academic class test (some academic rules require taking a gross course over if a 'final' test is failed). dilettante radio is a hobby, NOT a union, NOT a Guild, NOT a tradecraft. Your JOB does NOT depend on the outcome of this test, certainly not the repose of your life..................NI0C: "BTW, there used to exist a requirement that one needed to log a inevitable number of hours of on the air activity in order to renew one's license."

    Yes, I know there was. That is IRRELEVANT. I supervision not what USA dilettante radio regulations WERE in 1912 or 1932 or 1952 or 1972 or 1992 or 2002. USA radio regulations acquire CHANGED much over the years. Note I issue "radio regulations" without specific definitions as to which radio service. If you are vigilant and informed about MORE radio than just dilettante radio service, you will acquire to correspond with that because CHANGE has happened to plenary of them during the last 75 years of FCC existance.

    Once the test is passed, that is IT. USA radio regulations accomplish NOT, acquire NOT required re-testing foryears and years provided regular paperwork renewals are done promptly. The ONLY worry would exist about running into those bragging yahoos who want to Run "newbies" down because THEIR tests "were so much harder." Pfaugh. Just a lot of BS by them.

    Now, after watching NASA-TV on cable for the live lift-off of Expedition 22 at the Baikonur Cosmodrome to the ISS, I am going to continue to "enjoy my dilettante radio license" AT *MY* PREFERENCES, not some "rules" of behavior, lifestyle, or whatever dictated by a minority group at a suburb of Hartford or anywhere else thinks I should exist doing. Go ahead and round up YOUR troops for some close-order drill...in the oh, so PROPER route to "enjoy ham radio." Thanks but no thanks, I can device out what *I* want to accomplish plenary by myself. Really.

    AF6AY

    Oh, and delighted Holidays...:-)

      RE: Back to the Future section 314159....   by NI0C on December 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To AF6AY: Congratulations on achieving your dilettante Extra Class license. Best wishes for the new year.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      US dilettante License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C writes: "A much better judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies."

    Of course, but FCC didn't see it that way. Unfortunately.

    Both in 1999 and after 2003, the majority of those who commented on the various proposals to reduce/eliminate Morse Code testing supported retaining at least some of it. But the FCC ignored the majority and went with the no-code-test-at-all minority opinion. FCC actions are not democratic and comments are not votes.

    Basic erudition of plenary the other modes is tested in the written exam. Even modes which are used far less on the dilettante bands than Morse Code.

    It should besides exist remembered that the 5 wpm code test is just the most basic level, not really "proficiency".

    What's really bewitching is that the drastic reductions in written exams and the reduction/elimination of Morse Code testing haven't resulted in lots and lots of new hams. So the worn tests weren't really a "barrier" at all.

    We had some growth from 2000 to 2003, but it didn't last. Since 2007 we've had growth again, and hopefully it will withhold on. But in neither case were there lots of new people flooding in. Nor did they see a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* approach in.

    NI0C: "Many new licensees are joining their ranks, learning and practicing the code even though it's no longer a licensing requirement."

    The ultimate irony of the situation may exist that they wind up with *more* Morse Code operators overall, both in absolute numbers and percentage of actual use.

    Some indicators:

    You mentioned 160 meters earlier. The ARRL 160 meter contest keeps on growing, despite the fact that efficient antennas are rather big - and it's a CW-only contest! It will exist bewitching to see this year's results.

    On territory Day 2009 I was section of the team that ran the CW station at the local club effort. They were in 5A + VHF/UHF, with 3 fulltime phone stations, 1 phone/data station, 1 VHF/UHF station (all phone), and 1 CW station. Yet their CW setup made more QSO points than plenary the repose of the effort combined, and came very close to making more QSOs. (Wait till NEXT year!) That wasn't unusual, either, it's happened many times in the past decade or so.

    Vibroplex was just bought by a ham who used to labor for Ten Tec. There are more companies making keys and paddles today than I can withhold track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not plenary simple QRP sets.

    Pretty pleasurable for a mode that gets almost no publicity and which requires some skill to use.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by NI0C on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:“But the FCC ignored the majority and went with the no-code-test-at-all minority opinion. FCC actions are not democratic and comments are not votes.”

    And, as they well know, some of those who expressed the minority belief were not even qualified to hold an belief on the subject.

    “It should besides exist remembered that the 5 wpm code test is just the most basic level, not really "proficiency".”

    Everyone who got on the CW bands after passing a 5 wpm test scholarly that there was nobody to talk to at this level. One of the pleasurable things about the worn 6 week wait (between passing an FCC exam and receiving one’s Novice license in the mail) was that it gave us some more time to exercise and help their skills before actually getting on the air. As I recall, the median speed on the Novice bands was probably about ten wpm. They knew they had to hit the ground running if they were to qualify for a renewable license before their non-renewable Novice tickets expired.

    “What's really bewitching is that the drastic reductions in written exams and the reduction/elimination of Morse Code testing haven't resulted in lots and lots of new hams. So the worn tests weren't really a "barrier" at all.”

    No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available.

    “Nor did they see a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* approach in.”“

    I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a dismal review here on eHam, adage it was DOA out of the box. Turns out he didn’t install the fuses in the primary power line!

    “our [Field Day] CW setup made more QSO points than plenary the repose of the effort combined, and came very close to making more QSOs. (Wait till NEXT year!) That wasn't unusual, either, it's happened many times in the past decade or so.”

    In recent years my son and I acquire operated territory Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always merit over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms.

    “Vibroplex was just bought by a ham who used to labor for Ten Tec. There are more companies making keys and paddles today than I can withhold track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not plenary simple QRP sets.”

    There has besides been continuous improvement in electronic keyers– most notably the chips designed by K1EL. Reception of CW has been remarkably improved by DSP filtering, AGC action, and din reduction.

    Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by KB6QXM on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Chuck,

    My point exactly. The ham radio license tests are so basic these days that you acquire hams that merit plenary of the technically savvy hams ogle bad.

    How can you acquire an Extra class ham that:

    1) Does not know how to attach a connector on the conclude of a piece of coax

    2) As you mentioned does not acquire the insight to check the fuses before adage that the amp is dead.

    3)Does not know how to find resonance for a simple dipole.

    4) Cannot clarify the inequity between resistance and reactance.

    These are scary, but upright stories of their new "instant gradification" hams. The mindset of give me a license and I will device it out later and they convoke this progress?

    In the days of the highly technical testing that was required to accept a license, when you told someone you were a ham radio operator, they respected you for your knowledge. Not now!

    73

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C: "some of those who expressed the minority belief were not even qualified to hold an belief on the subject."

    I'd express that belief rather differently:

    Everyone can acquire and express opinions on anything and everything. Whether those opinions are based on experience, facts and sound reasoning is another matter.

    NI0C: "One of the pleasurable things about the worn 6 week wait (between passing an FCC exam and receiving one’s Novice license in the mail) was that it gave us some more time to exercise and help their skills before actually getting on the air."

    6 weeks? It was a lot more in 1967! Process went fancy this:

    1) Prospective ham scholarly code and theory well enough to acquire a Go at the exam.

    2) Prospective ham organize volunteer examiner (no capitals) who would give the test, and set up time and place.

    3) Volunteer examiner gave code tests (receiving and sending). If prospective ham passed them, volunteer examiner sent away contour requesting written test.

    4) When written exam came in the mail, volunteer examiner and prospective ham would set up time and residence for written exam.

    5) At written exam session, sealed test envelope would exist opened, prospective ham would win test. When done, volunteer examiner would seal up plenary papers in FCC-provided envelope and transmit off for grading. plenary volunteer examiner did was merit positive prospective ham didn't cheat.

    6) FCC would process the gross thing and transmit either a small envelope or a immense one. small envelope was preferred because it contained only the license. immense envelope contained paperwork to accomplish the gross thing plenary over again.

    Getting anything through FCC took 6 to 8 weeks back then, so the gross process could easily win 12 to 16 weeks just in FCC processing.

    All that encouraged prospective hams to overlearn so they'd pass on the first go. And as you said, it gave time for more practice.

    NI0C: "As I recall, the median speed on the Novice bands was probably about ten wpm. They knew they had to hit the ground running if they were to qualify for a renewable license before their non-renewable Novice tickets expired."

    As you say, the nonrenewable Novice with its limited one- or two-year term besides had the consequence of encouraging newcomers to hit the ground running. Most of the new hams I knew had a key, receiver and antenna set up and working long before they had the license, and used the processing retard to accept a transmitter set up and ready to Go so there would exist no retard when the license arrived. In my case I used the time to build a transmitter from scratch.

    NI0C: "No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available."

    Since 1990. besides accomodations in the tests. But at least some folks I acquire encountered were too arrogant to win odds of them.

    NI0C: "I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a dismal review here on eHam, adage it was DOA out of the box. Turns out he didn’t install the fuses in the primary power line!"

    That's not a vice of the exam process. It's a lack of common sense and failure to RTFM.

    Which is nothing new.

    There was a QST article some time back about speechless questions and mistakes that various rigmakers had encountered from customers. fancy the ham who plugged a mike into the PHONES jack of his new receiver, hit the SEND-RECEIVE switch and called CQ. Or the ham who wired a Heathkit transmitter and used spaghetti where the manual called for it - except he used *real* spaghetti, not varnished insulating tubing. Or the ham whose set wasn't doing so well, so he lifted the lid and tightened plenary the slack screws....

    The article appeared about 1956.

    One immense inequity between the worn days and now is that, in the worn days, a mistake fancy that would generally exist known only by a few, rather than being on array at a favorite website fancy eham.

    Another inequity is that most apparatus nowadays is relatively inexpensive compared to yesteryear, when you adjust for inflation. There besides wasn't the expectation of plug-and-play.

    None of which is a result of changes in testing.

    NI0C: "In recent years my son and I acquire operated territory Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always merit over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms."

    We acquire probably worked each other many times, just not using their own calls. The local club rotates the convoke used each year so that plenary the regulars accept a chance.

    NI0C: "There has besides been continuous improvement in electronic keyers– most notably the chips designed by K1EL. Reception of CW has been remarkably improved by DSP filtering, AGC action, and din reduction."

    Besides plenary of that, there are better crystal filters, better rig designs, etc. The Elecraft K2 is an illustration of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW...

    NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from dilettante Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the identical job so much better.

    In 1921, Godley went to Ardrossan, Scotland and received more CW than spark signals on 200 meters - even though most of the spark signals were running higher power and were more numerous than CW rigs at the time. That demonstration, and the 1923 two-way transatlantic QSO on 110 meters changed a lot of minds. By the time spark was outlawed for hams in the late 1920s, it was merely a procedural thing; hams had simply stopped using it.

    Yet big numbers of amateurs today continue to expend Morse Code/CW on the air, because nothing has approach along that does the identical job better.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      More Back to the Future (easy as pi)   by K6LHA on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on December 21, 2009:

    [N2EY]: “But the FCC ignored the majority and went with the no-code-test-at-all minority opinion. FCC actions are not democratic and comments are not votes.”

    NI0C: "And, as they well know, some of those who expressed the minority belief were not evenqualified to hold an belief on the subject.

    Ahem, not to crash up the hate-the-nocoders-cuz-we-morsemen-are-the-GREATEST imitation of Muhammed Ali (formerly known as Cassius Clay) but the FCC allows any national to observation on any docket up for public comment. NPRM 05-235 was about GETTING INTO USA dilettante radio, not an "upgrading" or anything else. GETTING INTO, as in the regulations required by an applicant to pass an dilettante radio license exam. There are NO "qualifications" necessary to post Comments or Replies to Comments. <shrug> By that curious illogic of alleged "qualifications" stated above, one cannot observation about GETTING INTO a radio service if one is ALREADY IN that radio service. :-)

    On NPRM 05-235 there were 3,786 documents filed between 15 July 2005 and 14 November 2005 (official ending day). On 25 November 2005 I submitted an EXHIBT which was a week-by-week tally of plenary documents posted on that docket. Anyone can access that through the FCC Electronic observation System under docket 05-235. That was just an informational exhibit, not "official" and quite probably not "qualified" under the coders' curious we-are-the-only-qualified-people "rule."

    Having saved each and every publicly-available document under docket 05-235, the exhibit results are as "qualified" as is workable to anyone literate. In that, it shows that the intial months of commentary, the CITIZENS of the USA were FOR the NPRM; i.e., for removal of the code test. There was a worthy deal of later DENIAL by long-ago-code-tested dilettante licensees which skewed the totals towards being "against" the NPRM.

    Note that I said "citizens" above. That is the ONLY qualifier necessary for the USA federal government. Anyone is free to peruse the Communications Act of 1934 or the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (some amendments to regulations) to see what "qualifications" are necessary. Anyone NOT a national can besides post on that docket but one can expect the FCC staffers to exist literate and vigilant of the federal laws governing their actions. As a matter of fact, there were three individuals who made multiple postings of opinions against the NPRM, plenary of them supposedly "qualified" having dilettante radio licenses.

    The logic of "qualifications" ONLY by having an existing, active-license term is itself FAULTY given the lawful charters of the FCC. Anyone NOT engaged in Mass Media (broadcasting) radio services may observation on matters concerning such broadcasting. Anyone NOT engaged in Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) without being IN either broadband data communications or electric power distribution activities. Anyone NOT owning/using/licensed-in the Private Land Mobile Radio Service (PLMRS) can observation on any matter in a docket affecting only PLMRS regulations. Each of those would apply for any radio service or section of regulations of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations.

    FCC 06-178, the Memorandum Report and Order eliminating USA dilettante radio service license testing for International Morse Code cognition, was made on 19 December 2006 under the authority of William T. Cross, then head of the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. It can exist read on the ECFS under docket 05-235. As of this date, 21 Dec 09, it is three years and 2 days since that R&O was released. plenary of the FCC determination reasons are clearly given in that R&O document. It is LAW.

    Those who wish to transpose such a test elimination are free to submit a Petition to re-install it in the USA dilettante radio service regulations. Two such Petitions were submitted after 06-178 became law. The FCC replied to both with decisions and reasons made public for their denial................[N2EY?]: “What's really bewitching is that the drastic reductions in written exams and thereduction/elimination of Morse Code testing haven't resulted in lots and lots of new hams. Sothe worn tests weren't really a "barrier" at all.”

    [NI0C}: No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available.

    Curious sentence structure. There were no "medical waivers" for written tests...or were there? :-) "Lots and lots of new hams" is a subjective description, unquantifiable. The no-code-test Techncian class had been growing continuously between 1991 and 2000, continuaing to grow afterwards until that one class now accounts for 48% of plenary licensees, a rate that is not affected by the allegations that "Tech plusses are renewing as Techs," a favorite reiterated "reason" of N2EY. N2EY's reiteration is NOT backed up by a shred of evidence proving his allegation. <shrug>..............[N2EY?] “Nor did they see a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* approach in.”“

    Now, that's a new excuse/rationalization. :-) I'm not positive where THAT was some benevolent of "reason" for removing the code test, but I'm positive N2EY will kluge together some benevolent of "justifying" statement. rather similar to his early-1970s "design" for a low-HF transceiver using vacuum tubes. Very advanced. [see listing of his "silver" photos positive to follow...:-)}...............NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up withtechnology."

    My apologies, I wasn't born until 1932. "Spark" was prohibited in the USA by 1927. Outside of some EMP testing, the only "spark" in my lifetime was with automobile sparkplugs, including early model gas engines (up to about 1948 or 1949, then replaced with "glow plugs").

    However, the TECHNOLOGY of COMMUNICATIONS - as used by other radio services - were already sending continuous teleprinter signals of eight such circuits plus two voice channels plenary on one SSB radio in the 1930s on HF over long-haul communications paths. Those were a "radio extension" of existing landline wired carrier systems that came into expend in the late 1920s. Of course that was for commercial and military "carrier" services and would not exist organize in dilettante radio. The FCC forbids communications carrier service in the USA dilettante bands.

    On the other hand, the FCC does permit SOME Spread Spectrum operation above 30 MHz in USA dilettante radio bands. They will besides permit Forward-Error-Correction for Data IF and only IF the format has been published elsewhere and is considered "public knowledge." Then there is PSK-31, a slow-speed data system that takes no more bandwidth than an OOK CW signal. Of course PSK-31 was innovated in the UK and air-tested in Europe before the ARRL bothered to publish anything about it. NIH factor? Well, there are "radio modems" in expend by radio amateurs today but the FCC does not yet permit high-rate modems (such as organize in commercial radio services) for USA radio amateurs.

    The pre-(about)-1960 teleprinter rates used to exist 60 WPM equivalent but were raised to 100 WPM before the Teletype Corporation electro-mechanical terminals were replaced by electronics versions with much higher throughput. Personal computers aren't necessary for all-electronic terminals (the first ones were done with digital circuitry as stand-alones) but the tremendous hard-disk mass storage capabilities of PCs of even a decade ago rescue having reels and reels of tape, paper or magnetic. plenary that mass storage in PCs besides allows very quick retrieval of text data for effortless viewing off-line or on-line.

    But, I digress. The mighty morsemen of the dilettante persuasion insist and insist on "Back to the Future" (easy as pi) modes as a "necessary qualifier" to issue anything at all. :-) Only They "know what is pleasurable for plenary amateurs." <shrug>

    AF6AY

      RE: More Back to the Future (easy as pi)   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! AF6AY:Congratulations on achieving your dilettante Extra Class license after petitioning the FCC to reduce the requirements.

    You might exist interested in:http://eham.net/reviews/detail/6136

    Maybe the ARRL will endorse your certificate for your special efforts. Perhaps they will even print a billboard sized certificate for you.

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from dilettante Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the identical job so much better. "

    It was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"The Elecraft K2 is an illustration of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW... "

    The K2 is indeed a remarkable radio. In terms of picking up decrepit signals, it's extremely close to its immense brother, the K3. I acquire my K3 and K2 setup for dual receive now, using a splitter on the Rx antenna inputs, and an audio mixer on the outputs.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by N2EY on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C writes: [CW] "was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then."

    Yes, but the bandwidth improvement was only section of the story. A spark signal can actually exist made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques.

    What really made the inequity was that spark, being a damped (modulated) wave, was not as efficient in operation as an undamped (unmodulated/continuous) wave. This was particularly upright as frequency increased and better receivers (Godley used a superhet at Ardrossan) came into use.

    The very elevated peak-to-average ratio of a spark signal meant that insulators and other components had to withstand higher voltages and currents than with "continuous" waves.

    There were existing 19-teens technologies that could generate undamped waves, such as Alexanderson alternators and Poulsen arc converters. But they tended to exist practical only up to a few hundred kHz at most, far below the frequencies amateurs could expend after 1912.

    The conclude result of plenary this was that amateurs soon organize that a 50 or 100 watt tube transmitter on 100 meters could accomplish what had required a kilowatt rotary spark on 200 meters. And often the refugee-from-the-lamp-factory could accomplish more, in both distance and in miles-per-dollar.

    That was the conclude of spark in dilettante radio.

    Oddly enough, spark continued to exist used by other, "professional" radio services for many years. Most common was its expend in maritime radio, because many ship owners did not want to invest in new apparatus every few years.

    (If you believe technology changes quickly these days, just ogle at a typical 1920 dilettante station, and then one from 1930).

    In fact, the expend of spark for back-up purposes in the maritime radio service was not outlawed until the 1960s.

    NI0C: "The K2 is indeed a remarkable radio. In terms of picking up decrepit signals, it's extremely close to its immense brother, the K3."

    Not just in weak-signal reception, either. The K2 besides excels in strong-signal environments (very elevated dynamic range) and in low angle din on both receive and transmit.

    It besides has very low power requirements for its flat of performance. On receive, my K2 typically requires about 250 mills at a nominal 12 volts. A typical Yaecomwood HF rig will draw four to ten times that!

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by K6LHA on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on 22 Dec 09 on "King Spark":

    "It was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then."

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Some folks just haven't kept up with the condition of the know-how in "communications bandwidth efficiency." :-)

    Disregarding commercial and military SSB formats that can carry two voice channels and eight TTY channels on the identical 12 KHz bandwidth over HF radio paths since the 1930s, the following are upright advancements in "communications bandwidth efficiency:"

    1. Claude Elwood Shannon's seminal paper of 1947 relating noise, bandwidth, and error rate and itsrelationship to temperature, Bell System Technical Journal 1947 (before the invention of the transistor at Bell Labs, done in a different section of that Laboratory). This established what would exist universally known as "Shannon's Law" for plenary communications circuits on this planet.

    2. Time-multiplexing of four TTY channels over one FSK CW radio circuit at 850 Hz "spread" (Mark to Space frequency shift), USN contract with DoD, in expend 1953 with the worldwide Army Command and Administrative Network (ACAN), later STARCOM. Required no more bandwidth than a sole TTY FSK circuit at the time.

    3. The first of the voice channel modems faster than the 300 WPM Bell System. Those would peak at the present-day modems on the Internet sending/receiving 56,000 bits per second over a voice-bandwidth channel only 3000 Hz wide. Millions and millions in expend worldwide just prior to the new millennium. The USA FCC regulations for dilettante radio communications on HF acquire drastic limits on radio modem data rates.

    4. Spread Spectrum techniques, at first classified only for government use, now organize in millions of cellular telephone sets/sites that allow many users to coexist WITHOUT INTERFERENCE in the identical bandspace and close geographical spacing. Makes expend of both Shannon's Laws and Information Theory techniques. There are soundless drastic limitations in FCC regulations on such techniques in USA dilettante radio.

    5. Digitized voice, first used over wired telephone systems by individuals in the early 1970s expanded to commercial expend ON HF broadcasting, most prominanet method being DRM (Digital Radio Mondial) that has been in-use now for six years. Digitized voice AND data has been in-use in small-unit portable radio of the DoD SINCGARS family, operational since 1989, and capable of selectable in-clear or on-line encrypted communications, besides adopted by most NATO military member forces. [digitization allows effortless encryption/decryption] A variation is the digitized modulation used in FRS/GMRS unlicensed portable/mobile radio use.

    6, UWB or Ultra WideBand techniques where bandspace is deliberately widened for many and varied not-communications-application such as short-range underground viaualization of buried objects, "looking through walls" of buildings, etc., etc., etc.

    There are hybrid systems which utilize Information Theory techniques, notably SONAR which was one of the first widespread uses of quickly Fourier Transform signal characteristic detection. Such Sonar systems resulted in the "waterfall" array now used in dilettante experimentation for weak-signal communications, notably on LF (which the ARRL has not seen suitable to promote although many European countries and the UK already acquire dilettante radio bands on LF). Yes, there is an underwater communications system in expend but it doesn't expend RF. :-)

    A common hybrid system is the "radio watch" and "radio clocks" now in expend by the (?) millions for automatic self-calibration that expend exceptionally-slow data rates permitting the miniature radio demodulators to reduce din with decrepit signals on LF (60 KHz in the USA and UK). Mine was "terribly expensive" three weeks ago ($27.45 with free shipping from Amazon for a Casio model that came out of the box already self-calibrated). I acquire another, older radio watch which cost less than $30 including tax and shipping, does not acquire the selectable UTC or curious time zone display.

    Another "hybrid system" is the USA DTV broadcast format that uses plenary available techiques of Information Theory to collapse at least 18 MHz of bandwidth into a sole 6 MHz bandspace AND adding quadraphonic sound, teletext (captions for the hearing impaired), plus a number of technical signals for constant checking of modulation quality. That system would exist impossible to achieve without an easy-to-manufacture but highly-complex-in-structure Integrated Circuit. The MPEG (Motion Picture Experts Group) extended known Information Theory techniques to the maximum in modulation-demodulation to enable bandwidth reduction. An added plus is the relative license of RFI compared to older, simpler analog modulation schemes and lack of "snow" with decrepit DTV signals.

    PSK-31 can exist described as a "hybrid system" in that it permits low-rate text (roughly 30 WPM maximum) in a bandwidth no greater than 500 Hz. Innovated by Peter Martinex, G3PLX, it has been shunned and depreciated in the USA as being: (1) NIH; (2) "non-traditional"; (3) Does not demonstrate the remarkable, awesome, gloried expertise of heroic manual OOK CW telegraphy of the dilettante radiotelegrapher. <shrug>

    I could record some more systems which permit as worthy (in a few cases greater, but those are not allowed in USA dilettante radio) an advancement. And, I don't acquire the personal undergo with them as with those just listed...but that spoils your glory worship of the FIRST mode in plenary radio.

    Happy Holidays from AF6AY

      RE: More Back to the Future (easy as pi)   by K6LHA on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C snarled through his teeth on December 22, 2009:

    "AF6AY: Congratulations on achieving your dilettante Extra Class license after petitioning the FCC to reduce the requirements."

    Wrong. I did not PETITION the FCC for anything. I merely made some Comments and Replies to Comments on the arrogate dockets before the Commision on NPRMs 98-143, 05-235, and some of the 18 Petitions made public by the FCC. convoke it LOBBYING in the mildest sense, availing myself of the liberty that any national of the United States of America has to speak to their government.

    Apparently the only "qualified" persons regarded by so many olde-tymers is THEM. Reflect on the FACT that the FCC (which regulates plenary civil radio in the USA) does NOT require any Commissioners or staff to hold any radio licenses! [gasp, extraordinary but true...]

    You will refuse to believe it, but my "campaign" (exaggerated description) was solely to attempt modernization of existing USA dilettante radio regulations. Having worked IN radio communications since 1953 and NEVER having had to know or expend it as section of that work, I had no jaundice or brainwashing about manual radiotelegraphy in radio. As far as I was concerned, it was an artifact of the past, used as the first mode of communications in early radio because early radio was extremely primitive, on-off keying was the only practical means and by 1896, a mature technique with (then) a half-century of existance in wired telegraphy.

    In the USA, the last remaining radio service to require International Morse Code testing for a license was dilettante and only for those classes that allowed operation below 30 MHz. To me that was an anachronism, something that no longer belonged in law. It seemed right to me to attempt modernizing regulations for the FUTURE, not to glory in the past. When William Cross signed off on FCC 06-178 (published first on 19 Dec 06) I felt vindicated for my efforts and know that many of my radio hobbyist friends felt the identical way. For the repose of the 2006-2007 holiday time I made NO attempt nor worked up any interest in achieving my "own" license nor in "having my very own radio station." I enjoyed the Holiday time with friends who were not concerned with preserving the past forever, much less glorying in the alleged wonder of it all. At the time I had already worked as a professional IN radio-electronics for 54 years, had "my own radio station" (a business corps radio with a tripartite partnership), had my filligree-edged blue background First Class Radiotelephone Operator License certificate granted in March 1956, had been a hobbyist tinkering/dabbling/ building/learning by myself since 1947. Oh, and I'd already been a contributor, then Assciate Editor with Ham Radio magazine...all without any dilettante radio license. Plus, I've had enough friends for years who were either hobbyists, licensed in some radio service, or just interested in the technology for their own sake.

    A yoke weeks after New Years Day of 2007, in talking to my wife and a mutual friend about plenary the "campaigning" I'd done, they suggested I Go for it. So I decided to accomplish just that. Not a problem. Once decided I set about to accomplish IT, disregarding plenary of those who had thought me "unqualified" in anything over the past half century. :-) There was no emotional motivator, simply a personal determination made to accomplish IT. As the worn Hawaiian colloquial phrase has it, "Go for broke!" :-)

    I was in a personal fiscal situation of being able to afford an entire HF-VHF station then and acquired good, but not necessarily "top-of-the-line" radio equipment. That is resented, sometimes bitterly, by those who are unable to accomplish so, and many of them voice their frustrations on me. I cannot nor will not back such resentful individuals, certainly not plenary those who insist and insist that "I should acquire done what they did" from teen years through their middle age. dilettante radio would NOT exist my LIFE, just another avocation, non-professional, in short a HOBBY. I did it solely for myself, just for my interest, NOT to showcase myself to others of "mighty accomplishments."....................NI0C: "You might exist interested in: http://eham.net/reviews/detail/6136"

    THANK YOU ever so much, Charles, haven't had such a pleasurable laugh in days!

    Just imagine...a Product Review on a CERTIFICATE! :-) A non-legal certificate at that. That is SO arduous to believe! :-) Gotta worship it!

    Thanks but no thanks. I acquire my very own, rather plain, austere "license certificate" from the ONLY legal issuer in the USA, the FCC. I soundless acquire plenary my worn commercial license certificates, as I said filligree-bordered blue background certificates for the first three radiotelephone (Commercial), then yellow background with less filligree on edges when it was changed to a GROL, until now, just an entry in the ULS database for commercial licensees once thzt license was made lifetime.

    Ten bucks for a non-member certificate, seven-fifty for a member charge? Oh, my, I'd accept as much or more sustenance from a meal at Home Town Buffet or satisfaction for cadaver console from a three-pack of cotton socks from Target (upscale Hanes brand), and acquire money left over from either one. I don't acquire ANY certificates on their residence walls, much less at their northern house in Washington state, hardly any photographs. My wife has a BA degree and TWO Masters degrees (for Education and sociable Work), using them plenary when she was soundless working. Those three certificates are in storage up north. THEY don't exigency them for array to others...................NI0C: "Maybe the ARRL will endorse your certificate for your special efforts. Perhaps they will even print a billboard sized certificate for you."

    Let's see, in getting into the spirit in the second week of March, 2007, I joined the ARRL on-line. My QST subscriptions were mis-labled in address for four months, despite the ARRL having my reform mailing address from their VE team that tested me a mile and a half from my house. In late April, 2007, the ARRL sent me an "offer" to link and accept a freebie from them if I did. Six weeks LATER? Departments in Newington appeared to NOT being on communication terms. After a polite note by surface mail asking if I could soundless avail myself of their freebie offer, I got a terse e-mail adage "I could not because I was already a member." [six weeks after joining] At least they NOW recognized that I really was a member. I've been in ONE "election" as a member over two years, that is, if one can convoke an unopposed candidate as being an "election." I've not had any responses to my two letters to "official representatives." On asking Newington for membership numbers of the organization I belonged to, I was referred to the Annual Report; they would not concede me immediately on the judgement that "demographics of membership are given only to potential advertisers." After a year and a half of growing frustration I decided to let membership lapse. The ARRL is primarily a PUBLISHING HOUSE and less a membership organization by their own attitudes, wordings, and phrases behind their PR propaganda. They hadn't done anything for me in two years.

    I just don't believe highly over such pretty paper from a NON-legal "official source." Years ago at the availability of better photo programs for PCs, a friend of mine made up plenary kinds of "certificates" which looked very, very "authentic" and would acquire WOWED a casual observer. It was plenary in sarcasm and humor at others' exigency for wallpaper bling. Some were devastatingly comic but in a sneaky subtle way. :-)

    I carry ONE non-standard detail in my wallet, a miniaturized photocopy of my DD-214 contour I got in 1956. If you are a veteran of the US armed forces you will know what a "DD-214" is (still used today but changed slightly to reflect different military regulations), non-veterans probably don't and don't much care. It is there because it can exist there. I don't expend it for "certificate bling," just as a casual and different conversation starter in sociable gatherings. Gatherings of HUMANS who can communicate without radio. [gasp!]

    Oh, and delighted Holidays...:-)AF6AY

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by NI0C on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I'm joyous that words spewed out on eHam don't occasions static crashes on 160m. This morning, there are over 9000 reported lightning events here in the midwest, and the corps is very noisy.

    If there were a prize for an individual's ratio of words uttered on eHam to number of QSO's on the air, you would definitely exist a contender.

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by K6LHA on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C: "I'm joyous that words spewed out on eHam don't occasions static crashes on 160m. This morning, there are over 9000 reported lightning events here in the midwest, and the corps is very noisy."

    Please accept my sympathies on USA dilettante radio not exist made to your specific desires and geographic location.................NI0C: "If there were a prize for an individual's ratio of words uttered on eHam to number of QSO's on the air, you would definitely exist a contender."

    Please consider CHANGING your personal antipathic commentary to the e-ham Forum belief section. There you may voice plenary you want without touching any of the article subjects that you look to despise.

    Meanwhile some of us supervision to ogle to the FUTURE and attempt to see where USA dilettante radio is going. I will leave you to the condemnation of the present that was not specifically to your liking.

    Happy Holidays

    AF6AY(born and raised in the midwest)

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by K6LHA on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on December 22, 2009, desperately trying to withhold redirecting the focus:

    "NI0C writes: [CW] "was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then."

    N2EY: "Yes, but the bandwidth improvement was only section of the story. A spark signal can actually exist made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques."

    It could exist made to acquire an infinitely narrow bandwidth (as with an ideal, but impossible to achieve, Dirac filter). Such would besides acquire an infinitely small power output.

    An arc discharge has extremely quickly conduction/non-conduction transients...in terms of picoseconds or less, contingent on the speed of electron flow, distance between discharge electrodes, plus the network's passive reactances supplying the source of electrons. As a result, the POWER SPECTRAL DENSITY of the total arc discharge is spread over hundreds of thousands of Hertz. The ACTUAL RF power out over "tens of KHz" (or low percentage-bandwidth in any section of the EM spectum) is very small. Passive networks connected to an arc discharge will not magically transform frequencies far from the desired frequency into the desired spectral region, they simply fling them away letting them dissipate that far-from-desired energy as HEAT. Heat is just wasted energy far above maximum-allocated radio frequencies (above 300 GHz).

    "Damped wave oscillaton" by arc-discharge into a resonant circuit, better known as "Spark transmitters" can exist analyzed once plenary the characteristics of the entire network are known/measured. There will exist variables of everything in the total analysis which can win weeks to compute. But WHY bother? Measurement instruments to accurately measure/characterize everything just weren't available to the mediocre dilettante experimenter prior to the 1930s and very few CARED to accomplish so. A Spark transmitter was SIMPLE. In addition it gave the ILLUSION of power with the visible and audible arc, generated ozone and arc content ash. Anyone who could ply hand tools could build one out of available wood and metal parts and wire. It was technically CRUDE. Cruder than a kluge.Spark transmitters, even with the most involved of tuned networks were basically din Generators.

    Very early radio used a beastly coerce system of elevated power RF sources with essentially-passive detectors as receivers, plenary on relatively low-frequency circuits. It "worked" enough to demonstrate that radio (as it was) was a viable communications medium for relatively short distances. Commercial radio services used the much-more efficient (and expensive) alternators, a (relatively) high-frequency generator (alternator) working in the VLF and LF spectrum regions. Alternators were relatively unadulterated RF sources or the first upright Continuous Wave generators in the power category. Yes, alternators had harmonics, relatively low-power, nothing at plenary fancy the din GENERATORS of Spark.

    Now, James, you should acquire KNOWN this from your early labor with Spark transmitters and your scholarly lessons in advanced radio theory obtained at the university later. Instead, you portrayed the very worn ways in radio AS IF they could exist done today or even a half century ago. It was simply not so comparable. Yet you had to glorify the early achievements in terms of others in print AS IF they were wonderous achievements of genius...and thus basking in their reflected glory..................As far as I know, the only surviving, useful arc-discharge RF generator is that used in testing electronic apparatus designed to withstand EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pules) effects. Controlled power and PSD (Power Spectral Density) characteristics, carefully measured and calibrated. Such is not used for testing dilettante radio equipment; there is no exigency to accomplish so.===========================

    This article was not remotely considered to exist a treatise on worn radio nor worn regulations. It started off simply as a study of the number of license classes in USA dilettante radio over a epoch of time following a milestone change in USA dilettante radio regulations. As usual, it was hijacked by some inevitable others who, having an antipathy/personality-conflicts with myself or some exigency to highlight themselves above others, took it far off the original intent.

    It is my interest - NOT shared by most others here - to ogle towards the FUTURE, not to live in the relected glory of past radio pioneers...or to assume to exist pioneers of radio (just of HF) by developed skill in manual radiotelegraphy or reading worn copies of dilettante radio publications.

    Laws of Physics is actually a higher order than man-made laws. Man-made laws are a reinforcement of those physical laws as well as for mitigating interference to plenary users of the EM spectrum. Laws of physics accomplish NOT recognize human desires, imaginations, nor the "history" aspect of early primitive radio.

    AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by KB0RDL on December 24, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I've been a certified county storm spotter for nearly 15 years and over half of their group hold advanced license, which is a bit more then the general ham population. I don't know of anyone who doesn't acquire apparatus of their own. The greatest impediment to wanting to become a general class or above ham isn't lack of interest in the hobby, it's housing association, condominium and apartment difficulties with antennas. Some of the tech class guys are wizards at VHF/UHF, interfacing with computers and so on, so the flat of technical know-how of the section of dilettante radio that interests them is high.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N2EY on December 26, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB0RDL writes: "The greatest impediment to wanting to become a general class or above ham isn't lack of interest in the hobby, it's housing association, condominium and apartment difficulties with antennas."

    I've said that for years; thanks for confirming it. I see from QRZ that you live in KS, which means it's not just a big-coastal-city problem either.

    And it's not just about upgrading but about getting a license in the first place.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KJ4KKI on December 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Wow, that is a worthy idea! 'Nuff said... 73   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KJ4KKI on December 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend! My club has at least 50 members and I believe the actual number is closer to 70-80 (I haven't looked at their outdated membership roster lately). Anyway, while a bunch of the hams accomplish acquire some "experience," they acquire a few intermittent college students and had some ladies recently become Techs. Their nightly ARES net turns into a rag chew after any official business is taken supervision of, and they always acquire at least 20 members checking in. They besides accept some Echolinks fairly frequently. They pulled a list of licensed hams in their county and the list was huge! Activity in their club was dwarfed by the number of licensees. I believe promoting ham radio should exist a section of any public school science or communications/technology course. I besides believe there should exist more ham clubs in colleges.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by KJ4KKI on December 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend! One has to exist springy with the times and needs of a population. I was apprehensive that I couldn't learn code and attach off getting my Tech license for several years. I got it with the no-code; studying for hours daily, taking numerous on-line exams and answering every question in the back of the book. I besides bought a second ham reserve and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%. I contrivance to learn code...when I acquire a time in my life to study it and exercise it. right now, I'm studying for my General. I accomplish local FM and satellites. Echolink exposed me to talking to people on other continents and across the nation. You Tube let me watch videos of people talking on their HF rigs. One has to ogle at the overall mission of something. While I admit that the Tech manual isn't circumstantial when compared to the general or Extra manuals/tests, it certainly gets one started with an HT or mobile FM rig...to accept their feet moist and chew on...so to speak. It showed me how much more I wanted to accept involved and learn. In my profession and flat of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the route it used to be." Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they accept there and adjust to it. And for the fellow complaining that an Extra didn't know how to build a dipole...it's in the Tech manual and the General. He's obviously an idiot who either forgot the formula or got lucky on tests (2 in a row?). My consensus: The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know. Not because a Tech or general license is "dumbed down," but due to my own self-realization. At least, that's my page worth.   Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K5ZTY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! Regarding the big numbers of non renewals, dilettante Radio, fancy golf, archery and girl scouts, is not for everyone. However, the ARRL has made it their project to license every person in the world by dumbing down the license requirements genesis with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s. The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to plenary sorts of short cuts to obtaining a license. There is no investment in the license other than some memorizing of answers. An applicant doesn't acquire to learn or array any erudition of the hobby at plenary to obtain any class of license. Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to expend it, no interest in renewing.We exigency to Go back to an entry flat license that is pleasurable for one year. Upgrade or you're out. Publish the question pool but no answers. They wouldn't accept as many applicants but they would accept more Hams.   Don't vice ARRL For What FCC Did   by N2EY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! K5ZTY writes: "However, the ARRL has made it their project to license every person in the world by dumbing down the license requirements genesis with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s."

    The changeover to the VE system wasn't the ARRL's idea, nor did they advocate it.

    FCC did it to rescue money. Commercial operator's license testing was privatized too. Thank the Reagan Administration for that one.

    Reducing the license requirements began, IMHO, in the late 1970s when the Morse Code sending test was "waived" - by FCC.

    K5ZTY: "The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to plenary sorts of short cuts to obtaining a license."

    Again, vice the FCC. They refused to Go after Dick Bash, and when they created the VE system, publishing the entire braindumpsmp;A pool became a practical necessity.

    K5ZTY: "There is no investment in the license other than some memorizing of answers."

    That depends entirely on the licensee. A lot of the newcomers I encounter really want to learn and understand RADIO, not just pass the test. Some others just want to pass.

    K5ZTY: "We exigency to Go back to an entry flat license that is pleasurable for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

    Nice wish but it's not going to happen because it would cost FCC more work.

    K5ZTY: "Publish the question pool but no answers."

    Won't work. What's to obviate somebody from publishing the answers, identical as Bash did 30 years ago? (Except it would exist easier this time.)

    --

    I correspond that there are plenary sorts of ways that the system could exist improved, but most of them require changes FCC just won't merit because they will cost too much in the route of "big government" resources.

    The trick is to find those changes that will help the system *without* requiring FCC to accomplish more.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by N2EY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! KJ4KKI writes: "I was apprehensive that I couldn't learn code and attach off getting my Tech license for several years."

    But did you actually try to learn it?

    KJ4KKI: "studying for hours daily, taking numerous on-line exams and answering every question in the back of the book. I besides bought a second ham reserve and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%."

    GREAT!

    But it's significant to understand that FCC doesn't require 100%, nor even 80%, to pass. IIRC 74% (give or win a fraction) is the passing grade for plenary the written exams, and has been for decades.

    KJ4KKI: "I contrivance to learn code...when I acquire a time in my life to study it and exercise it."

    15 to 30 minutes a day. The trick is, accomplish it every day.

    KJ4KKI: "In my profession and flat of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the route it used to be."

    Then you understand that it's not plenary without reason.

    KJ4KKI: "Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they accept there and adjust to it."

    And sometimes, in the end, change isn't good. Sometimes the folks who said "That's NOT a pleasurable idea!" were right.

    KJ4KKI: "And for the fellow complaining that an Extra didn't know how to build a dipole...it's in the Tech manual and the General. He's obviously an idiot who either forgot the formula or got lucky on tests (2 in a row?)."

    Remember that it only takes 74% to pass. That means a person can acquire immense gaping holes in the stuff tested and soundless accept the license.

    FCC doesn't supervision how somebody gets the right concede as long as they don't cheat. FCC doesn't supervision if someone uses rote memorization, word-association, unadulterated guessing, or actual understanding of the material to pass, just as long as they don't cheat.

    Some may scoff at the belief that a person could memorize their route to a passing grade, given the size of the question pools. But "memorization" doesn't involve somebody has to memorize plenary the questions and answers verbatim. In the real world, plenary it means is that a person has to recognize the right concede out of the given ones - 74% of the time.

    There's besides a immense inequity between being able to concede the questions on the exam, and actually knowing how to accomplish something.

    KJ4KKI: "My consensus: The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know."

    That's not a consensus - it's wisdom!

    KJ4KKI: "Not because a Tech or general license is "dumbed down," but due to my own self-realization."

    The problem is, too many hams of plenary vintages don't acquire that self-realization.

    73 es GL de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! K5ZTY complained on January 2, 2010:

    "Regarding the big numbers of non renewals, dilettante Radio, fancy golf, archery and girl scouts, is not for everyone. However, the ARRL has made it their project to license every person in the world by dumbing down the license requirements genesis with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s."

    NO way, senior. Privatization of testing was done by the FCC for BOTH commercial and dilettante radio operator licenses...for BUDGET reasons. besides done was to establish frequency coordination groups for business corps radio users plus a worthy overhaul of radio licenses for small boats and general aviation aircraft, public safety agencies. The ARRL has NO POWER to merit regulations. The ARRL was besides among three to govern the NCVEC genesis in 1984. Note: PL 97-239 enacted on 13 Sep 82 made it workable for the FCC to enact privatization. [That's Public Law 97-239 and does not refer to section 97, Title 47 C.F.R.].................K5ZTY: "The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to plenary sorts of short cuts to obtaining a license. There is no investment in the license other than some memorizing of answers. An applicant doesn't acquire to learn or array any erudition of the hobby at plenary to obtain any class of license."

    That's your opinion, of course. When did you accomplish your last formal dilettante radio license exam? I took mine on 25 Feb 07. For plenary three test elements then, the Question Pool had an mediocre of 13 times the minimum required pool questions of 10. So, for 120 questions total, there would acquire to exist 1560 questions to "memorize," 6240 answers to "memorize" (have to avoid distractor-worded answers that look right but are wrong), for a total of 7,800 items "memorized." That's much more than I supervision to memorize for any hobby test.

    By the way, the dilettante Extra test constituent of 50 questions had a tad over 16 times the number of pool questions of 10 so that would acquire been more difficult for "memorization."...................K5ZTY: "Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to expend it, no interest in renewing."

    Ahem...the second-lowest "renewal" rate in USA dilettante radio is Technician class. general is third. dilettante Extra is first (they are the arduous CORE amateurs). The number of licensees in Novice class, Technician Plus class, and Advanced class acquire plenary been dropping since 2000.

    Someone who got their first USA dilettante radio license in the year 2007 will acquire to wait 7 years before they CAM renew. Its the law. As to "investment," the ARRL VEC team of 2007 charged $14 for a test session, for constituent testing or just for an administrative change not needing testing. I would estimate at least 35 were there on the day of my test, so the team leader locked up (probably) $490 at the conclude of that day. $14 is the expense for a simple breakfast for two at a Denny's. <shrug>[Jimmie M., "Denny's" logo has an apostrophe, "Ralphs" does not, tickle recall that]

    "No pride of accomplishment?" That's overly-cynical. I win PERSONAL pride in everything I've set out to accomplish and then complete satisfactorily. I don't labor up a immense head of steam and Go parading it around forums for decades. :-)

    "Don't know how or why to expend it?" Whooo...that's going overboard in a hurry. Unless there is some HUGE revision of section 97, Title 47 C.F.R., USA dilettante radio is NOT a trade, NOT a union, NOT a guild, and cannot exist a business/corporation (by LAW). Very few dilettante radio RF emitter model numbers acquire identical controls with identical characteristics. plenary of them require reading the effing manual to expend them. Its the identical route with commercial RF emitters, believe it or not.

    If someone just doesn't know "WHY" to expend it, then I doubt they will ever pass a test for it. Just win a ogle at the current NCVEC QP contents. You should inquire WHY they are AT a VEC test site if they "don't know why." That section is a nonsense question. <shrug>.................K5ZTY: "We exigency to Go back to an entry flat license that is pleasurable for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

    By golly, then I "failed" this draconian pecification! I got my dilettante license almost three years ago...and I've NEVER upgraded it!

    I must exist one of those "worthless, beginner, know-nothings, ignorant, stupid, etc." beings who didn't accomplish dilettante radio for years before being licensed in dilettante radio!!! :-) Ah, no matter, I've been called plenary of those names by already-licensed amateurs because I've been a professional in radio-electronics since 1952 and just didn't TRY to accept an dilettante license until age 74. Oh, oh, OH, such a terrible, terrible attitude! :-)

    Oh, and how did you accomplish in your federal tests for golf, archery, and girl scouting? I'm really interested in HOW you passed the latter...;-)

    AF6AY

      Email SubscriptionYou are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

    Subscribe!My SubscriptionsSubscriptions Help

    Other Recent ArticlesRSGB ARDF Championships:Fire District Agrees to Sponsor CERT:Man's Electronics Disrupt Entire Neighborhood's Car Keys, Garage Openers:Bench Therapy Video -- AQRP Antenna Analyzer:Special Event for 75th Anniversary of the Battle of Cassino:





    Back to Main Page





    Killexams 310-152 exams | Killexams 310-152 cert | Pass4Sure 310-152 questions | Pass4sure 310-152 | pass-guaratee 310-152 | best 310-152 test preparation | best 310-152 training guides | 310-152 examcollection | killexams | killexams 310-152 review | killexams 310-152 legit | kill 310-152 example | kill 310-152 example journalism | kill exams 310-152 reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review 310-152 | review 310-152 quizlet | review 310-152 login | review 310-152 archives | review 310-152 sheet | legitimate 310-152 | legit 310-152 | legitimacy 310-152 | legitimation 310-152 | legit 310-152 check | legitimate 310-152 program | legitimize 310-152 | legitimate 310-152 business | legitimate 310-152 definition | legit 310-152 site | legit online banking | legit 310-152 website | legitimacy 310-152 definition | >pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | 310-152 material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure 310-152 exams | pass4sure 310-152 reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure 310-152 security | pass4sure cisco | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure 310-152 dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure 310-152 braindumps | pass4sure 310-152 test | pass4sure 310-152 torrent | pass4sure 310-152 download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |

    www.pass4surez.com | Braindumps Download | www.search4exams.com | http://www.sraigalleries.com/