Buy your textbooks here

Free 310-152 Text Books of Killexams.com | study guide | Braindumps | Study Guides | Textbook

Learn our 310-152 practice questions and 310-152 braindumps - Questions and Answers - cheatsheets and pass 310-152 exam with high score These Q&A are sufficient to pass 310-152 at first attempt - study guide - Study Guides | Textbook

Killexams 310-152 braindumps | Pass4sure 310-152 VCE drill Test | https://www.textbookw.com/



Killexams.com 310-152 Dumps | existent Questions 2019

100% existent 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 cognomen : Sun Certified Backup and Recovery Engineer (emphasis on Solstice Backup)
Vendor cognomen : SUN
: 115 existent Questions

Download 310-152 braindumps with valid existent 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 collect the 310-152 Questions and Answers is'nt only to pass the 310-152 exam at the first attempt but Really help Your learning about the 310-152 exam topics.

If you are really worried about the 310-152 exam dumps. You should just download 310-152 existent questions from killexams.com. It will redeem you from lot of problems. It makes your concept about 310-152 objectives crystal pellucid and compose you confident to physiognomy the existent 310-152 exam. compose your own notes. You will note that some questions will looks very effortless to answer, but when you will try at vce exam simulator, you will note that you retort them wrong. This is just because, those are tricky questions. SUN specialists compose 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 retort those 310-152 dumps again and again, your concepts will be cleared and you will not pitch when SUN change those questions to compose unavoidable techniquest. This is how they back candidates pass their exam at first attempt by actually boosting up their learning 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 existent exam questions and answers of 310-152 exam that will back you secure suited score in the exam, but issue is not just passing the 310-152 exam some time. They provide VCE exam simulator to help your learning about 310-152 topics so that you can understand the core concepts of 310-152 objectives. This is really important. It is not at utter easy. Their team has prepared 310-152 questions bank that will actually deliver you suited understanding of topics, along with surety to pass the exam at first attempt. Never under appraise 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 like 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 drill tests with VCE exam simulator will back you memorize the questions and retort them well. You will endure to recognize these questions in existent exam. You will secure better marks when you drill well before existent 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 existent 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
-> Great 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 suited source after a long time. Everyone here is cooperative and competent. Team provided me very suited 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 suited marks so that I would compose a suited print 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 august prize of best scores in the 310-152 exam.


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


Where must I mark in for 310-152 exam?
Like many others, I actually endure 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 select your 310-152 exam, you could completely dependence on this internet site.


The passage 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 select complete credit score for this as I used killexams.com to prepare for the 310-152 exam. two weeks after kicking off my drill with their exam simulator, I felt like I knew the Answers to any question that will near 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 all thing that turned into in the practice% turned out to be very apposite 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 - fragment I | 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill Test

any individual involved within the certification trade will uncover you that these are complicated instances. in the days before the dot com bust, IT certifications endure been a passage for any individual with a technical inkling and a puny money to secure licensed and, without doubt, secure 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 fragment of the IT trade, storage providers endure been brief to recognise that they too might tender certifications, and they too could profit because of this. The most effectual 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 be certification candidates nascence searching more toward preserving the job they had in residence of taking a witness at getting licensed and touching 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 be scorching over the arrival years is storage networking certifications.

What's obtainable?The latitude of certifications accessible can compose identifying one a tricky task. most of the dealer unavoidable certifications will, rather reasonably, focus on that companies products and it be related applied sciences. whereas this might possibly be an excellent issue for getting up to pace on that company's items, you should believe the portability of the certifications when you near to a determination to bolt to an additional enterprise that uses diverse items. The draw back is that one of the vital more typical certifications can be viewed as less advantageous through an commerce enterprise who's looking for a specific capabilities set and so a extremely specific certification. during this admire, there are basically no difficult and like a glisten rules - you exigency to simply figure out which passage you are looking to bolt after which head in that course. Of direction there's nothing to pretension that you can not just select multiple certification, which could be 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 be 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 secure pissed off at having to stay up for a dealer to secure their house so as.

TestingNearly utter of the certification suppliers elect to consume 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 be common sufficient. If this might be your first certification witness 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 likewise be taken at certainly one of lots of trying out facilities worldwide. checks scope from 45 minutes to about 2.5 hours and are normally closed e-book assorted altenative affairs. In nearly utter situations your effects are given at the conclusion of the witness at various enabling you instant gratification (or commiseration) on your efforts.

The fees of exams differ drastically between certification providers however are frequently between $a hundred and $200 per test. If the enterprise makes consume of both testing suppliers, the saturate and content of the check could be the equal for both, so the alternative of testing company will swirl 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 perquisite here, it's critical to endure in intellect that now not every certification is going to be acceptable to every grownup. in case you are just nascence out in storage certification, be certain to witness against one of the vital greater common 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 compose 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 weighty 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 unavoidable 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 be taken first. The Brocade certification roadmap, which is purchasable at Brocade's website, likewise comprises tips about the premier Brocade licensed SAN Architect certification, even though particulars are scant on precisely when the critical tests to attain this stage should be obtainable.

EMCOf utter of the corporations discussed here, EMC has possibly the most developed, complex 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 commerce Storage Fundamentals exam, which covers simple storage networking ideas along with a felicitous 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 select a certification exam. even if this makes the Gadzoox certs as effectual as others will depend on your personal viewpoint or that of your existing or potential corporation. extra information on the certifications may likewise be discovered on the Gadzoox website.

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

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

community ApplianceStorage retort manufacturer network outfit has created a certification software with two diverse tracks designed to focus the candidates consideration on community outfit items. the two tracks are NetApp licensed associate (Filer) certification, which requires three tests to be taken earlier than candidates can movement on to the NetApp licensed knowledgeable (Filer) cert which requires a further two tests. The identical benign of path (with diverse checks) exists for the NetApp licensed affiliate (NetCache) and NetApp licensed expert (NetCache) certifications. For more guidance on network outfit certification discuss 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 deem is a suited or a foul component 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 likewise be 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 likewise be create 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 single examination, and the certs can likewise be taken in any order. For extra counsel hunt counsel 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 counsel 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 fragment Two......partially two of this text, they are going to consult with some commerce figures about certifications and secure the retort to at least one very critical query. Are certifications cost your time, funds and energy? they will likewise resolve some extra components that you'll want to believe when opting for a certification.


Certification Watch: Microsoft adds .web Developer Credentials | 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill 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 busy year. in this matter they report on 4 new and pending certifications.

Microsoft declares New .internet Developer CredentialsAs a fragment of the roomy 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 criterion inspecting necessities and Defining solution Architectures. latest MCSDs are not required to supersede to the .internet music to continue to be certified. For the complete story, note 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 ilk of sizzling matter matter in recent months that it can near as no shock that the Computing expertise commerce 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 matter matters. The trustworthy cognomen of the brand new certification has now not been determined yet, however Certification Watch has discovered that it may not be protection+. search for a beta exam in Fall 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 rectify 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 bolt on to select two exams. the first exam is in the time-honored, desktop-primarily based format administered by Prometric testing centers. The 2d is a select home useful examination that requires analyzing proof info and producing a document. note 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 rush either the VERITAS NetBackup and Solstice Backup exam to merit the designation. The tests are designed to measure learning of professional backup methodology, restoring records and meeting design requirements and value $150 each and every. They can be create through Prometric checking out centers.

The complete present problem of Certification Watch will likewise be 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 secure certified and secure forward. She likewise is the founder of GoCertify.com.

related word 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 passage 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 learning of: Product Overview and perception

    characteristic |  by passage 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 chore Debater might repair fb

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

  • IBM broadcasts strongest AI application Yet: The start of sensible 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 consume 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 learning of For ITSM goals

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


  • Certification Watch: community Storage Certifications | 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill Test

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

    1. Microsoft Cancels Plans to Decertify home windows NT 4 MCSEsIn a dramatic reversal of their previous plans, Microsoft has cancelled plans to decertify utter MCSEs who don't help to the windows 2000 song by means of the cease of this yr. in its place, the MCSE title will develop into music unavoidable - 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 trustworthy 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 likewise be chosen from home windows 2000, .internet, or XP skilled working outfit checks. The non-obligatory alternate options consist of the habitual Microsoft alternative, masking such issues as Proxy Server, alternate Server, SQL Server and others. Microsoft will additionally accept a composite 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 compose up its new network Storage skilled software. The solar certified facts administration Engineer covers the learning required to achieve 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 hub might be 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 criterion 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 secure a reduction). trying out is obtainable by the consume 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 utter 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 endure to renew yearly, which contains paying an annual charge. MCTs endure 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 toil for a Microsoft CTEC).

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

    The comprehensive existing issue of Certification Watch can be create at GoCertify.com.

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

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

    characteristic |  by passage 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 learning 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 passage of Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s venture Debater may fix facebook

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

  • IBM declares strongest AI application 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 passage of Andy Patrizio, September eleven, 2018

  • artificial Intelligence Salaries: Paychecks Heading Skyward

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Andy Patrizio, August 28, 2018

  • synthetic Intelligence consume 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 difficult assignment to pick solid certification questions/answers assets concerning review, reputation and validity since individuals secure 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 near 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 assurance 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 note any spurious report posted by their rivals with the cognomen killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com dissension or something like this, simply bethink there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of suited administrations because of their advantages. There are a Great 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 drill test | 650-126 braindumps | 210-455 existent questions | E20-655 free pdf | C2050-219 drill questions | C9050-042 VCE | 1T6-215 dump | HP2-H05 existent questions | 000-433 dumps questions | C2150-614 study lead | AXELOS-MSP questions and answers | C9010-252 drill test | EE0-515 drill 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 drill questions | 1Z0-935 exam questions | C2180-606 drill test | DNDNS-200 free pdf | 1Z0-066 examcollection | SAT study lead | 1K0-001 study lead | 1T6-222 dump | HP2-K21 questions answers | CTAL-TTA-001 test prep | PTCB test prep | VCS-323 drill questions | A2040-910 exam prep | CLAD study lead | 000-633 questions and answers |


    View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


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


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

    Pass 4 certain 310-152 dumps | Killexams.com 310-152 existent Questions | https://www.textbookw.com/

    Radioactive Wounds of War | killexams.com 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill Test

    Tests on returning troops intimate sedate health consequences of depleted uranium consume 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 state National Guardsman got home, he erudite that a bunkmate, Sgt. Ray Ramos, and a group of N.Y. Guard members from another unit had accepted an tender by the New York Daily word and reporter Juan Gonzalez to be 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 secure tested too. It turned out he was the most contaminated of them all.

    Matthew immediately urged his wife to secure an ultrasound check of their unborn baby. They discovered the fetus had a condition common to those with radioactive exposure: atypical syndactyly. The perquisite 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 consume 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 consume 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 like they’re butter.

    The problem is that when DU hits its target, it burns at a high temperature, throwing off clouds of microscopic particles that poison a wide region 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 likewise a highly toxic weighty 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 component has an affinity for bonding with DNA, where even trace amounts can intuition 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 passage to consume the weapons. Rokke says the Pentagon responded by denouncing him, after earlier commending his work.

    No one knows how many U.S. soldiers endure 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 be tested at Ft. Dix, they wrongly told us they didn’t endure to worry unless they had DU fragments in their body,” says Matthew. His buddy, Sgt. Ramos, who exhibits symptoms resembling radiation sickness and weighty metal poisoning, adds that at Walter Reed Medical hub he was grilled for hours about why he wanted to be 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 bolt near Iraq because of security concerns.

    “It doesn’t appear perquisite that they are poisoning the places they are conjectural to be liberating,” Ramos says.

    The Pentagon continues to insist, on the basis of no field evidence, that DU is safe. To date, only some 270 returned troops endure 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 word 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; utter had symptoms of uranium poisoning.

    Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut state Representative Pat Dillon (D-New Haven), a Yale-trained epidemiologist, has crafted state-level legislation that Connecticut and Louisiana endure 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 Fall 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 effect this October, military groups and family organizations, state legislators, and even National Guard unit commanders endure 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 application 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 claim similar access to rigorous tests, which can cost upwards of $1000 per person.

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

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

    if you like this, check out:

    Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over Three Years | killexams.com 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill 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 legal reference, the public FCC database. Other sources of statistics are utter derived from this. Two such sites used here are Hamdata and ARRL. ARRL statistics betray only those licensee numbers within their 10-year effectual period. Hamdata shows utter licensees including their 2-year Grace era 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 altenative of date was arbitrary, picked to inaugurate 3 months after the cessation of license examination code test requirements.* New license classes of Technician-Plus, Novice, and Advanced would not be 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 occur perquisite 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 common 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 appear to be 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 common class numbers.

    Longer-term class numbers can be 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 arresting 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 common class was last with +6,673 or 4.41% increase. Attrition in the TPNA group seems ordinary considering that no renewals endure been available for years.

    A psychologically-sensitive region is Expirations. License expirations may be due to death, disablement, or simply from disinterest in continuing to withhold a license renewed. So far, this author has create that only Hamdata displays Expirations as well as New licensees, Class Changes, plus miscellaneous data such as Administrative changes (mailing address changed, cognomen 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 era 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 common trend seems to be that New licensees are nascence to overtake Expirations but that may be premature. Second, the Class Change numbers took an upward swirl perquisite after cessation of the code test, changes available through new regulations. However, the number of Class Changes endure dropped off in the three-year period. That may be due to a lessening of dilettante radio attractiveness to the common public. A common trend appears to be that the covet to upgrade is slowly decreasing.

    Radio amateurs in their Grace era may be 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 era numbers. Surprisingly, Technician class is next lowest but common class has the highest percentage within their 2- year Grace period. common class has existed the longest in USA dilettante radio history.

    According to Hamdata, the peak of utter USA dilettante license grants happened on 2 July 2003 with a total of 737,938. Total dilettante license grants endure been less than that following that date of 6 years ago. To secure 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 era 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 be that Technician class is growing the fastest of the three and those Technicians appear to be STAYING in that class. Note that Class Changes endure 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 want of common 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 be made to AF6AY@aol.com. These screenshots were done by Printing HTML screens via Acrobat 8. In some cases the HTML screens contain background colors and advertisements which did not transfer to PDF. In utter cases the statistics numbers transferred correctly.

    Member Comments: This article has expired. No more comments may be 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 be that Technician class is growing the fastest of the three and those Technicians appear to be STAYING in that class. <<

    I mediate (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would be the EmComm Whackers that secure tech licenses so they can consume ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because utter they saturate about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby.

    Another third are the CBers who secure their Techs so they can consume 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 near back so they can shoot skip on their "extree channels" and in the meantime are quiet on CB Hamsexy.com.

    The relaxation are just the habitual ones who once they secure their license endure no interste in ever getting on the air. Those will utter bolt 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 utter 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 endure 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 fancy to note these stats by age group. Obviously, in order to sustain the hobby, they exigency an influx of green 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 compose a suited thing into a evil one ! They endure made it back to 2004 levals of hams ! The fact is they are growing again and the auther doesn't like it that the changes endure 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 ordinary considering>that no renewals endure been available for years.

    Not true. I renewed my Advanced class license, and witness 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 compose it available. They would probably "grandfather" Advanced class licensees to Extra Class to Do away with it, and they've repeatedly said they won't Do 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 robust one either.   RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Over T   by N5TGL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I mediate (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would be the EmComm Whackers that secure tech licenses so they can consume ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because utter they saturate 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 note 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 mediate (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would be the EmComm Whackers that secure tech licenses so they can consume ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because utter they saturate about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby. " ...[end]

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

    The EmComm people endure puny to no interest in dilettante radio. The license is simply a instrument to consume equipment, often owned by a city or county, not the "ham". It is turn-key process for them. select a one day license class, pass a simple test, consume equipment. Much like taking any other certification class.

    This is not cynicism speaking. These are not slothful or stupid people. They simply Do not endure 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 busy promoting WinLink, so non-hams can consume ham frequencies for email. WinLinkers likewise want to redeem the world, pass utter 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 witness 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 Do not involve expired licenses in the grace period)

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

    Modify and secure a vanity call, too.

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

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

    Yep, FCC has turned down utter sorts of no-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response is always the same: 'just pass the tests'. I mediate one intuition is that it would cost them utter 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 likewise started renewing utter 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 likewise one intuition the Technician license numbers endure 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 be not one at all.

    Since 1951, the only other FCC-issued license class to fade was the worn Conditional, which went away in the mid-1970s. FCC did it the identical passage - utter 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 note the trends.

    For example, it's effortless to note 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 be workable for you to betray 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 opinion that people interested in ECOM are inflating the TECH class appears to be an offering of anecdotal observation, and to this point is not documented from a statistically significant population sample. This does not weigh in that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to champion 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 be hobbyists in the traditional hobbyist sense - and may not endure an interest in the radio art; nevertheless, it is difficult to imagine a better demographic to target for the growth of the hobby.

    Even people who Do not presently endure a passion for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will compose 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 utter bands, utter 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 figure 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 arresting thing...well, observation? ARRL's conjecture?

    In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being. A major propel between ARRL and emcomm champion agencies encouraged people to secure 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 high on the list for emergency preparedness. So these new hams, in the emergency preparedness classes, erudite that their first focus was on developing a sustainable water and food supply, and learning how to stay properly sheltered. They started putting time into that instead of ham radio.

    And, they erudite quickly that ARES/RACES endure stultifylingly complicated hierachies, pseudo-government, that nobody in their perquisite intellect would want to be fragment of - although power mongers fancy 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 artificial bubble had passed, and they returned to a more ordinary 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 haphazard 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 medium age of ham radio has increased from 59 to 61 since the mid-70s, the medium 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 passage more green people than I endure ever seen at ham functions. They don't bolt to clubs, though - their generation communicates on Twitter and by texting, not at in-person meetings. Clubs may well be dying, but not because ham radio is dying. It's just that the youth are not so interested in clubs.

    Gotta watch what I pronounce here, some people would convoke me young. I Do clubs and I Do 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 compose a suited thing into a evil one !"

    Not at all. It is merely a dispassionate witness 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 like it that the changes endure worked !"

    Wrong. The "auther" [sic] is myself and my single license grant in the dilettante radio service is fragment of the data presented. My license grant was achieved by passing utter 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 likewise be renowned that I've held a First-Class Commercial Radiotelephone license since passing those four test elements in one sitting at an FCC field Office in Chicago, Illinois, during a weekday in March, 1956. Later, that "First Phone" became a common 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 witness requires removal of rose-tinted glasses and dropping the "we are always the best and biggest" pep-rally attitude and witness at reality. If there IS a "growth" then its percentages are down in ordinary statistical noise. The best filter to achieve a high 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 secure into dilettante radio thinking it would be a loser. But, I'm fragment of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dilettante radio would endure changed after my dilettante license was granted. I note puny change, therefore the study to note if a intuition could be determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Over the long term, the continued existance of USA dilettante radio requires enough citizen interest to justify its existance to the federal government. Your dilettante radio license grant is nothing more than a federal leave 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 moral virtue or righteousness. Licensing is just a regulatory agency instrument to maintain order in the EM spectrum, to mitigate interference.

    From a cursory glance at content of e-ham articles by respondents, the majority appear to be those who endure 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 select sedate objective looks at the state of this radio service now. Further, long-timers mind 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 endure 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. perquisite now I don't note much of that with my objectivity filter switched in.

    One mark 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 collect 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 utter bands, utter 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 endure no station and no interest, or 500,000 hams, 90% of whom endure 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 be exact.

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

    Here's another factor: Cell phones. Early models were big, expensive and had limited coverage. From the nascence of the repeater era, a significant number of new hams got licenses to consume 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 haphazard 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 medium age of ham radio has increased from 59 to 61 since the mid-70s, the medium age of America has increased by 8 years. So, ham radio is younger, comparitively."

    I endure to question the "average age of hams" numbers often cited. How are such numbers determined? The FCC database doesn't endure birthdate data for utter US hams. deliberate surveys are notoriously unscientific. Observing who goes to hamfests, club meetings, etc., isn't trustworthy either. And is that medium 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 vital longer, having fewer kids, and having them later in life.

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

    It may not be a matter of interest as much as having the time available in roomy controlled blocks. A person can bolt online, text, tweet, etc. whenever they endure a few minutes free and endure access to a device. Club meetings usually occur on weekday nights and require an investment of a pair 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 quiet holding CLASS LICENSES.. which discriminates against the minority who can't appear to secure a common OR EXTRA license. THUS THEY SHOULD liquidate utter CLASSES OF LICENSES TODAY AND JUST CONSOLIDATE IT INTO/ compose IT ONE CLASS..

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

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

    One could start with the US band plan...(now that CW is not required) and toil up to licensing for early retirement and secure 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 be useful for some such as those involved or considering becoming involved in sales of dilettante radio outfit or publications as one case of many, for most of us the statistics are puny more than entertainment or curiousities.

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

    Don't, however, forget this:

    AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU compose IT FOR YOURSELF.

    All the complaints, utter the stupid comments tossed aside, YOU are dilettante radio. It is utter in your hands. compose 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 mediate that the existent reasion that CW was done away with ... due to discrimination as a requirement to gain the higher class lice. Hmmm so why now not Do 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 secure a Tech license and never upgrade:

    Race communication for things like Solar Car competitions.

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

    Radio control airplanes.

    Legal tinkering with long scope high power high speed network links just for the heck of it.

    The first pair probably provide a very constant influx of college age hams who are studying engineering. I knew of a objective 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 objective number of them renewed. That's suited news. But the spot checks didn't defer any upgrades.

    There's a lot of stuff you can Do 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 like long scope telemetry.

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

    The Tech license actually gives you VAST privileges. I'm certain there are plenty of people who secure it just for EMCOMM or who secure it and secure bored because 2m FM has puny to offer, but the fact of the matter is being licensed by the FCC to consume a wide variety of types of communication at high power levels on a big swath of the VHF/UHF/microwave spectrum is a rather valuable thing for people interested in unavoidable 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 endure three Hams in my house now. Myself, and I endure been an Extra since 1996, my YL, KD0ISN, who is a new Technician and has no sedate interest in upgrading, and my 9 year worn daughter Anna, W0ANT, who is working on her common for expaned HF.

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

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

    That said, glad I am not the only one who wonders what 10M is turning into.........I mediate 1/2 the peril does not even endure a license on that band-

    Thanks for the Great report- BTW, per a convoke I placed into the ARRL last year for research, you can not secure age breakdowns as the FCC license figure no longer tracks this- That is crazy- seems like really critical 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 Do hear a lot more of them on the air lately.

    No, they are NOT utter playing games. Here's why: Mom & Dad are playing video games and talking on the cell phone. Anything Mom & Dad Do 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 frigid people. So I want to learn about what they are doing.

    It was Bill Cosby who said; "The intuition why grandparents and grandchildren secure along so well is because they partake a common enemy."

    I erudite 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 betray that the dilettante radio fraternity is in the dolrums like everything else, and is probably slowly sliding back.The identical applies in Britain, they are likewise 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 secure things touching is now low in the sky, and producing a sunspot perhaps once every six weeks. There wouldn't be so many car drivers in the US if gasolino was $10 a litre would there ?

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

    This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the subjugate 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 talk to the property of Amateurs. FCC fragment 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 endure their ham station hanging from their belt, or those who buy HF dipoles in plastic bags will contribute much. Many of the new lads appear to be uninterested in further education once a ticket is in hand, and I'm not certain that many of them will ever be any asset to the electronics or communications industries. Sooner or later, some Washington counsel will witness at "Basis and Purpose", then witness at the dilettante Service and determine they are not fulfilling their obligation, then determine that someone else should be profiting from some or utter of "our" spectrum. I only hope that I will be breakfasting with Mssrs Kennely and Heaviside before they ensnare 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 enlarge 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 disagree with those who pronounce that a very big percentage of new Technician class licensees are EMCOM types who endure no other plans in the hobby. I Do think, and I Do hope, that trend is dying, so they can secure back to existent hams with a existent interest in dilettante radio, but it has not died yet.

    As confirmation, two people I know from non-ham context endure just expressed an interest in learning more about dilettante radio. Both of them note it as a ilk of emergency communications, but for personal use, such as "if I endure an emergency I can secure help." Both likewise mediate of it in the ordinary 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 pellucid they are in the minority.

    That means as this EMCOM "fad" (and I mediate 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 palpate with family" FRS hams and the "free cell phone" hams. The radios endure 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 mediate it is on the downhill swing now, with the new clarification by both the FCC and the ARRL. Thousands of 'heros' will become discouraged, and those radios too will bolt into a desk drawer, to be 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 select utter the stuff currently required for the Tech, common and Extra and roll it into a single 120 question test. Anybody who wants a US dilettante license just has to pass that test, and they secure 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 brilliant 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 utter 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 grant that those green 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 secure started. But they weren't child prodigies, just smart and hard-working.

    Can anyone *really* pronounce the tests are or were "discriminatory" when brilliant green elementary school children could pass utter 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 compose IT FOR YOURSELF."

    That really sums it utter up. Thank you.

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

    Most of utter the perquisite 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 pair years, due to a toil relate injury, raising a family, dealing with doctors, lawyers, etc, I was inactive for about 4.5 years. Once the state of Fl decided to retire me. had this puny 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 select the 5 wpm code test, it was then that I create 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 pronounce they did or for the EMMCOMM aspect of the hobby, most of em endure either let their license lapse or renew even though they are not active. Who knows why, but even though they may only be 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 secure where I did, fortunately through family and friends I endure been able to stay as active as I can be under my circumstances. Just give them time and hopefully one day some will near 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 be an infux of green people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most common wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who bolt to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV. This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the subjugate 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" perquisite 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 Great stuff there since the mid-1970s, first trying out the Gingell polyphase network (Mike Gingell likewise 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 parade 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 perquisite fine innovation for HF receivers without needing a fancy PLL or DDS for first Local Oscillator crystal control. It might be better known as "Barlow-Wadley" since its introduction in a receiver produced in South Africa. It was suited enough that Drake used it over here and Radio Shack had it in their top-of-the-line SWL BC receivers.

    The first minute strategy 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 achieve DETAIL in how it could toil along with antenna footprints on the surface.

    Americans may endure 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 likewise invented the hand-carried scientific calculator but hams don't like them...calculators toil 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 compose 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 toil in the fog no problem).

    Otherwise, I disagree with you but only in stating that USA radio amateurs haven't invented utter that much for dilettante radio purposes...they are quiet "pounding brass" and promoting it as the "best" passage 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 mediate that the FCC license is a sacred cow. It is not. If for some intuition (and Do hope this does not occur) the FCC were to suspend utter licenses or Do away with dilettante radio, the endeavor would quiet bolt on. Some folks like myself would quiet build and achieve up antennas (mostly for recieve purposes at such a time), and would quiet build and tinker with probably low power transmitters and receivers and transceivers.

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

    In addition, let me pronounce a few words of appreciation for those who endure an inner calling for dilettante emcomm. For the most part, these suited spirited folks endure a genuine interest in and note a existent practical exigency for citizen participation in emergency communication. May God bless them for their calling. Just as the citizen soldier stands ready to retort the convoke of arms to guard his family, his community, his state, his nation, so likewise the citizen emcomm volunteer stands ready to serve these identical purposes should a calamity incite the exigency to be there, and they drill difficult for it on their own time, mostly with their own gear, and at their own expense. It is lifeless wrong to try to achieve 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 existent hams. Strive to be either the one benign or the other, or both, and then you will endure achieved the ulitimate award of dilettante radio which transcends even the dilettante extra class mere license. The license can never supersede the existent 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 expertise 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 like reading actuarial tables.

    Assuming it's utter 100% rectify (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 green 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 secure this "We must only secure green people licensed"obsession.

    Look at the medium age for an AARP member. They appear to stay 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 disagree with your comment. One time when I was working with HCJB Radio (HC1QH) they received a listener epistle from a scientist at JPL. He observed that during his toil day he was able to communicate incredible distances with some pretty sophisticated equipment. But when he went home he was equally as thrilled to swirl on his rig and chat with fellow hams around the world. There is just something about electronics in common 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* pronounce the tests are or were "discriminatory" when brilliant green elementary school children could pass utter of them?

    Ya then why did they endure to Do 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 likewise 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 desist at the CW testing. Why not just endure 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 compose it what YOU want it to be and no one can say..."Well I'm better because I endure a higher license than you do... which some find nasty and thus the wars on the radio when the others bolt off and consume frequencies that are reserved for them. Thats discrimination and warp when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't consume 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 be removed like they did with the band plan, cw and other issues. After utter why should someone secure special treatment... preferential treatment... from the identical government that they utter pay their taxes to??

    So by going back and looking as to why things changed... I mediate you can note that it WAS determined to be 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 expertise of radio?"

    KC5NY, let not your heart be troubled. Every single time a existent ham goes on the air, he advances the expertise of radio.

    Furthermore, no benign of radio communication in the world, no matter how sophisticated can compare to the jewel of dilettante radio. In a sense they toil with the crumbs from the master's plate, and yet " when utter else fails ......" Is that not a wonderful advancement in the expertise of radio? How many lives saved past, present, and future? How many calamity 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 import and delight and learning and fellowship by dilettante radio?

    No, KC5NY, let not your heart be troubled. If you withhold within you the perquisite attitude, you are a member of one of the greatest fellowships in the world and one of most effectual 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 be a ham you must surge above the petty squabbles, the tired worn snobbery, the evil attitudes, the gloom and doom, the cognomen calling, and utter the relaxation of it. You endure to focus on what was and should always be your attraction to radio communication. This is what makes you a ham, and what you Do with that spark of inspiration is what keeps you a ham.

    Forget utter the petty stuff. be 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 endure to Do away with the CW test?"

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

    Consider that the treaty changed in 2003 but it took FCC more than 3-1/2 years to change the rules. They could endure done it in a day but they dragged their feet. mediate 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 likewise 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 be retained for Extra, not completely removed. FCC said no.

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

    And I request again: How can anyone pronounce the tests are "discriminatory" when brilliant kids who aren't even 10 years worn endure passed utter of them?

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

    Just achieve utter the stuff in utter 3 question pools in one 120 question test.

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

    "Thats discrimination and warp when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't consume 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 intuition for having multiple license classes is to compose it easier to secure plenary privileges, not harder. If there were only one class of license, it would endure to involve everything in utter three license tests, and utter newcomers would endure 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 be discriminatory only if there were requirements that had nothing to Do with dilettante radio. For example, if a prospective ham had to be at least 14 years worn before being allowed to select the tests or be issued a license, *that* would be discrimination.

    "It should be removed like they did with the band plan, cw and other issues."

    ??They didn't remove the band plan.

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

    Because they proved themselves qualified. And the privileges are available to utter 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 loom ~3/4 of new licenses are obtained for em-com purposes. Of those new licenses, ~1/4 eventually secure 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 select new hams however they can secure them. It's up to us seasoned hams to betray 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 like reading actuarial tables.

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

    Lenny felt a exigency to secure 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 Fall of 2007 and then passed the common class test in October 2008. I am now studying for my extra class. My dad was a ham and so I endure always had an interest in ham radio. He passed away in 2006 and I endure taken his original convoke sign, the one I heard him consume 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, toil etc., never was able to dedicate the time to learn it. I am definitely not anti-code though and would like to eventually toil 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 toil HF on the weekends when I endure more time to dedicate to it, but my Icom 718 is always on around 3878 or 7180 kHz every evening. I endure joined the two local ham clubs in my county and am likewise a member of the ARRL. As far as getting people interested in ham radio and retaining new hams, I would inspirit utter of us to be visible and talk it up. I am by profession a word broadcaster at the local radio station here in Ste. Genevieve and I try to secure the local hams on my interview betray at least once a year, usually just ahead of field day (in fact I was doing that before I became a ham). I likewise manage the local cable access tv channel and endure had the hams on my programs there. I mediate as long as they endure a core group of active hams who are visible in the community and seen as a positive fragment of a their community they will be 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 achieve up a new 4 component 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 ilk 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 select new hams however they can secure them."

    I care! What is the consume of getting a new licensee, if they really aren't a ham-don't saturate about communicating or getting on the air? Why is the number of licensees they endure so important? Just give everyone a license along with their social 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 maxim goes) there's might in numbers. This is especially considerable considering the ever increasing claim for the commercial uses of the RF spectrum.

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

    Given the current trends, it seems their dilettante population may swirl 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 utter means kick everybody out of the hobby you don't like.

    I certain hope the 3 of you left devour talking with each other.

    There's play for everybody. There's might in numbers. As time goes on things change, try to compose it better, and secure over it.

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

    And what's the consume of people having worn licenses that aren't used anymore? I'd suspect there are more worn timers that endure given up on ham radio than there are new emcom types who only consume 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 endure the license term changed from 10 years to 1 year.

    The bottom line is the hams who don't consume their licenses passed the identical test the relaxation of us did, and paid the identical VE fee, so they're entitled to their license. Instead of being judgmental and getting utter bent out of shape about inactive 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 inactive 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 endure to Do away with the CW test?"

    You best bolt check the ADA group. They were the ones that endure handicapped people who, along with most of the others that JUST COULDN'T appear 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 discrepancy to them if they can't mark their cognomen correctly. If they can't secure 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 achieve the perquisite shoe in the left foot...like duhhhh betray 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 request dummy questions yet endure EXTRA class licenses. One only has to witness at the sidebar on eham too... request one what a volt is and you will secure the deer caught in the headlight witness 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 utter them warning stickers just don't apply to 'em after utter they are EXTRA hams... dead... but it looks impressive on the grave marker where it says.. he was a Extra Class ham... Too evil 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 utter stats, the numbers can be spun one passage or another to betray bias.

    As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not note 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 endure just renewed my advanced class license and will Do 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 Great hobby, I truly hope that they Do not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

    If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you utter 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 select the time or endure the disipline to be proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for puny 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 secure that. It was likewise tradition from the very nascence of the hobby.

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

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

    Why spend utter 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 warp of the author. If you want to note the roomy 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 existent ham"? If so, they are in roomy trouble.

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

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

    For example, I endure a Great interest in PSK31 and other digital modes that select very puny power, yet can QSO at Great distances. I don't saturate about contests (but I don't complain about contesters), but I really devour a 20 minute QSO with a ham thousands of miles away. I secure a kick out of having to witness at a map to find a ham's QTH, perhaps some puny island I didn't even know existed. Or a town in Spain I endure not heard of.

    But I endure no interest in SSTV, RTTY, or CW. Does that compose me not "a existent ham"?

    And I'm one of those guys that passed utter of the tests in one test session. Do you really mediate I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't endure to memorize a bit of that. I had to memorize a baud rate (and why does that matter?) and how tall an antenna can be without getting the FAA's panties in a wad (200', but hey, I can understand this), and a few things like 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 mediate I endure that fragment of the hobby down pretty well. I had subscriptions to common 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 existent ham" based on whether or not I can route 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 certain I endure the capacity to learn Morse, too. But I'm really not interested.

    I won't apologize. And I won't endure others telling me whether I am "a existent 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 endure 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 secure sustained propagation on 10 meters, and assuming they'll eventually figure 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 opinion that people interested in ECOM are inflating the TECH class appears to be an offering of anecdotal observation, and to this point is not documented from a statistically significant population sample. This does not weigh in that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to champion 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 utter along the short time between the continuing enlarge in numbers of the Technician class from 1991 to 2009. Nearly utter of those anecdotal 'reasons' were depreciatory of the Technicans (see "shack on a belt" descriptors quiet 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 be hobbyists in the traditional hobbyist sense - and may not endure an interest in the radio art; nevertheless, it is difficult to imagine a better demographic to target for the growth of the hobby."

    The only available data is in the FCC Database. The intuition I prefer Hamdata figures is that they present much more information on license history over the long term, endure 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 retort 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 Do not presently endure a passion for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will compose 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 be interpreted, just as I "interpreted" the number in each class who are in their Grace era by the discrepancy between utter licensees in a class and ARRL data which counts only those in their 10-year license term. I would deem 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 utter bands, utter 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 be endless OPINIONS on utter of those. Everyone has the ONLY "true" intuition and others not going along with those reasons "have a evil attitude." It is like nailing jelly to a tree. :-).............K4ZN: "Kudos to Len AF6AY for presenting the tabular figure of the data. It is food for thought."

    Thank you. It was meant to be 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 be spun one passage or another to betray bias."

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

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

    For another example, a prime intuition 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 endure 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 passage to witness at it.

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

    We secure 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 endure upgraded or left, while almost 2 out of 3 Advanceds quiet hold that license.

    KB6QXM: "I endure just renewed my advanced class license and will Do 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 Great hobby, I truly hope that they Do 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 utter 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 high school yet. That was back before CSCEs, VECs, published question pools, Bash books, etc.

    No roomy deal.

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

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

    And the challenge is quiet 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 immaculate up CB that way.

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

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

    KB6QXM: "Why spend utter 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 evil apples stick out because most hams, worn and new, are nice people who at least try to be suited ops.

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

    And even then, the numbers won't pronounce much. For example, they won't pronounce 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 pronounce 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, please route 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 existent ham"?"

    No.

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

    People secure rusty at things.

    Here's another data point: I can Do at least 25 wpm solid perquisite now, sending and receiving. Probably more like 35-40 on a suited day. I can likewise 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 bolt around. And different ones interest different people for reasons utter their own."

    Of course.

    AE5JU: "But I endure no interest in SSTV, RTTY, or CW. Does that compose me not "a existent ham"?"

    Not at all.

    AE5JU: "And I'm one of those guys that passed utter of the tests in one test session. Do you really mediate I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't endure to memorize a bit of that. I had to memorize a baud rate (and why does that matter?) and how tall an antenna can be without getting the FAA's panties in a wad (200', but hey, I can understand this), and a few things like 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 mp;A without understanding it, and manage to secure licensed anyway.

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

    AE5JU: "But that some would determine whether I'm "a existent ham" based on whether or not I can route 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 endure others telling me whether I am "a existent ham" or not based on their criteria, not mine."

    I mediate you've got it backwards.

    I mediate a lot of things really are determined by how others note a person.

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

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

    IOW, existent experts don't bolt around telling people they're experts - because they don't endure to.

    In similar fashion, existent hams don't bolt around telling people they're "Real Hams" - because they don't endure 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 pronounce that most of those who hunt ham tickets in this fragment of Minnesota are doing so in order to be able to participate in SKYWARN, ARES, and other types of public service work. I teach the local classes, so I know.

    A percentage of those Do secure interested in radio and further to common or secure more involved in the hobby aspects of it. They Do endure quite a few locals who only operate 2 meter FM and/or APRS, so those folks do, indeed, exist.

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

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

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

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

    We exigency to strongly inspirit their newbies to consume their CW privileges. I would like to note more of them try CW using computers if they just don't mediate they can Do it by ear. There's nothing to avert Techs from doing this, and it's something they exigency to 'push'.

    I likewise mediate they exigency to return to the past to find fragment of their future. One of the things that made ham radio common 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 endure today, with one roomy difference. They had night time voice capability on 160 meters. I mediate their newbies exigency nighttime voice privileges on HF, too. 160 meters is not the best place, but it would be better than what they endure now.

      "Strength in numbers" can be used against you, too   by KASSY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I bethink when grand-dad was with NTIA. One of the most-often cited reasons why "it's OK to select 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 toil against us to endure more licensees that Do not secure 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 endure just renewed my advanced class license and will Do 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 Great hobby, I truly hope that they Do not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

    If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you utter 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 intuition 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 utter stats, the numbers can be spun one passage or another to betray bias. As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not note 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 endure 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 toil 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 endure started my data collection about 7 to 8 years earlier since the renewal time is after 10 years. From your beligerance I mediate 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 select the time or endure the disipline to be proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for puny work."

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

    YOU are running around with pre-built warp on the supposition that utter new license applicants aredummies and endure 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 medium in 1955 for the Far East Command Headquarters then in Tokyo. not one of the radio circuits used on-off keying CW codes. That was a nascence for me 56 years ago. NO "license"required and NO special Army classes (my MOS was Microwave Radio...equipment that would not be on-site until last half of 1954). They erudite "on the job." not one of us "failed" or were transferred out. They were in "the roomy 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 endure 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 saturate to play old-time telegrapher I must be some benign of "dummy," right? Cubed if I had an evil CB, right?

    Well, you pronounce *I* endure "bias" with the implication you endure "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 endure gotten one of those "very impressive" dilettante radio licenses earlier...maybe even a Ham Radio BADGE in its wallet! As it was utter I got was a Commercial (First Class) radio operator license in March, 1956 (all 4 elements passed in one sitting in a Chicago FCC field Office)...without prior experience in broadcasting, military or civilian. Gollee, I must be SO deficient and BIASED!

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

    "Tradition" likewise means using crystal set "receivers" and damped-oscillation "spark" transmitters, plus (get this one) "Picking your own convoke mark without government approval!" before 1912. "Spark" is forbidden in the USA. FCC regulates USA civil radio. That leaves only crystal set receivers. Can you secure a DXCC using only a crystal set as a receiver?...........KB6QXN: "Then uncover 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 utter the questions and answers for dilettante radio license testing in the USA............KB6QXN: "Some new extra class licensees Do not know how to Do anything, including soldering on a connector onto a piece of coax. This is a suited thing?????"

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

    Me, I erudite how to connect "UHF" connectors back in 1952 with solder. I don't mediate the "crimp" style connector was on the market then but I could be wrong. Not long after I erudite 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 field 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 achieve there by some astronauts for NASA.............KB6QXN: "At least teach 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 instrument inside the open PA door, caught his fatique sleeve on a tuning dial gear and his bare left forearm touched a warp supply line of roughly 350 VDC. warp supply was NOT in the door interlock chain. He didn't endure a "license" to operate. Neither did I or anyone else. utter they got were "on-the-job-reminders" without formal classes.

    Oh, and one day, during an unannounced fire drill, Executive Officer in saturate 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 utter of this money on equipment/time when the behaviour of these people are terrible because of the lowered standards?"

    By golly, NOTHING seems to meet 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 warp 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 like 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." betray 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 like you Len! I endure not seen the likes of your ilk since my mentor. You two would secure along great! Must be a Defense industry thing....

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

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

    Sort of the point isn't it. I endure been able to upgrade for years now, but why? Honestly, many HAM's appear needlessly intimidating and Myopic, I don't exigency the hassle. I enjoyed the worn "can do" and "what if" attitude of yesterday. The QRP horde certainly has the rectify attitude, but I am not much with Code, and most of the QRP guys fancy 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 difficult day being assessed at school, and hearing worn buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will be 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 lifeless language like 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, like 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 difficult 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 talk for utter kids everywhere, I quiet bethink 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 be "hard", so I just erudite 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 passage to find one, because for some intuition K3RTR wasn't into doing that. Navy MARS was his thing; I erudite a lot about RTTY from Sam.

    Back in the mid-1960s, utter 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 puny sense to me that there were four different license classes that utter had the identical privileges. Even stranger was the fact that the Advanced was quiet carried on the books as a sunder license class even though no new ones had been issued by FCC since the cease of 1952. But that's how it was, and what mattered to me was getting on the air, then working my passage from Novice to common 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 be of three kinds.

    Some were up in arms, utter upset that they'd endure to select more exams to withhold their privileges. There were dire predictions that the changes would destroy ham radio, that used outfit values would plummet and new outfit would disappear, that the bands would be empty, and much more. They said the Advanced exam would be 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 fervent to select on the challenge and secure whatever license was needed to Do what they wanted to Do 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 Fall 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 relaxation of those bands became more crowded.

    Disaster, right? cease of ham radio, right? Well, not exactly. In fact, some very eerie 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 green folks like me, who didn't realize how difficult 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 passage a 14 year worn dilettante would pronounce 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 pile rigs from surplus and worn TVs for a pair 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 Do what needs to be done.

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

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

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

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

    I like 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 lifeless language.

    Here are some more:

    'If you believe, you can achieve'

    'If it happens, it must be possible'

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

    But most of all, I disagree with AI2IA, who summed it utter up the best:

    "Amateur radio is what you compose 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 endure passage 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 difficult day being assessed at school, and hearing worn buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will be 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 lifeless language like 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 secure dilettante radio licenses, they are always "smarter, more knowledgeable, more intelligent, more accomplished, better than everyone" because they pronounce 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 confiscate 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 create his passage on to eham to downgrade anyone and everyone that will read his divel....

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

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

    P.S. Yes I am arrogant enough of my convoke mark and cognomen to mark 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 expertise of radio?"

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

    Bob

      RE: Trends in USA dilettante Radio License Classes Ov   by WS4E on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I endure 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 mediate getting Extra is effortless now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not endure had a study confederate who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him interpret some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

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

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

    In fact I endure been practicing code since summer, with my goal to participate in Straight Key Night this year. My goal was Do CW in 1 year but thats close enough. I can read at about 20wpm, but I am trying to build some fist skills to consume 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 quiet believe that there are many of us out there that quiet want to LEARN and consume CW, I don't note anything to worry about CW going away. I likewise don't note the no-code Extra as a evil 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 comment until your statements reading your crap and putting a desist to it.

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

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

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

    As to my abilites in CW... I mediate I medium around 40-45 wpm in morse and faster using american.. as they endure 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 secure 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 bolt around looking for people to sue when they don't secure their way? They endure seen a lot of them secure "in your face" when they exigency a extra bux. Some Do it just to "get in your face" as they are frustrated troll's)

    As to your enuendo abou the ARRL... When they bolt to the the FCC and say..."WE depict utter 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"... bolt figure. they are quick to link which ever side is winning (or can compose them money) ...and popular... be it politically rectify or not from what they endure seen.

    Well Danny boy.. you endure a MERRY CHRISTMAS and ecstatic New Year... if you can... and try not to spread so much dislike and discontent ...the south lost the war... secure 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 endure 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 mediate getting Extra is effortless now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not endure had a study confederate who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him interpret some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

    In fact I endure 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 consume 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 quiet believe that there are many of us out there that quiet want to LEARN and consume CW--------------------------------------------------

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

    Nothing wrong with 15 wpm.. its a nice speed to QSO on ... and they will be looking for your convoke mark on SKN...congrats.CW is more than just code... its a passage of thinking.. like 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 toil for it like you did)

    We hope others succeed 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 be a suited thing...from what they endure heard... I am certain some of the 5sneylanders are quiet contemplateing months later what the propel 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 create his passage 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 secure in. That's unlucky for the existent dilettante community. But it is their policy and they are utter stuck with the benign of frustrated, bitter-bile-filled vomit from an anonymous coward that badly needs some psychologic therapy............KE5WDI: "I could sit back without comment until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to endure thinks "dumbed down for them". It just so happens that I know quite a few people with disabilities that could probably route code around your butt with both hands tied behind their back. I mediate it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a desist to it."

    E-ham's policy is their policy but I question it even if they are anxious to fill up space and secure lots of "comments" on articles regardless of their content so as to loom "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 citizen for a long time and am a deliberate enlistee in the US Army during a wartime (the active aspect of the Korean War). No one on e-ham article forums is required to achieve 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 Do what can be described as a total dislike CRIME comment as this "QRZ..." anonymous coward did such as (quoting):

    QRZ...: "We hope others succeed 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 be a suited thing...from what they endure heard... I am certain some of the 5sneylanders are quiet contemplateing months later what the propel 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, evil to consume even an alliteration to a swear word, but it is perfectly "okay" to utter TOTAL dislike and DENIGRATION against one activity interest group!? Yes, I guess it is.

    Until e-ham management takes a suited witness at its own policy, I will not bother considering subscribing as I once (perhaps naively) did..............As to the original matter of "trends in license classes," I can pronounce that this palpable BIGOTRY of OLD-style "ham radio must-do" quiet exists AFTER regulations endure legally changed. I endure 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 dislike against newcomers who don't Do what the old-timers pronounce they MUST do.

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

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

    I endure seen evidence that there ARE long-timers who are freehanded enough to let newcomers find out for themselves without coercion. They are few to arbiter by quantity in forums. No demands to "do as *I* say" from them. USA dilettante radio is a deliberate activity with plenty of OPTIONS available within allocations. There is NO regulatory claim that licensees MUST consume any particular mode/modulation over any other allocated mode/modulation. Just stay within frequency boundaries, succeed regulations, and play nice. But, the super-patriotic traditionalist DEMANDS that they Do as they command. When they don't, these traditionalists secure irate and spiteful. utter of this "brotherhood of hams" is a lot of hypocritical BS concerning them. They only want utter 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 endure so many OPTIONS in their current USA dilettante radio regulations, WHY is there so much outcry about using only "CW?" WHY are they to be subjected to the filthy bile from an anonymous coward hiding behind a pseudonym? WHY can't they just pick and elect what THEY like to consume or try?

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

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

    I'll endure 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 quiet not pronounce what a ordinary person can in 1 min) endure you thought about running for ARRL political office. You would be great.. only problem is most don't know (or care) what you bolt on... and on talking about... that is so far off matter that they can bolt select a nap, a shower, endure lunch, Do their taxes and near back never missing a thought... as you contenue to ramble on...and on...

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

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

    Thanks.. and they would value it if you could Do 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 secure bored and Fall 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 note that vibroplex was sold to a new guy... Mitch must endure given up the manufacture and sales of them. Sorry to note but witness forward to having the tradition contenue with the newbie.

    oh well be heedful who you convoke a coward... one might select that as being nasty and you secure ban again for innuendoes.

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

    C U on SKN CW. and may the DX be good. (sri e not hr u on Leonard af6ay, best bolt to HRO n buy a key and Do like 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 quiet am arrogant to this day as a Tech. My plans to upgrade to common are there, but time,work, cost of outfit and family life mind to overshadow this dream. I will eventually upgrade and devour 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 expertise of radio?" KC5NYJ:

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham endure done many things to further the expertise of radio, so I don't know where you secure off. I endure been doing quite a bit of toil to help mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to further 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 puny over 2 weeks, with a moderate 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 certain that I could quiet 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 secure in the passage of getting the Extra class. I didn't saturate what would endure been required to secure it... I was going to secure it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more learning than was required to pass the test, that is utter 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 expertise of radio?" KC5NYJ:

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham endure done many things to further the expertise of radio, so I don't know where you secure off. I endure been doing quite a bit of toil to help mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to further 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 puny over 2 weeks, with a moderate 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 certain that I could quiet 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 secure in the passage of getting the Extra class. I didn't saturate what would endure been required to secure it... I was going to secure it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more learning than was required to pass the test, that is utter 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 utter the exams in one day but can't link two pieces of wire together. He boasts about his achievement and suffers figure xenophobia. Maybe he will try to link two wires and thereby electrocute himself.Of course they in England had to be more heedful because they endure the superior 250 volts. This means they can endure thinner more resilient cables on utter 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, like Kings Bush and Obama.Get a life guys ham radio is (a) a hobby, (b) life itself, not a passage of life. It is almost as suited 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 be subtle or obvious. Leaving out a apposite fact is one way. Another passage is to state an opinion - or a wish - as if it is a fact.

    Errors in logic are utter over the residence too. The most common IMHO are the "ad hominem" oversight and its mirror image, the "appeal to authority" error. Both are the attempt to consume the identity of the speaker to supersede a heedful examination of the reasoning and facts. When you note someone giving their resume as a intuition 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 controversy doesn't exigency to consume 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 compose someone a troll nor change the veracity of what they say. Their statements quiet endure to be 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 endure the play and the money, deem a suited radial-arm saw. I always preferred one to a table saw. Helped build a pair of folded horns with one.

    To WS4E: suited on ya! I hope to toil you in SKN. What bands Do you work?

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

    To AD7VH: I mediate if a person is satisfied with their license, they shouldn't be 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 utter discussions are not griping; it's considerable to know what actually happened, and why. And to note how things endure 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 watchful that, quote---"On 25 February 2007 I took (and passed) utter test elements in front of a four-member ARRL VEC examination team. utter four team members separately checked my retort 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 utter the hobbies that I endure ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than utter of them achieve 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 utter the hobbies that I endure ever enjoyed, this one>has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative,>bassackwards people than utter of them achieve together.

    Nah, computer technology forums are even worse.

    I guess you endure 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 mannerly 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 consume of the word, "To" endure to Do with my commenting on how long some posts are. The word to is used as a role word, and can be used many different ways, as can the word, "too". You shouldn't try and school someone else, when you don't endure 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 utter the hobbies that I endure ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than utter of them achieve together.

    I know this may be 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 note now.

    In the earlier days before the exigency to always be Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not secure a license. That was it. The PC police to compose certain everyone is included as they Do not want to offend 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 pronounce Oh I note 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 bolt for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax utter the passage around.

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

    Do I want to be in a class of license where the requirements were known or Do I want to be lumped into a group with some people that actually had to Do a lot of difficult toil to secure their extra class license and likewise people that had to Do very little. NO!!

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

    Feel free to flame me. Do 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 freehanded minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries.

    I am not a conservative, but I would pronounce a moderate 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 endure 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 achieve a question designate after my first line in my last post. I am certain 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 note now."

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

    I request this because the slack 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 be Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not secure a license. That was it."

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

    KB6QXM: "The PC police to compose certain everyone is included as they Do not want to offend 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 be really arresting to secure 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 secure a lot more people to evade the marathon if the distance was reduced from the traditional 26 miles 385 yards.

    KB6QXM: "Educational standards based on tradition."

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

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

    KB6QXM: "The identical should bolt for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax utter the passage around."

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

    btw, nowhere in fragment 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 be in a class of license where the requirements were known or Do I want to be lumped into a group with some people that actually had to Do a lot of difficult toil to secure their extra class license and likewise people that had to Do 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 utter that connected to the tests you took years ago to secure the license?

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

    The high 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 cease 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 achieve 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 utter the hobbies that I endure ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than utter of them achieve together."

    KB6QXM: "I know this may be 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 note 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 utter the NPRMs, 18 (!) Petitions that eventually led to the December 2006 Notice that code testing would be eliminated from USA dilettante radio license examinations. That is a 9 year span of time. What is MISSING from them are utter 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 force in 1991. The FCC does not endure utter those NPRM documents on-line yet but copies of the 1990 Notice endure been obtained and circulated.

    The alleged "pressure" came from INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS who were seeking to modernize regulations. It was a LEGAL process and allowed utter 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 be a suited preservative since the dry grapes of so many old-timers over a decade is quiet poured out on forum participants.................KB6QXM: "In the earlier days before the exigency to always be Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not secure a license. That was it."

    Incorrect. That requirement was in the LAW and achieve there by the FCC, not by any "politically correct" groups or individuals. What was a failure on that statement was that, to be granted an dilettante radio license, an applicant had to meet the lawful requirements AT THE TIME. Those requirements endure been changing. Witness three major recent milestones: Incentive Licensing; Restructuring; Elimination of code testing entire. utter of those major changes were achieved by democratic process with the FCC hearing utter sides. That included the ARRL and its legal firm on retainer arguing for what can be 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 compose certain everyone is included as they Do not want to offend anyone lowered the standards so low that my labrador retreivers could pass the tests."

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

    Since privatization of utter radio operator license testing, commercial or amateur, the NCVEC Question Pool Committee has authored utter 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 quiet not satisfied, write a PETITION and present it to the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. [there were no less than 18 Petitions up for comment 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 pronounce Oh I note 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 bolt for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax utter the passage around."

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

    "Lowering standards?" Standards are not so inviolate that utter those existing when YOU were FIRST LICENSED IN dilettante RADIO are to be kept forever. If you quiet mediate that, then you are exhibiting selfish, very self-centered viewpoints. Laws CAN be changed. The USA has a process by which to Do such changes. That CHANGE happened that you did not disagree 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 freehanded minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries."

    I detect your irritation that utter will not witness 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 endure many hobbies."

    Good luck in your many other hobbies. I'm certain you can win every single karate contest with your attitude, always near out on top with your superior abilities. Do they stand in awe of you or just bolt "awwwww....?"

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

    The high 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 cease 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 single commenter on one NPRM could NOT compose a convincing change, the only "blame" to compose is by pointing to and identifying yourself. It is pellucid that your political orientation is to the Democratic party. That has NO existent manner 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 utter of the respondents to NPRMs listed. If you really, really read utter of the Comments and Replies to Comments on any NPRM, it would be rare indeed to find any overt political party influences by commenters.

    The FCC decides on NPRMs of utter 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 citizen demographic. "Mass Media" (formerly known as Broadcasting) is perhaps the largest because there is direct effect to any citizen or household that has a broadcast receiver, audio or video.

    As to your comment about "slow eorsion of standards" in USA dilettante radio, it demonstrates that YOU deem yourself far better than any government agency in knowledge, law, and many other things. There is ONE federal agency to regulate utter civil radio in the USA. There are NO "supreme leaders" of any radio service except for some delusional types who mediate 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 utter decisions on change are published in the Federal Register. In some cases, decisions endure near 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 be defined as low-level anarchists, even small-time dictators who note only themselves as some benign of "role-model" and/or "standard bearer." Those who fancy themselves "better" than the law can anticipate to be up against others who mediate selfishly about being the "boss of all" and only one of you will (think) you "won." Neither one won anything except disfavor of utter of us who accepted change. They outnumber you. mediate about that.

    AF6AY

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

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

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

    Come to mediate of it, new borns might programed to bellow if they endure 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 achieve 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 fragment 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 not one of that really answers the difficult 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 cease 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 outfit manufacturers, lots of green people getting licenses. Some pronounce 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 cost and complexity of the new SSB outfit shut out too many people.

    Some said it was the want of sunspots, the surge 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 green people. They had the counterculture, antiwar protesting, rock-and-roll, drugs, free love, and much more. Some said ham radio was passage too square to be accepted by hip green folks who were in a much different groove. Bummer!

    Some outfit 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 be the cease - 1980 at the latest!

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

    And they quiet endure 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 bolt for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it> is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering> standard, you lax utter the passage around.

    What standards endure 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 field office, and the tests were utter about tube radios and dipoles and the CW and phone band edges.

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

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

    WOW.

    I mean, back when I was a kid, I did manage to figure out how to warp tube amplifiers, witness at trapezoid patterns on scopes to adjust modulation, recount how to consume VR tubes to Do 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 be honest I was stunned with utter the new modes and rules and accompanying regulations I had to know for the new 21st century Extra test. Space operation? dilettante TV? utter 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 utter of the advances in technology, and I didn't endure 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 erudite as a kid about pile and adjusting tube rigs? Yeah, sure. But it certain would swirl off any new kids wanting to secure into the hobby for us to force 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 ensnare up on).

    And I quiet toil 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 champion it.

    I find it particularly arresting 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 bolt back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the august person they believe themselves to be.

    Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I endure my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the outfit that I have. I would like to secure my common 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 quiet very busy with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they devour the hobby, they Do so at the flat in which they choose. I consume my outfit maybe three four times a week and devour doing so very much. I endure other hobbies as well and Do not emerse myself into them any more than I covet 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 devour the hobby at this level.

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

    Does anyone understand the reference here. I consume the outfit that a tech license gives me the privilage to use. I Do not have, not Do I at this time own HF outfit so Do not exigency a common or Extra license. Do I endure the learning to obtain them?I endure taken the test on line dozens of times and passed them. Will I rush out and secure one so I can talk on the identical outfit that I talk on already............ No more so then I will rush out and secure 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 enlarge 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 be arresting to note 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 endure a bunch of different things in mind.

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

    In the worn days they didn't endure access to the actual mp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass utter 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 secure another go. Exam sessions were held on weekday mornings in FCC offices, which meant a half-day or more off toil or waiting for a school holiday that wasn't a Federal holiday. The test fee was as high 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 mind to propel out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today mind 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 utter meant in drill was that the typical ham would learn the things that might be on the test backwards, forwards and upside down to be certain of a pass on the first go. select Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what figure the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to be absolutely certain of being able to unravel any benign 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 weigh in everyone today just memorizes the mp;A and doesn't learn anything in the process. Far from it! But it does weigh in that the test routine is very different - and that's a change in standards.

    There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which pledge to select someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone endure 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 common license as well.

    Nobody is maxim that hams today should endure 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 compose a simple wire dipole.

    Boil it utter down to this: Which would you deem easier to pass:

    An exam where you knew the common subjects that would be tested

    or

    An exam where you knew the common subjects that would be tested AND could note every one of the actual mp;A that could be 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 field offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost utter of the toil 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 secure involved in the actual regs too much, they set the common policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding. witness at utter the champion Bush II gave to BPL for just one example. witness 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 Do they lower the number to 294 Million? That would skew the percentage a bit! Many are not citizens, but visitors on toil visas.

    Can these people obtain ham radio licenses???

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

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

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

    No amps, just suited antennas & suited 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 swirl it on. You don't endure clue.

    The inability to adopt to progressive communications methods & truly serve the community has stunted the growth of a once Great technical hobby. EMCOMM wannabes should be 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 endure BEEN!

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

    Feel free to write but it is obvious truth, from where I sit. I endure been licensed long enough to note 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 toil visas, they're not here illegally.

    Citizenship used to be a license requirement, but not any more, so legal resident aliens can secure 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 arresting 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 bolt back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the august 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 green they whittled their own ICs out of wood!" :-)................KC9HGJ: "Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I endure my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the outfit that I have. I would like to secure my common 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 quiet very busy with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they devour the hobby, they Do so at the flat in which they choose. I consume my outfit maybe three four times a week and devour doing so very much. I endure other hobbies as well and Do not emerse myself into them any more than I covet 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 devour the hobby at this level."

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

    Hear ya! suited on you for writing that.

    What some of those ultra-conservative "critics" are really maxim is that utter should worship them for their self-described glorious achievements, at how intrinsically suited they imagine they are, whatever is the "achievement." dilettante radio is a HOBBY, a non-professional avocational activity involving radio, even if the Regulations Do not recount it exactly that passage 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. utter the USA government dictates is some technical regulations to mitigate radio service interference.

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

    Good on you again! I totally disagree with you on that. I pronounce 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 endure this terrible 'need' to be 'better than others' anddon't falter to attempt beating on those who just want to devour the hobby independently, personally, the passage THEY want to devour it.

    In the USA the FCC gives us Great liberty in personal OPTION of altenative in choosing what they want to Do 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 leave to operate on unavoidable frequencies under unavoidable 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 be academic institutions with licenses representing 'degrees' of academic achievement. Each license is merely a PERMISSION, a privilege to radiate RF under unavoidable conditions as codified in law.

    In a jagged analogy, it is like the Cartage Driver License, a leave to carry cargo for hire and engage in legal commerce of such cartage, but being required to obey the very identical roadway laws as utter other drivers of any vehicle type. The ONLY advantage a "30 ton tractor and box" is physical mass that can overrun little vehicles in defiance of the law. In another passage the petty puny dilettante tyrant tries to BULL their passage 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 Do not have, not Do I at this time own HF outfit so Do not exigency a common or Extra license."

    I got an dilettante Extra class license just because I could. It was a personal advantage 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 experience and learning to pass some dilettante tests. I likewise 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 absolute resentment to unavoidable others.

    According to unavoidable others "I endure to inaugurate as a teen-ager and slowly toil my passage up the proficiency ladder and bolt through utter the class levels to justify 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 bolt 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 utter of us then.

    Just WHY in #### cognomen must they "progress slowly, step-by-step through utter the classes of license?" dilettante radio is a HOBBY. It isn't a Union or Guild. It certain as #### isn't professional by federal definition. WE, utter of us are allowed to enter or progress as far as THEY saturate to. I've been a PROFESSIONAL in electronics and radio, that is earning MONEY for my toil services. A few Others expressed Great 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 like that. I could endure 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 utter by myself that I might be 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 certain that sticklers for EXACTNESS will shriek "that isn't a QSO!" It was a radio contact nonetheless. Q-codes were devised by professional radiomen, not amateurs. Amateurs picked up the consume so that they could fake to be "professional." Roger that. :-) In utter the history or radio communications the ACTUAL invention/innovations of advancing any state of the radio expertise by amateurs were done before 1940. I don't saturate what the ARRL writes, I've got many other sources of historical information on electronics which are not out trying to secure 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 endure commented on UNverified 'trends' that are more half-truths, folklore, repetitions of what others claim. I pronounce that anyone who enjoys whatever activity they are in are very free to devour it. I likewise pronounce that anyone who wants to dictate what anyone else "should" devour 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 like 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, Great prose Len--easy to succeed datum presentation."

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

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

    Thanks for the nice words, Bob.

    Unfortunately, some folks mediate 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 note if there was an impact from the elimination of utter 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 mediate of it, new borns might programed to bellow if they endure to learning CW?"

    :-)

    Heh heh, I can't uncover 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 request THEIR "permission to select 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 roomy commerce of radio communications (not broadcasting), without any exigency to know or learn "CW" I am just incurious to it. I endure no fancy for "CW." I endure no dislike for it, either. Indifference is not "hate."

    I picked my study chronological era because: (1) I had third-party data from two independent sources; (2) Cessation of USA dilettante radio code testing can be 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 endure the tools and capacity to compose "graphs" but saw no justification for a little 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 endure insisted that "nothing can be seen for a 'short time' period." They would stretch it utter out for years, a time sufficiently long enough for it utter to dim in history and thus become a NON-subject. I classify that as just plain denial by those who can't endure to note their mode (at which they pretension expertise) no longer "loved" or an attempt to compose themselves better than others, indeed 'superior' because they met standards of long ago.

    Newborns bellow 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 pronounce nasty to others when evidence is presented that doesn't felicitous their personal idea/experience/brainwashed notions of what dilettante radio "should be." <shrug> It is not my job to coddle them and praise them gratuitously. :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

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

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

    N2EY: "Sure, there's the code testing reduction and elimination. But that's not utter that changed. In the worn days they didn't endure access to the actual mp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass utter 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 secure another go. Exam sessions were held on weekday mornings in FCC offices, which meant a half-day or more off toil or waiting for a school holiday that wasn't a Federal holiday. The test fee was as high 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 bolt commercial and actually merit money as a radiotelegraphy operator on the Great Lakes. You would be a natural with your superb code key skills.

    Oh, and well before the Dick Bash books, there were the "mp;A" chain of books on just about every trade that had license testing, commercial radio and dilettante radio included. Hardbound in 1956. I tried to secure 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 utter the rules from a borrowed copy (fit into a half-inch lax leaf). I didn't endure any thought of re-taking any test in Chicago at an FCC field Office. Gollee, if there was some regulation or something on re-taking atest, I would endure failed to bethink it. Tsk, tsk, I didn't endure 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 pronounce 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 Do 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 mind to propel out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today mind 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 certain sounds as though THE HAM TEST was a existent toughie long ago. I don't know since I never bothered to select one until 2007. I've heard differently but then both you and K8MN endure publicly agreed that I was "too stupid to pass a ham test." Of course that was before I asked for your leave to select one. Undaunted, I just took it and passed utter three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-)...............N2EY: "What it utter meant in drill was that the typical ham would learn the things that might be on the test backwards, forwards and upside down to be certain of a pass on the first go. select Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what figure the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to be absolutely certain of being able to unravel any benign 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 utter three courses in The Calculus in collitch, yeah... :-)................N2EY: "The changes don't weigh in everyone today just memorizes the mp;A and doesn't learn anything in the process. Far from it! But it does weigh in that the test routine is very different - and that's a change in standards."

    I quiet endure the one-inch thick looseleaf notebook filled with verbatim questions and answers of utter 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 utter 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 utter the allowed questions in the Question Pool but it would be a wasted application 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, utter characters plus positions and lots of other puny notes in the script. The only comment I got was "ya gotta be 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 be 1560 questions with 6240 answers. The 120 test questions (and 480 answers) would be (or should be) selected randomly out of those 6240 total items. Since many answers are "distractors" (almost-correct answers written so as to loom as correct), utter questions AND answers exigency to be "memorized." But, I guess utter you long-time amateurs endure SUPERHUMAN powers thus you endure evolved into superbeings or something. It must be the fanciful state of the radio expertise that long-timers secure doing utter that morse code stuff?............N2EY: "There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which pledge to select someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone endure 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 endure been granted since the year 2000.

    You withhold maxim that Technician Pluses are "automatically renewed" as Technician since no newTechnician plus licenses endure 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 desist you, accurate data verification hasn't stopped you yet].............N2EY: "Nobody is maxim that hams today should endure 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 compose 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 appear to recall one James Miccolis as being ADAMANT about absolutely KEEPING the morse code test perquisite on through November 2006, then maxim its elimination would be 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 be eliminated in December 2006, exact effectual date to be 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 high school back in 1947, well before being licensed to drive...............N2EY: "Boil it utter down to this: Which would you deem easier to pass:"

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

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

    Ya see, I passed utter the required tests for dilettante Extra in the USA and will never endure to worry about taking another dilettante test in my life. Just withhold on renewing and it is mine for life. Even if I secure a Vanity callsign modification. That applies to utter who renew within the required time period. Imagine, the mighty state of the expertise of radio KNOWN by utter 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 field offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost utter of the toil 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 quiet 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 likewise 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 pair of six-year-olds back in 1998 or so (cute picture was in the ARRL Letter). Are they quiet licensed? It is about 11 years later now. They must be in their grace era 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 secure involved in the actual regs too much, they set the common policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding."

    Sorry, the FCC is an INDEPENDENT federal agency, James. please 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 endure been named George Herbert Walker Bush II. On utter those "waivers" that troubles you so, WHO out there in dilettante land got code-test waivers? You endure 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 likewise 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 mediate you've been working too difficult as a "radio manufacturer" running the "Southgate Radio" company since the early 1970s. Relax, try to secure your intellect clear. Try watching TV, like 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 endure been licensed for about two years, upgraded to General, and will upgrade to AE next year. The clubs in this region 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, frail signal digital (all bands), and mediate that the ARRL prints the band 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 learning in those areas when the next WARC rolls around and (fill in the blank) Telecomm wants the all EHF band 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 utter three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-) ". I'll pronounce 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 like spitting into the wind."

    It can appear like that sometimes. But to paraphrase what you wrote about dilettante radio, "Eham is What You compose 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 believable but is inaccurate, deceptive or just plain untrue. Those who know the facts then rectify 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 saturate about the veracity at all. What the troll wants is attention, and the opening to furious others and insult them. The responders Do saturate 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 consume utter the habitual tools of rational fallacy to withhold the responses coming. Common ones are the Appeal to Authority, Presuming the Conclusion, opinion as Fact, Ad Hominem, controversy from Verbosity, misquoting, and various semantic games, but there are many others.

    The solution in utter cases is to simply ignore the trolls completely and not select the bait.

    You can uncover when a troll is getting desperate when the inaccuracies swirl 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 unavoidable thing. No proof is given, just the spurious 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 passage or another and bolt on to other ways of keeping the game going. Remember, the troll doesn't saturate about the veracity at all, only about the attention. The "Prove it!" response is attention, which is exactly what the troll wants.

    The only passage to win is not to play. Then eham becomes a pleasure. I've erudite 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 utter the data that you gents are bantering about that I believe will eventually prove to be their undoing.

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

    It is likewise considerable to bethink that, because their licenses are utter on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you utter are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us endure 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 toil as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the last several years, I endure been able to count on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm likewise getting the identical feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly endure contact.

    Indeed, most of my candidates for a "new" license in their Service endure been what I convoke "retreads". These are folks who may endure always wanted to secure 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 pronounce 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 figure of job, family or income) prevented them from actively pursuing the hobby until now. In the interim, they simply let whatever license they may endure 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 endure said, there is rarely an "under twenty something" in the lot.

    Now, don't secure me wrong. I'm more than ecstatic to endure these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then utter 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 lifeless and gone.

    The bottom line here is that, while their numbers may witness like they endure "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 quiet 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 want 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 inaugurate dropping like 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 endure 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 endure "advanced" utter the passage to Extra Class.

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

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

    It simply hasn't happened.

    It would now appear that almost HALF of those in their current ranks endure told the FCC to "take a hike" with their stupid "incentive" nonsense. Indeed, for whatever reason, today's Technicians endure 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 be considered a dismal failure. Everywhere else, that is, but with the FCC's myopic attempt to swirl dilettante Radio into the "No Budding RF Engineer Left Behind" Radio Service.

    It would utter be 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 achieve - supporting the basic fact that utter hams are equal, and that motivation is the key to expanding the hobby. That motivation can only near 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 mediate 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 likewise considerable to bethink that, because their licenses are utter on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you utter 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 endure 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 legal in 1999.

    KB1SF: "while their numbers may witness like they endure "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 quiet 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 like a glisten or as far as they might like but they ARE rising. Graph the numbers from the AH0A site and you'll see. (Graphs are excellent suited 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 endure "advanced" utter the passage to Extra Class.

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

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

    You're leaving out the most considerable 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 secure 383,583, which means that back then 56.84% of US hams held "nothing more than a Tech Plus license".

    Now witness 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 secure 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 utter this very clearly.

    KB1SF: "It would now appear that almost HALF of those in their current ranks endure told the FCC to "take a hike" with their stupid "incentive" nonsense. Indeed, for whatever reason, today's Technicians endure 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 uncover a very different story.

    Also, if someone is only interested in VHF and above, why should they upgrade? Tech gives them utter operating privileges above 30 MHz, which is more than 97% of the spectrum allowed to US hams, and utter modes. If a ham doesn't want to Do 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 be considered a dismal failure."

    How many people with bachelor's or associate's degrees bolt on to a master's degree?

    How many with a master's bolt on to a doctorate?

    Are those degrees "a dismal failure" because so many people don't bolt after them?

    I mediate not.

    I was a ham back in the 1960s and I bethink utter the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would be the cease of ham radio by 1980 at the latest - back when there were maybe 250,000 US amateurs.

    Didn't swirl 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 utter the data that you gents are bantering about that I believe will eventually prove to be their undoing. It’s that NOWHERE in the public FCC database does it state 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 endure (or no longer have) data on age, or gender, and certainly not race. But, witness through several current or past dilettante radio publications in the USA and anyone can note 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 note that. I'm not going to speculate on HOW utter 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. utter had the appearance of being male, utter appeared to be "over 40 in age.".................KB1SF: "It is likewise considerable to bethink that, because their licenses are utter on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you utter are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us endure died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?"

    I disagree rather there. I did not Do anywhere close to a "demographic picture" in my article for the simple intuition that there wasn't enough data to champion anything close to a plenary demographic workup.

    The Hamdata website daily presentations Do betray 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 be supplied with death notices of licensees. dilettante radio service in the USA is essentially a hobby activity, not working in conjunction with the social Security people as an example.

    ARRL statistics and at least one other statistics site Do NOT betray 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 likewise that the ARRL does NOT betray 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 utter 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 secure any figure on ARRL membership numbers except once a year in their Annual Reports. One has to be a potential advertising buyer, identity questioned if not a recognized dilettante radio product maker/seller to secure current numbers of members. In other words, ARRL members cannot secure plenary information on their own 'national representative.' Members secure ONLY what membership headquarters decides.

    In Hamdata's case, they endure 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 sunder classes and to cross-check utter licensee names against the previous day's download to note if they are quiet within the 12-year total term. "Secondary sorting" would be 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 complex sorting program.

    ARRL statistics Do not betray evidence of any such "secondary sorting." I don't know the details ofwww.qrz.com sorting methods; QR-zed is a private commerce 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 mannerly 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 endure "come back." [I endure 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 toil as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the last several years, I endure been able to count on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm likewise getting the identical feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly endure contact."

    I'm glad you identified your own evidence as "anecdotal." The common figure of commentary on e-ham and other venues is that whatever numbers they haul out of hat are utter absolute and done utter by themselves, therefore should not be questioned by anyone! :-)

    In common I Do not personally note the "need" to secure "younger people" so interested, especially teeners. Yes, I've read the scripts about utter who were introduced to 'radio' as teeners and instantly fell in fancy and made it their "life work." <shrug> Some bitterly resent ANY negativism expressed towards teener newcomers and a very few select it as a "personal insult!" The state of the expertise 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 state of the expertise would change rapidly, usually less than half of onegeneration.

    Conditioned thinking (aka 'brainwashing') seems to toil best on teeners. That's about the only intuition I can note for getting teeners into dilettante radio. That passage the older generations can endure someone upon which to imprint them with their own exigency to be parental and "show them the proper way" and utter that stuff. When one gets older, pronounce into twenty-something ages, most endure acquired a Great variety of input into social mores, activities, sciences, trades, etc., etc., etc. They've likewise gotten a better passion about themselves and their capabilities and start questioning some of the 'older' folks who appear to endure quaint ideas (to the 'younger' folk). "Middle aged" folks mind to resent (sometimes bitterly) any unenthusiastic responses after they endure told 'younger' folk "I know what is suited for you and you'd better listen!" :-)...............KB1SF: "Now, don't secure me wrong. I'm more than ecstatic to endure these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then utter 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 lifeless and gone."

    I hear you and probably agree. That is not in my experience nor how I got involved with getting a license in the dilettante radio service. I did not succeed the 'accepted' script of the majority. :-)

    Worse yet, I don't endure 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 witness like they endure "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 quiet 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 endure objected strenuously against ANY "decline" in USA dilettante radio and I expectthey will continue. Most of their views are very PERSONAL and their opinions appear set in stone sothat they are not violated by 'outsiders.' Still, very few of them will select any action on their own to swirl it around. It takes some personal courage to present something dispassionately in public. One can be reviled for presenting truth, facts that don't felicitous others preconceived notions, even personal fantasies. Medical doctors secure that a lot from patients who are diagnosed with evil 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 decline to further to the present time. Oh, they may endure the bling of ready-builts of today with lots of bells and whistles but so many quiet mediate that Ohm's Law of Resistance is quiet some benign 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 felicitous 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 consume a WIRE dipole and stay on HF where utter the "experts" are. The "experts" endure already told me so. Long ago. :-)...............KB1SF: "As others endure 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 endure "advanced" utter the passage to Extra Class."

    I will disagree on negativism of "NOTHING more than a Technician license." That's not the passage to secure those "nothing more than" license holders to advance. They will likely stay at 48% (not just 40%) of utter classes until they had enough with utter bossy worn "experts." Some endure create their niche and are content with it. Let them devour it................KB1SF: "In any other "educational" endeavor, a 17 percent success rate to the "top rung" of the ladder (an Extra Class license) would be considered a dismal failure. Everywhere else, that is, but with the FCC's myopic attempt to swirl dilettante Radio into the "No Budding RF Engineer Left Behind" Radio Service."

    Well, having spent a half century in electronics engineering, I can't bethink even up to 17% of utter of my co-workers being dilettante radio licensees or going for one or even having one in their past. It wasn't any advantage 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 Do so. Sure, I didn't secure 100% rectify on 120 questions total but then I don't anticipate to consume dilettante radio in Outer Space...so I scored about 95%. :-) I got it to Do 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 expertise 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 be restful with it...as evidenced by the dilettante radio publications' contents of ancient times. comical thing is, the vast majority of my toil colleagues ALREADY create electronics fascinating enough to toil at it, to further the existent state of the art. THEY did it, not dilettante dabblers, ornery to what the ARRL tries to compose everyone believe...................Good discussing things with you, Keith. Thank you. stay warm and endure ecstatic 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 utter sorts ofno-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response isalways the same: 'just pass the tests'. I mediate onereason is that it would cost them utter sorts of adminwork.

    What? That's utter 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 mediate it would be more toil to process utter those test results. Not that I care, I don't endure 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 be 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 witness to the person on their left and then to their right. Then he told us that 2 out of 3 students that inaugurate college don't graduate. He told us that if they mediate they are going to compose it then those other 2 people must not. Of course statistics don't actually toil that passage 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 quiet larger than your 17% case but then like N2EY pointed out, that's just a bachelor's. I'm certain you could count on one hand the number of people in that play who made it utter the passage to doctorate.

      No-Test Upgrades   by N2EY on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC8RWR:

    You endure to bethink that FCC is fragment of The Government, so it's probably not nearly as simple as you imagine. For example, there are probably utter kinds of safeguards to avert simply upgrading a license class, let solitary doing it for utter Advanceds.

    Amateur radio licenses are fragment of a bigger database that includes utter FCC licenses so it's even more involved.

    There's likewise the question of whether FCC would endure to route out utter new license documents.

    As for processing the tests, FCC doesn't Do 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 utter of them upgraded.

    But perhaps the biggest intuition FCC has turned down no-test upgrades is that FCC thinks they would set a evil 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 secure 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 quiet compose 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 quiet exigency any) that "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure.

    I've likewise 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 swirl around and they inaugurate 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 be becoming blatantly obvious to anyone in their Service in the United States who quiet holds a license and who has eyes to note and ears to hear.

    Indeed, utter one REALLY has to Do these days is to simply witness around the play at the advancing age (in the figure of graying (or balding!) heads and expanding waistlines) of the bulk of participants at various dilettante radio-related gatherings to note these very pellucid 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. redeem for the occasional contest weekend or 75 meter net, overall, their bands are becoming ever more peaceful as compared to just a few years ago.

    I often wonder how many others endure called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to endure that band very quickly near 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 quiet on the air. Nowadays, the bulk of repeater activity occurs during commuter "drive time". The relaxation of the day, usually utter one hears…sometimes for hours at a stretch and up and down the band…are repeater IDs.

    Hamfests, too, are passion the pinch. Even the "granddaddy" hamfest of them utter 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 passage you sever 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 common hamfests (like the Miami hamfest) endure now gone the passage of the dinosaur from want of participation. Countless other smaller 'fests endure long since evaporated as well.

    Now, granted, each of these trends and observations, when viewed in isolation, probably wouldn't be intuition for alarm.

    But when they are viewed collectively, I believe they paint an (admittedly quiet anecdotal) picture that their hobby is now, quite literally, dying a very slow, painful death. And, as I endure renowned in previous posts, they really endure nobody but ourselves to guilt for it.

    For over 40 years now, they endure 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, utter they REALLY endure to betray for that nearly 40 plus years of regulated snobbery is an ever-shrinking brain pool of younger talent.

    Or, to achieve it another way, it now appears we've been very successfully (and very happily) "eating" an ever-larger portion of their "young" along the passage for utter those years. And, predictably, their Service is now paying a very high cost for keeping utter that ARRL-inspired, FCC-imposed regulatory malfeasance (in the figure of arcane Morse tests and increasingly irrelevant "achievement tests") firmly in residence LONG after it had outlived any regulatory purpose. This, of course assumes that utter that ego-stroking nonsense had any "regulatory purpose" to start with!

    The veracity is that, in most other US federal agencies, such operationally baseless approaches to federal certification endure 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 endure utter determined that such operationally baseless approaches to federal licensing are "systemically discriminatory". Those findings, in turn, endure made such certification approaches illegal under a all plethora of 1990s-era US federal equal access laws.

    Unfortunately, I forecast that their ongoing, collective obsession with keeping utter 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 likewise very well prove to be their undoing.

    Indeed, it is now becoming ever more discrete that their ARRL and FCC very clearly sowed the seeds of their eventual demise when they rammed utter that achievement-based licensing nonsense down their collective throats many years ago. And, to my passage of thinking, KEEPING utter that systemically discriminatory nonsense firmly in residence well into the 21st Century remains nothing short of criminal.

    The suited word is that their highly vocal cadre of "incentive licensing dinosaurs" quiet desperately clinging to that dying dream are now becoming secretive keys in ever-increasing numbers.

    Unfortunately, the evil word 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 be because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" endure been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their fanatic insistence that such newcomers can never hope to be "real hams" unless and until, for example, they've taken and passed a stupid Morse test.

    And then they endure 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 passage you sever these numbers, to me, they utter add up to a very pellucid recipe for their Service's continued slide 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 apposite 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 interpret what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a common Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I endure yet to secure a straight answer…or ANY retort for that matter.

    Could it be 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 intuition of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or be 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 appear 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 likewise 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 fragment as follows:

    "No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 7(20), shall, solely by intuition of her or his disability, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance OR UNDER ANY PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY CONDUCTED BY ANY EXECUTIVE AGENCY…"(emphasis mine)

    The law goes on to pronounce that, "The head of each such agency shall promulgate such regulations as may be 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 suited class action counsel could compose a very stout case that their all 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 betray below), but likewise bolt WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines intimate should be the MINIMUM qualifications for plenary participation in their dilettante Service.

    The term they educators consume to recount such tests is "invalid" because such tests measure skills and abilities that endure puny or no relationship to what candidates actually exigency to know in order to successfully effect in their new roles. When constructing such tests, one must always request the question: "Does the test actually measure what it is conjectural to measure?"

    What's more, when such tests require a learning of predominantly "nice to know" rather than "need to know" information, then, according to a all 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 grant contingent on applicants successfully answering questions that endure puny or no DIRECT relationship to the privileges they grant.

    Let me cite an case 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 compose 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 compose them. And while a learning of how boxes are made is certainly "nice to know", it is NOT an essential component in the job they are being hired for.

    Therefore, they cannot (legally) be required to know such information.

    Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly retort 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 be qualified to operate in the last few KHz of their HF bands now reserved for Extra Class operators. In fact, ANYONE with a valid 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 likewise 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 valid 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 retort that particular question endure absolutely NOTHING to Do with the learning 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 considerable in determining the legal validity of their tests.

    And, sadly, BOTH the common AND Extra Class exam pools are now CHOCK plenary of these equally "nice to know" questions that often endure absolutely NO direct relationship to the added privileges granted. True, such questions discuss dilettante operation in general. But, under today's federal equal-access laws, that's simply no longer suited 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 grant of an Extra Class license becomes systemically discriminatory because it perpetuates a SYSTEM of discrimination by forcing utter applicants (not just the disabled) to demonstrate learning and skills that are either irrelevant, or are not required for the exclusive privileges associated with the class and ilk 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 to some extent 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 be withheld from lower class licensees in their system would be 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 endure absolutely NOTHING directly to Do with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant.

    In short, today's FCC is now caught between a legal "rock and a difficult place".

    Clearly, a 50 question test based on a 600-page license manual over highly technical (but yet quiet 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 endure ALREADY been tested on the common Class exam.

    Likewise, it DOES NOT select 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 irrelevant tests.

    And, as I've likewise shown by citing just TWO questions from the current Extra Class exam pool, there remains a glaring (and I pronounce 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 veracity that new US federal equal access laws like the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act now require that EVERYONE be given an equal opening for full, "barrier free" access to public services and resources like the dilettante Radio Service. Clearly, such laws are now threatening to fracture up their horrifically entrenched, government protected, members only "Country Club".

    Now, certainly, complying with these new laws does NOT weigh in there should no longer be any licensing or control of that access to their Service. To the contrary, the ITU rules very clearly state that applicants who wish to operate in their Service are to be both tested AND licensed.

    But, what this DOES weigh in is that, in order to be in plenary compliance with US equal access law, federal agencies like the FCC can no longer arbitrarily residence regulatory barriers in front of people seeking plenary and complete access to federally administered programs like dilettante Radio without just cause. That likewise means that the content and comprehensiveness of their exams exigency to be DIRECTLY tied to some very specific operational needs.

    Right now (and as I endure 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 near up with 50 UNIQUE questions that relate SPECIFICALLY to the scant additional operational privileges their Extra Class license now grants.

    It is likewise considerable to bethink that no person needs to specifically prove they've been discriminated against in order for a federal agency to be create guilty of systemic discrimination under these laws. utter that's necessary is that it can be 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 endure clearly and unequivocally done in the paragraphs above.

    I've always create it dejected that, everywhere else in the world, governments endure 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 utter radio services internationally, has set out broad (VERY broad) frequency allocations for their Service...usually consisting of only an upper and lower band limit and a specified bandwidth for the emissions to be conducted therein.

    It is only in the United States that those broad limits endure been further restricted by license class and operating mode in their fragment 97. And that is because the FCC, back in the 1950s and 60s, decided to basis 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 endure likewise said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a valid (spelled: "legal") intuition for a US Government agency to grant plenary privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another.

    Indeed, such differentiation can no longer be legally based on applicants being forced to correctly retort exam questions that are either duplicative, irrelevant 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 little 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", evade a KW of power (vice 250 Watts), be the licensee of a club or repeater station, and give exams.

    Clearly, the latter pursuits involve a Great deal more potential risk of physical harm to either one's self or to others (running high 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). utter of those activities absolutely require a modicum of additional technical learning to effect 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 common Class operators ALREADY endure demonstrated they are qualified to operate in) they are far less supine 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 utter of their internationally allocated dilettante Bands. The only frequency restrictions such Basic Certificate holders endure are by emission BANDWIDTH, NOT by license class or operating mode. And, usually, for HF, that bandwidth limit is set at 6 KHz (except for 30 Meters where it is set at 1 KHz).

    Or, to achieve 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 bethink utter the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would be the cease of ham radio by 1980 at the latest - back when there were maybe 250,000 US amateurs.

    Didn't swirl out that way.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim your analysis on the matter 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 occur in Great numbers. In other words to hang your hat on the notion green people becoming licensed radio amateurs in the coming years should result in the total growth of ham radio operators is well a stupid belief. green folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and worn age folks. Let us suppose a high 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 saturate is to grow the basis to a specific goal and to Do so with the resources given. After completing market research what age group would they elect to target. Suppose the ARRL hires such a firm hoping more licensees weigh in more members and the conclusion from the marketing concern is the members difficult earned money should bolt toward an advertising drive directed and focused on the young. Applying nothing more than the rule of intuition they know the conclusion would be to target older age groups. IN other words the opening to recruit new ham operators is with older folk. Heck the fellow that wrote this article is an older gentleman who wisely took advantage of the new codeless license. So for anyone who says dilettante radio cannot attract older folk especially with the easier testing requirements just witness at the the fellow who wrote the trends article. He is an excellent case of the Great new opening for older and middle aged folks to near into the hobby. Now having established the notion of green folk driving dilettante radio growth as dimwitted, it is time to examine the more believable proposition that middle aged and older folk new to the hobby can sustain or even grow dilettante radio in the future. One passage to retort this question is to bench designate other orgainzations who are in fact growing by targeting older people. There are some really suited examples that give credence to the credence older people can sustain and even lead to the growth of an organization.

    I hope ham radio can attract some youngsters but lets sensible up on the notion of targeting green folk to redeem 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 apposite 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 achieve on my most objective observation on this (good) question, I would pronounce 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 endure just TWO for HF access. But that would raise a terrible Hue and bellow from the very established 'oldsters' who would guard to the cease their "right" to hold unavoidable cheished Title, Rank, Privilege, etc. It was acerbic enough during the comment aspect on the 'Reconstruction' NPRM, and I can note it would be 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 strategy long ago established. I was not directly involved in that but watched it happen, heard utter the acerbic recriminatory comments and took no fragment on either side. The number of classes grew from that until the USA "led" other countries with the most classes. That isn't existent 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, endure HAD to be confidential with unavoidable services' regulations when toil 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 utter 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 nosy self-promotional, self-grandiosing attitudes.

    Case in point on Hobby activities. A pair of decades ago, model hobby folks lobbied for and got a specific band 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 state of the aeronautics art. It is basically for a HOBBY activity. So, they were able to convince the FCC to designate a band around 72 MHz just for model radio-control activities. The dilettante radio organizations secure utter caught up in their presumptuous and fairly spurious notion that dilettante radio is responsible for utter 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 cease 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 figure 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 secure enough subscribers). Facsimile? That was in consume commercially prior to WWII. "Fast-scan TV?" TV broadcasts by RCA were done commercially at thhe 1939 World's objective 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 cease of WWII. Really, the only mode/modulation that is 'new' is that which is new to individuals because they endure no previous experience in it or are uneducated 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 interpret what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a common Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I endure yet to secure a straight answer…or ANY retort for that matter."

    Good luck on that, Keith. :-) anticipate lots of misdirection into other areas if a reply does ensue.................KB1SF: "Could it be that (gasp!) there ARE none?"

    Oh, there ARE reasons. Extras want their own private playground in the spectrum, free from riff-raff. They mediate they are 'entitled' (enobled?) or something. :-)..................................KB1SF: "As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a valid dilettante Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an dilettante television transmitter."

    To bolt further, since there are NO - iterate NO - age barriers, a cute puny 6-year-old can LEGALLY operate a full-gallon transceiver and "accidentally" intuition interference to others or to other radio services. to some extent this lack-of-age AND responsibility got in the passage of Common Sense. Any parent who isn't a moron will KNOW that wee children endure NOT acquired enough learning and responsibility to act "correct" utter 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 retort that particular question endure absolutely NOTHING to Do with the learning and skills needed to safely and courteously exercise the uniquely exclusive privileges an Extra Class License grants."

    At this point, I elect to Do a cop-out. "I've got mine." I answered correctly for my test, so there, nyah, nyah. :-) [my license is suited for my all 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 considerable in determining the legal validity of their tests."

    I hear ya. But, the medium USA ham will simply shrug it off and endure the ARRL or VEC QPC "know what is best for ham radio." The medium 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 to some extent 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 be withheld from lower class licensees in their system would be 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 endure absolutely NOTHING directly to Do with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant."

    "In short, today's FCC is now caught between a legal "rock and a difficult place"."

    I can understand that progression. But, there was one puny crack in that: Privatization and its aftermath. In between the Notice of Restructuring coming and actual begainning in law, the FCC achieve utter 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 puny comment in forums, but it would set a slightly different tone in required learning of written tests........................KB1SF: "And, as I endure likewise said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a valid (spelled: "legal") intuition for a US Government agency to grant plenary privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another."

    Well, as Jimmy Miccolis liked to pronounce before "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." He likes his ego stroked often. :-)

    The Hue and bellow would be fierce for utter those extra egos out there. They've become addicted to Rank, Status, Privilege, and Perquisite they can get. While you endure some suited (apparently legal) reasons, those would be pushed aside by utter 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 select what you wrote at physiognomy 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 quiet confidential with that material...even though I endure sedate doubts about EVER doing ham radio in space. :-) :-) :-)

    Sorry, I won't accept just the on-line drill tests. A FORMAL test would endure your all ham 'career' riding on it. No kindly proctor with which to endure your first ham QSO. Let's compose it tough and achieve the test location in an unfamiliar place, a bit noisy, filled with strangers. bolt ahead, compose 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) inactive hams usually don't upgrade

    3) There is no deadline for upgrading; a ham can select as long as s/he wants

    4) FCC has been renewing utter 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 Do that, and witness 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 swirl around and they inaugurate 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. utter 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 Do these days is to simply witness around the play at the advancing age of the bulk of participants at various dilettante radio-related gatherings to note these very pellucid demographic trends."

    But are those gatherings a scientific sample? A ham who has a job, family, home, etc., may not be 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 endure accurate age data on utter US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a all is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will betray the trend continuing.

    "our bands are becoming ever more peaceful 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 roomy one.

    KB1SF: "how many others endure called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to endure that band very quickly near 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 be 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 passage you sever 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 be in a continuous block.

    Hamfests used to be a major source of new info and bargains. The internet, ebay, and the rising cost of attendance endure changed utter that.

    KB1SF: "the evil word 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 like 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago? Can you betray us existent data? I mediate not.

    Here's an observation: When I was in high 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 outfit was very common.

    KB1SF: "our vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" endure been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers"

    Dinosaurs? I bethink 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 endure the nerve to wonder why potential youthful newcomers to their hobby are now "voting with their feet" in ever increasing numbers!"

    I mediate the existent problem is that people green and worn don't even know dilettante radio exists.

    There's likewise the problem that many of those who Do endure a very distorted image of it.

    And the problems of antenna restrictions, time restrictions, space and money restrictions, etc.

    Just witness at how many articles, posts and such perquisite here on eham are devoted to hams in no-antennas situations trying to secure 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 common at the identical session without paying another VE fee. identical for Extra. So why don't utter hams testing at VE sessions try utter the exams they can? utter it takes is a few minutes' time.

    Why don't more hams bolt utter the passage to Extra?

    The retort is often that they perceive the test to be too difficult for them to pass.

    Of course for some folks, the perceived vicissitude 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 intuition of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or be subjected to discrimination by any such entity."

    So you're maxim 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 betray below), but likewise bolt WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines intimate should be 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 compose 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 be OK.

    Amateur radio isn't a job.

    KB1SF: "Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly retort 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 common learning of dilettante satellite operation is apposite 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 valid 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 be easy, you wouldn't be making these claims.

    Perceived vicissitude is what it's utter 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 perquisite - you want to expand the Technician question pool to involve many if not most of the questions now in the common and Extra pools.

    Using that logic, they could probably bolt through the common and Extra question pools and bolt many if not most of their questions to the Technician pool.

    For example, since Techs endure plenary privileges above 30 MHz, and can consume any authorized mode, they can select any and utter questions dealing with operation above 30 MHz and bolt them to the Tech question pool.

    And since Generals endure plenary power and plenary mode privileges below 30 MHz, they can bolt utter HF questions to the common pool.

    That will compose the Tech question pool enormous, the common pool will probably be larger, and the Extra pool will be very small. The perceived vicissitude of the Extra will then decrease, but the perceived vicissitude of the Tech will probably increase.

    Is that what you really want? Is that a suited 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 secure 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 sever to the chase.

    We currently endure a license system that will eventually become three license classes through attrition if no changes are made. Tech Plus will fade in a few months as the last Tech Pluses are renewed as Tech or expire. Novice and Advanced will select longer but will ultimately fade if nothing is done.

    What, *specifically*, would you endure FCC do?

    Move big numbers of common 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 utter the questions in one pool and endure just one class of license with a 120 question test?

    Bring back Morse Code testing as an option, scoring the results passage Canada does?

    Eliminate subbands-by-mode? Subbands-by-license class?

    Allow data modes in the 'phone subbands?

    Show us *exactly* how it should be. recount your model license system in detail, including how existing hams would be affected.

    Then let's note how the dilettante community reacts, starting perquisite 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 matter is excellent"

    Thanks for the benign words.

    WA4KCN: "On the matter of youngsters joining ham radio, it is excuse me rather dimwitted to believe this could occur in Great 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 endure to disagree, I mediate the existent issues are very different from what is usually discussed in these forums.

    Here's what I mediate is really going on:

    1) want of effectual publicity. How often Do you note dilettante Radio portrayed in the movies, on TV, etc.? Even more telling, how often Do you note 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 be interested endure a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either.

    A roomy fragment of effectual publicity is having a description that's effortless to bethink and which sums up the main points. That's why I like 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 mind to endure few hams, and the hams who Do 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 utter about.

    The antenna is the second-most considerable fragment of the station (besides the operator!) but more and more it's the most compromised. How many prospective and new hams endure simply walked away because of antenna restrictions?

    3) Perceived complexity and high cost of a station. witness at worn ham radio magazines and books, and you'll note article after article that seemed to leap off the page and pronounce "BUILD THIS RADIO!" There were lots of simple designs for receivers, transmitters, antennas and accessories that could secure 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 complex transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to endure the identical draw.

    I Do disagree with you this much about attracting green people: If they portray dilettante Radio as something done only by older people, they won't be attracted as much as if they portray it as being something for everyone. And if they specifically target an age group, they'll figure out we're doing it, and it will be just another ad to ignore.

    IOW, what they exigency to Do is not to target any particular age group, but to simply secure the word out.

    ---

    One of the things I clearly bethink 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 green people, but instead challenged them to meet the standards.

    This was and quiet is one of the Great things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for green people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you uncover them. Nor can they uncover what outfit 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 be 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 be faked. Yet it is those features which will attract many green people.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      A Data Point About green People   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "My hunch is that this could very well be because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" endure been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their fanatic insistence that such newcomers can never hope to be "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 Do 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* champion 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 note how the dilettante community reacts, starting perquisite 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 select in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to select the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

    When I witness at the horrific inaction by their FCC on these issues, I really endure to wonder whether they are simply waiting for utter of us to die and their Service to whither away so they won't endure to deal with us anymore. It is painfully obvious that, much like the CB Radio Service, they endure since become puny more than a "pimple on the rear cease of progress" in the august scheme of things.

    I likewise well realize that, just like it took a federal lawsuit filed by the ARRL to secure 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 profound enough pockets actually files a similar federal lawsuit against the FCC and/or initiates a Congressional research into the matter.

    This means that, ornery to your convoke to "see how the dilettante community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T be decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately be decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually create to be in legal compliance with the relaxation 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 nauseate for such blatantly discriminatory practices in the figure of sweeping civil rights legislation eventually trumped utter those "wants". Today, those changes endure since become an accepted fragment 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 renowned physicist, Max Planck once said, "An important… innovation rarely makes its passage by rapidly winning over and converting its opponents; it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does occur is that its opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is familiarized with the new notion 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 likewise now aging and dying in ever-increasing numbers.

    But, even so, their licensing system remains chockablock plenary of "unnecessary regulatory barriers" (to consume the FCC's own words when they dropped utter forms of Morse testing) to plenary access to their Service (an Extra Class license). By any measure, those clearly immoderate licensing requirements remain passage 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 all plethora of 1990s-era federal laws.

    So, as I note it, the only question now remaining is what, if anything, their FCC is going to Do about this issue…and when they are ultimately going to be forced into doing it.

    And while I certainly can't afford to bring such a lawsuit against the FCC myself, I can certain as hell pester my Congresspersons about it. Indeed, I (and a number of others) are already doing so. But only time will uncover if they will eventually be successful in that regard

    In the meantime, I'm going to leave you gents to your ongoing "kabuki dances" on the subject.

    For, I likewise well realize that utter 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 matter and discredit the messenger so as to avoid sedate 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 common or above,simply to listen to a much higher hullabaloo floor and achieve up with inconsiderate ops.I like vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to common or advanced to which I would NEVER consume the privledges? Contesting seems to be the primary activity on hf besides the occasional op. talking about his "bodily functions"! IF I wanted to hear that,I would endure bought a cb!I Do like the international sw bands for useful overseas word coverage. little unobtrusive antennas,Versatile in nature and efficient with low power are likewise a perk.So you see,just because they prefer to maintain tech. flat licenses doesn't weigh in they don't value the hobby.It simply means they are ecstatic where they are and note no intuition 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 select 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 maxim in any detail how the US dilettante license system should be.

    KB1SF: "this issue absolutely WON'T be decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately be decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually create to be in legal compliance with the relaxation 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 Do 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, utter anyone without a criminal record has to Do is to pass the required tests to secure a license. Those tests are objective (no judgement calls on the fragment of the VEs), public info (mp;A published for more than 25 years, available FREE for the download) and so basic that elementary school children endure passed utter of them. How they could be "discriminatory" to anyone really qualified to be a radio dilettante is not clear.

    KB1SF: "For, I likewise well realize that utter 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 matter and discredit the messenger so as to avoid sedate discussion on what has now become a VERY inconvenient truth."

    In other words, you decline to retort apposite questions, decline to give details, and decline to actually discuss the issue.

    OK, fine.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: green 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 discrepancy in percentages due to the lesser number of Technician class NOT in their grace period.

    Since ARRL does NOT betray past numbers, one has to dependence on Hamdata numbers of 2 years ago. Those achieve the Technician class at 310,286 out of 711,936 or 43.58 percent of individual licesees. The discrepancy 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 maxim "the FCC renews Technician Plus as Technician" with the implication that Technician class has so very puny actual growth. Considering that Technician-plus can either drop out entirely or "renew" into another class (with confiscate test component passing), your rationalization doesn't endure validity.

    Note: Constantly bringing up 'Restructuring' ordered in 1999 and effectual in 2000 doesn't endure much manner 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 utter 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 Do that, and witness 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, utter FCC records available to the public betray Technician and Technician-Plus as sunder license classes. Even the ARRL considers them sunder classes on their biased tabulations. What more Do 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 swirl around and they inaugurate 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. utter 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 be 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 enlarge 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 nascence tabulation would endure shown that this "growth" has picked up towards the cease of the three year period. I'm sorry you can't note that. [not that you saturate to observe, anyway...you appear stuck on the effectual year of Restructuring of a decade ago]....................N2EY: "You can't prove that scientifically because they don't endure accurate age data on utter US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a all is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will betray the trend continuing."

    Jimmy, hardly ANY of your conjectures you've presented here Do NOT endure any third-party proof. utter they note 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 endure some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I bethink 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 quiet damage 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 figure on the FCC website. It is quiet there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, suited luck, I'm not going to bother.

    Oh, and I quiet endure the copy of the ARRL epistle 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 endure made it a plenary attachment.

    What I was unaware of at the cease 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. puny Jimmy is quiet smarting and bringing up that one "age" matter TEN YEARS LATER. He should GROW UP!

    -----------------------

    On the "age" thing, to succeed Keith's arresting points in regard 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 be a legal control operator, utter alone, and literally PLAY with an dilettante radio without any plenary learning of RESPONSIBILITY of operation. CHILDREN Do not utter endure some intrinsic "responsibility" guidelines automatically...not even if they hold utter sorts of written test certificates from a federal agency. That responsibility must be erudite and UNDERSTOOD and it is the job of PARENTS to inaugurate 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 pronounce 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 rational thinking according to childish fanatics in ham radio. That is, to me, illogical idiocy.

    Len, AF6AY

      RE: green People and Ham Radio   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY claimed on 12 Dec 09:

    "1) want of effectual publicity. How often Do you note dilettante Radio portrayed in the movies, on TV, etc.? Even more telling, how often Do you note it portrayed accurately, and as something that's being done today, not decades ago?"

    On the night of 11 December 2009, the hit TV betray "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" had a scene where four CSI off-duty officers were stranded at a closed diner. Out of scope of any cell phones they tried to convoke in to LVPD using a "ham radio set" they create in a back play of the closed diner. It malfunctioned (with habitual 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 create 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 toil according to some long-time licensed radio amateurs. :-)

    Questions on the plot would be "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, busy playing with their ham radios that they don't devour some "other" recreation? Must be... :-).................N2EY: "If people don't know that dilettante Radio exists, they won't become hams. If people who might be interested endure a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either."

    So, Jimmy, what endure YOU done? You've been a radio ham for four decades. You must endure 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 region a few decades after incorporation. Seems there was a all LOT MORE interest in commercial, government, military radio back in the 'twenties.' But I digress into areas where you endure no interest, only in ham radio.

    The ARRL is "supposed" to be "our national representative." They pronounce that every haphazard they can. But ARE they? I don't mediate so...by the membership numbers, by their want of effectual leadership in forming legislation "for" dilettante radio, by their want OF effectual PUBLICITY to the common public. Oh, they trumpet that the ARRL has "lots of material" but to some extent utter those things secure LOST on the passage to the Mass Media outlets.

    My wife and I live in a big urban region 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 maxim goes. My wife is incurious to dilettante radio but she would notice if there are any word items or publicity about that because I am a licensed dilettante radio operator. wonder of wonders in this 'modern age,' they actually discuss things freely, even during and after going together in high school (both Class of 1951). THEY endure seen more word 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 endure made available 'to the public?' Does the ARRL anticipate that 'the public' utter 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 utter genres) and some of the channels are in exotic languages. Perhaps those ARRL videos are translated into one of those channels and they can't 'read' them? Must be it, yeah...:-)...............N2EY: "A roomy fragment of effectual publicity is having a description that's effortless to bethink and which sums up the main points."

    Jimmy, despite your discrete claims on Marketing Expertise, the FIRST THING and MOST considerable THING is TO be VISIBLE, TO be AUDIBLE. It does no suited whatsoever to be INVISIBLE and then natter and gromish about "how suited they are and what they have" in ARRL epistle after ARRL Letter. utter those CLAIMS endure long since dropped into the random hullabaloo floor with utter 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 mind to endure few hams, and the hams who Do 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 utter 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 endure 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 endure a TWO HUNDRED FOOT TOWER at my residence? NO. Not because my wife wouldn't like it, *I* wouldn't like it. It is their RESIDENCE. Oh, and I endure 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 note the dismal green fiberglass-covered perpendicular in the back yard.

    I endure a suited 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 high cost of a station."

    Oh, oh, here they bolt with implied socialism again. So, THEY can't endure something expensive because YOU don't endure anything expensive?!? Sorry, Jimmie, I'm not going to spend the relaxation of my life diving in dumpsters to build frankenboxes a la pre-1970 style so that I can be some benign of "real ham.".................N2EY: "Look at worn ham radio magazines and books, and you'll note article after article that seemed to leap off the page and pronounce "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 secure 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, utter I've said is that "morse-code-centricsm" is restrictive in the physiognomy 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 be more gracious on accepting losing status. That's a nice boy....................N2EY: ",,. Showing a complex transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to endure the identical draw."

    No? You better inform the auto makers of that. green people with new driver's licenses are always looking at EXPEN$IVE cars, mentally wanting one. A few buy them and Do 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 endure WORKED utter THEIR LIVES endure managed to accumulate some monies to actually (gasp!) BUY CASH a lot of things they couldn't secure when younger. You RESENT that. TS. Either toil to secure more money but don't try that "everyone-equal-socialsm" rationale again. It just shows your jealousy.................N2EY: "This was and quiet is one of the Great things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for green people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you uncover them. Nor can they uncover what outfit 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 be in middle school!"

    To achieve it in other words, you can be INVISIBLE using "CW." like 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 Do the transgender thing with "CW." Who is going to know? :-)

    Jimmie, quit trying to resuscitate this morse code test controversy AGAIN. The USA dilettante radio regulations ELIMINATED code testing three years ago. Accept it in some semblance of suited grace, or revert to being angry, irritated, resentful, jealous of those who endure money, disappointed about losing one of your cherished Brag Tape things. Or, you can continue with your (apparent) mid-life head and become a acerbic worn man who will require the undertaker to crowbar out the morse key from cold, lifeless fingers.

    There IS an alternative: Invent a TIME MACHINE, bolt back to that existent 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 note how the dilettante community reacts, starting perquisite here on e-ham"."

    Keith, in the decade I've encountered puny Jimmy in dilettante radio forums, I've never renowned him to actually discuss some valid 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 note that this "amateur community" is FAR BIGGER and so numerous that only a tiny, tiny fraction can felicitous into e-ham. That's not a evil designate against e-ham, that is realistic since about 700,000 licensees just couldn't felicitous into this website, let solitary a single 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 passage I would pronounce he is desiring to be 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) evade for any ARRL position, yet he ORATES as if he is an Evangelist of that Olde-Tyme Religion. He will Never forgive the slightest imaginary bruise to his ego yet will, at the drop of a participle, insult what he considers "lesser beings." sedate mental dichotomy at toil 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 mediate would be more confiscate is to toil up a sunder ARTICLE on that subject. I don't mediate the e-ham overseers would ratify it but I'm an optimist most of the time. On further reflection, I mediate it would be 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 puny study was done to meet my own curiosity on USA dilettante radio changes, to note if there was any perceptible change. I didn't note 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 utter 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 be very much of a change to entice newcomers.

    Looking back on my political efforts to attempt influencing a federal agency into changing unavoidable regulations, I began in earnest too late, yet kept at it...without that "badge of courage" that some deem a mighty dilettante radio license. :-) I had been too long the professional in radio-electronics, busy pushing the performance envelope here and there, and thus considered a "beginner," a "newby," and "too stupid/ignorant" to pass any three test component dilettante radio test. Gotta fancy some of those comments. :-) I had Great amusement at getting the reaction of utter those mighty Extrss who thought I was just a dumb nobody and "could never Do 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 deem them - objectively - to endure merit. I tossed in an worn matter of mine as a workable addition...but only because puny Jimmy brought it up lately (a benign of 10th "anniversary?" :-). Seriously, I've been involved in trying to change a little set of USA dilettante regulations for a decade now, achieved what I set out to do, then decided to secure 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 quiet an idealist, quiet open for a suited intuition to fight, but life is limited and I would like to devour more of it. Getting into local politics here there's a lot to Do there, too, issues that directly palpate us in this region. Otherwise, I'd link you as a volunteer for another suited Cause...................KB1SF: "This means that, ornery to your convoke to "see how the dilettante community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T be decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately be decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually create to be in legal compliance with the relaxation 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 mediate he undertands the terrible expense of waging any big legal war on an established government agency. The ARRL can't back because they are quiet entrenched in the USA dilettante radio of yesteryear and they've already spent a bundle on this BPL thing. Of course they NEEDED to Do that in order to "protect" their core membership, a probable minority within a provable minority membership organization. workable aid must near from Congress forcing the issue...but they must Do so without the doubt (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 be the more stylized than Kabuki. Noh players wear plenary physiognomy 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 be asked if they would accept CHANGE, they would chorus, "NOh, NOh, NOh!!!" :-) :-) :-)

    Bad word-play aside, Keith, you and your family endure a suited Holiday time!

    73, Len AF6AY

      Why Upgrade?   by N2EY on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N9ZAS writes: "I like vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to common or advanced to which I would NEVER consume the privledges?"

    The only reasons I can imagine are:

    1) To be a VE2) To secure a 1x2 or 2x1 callsign

    I bet there are a lot of folks who feel the identical way.

    Also, if someday you to some extent develop an interest in the bands below 50 MHz, the license to Do so will quiet be there, requiring only that you select the tests for it.

    N9ZAS: "Contesting seems to be 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 endure to consume 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 weigh in they don't value the hobby.It simply means they are ecstatic where they are and note no intuition for a useless upgrade to a useless license!"

    I would pronounce "unused" rather than "useless" but the notion is basically the same. Why secure 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... utter the talk and banter of lic. classes.I got into dilettante radio for ECOM reasons at first. then a friend of mine invited me to their local field 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 quiet consume and toil cw but since i didnt endure to select that portion of the test does that compose me any less than any of you who did select it.Instead of berating the ham community for not advancing to higher classes, secure them involved and interested. If it wasnt for my friend i quiet would not endure advanced.

    Its not that most of the Tech endure no interst in going higher, they endure 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 be made here, or simply self-grandizing pontification for the mere delight of seeing one's cognomen "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 be the fertilizer that they were utter 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 secure into dilettante radio thinking it would be a loser. But, I'm fragment of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dilettante radio would endure changed after my dilettante license was granted. I note puny change, therefore the study to note if a intuition could be determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Seeing change occur requires that one actually secure 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 likewise 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: green 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 endure some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I bethink 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 quiet damage 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 figure on the FCC website. It is quiet there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, suited luck, I'm not going to bother.

    I note you're quiet 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 puny more complicated than that - but not much more.

    It utter 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. pair 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 endure been a few 'challenges' on "old data" of dilettante radio statistics. For those I tender the following correspondence copy that dates back to PRE-Internet days. Note that the Internet did not bolt public until 1991, therefore it was saved by someone unidentified from one of the commercial services (such as Compuserve). I Do 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 utter formatting is TEXT using common fixed fonts such as 'Courier.'

    Proportional spacing fonts had yet to be 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 figure such as grouping by ZIP coding and available (generally) only on a weekly basis. Later improvements in Information Technology resulted in the combined single big dilettante radio license database currently in-use that requires high-speed Internet connectivity to download within an 8-hour period. Note likewise 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 utter In This Together?" [ www.eham.net/articles/21114 ] I did not consume utter 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 create it last year. I compose no claims as to accuracy or inaccuracy of this. I mediate the author, Richard Hoffbeck, tried his best to be accurate and dispassionate about the results.

    ====[ consume 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 - utter 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 horde (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 likewise 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 create 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 era 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 effect that since the number of hams has been growingat a faster rate than the population as a all there is no problem. That typeof analysis is faulty in assuming that society as a all has remained at thesame flat of technology. I mediate that ham radio has definitely declined inimportance due to technological advances across the board.

    rick, N0LOX

    ======[ cease 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 utter 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 achieve 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 roomy application 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: surge of cell sites and miniaturization of handsets to compose 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 difficult disks and 'floppy' little mass-storage systems) in the 1980s changed to 2600 MHz clock rates with 100 MHz medium RAM access times and internal or external 2 TB difficult disk units costing less than $200 new. Visual displays went to flat-screen LCD or plasma technology, consummate linearity, displacing the bulky CRT "monitor." The Universal Serial Bus allowed utter new peripherals to be within the new "plug-and-play" standards. The Personal Data aide 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 bolt into the "games" category suffice to pronounce 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 endure 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 crash 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 utter 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 toil out. I Do 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 route 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 endure utter heard of what happened on Valentine's Day in Chicago.

    Valentine's day 1993 was the day that was the nascence of the cease for ham radio, as I and many hams knew it. I bethink 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 likewise shown.

    In some cases the exact date of the numbers is not given in the source. Also, it is not pellucid whether the numbers involve licenses that are expired but in the grace period, or only current unexpired licenses.

    It's considerable to know the history surrounding the license rules if one wants to intelligently resolve the data. Failure to select 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 like utter 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 sunder class of license equivalent to a General-by-mail until the mid-1970s. It was phased out by renewal of utter 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 utter 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 routine 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 sunder the two groups, with code-tested Technicians be reclassified as Technician Pluses upon renewal.

    In April 2000, FCC reversed direction and began reclassifying utter Technician Pluses as Technicians upon renewal. No new Technician Pluses were issued after the change.

    The cease result is that since 1991 the Technician class has consisted of a composite of code-tested and noncodetested amateurs. Since 2007 they endure utter had the identical privileges. However it is an oversight 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 high points.

    Now for some numbers:

    ---

    Year cease 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 cease 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. suited Job.

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM writes:

    "Good research. Well written. suited Job."

    TNX, but it wasn't much, really.

    What would be really frigid IMHO would be to secure the numbers from utter of the various Callbooks down through the years and achieve them on a website. Complete with graphs to betray 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. suited research. Well written. suited Job."

    In reality, his numbers endure NO manner on the three years following the elimination of morse code testing in USA dilettante radio license examinations. That three year era was stated as such in the title of this article. He could just as well endure cribbed statistics nascence with the creation of the FCC in 1934 and be 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 utter to consume International Morse Code on USA dilettante radio bands. There endure 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 band nearly a decade ago. Legally any USA radio dilettante can operate "CW" in the upper fragment of 80m band. It is IN the USA (FCC) regulations.

    The nosy fragment of these "CW Bigotry" displays by a few long-timers overlooks the legal capacity and OPTION for *ANY* USA radio dilettante licensee to consume 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 consume the mode of code, any class! [amazing, but true]

    A few barracks lawyers succeed the ARRL criterion in "sinning by omission." For example, a constant 'rebuke' is "Since 2000 Technician-Plus endure been renewed as Technician." N2EY uses that often, almost always after I endure 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. utter 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 be 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 be shown NOW.

    While PAST history may be "interesting" to SOME, let's physiognomy 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 unavoidable regulations (forever and ever)" in the USA amaetur radio service is invalid, facetious, and quite a bit ludicrous. The insistance of some that unavoidable regulations be KEPT because those 'somebodies' met regulations of LONG AGO is merely self-serving and otiose on their part. They mediate 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 suited for the USA dilettante radio service to MAINTAIN and NOURISH the profound divide in the service created by these long-timers who favor unavoidable modes and modulations. That is the antithesis of "keeping up the state 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 utter class examinations needing code testing. That came after a long, protracted comment era (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, utter aimed at trying to repeal Restructuring or to change it EVEN MORE, most regressing to the state of older regulations. Those might endure 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 interpret their decisions clearly in every Memorandum Report and Order. That a particular determination "goes against" some clique is only unlucky for them. That clique LOST and does not endure grace or manners to accept such loss.

    What appears to be the most "damaging" to the collective prides of long-timers was NPRM 05-235 released on 19 July 2005. Its main item was the elimination of utter 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 effectual date to be 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 endure 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 weigh in it defines these individuals as being superior to ordinary folk for eternity. In NO passage is their opinion to some extent "better" than ordinary folk, nor is it imprimateur of their being some benign of "boss" who can establish "what is suited for all." Stubbornly, so many mediate that some or utter of those syndromes Do not apply to their own selfish illness. Thus the profound divide is maintained in USA dilettante radio, legal hobbyists on one-hand, the vocal bigots who want desperately to CONTROL dilettante radio in their own image on the other side. They cannot endure it both ways.=========================There IS some hope for the code cliques and those who claim 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 be disseminated for public commentary, depending on the opinion 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 return of code testing. Those two ('Ward' and 'Gordon') were eventually dismissed.

    The fact that a Petition is published does NOT weigh in it is universally liked/worshipped/damned. It is merely up in the public eye, a public that does NOT partake your divine wisdom nor guru-guidance. One has to be mentally stout to achieve up a Peition and then physiognomy the consequences of public opinion.==========================Cliques can forget the Petition notion and just sit in forums and newsgroups and bitch and moan for ever, damning newcomers via utter 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 mark of ceasing. The pollyanish phrasing "amateur brotherhood" is a hypocritical nonsense statement. It is a vaporous myth.==========================Fair warning: Code cliques will eventually be 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 utter 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 posit those newcomers are utter 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 be really frigid IMHO would be to secure the numbers from utter of the various Callbooks down through the years and achieve them on a website. Complete with graphs to betray 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 endure lots of worn Callbooks.

    For information back to about 1996, the AH0A website has plenty. Maybe AH0A would deem adding historic data?

    --

    There endure 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. utter 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 be known and understood to compose rational conclusions about the growth as well. For example, the number of Novice licenses was very little 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 fragment 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 puny 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 effect is vanity calls. Normally, an dilettante license can only be renewed in the last 90 days before expiration, or in the two-year grace era after expiration. (FCC defines "expiration" as the cease of the 10 year license term, not the final removal from the database after the grace era ends).

    But a vanity convoke can be 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 twist the all how-long-to-expiration picture.

    Since April 15, 2000, the Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses endure been closed to new issues. This is the second time this has happened to the Advanced; the first time was at the cease of 1952. And just like 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 be arresting to note how long it takes for the last Novice and Advanced class licenses to bolt away, either from upgrade or cancellation. Some Advanceds endure vowed never to upgrade to Extra, so it may be a very long time.

    The fastest decline of utter 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 passage that is different from utter 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 common back in the 1970s when the Conditional was phased out.

    IOW, if you witness at the number of Technicians without reference to the rules changes, it can (erroneously) loom 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 witness 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 considerable 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 passage 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 endure 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. utter 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 near to an end.

    The reserve cited several reasons for the growth:

    o term of the license extended to 3 yearso sunder license required for portable worko enlarge in leisure time owing to unemploymento decline in cost of outfit 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 region endure no electronics background or interest. Most of the new guys are community emergency response ARRL boyscouts.

    These numbers weigh in puny to me. They are far more considerable to the ARRL's membership department and for the commercial ham manufactures, etc.

    What is the medium age of hams today? And what is their interest in ham radio?

    Both of these questions you can't uncover by parsing a FCC database.... Both are likewise 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: arresting numbers!

    Couple more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were utter by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not be 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 sunder and discrete radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was likewise 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 effect in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could defer without modification. absolute 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 utter countries that issued dilettante licenses.

    The US ham bands were sever 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 utter back then.

    You'd mediate that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would endure a achieve a existent 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 little study of the changes in USA dilettante radio classes since the elimination of the code test from utter 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 pronounce they SHOULD!" :-).................NI0C: "Are they assisting others in some passage 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 saturate some of us with a violation of "Article 31" of the UCAJ and endure 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 pronounce 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 compose a LOG to betray authorities except for Spread Spectrum. Not even to the Raddio Kops!

    Feel free to achieve on your shiny Raddio Kop shield and endure the Raddio Poe-lice hustle me down to the lock-up (or is it 'lock-out'?). I am certain one of the very dilettante Poe-lice will snarl "You'll never QSO in this town again!!!" :-)

    Go ahead, compose 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? Do you endure some bipolar disorder that compels you to jump into forums and snarl at utter you don't like? That is NO passage to "help" the "cause" of USA dilettante radio, is it?=================Well, now, you just bolt back to 160m "CW" and endure ever so much fun. Nobody is stopping you. Odd it is that you jump in here disparage others writing about regulations in here and then convoke it "garbage."

    Gosh, it must be 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 utter be respectful of utter you old-timers busy going back to the non-future past in amateurism...because YOU pronounce 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 certain 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 all 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 near to an end."

    By July 2, 2003, the growth spurt in MODERN USA dilettante radio licensees, utter classes totalled, had near to an end. That peak has not even been caught up with by 16 Dec 09 (6 1/2 years later) and is quiet 9,962 modest 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 expertise of utter electronics is so Great by now that a comparison would be ludicrous. I can cite several sources for the simple intuition 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 quiet in their childhood in 1928 and costly in little quantities. The term "semiconductor" wasn't in the electronics lexicon. The only semiconductor-like diodes were the Galena crystal detector (a figure 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 endure been Neverland for radio amateurs due to its "strange, complex requirements."

    Compare that to 2008. Transistors were then a age 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 single IC and at very low DC power demand. AM voice can be emitted using the very identical RF power amplifier used for "CW" or Data modes; it is the criterion 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 band allocations below the bottom of the AM BC band yet the Europeans endure had such for years. dilettante band allocations endure long since been approved on up to the 300 GHz international allocation limit and ready-built VHF-UHF transceivers are on the market to bolt above the 70cm band. Data modes can easily bolt as high as USA dilettante allocations allow thanks to modern solid-state circuitry and devices. There are a (few) VNAs or Vector Network Analyzer that defer very suited complex 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 Do 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 era for renewal. NO ONE granted a new license in the last 9 years requires ANY testing in their all life as long as they compose mail or e-mail renewals within the regulated time.

    "o sunder license required for portable work"

    No such thing needed now, but then that regulation would endure 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 enlarge in leisure time owing to unemployment"

    The Great 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 pronounce it was "LEISURE TIME" from the solace of being well-fed NOW.

    "o decline in cost of outfit 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 bethink it, there were just plain garbage dumps or burning pits in northern Illinois back then. :-)

    Had you mentioned 'radio' to anyone in the public THEN they would endure thought of the then-new home entertainment medium of BROADCASTING. Few in the public knew about dilettante radio THEN just as few in the common public know about dilettante radio NOW. There are lots of copies of worn radio outfit 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 recount those 1928 receivers insofar as "features," stripping away the marketing laguage phrases? Were they even comparable? I don't mediate so, but then, despite being born in that era, I endure no fancy 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 endure a listening hobby requires stations there to listen to. In the 1928-1934 era AM broadcasting on MF had expanded to select on a semblance of a age 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 common public) would not really become big until AFTER 1945 with most of the hostilites in Europe and Asia much reduced. Note: It will select considerable historical data searching to find ANY era of time when hostilities endure 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 era may be "interesting" to some but so few here endure 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 compose 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 mediate you endure a very suited point

    I can't Do 160 but I can Do 80 CW.

    Maybe I'll note you there.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dilettante Radio License Numbers   by WA4KCN on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE: arresting numbers!

    - pair more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were utter by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not be 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 sunder and discrete radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was likewise 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 effect in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could defer without modification. absolute 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 utter countries that issued dilettante licenses.

    The US ham bands were sever 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 utter back then.

    You'd mediate that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would endure a achieve a existent damper on growth, but the antithetical happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim endure you considered writing a reserve on the history of dilettante radio picking up where 200 Meters And Down left off. I mediate 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 achieve utter my eggs in the Top band basket in order to endure a better antenna that will wield more power.

    Top band is experiencing some periods of outstanding propagation this year, and I'm having a suited 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 endure a few hours of daylight available for a fracture from DX'ing top band 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 compose 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 band is very interesting,will be tuning up there a puny 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 witness at it this way.If I can find someone to ragchew with, I'm happy.There are people who just secure 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 be and I don't own anelectron microscope to note the molecular sized componentsused today. I Do like reading a lot of the older QSTmagazines and seeing the different projects that wereconsidered state of the expertise at the time.Ham radio isn't only what you compose of it for yourself,it's what you give back to the hobby by passage 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 endure 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 suited band, lots of sunspots, and a suited antenna and radio to tune them by.......And don't forget the red 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 endure only one Top band QSO in my log, but it was quite memorable!

    Thanks for the benign words. You may find the licensing history referred to above to be of interest.

    ---

    KD7YVV: field Day is a favorite of mine; been doing FD since 1967.

    I mediate the phrase "ham radio is what you compose of it for yourself" includes what you give back. IOW the person who gives back suited stuff will find they secure more out of ham radio.

    "Give me a suited band, lots of sunspots, and a suited antenna and radio to tune them by......."

    I *like* that!

    "And don't forget the red chocolate for those coldwinter nights!"

    Earl Grey tea for me...

    73 & TNX utter 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 fragment 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 be create at:

    www.qsl.net/ecara/wayback/main.html

    That is the linking page for utter 35 parts nascence 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 endure likewise been reprinted in the Marin ARC newsletter out of San Rafael, CA. Some of those "Wayback" columns' material has likewise been create on audio and Twitter sites. Bill Continelli retired from the IRS after 30 years in 2009 and formed his own Tax commerce in upper New York state and quiet contributes material to several amateur-interest websites.

    There is a Great deal of HISTORY on the matter of radio, utter radio services, available on the Internet and in print. Rewriting of past material is just rewriting. It is better to compose 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 witness 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 utter 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 outfit changes, Sputnik, incentive licensing, cb, Vietnam, the 1960s counterculture and much more.

    Maybe someday. Thanks for the benign words.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Back to the Future fragment 314159....   by K6LHA on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Those who did not like how present history turned out wanted to Change The Subject!

    Make no mistake about it, the past dozen years endure 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 utter 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 passage it resembled a highly-amplified horror and furious that surfaced in 1958 when the FCC "took away the 11m HAM band that was 'rightfully' THEIRS" and "gave it away" to ordinary citizens to consume as Class C and D Citizens Band. utter that furious and resentment quiet lives since "CB" is quiet considered a "hateful" thing by so many amateurs and its users are quiet almost evil incarnate. :-)

    Conditioned Bigotry of the hatred against CB quiet 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 difficult to eradicate. It is an emotional state profound inside minds, used as a personal refuge, a surcease of personal frustration by taking it utter out on some target. Those targets "are not like US!" bellow the bigots (the only ones who know the "truth"). :-)

    One passage to alleviate some individual frustrations are to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Yes. Retreat to the PAST. There is SAFETY there because utter 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 consummate safety, endure endless arguments over puny 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 witness to the future. <shrug> :-)

    My puny 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 like the outcome since those that applied for licenses were "not like Them, did not Do as They had to do." The crowd-pleasing types, trying to guage which passage to go, generally sided with the uber-conservatives. In the last dozen years the sky literally fell on them yet the relaxation of us were unscathed. Only a few respondents expressed independent opinions; those seemed to mediate for themselves, unaffected by any exigency to bolt with conservative group-think. If anyone dared venture into opinions on the immediate future, it was not apparent.

    If anyone quiet thinks that PAST decisions in USA dilettante radio are "prologue" then it is a grievous mistake, a wrong definition. Since just 75 years ago and the creation of the FCC, USA dilettante radio regulations endure been constantly EVOLVING, CHANGING...just as they endure with every other radio service. Is history "important?" Or is it just a record of what went on before NOW?

    WE are vital in the PRESENT. Most of us endure 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. like it or not, changes were made. Did any of these changes palpate any long-timer or uber-conservative operating privileges? Nary a one, hardly any impact at all. Then WHY utter the denunciatory labels and epithets thrown out against change? Sorry, no reasonable person can accept individual's personal feelings about changes that apply to utter 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 like to find out about long-past events in radio. It IS arresting to many, but it is not a model for the future they are in NOW. Just don't fire 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 fragment 314159....   by KB6QXM on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll bet he believes that the United States should endure 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 near out because of the politically rectify FCC and greedy ARRL will be a no-test license. That will be the first step. They will sit back and note how that goes over and then they will liquidate utter testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they Do 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 near out because of the politically rectify FCC and greedy ARRL will be 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 witness 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 utter over again in front of an FCC examiner before being allowed to even try the Class A.

    All US hams had access to utter 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, common 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 endure utter sorts of evil habits, but who mostly were just suited 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 utter US amateurs except Novices and Technicians, so there was no intuition to bolt 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 Do it right.

    And yet over time the vast majority of those Novice newcomers erudite the perquisite ways and went on to Do Great things in dilettante Radio. Their numbers caused US dilettante radio to grow utter 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 mediate anything, at least for a while. There are no proposals to change the license structure in front of the FCC now, nor endure there been for a while.

    If you select a suited difficult witness at the license question pools from the standpoint of someone who has a background in electronics, they witness 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 witness at them from the standpoint of someone who *doesn't* endure a background in electronics, they witness a lot different! Lots of new stuff there for the non-technical person.

    The really roomy discrepancy is that, in the evil worn days, they didn't endure access to the actual mp;A. Which is a change in test method, not material. But bethink *why* that change took place: FCC wanted to redeem money by not doing the tests themselves any more.

    Look at utter the FCc rules changes we've seen in the past 30-odd years and deem whether they cost FCC money or saved money and you'll note the point.

    I don't note a no-test license as a possibility. First off, it violates the ITU-R treaty. Second, and more important, the evil experience of cb is more than enough intuition not to Do it.

    The one thing anyone who is concerned about the current testing can Do is to write more questions for the pools and route them to the QPC. The pools could then grow to the point that it would be much easier to learn the material than to word-associate and memorize one's passage 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 like this one, answering newcomer questions and writing articles.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Novice 1967Technician/Advanced 1968Extra 1970

      RE: Back to the Future fragment 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 bet he believes that the United States should endure open borders also! How about Socialism also? One world government? utter 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 endure tested in? Yours? :-)..................KB6QXN: "Mark my word, the next incentive licensing that will near out because of the politically rectify FCC and greedy ARRL will be a no-test license. That will be the first step. They will sit back and note how that goes over and then they will liquidate utter testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they Do not want to exclude anyone."

    Tsk, tsk, you are irate again. toil quiet going evil for you in Silicon Gulch? My sympathies...

    A quick witness at the Federal Register doesn't betray ANY mark of what you pronounce is "true." No new "incentive licensing plan." Not even from the mighty folks at Newington. NO mark of "eliminating utter 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 nascence 75 years ago the FCC has an systematic and legal process to which anyone can Petition for new regulations, comment and Reply to Comments on any docket up for discussion...or pronounce anything it wants. Those can be submitted and recognized from ANY citizen, with or without some federal license in that particular radio service! [really fabulous when one thinks of it] Yes, anyone can post a comment or Reply to Comments about an dilettante radio docket without any dilettante callsign whatsoever! [wow, isn't that "left-leaning," though!] Not only that, utter those who submit documents endure their names (and callsigns if applicable) listed in decision-making Memorandum Reports and Orders! I root that sort of democratic-process government and served my country in the military to back that up. In case you never served, utter who enter the military achieve their LIFE on the line when they select that oath. Did YOU achieve your life on the line for your ham license?

    The ARRL just doesn't endure 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 like 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 basis 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. utter 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 note and download utter the questions and answers at www.ncvec.org for nothing. The NCVEC Question Pool Committee MUST be 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 note that the NCVEC QPC had MORE than the required 10 questions (for random selection by VE groups) for each required question. The medium for utter 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" saturate would apply ONLY if an applicant was eidetic (one who has a "photographic memory"). NOT knowing ahead of time which questions would loom 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 retort MIGHT loom right.

    I might endure agreed that the number of illustrations MIGHT endure 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 grant that I endure some experience in 'radio' (a subset of electronics) that isn't common to many dilettante license applicants. Was it "hard" for me? No. Would it be "hard" for someone just off the street? Yes. But...the medium license applicant ALREADY knows SOMETHING about the subject. suited grief there endure been utter sorts of "Handbooks" (and over-priced "test guides") published by the ARRL solitary for a half century.

    Now they secure to the crux of the matter, the Nobel-laureate International Morse Code test! I didn't endure to select one. In fact, the ARRL-VEC team didn't endure any code sound reproducing outfit 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 quiet available at the FCC, either in their Reading play or on-line! [another fabulous but truemoment!] How about that? A democratic-process time for ANYONE to compose their case on NPRM 05-143 and then endure each and every Reply and Reply to Comments made available for the PUBLIC to see! Is that "left-leaning?" Or is it just darn suited democracy at work? I'll bolt with the latter.

    You endure to bethink that USA dilettante radio has NEVER been considered "professional" nor is it in any passage "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 be operated/tended/maintained sending out an medium of more than 220 thousand messages a MONTH for the Far East Command Hq. not one of those messages required any sort of morse code skill to send; they were utter teleprinter, connecting the Command with utter 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 consume 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 be an dilettante ond HAD to pass a morse test...all the passage to early 2006. It was conjectural to be "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 quiet adamant about keeping the morse test. Why?

    Mostly, I mediate it was because of an attitude of "I had to select a test in it and utter who succeed better select one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as plain 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 astonish me one bit if your local John Bitch Society demands return 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, bolt back further, when hams were HAMS! Not a single transistor or IC around then to pitch long-timers, nossir, nothing complicated about early radio! bolt for that crystal detector and spark transmitter DXCC! Pioneer radio utter over again, betray us how it's done, betray 'em who is boss!

    Oh, and ecstatic Holidays! :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future fragment 314159....   by NI0C on December 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "But, in 1999 the long-timer stalwart morsemen were quiet adamant about keeping the morse test. Why?

    Mostly, I mediate it was because of an attitude of "I had to select a test in it and utter who succeed better select one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as plain 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 intuition (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" mediate it was "selfish as well as plain dumb" to remove that requirement.

    We, the "stalwart morsemen" are quiet 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 talk for ourselves, thank you, so don't bolt putting words in their mouths. Over and over again, you endure used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and rip him down again.

    You're a verbose person, Len. You appear to endure a lot of radio learning and opinions about ham radio. I may endure easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever maxim where you hang out-- what's your favorite dilettante band to listen to; endure you ever made a QSO; what kinds of outfit and antennas Do you like to try out; endure you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with dilettante radio applications, etc.

    As you well know (and like to point out) there's no requirement, legal or otherwise, that you Do any of these things. I bet, though, I'm not the only one who wonders once in a while-- why Do you endure 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 near across.

    BTW, there used to be a requirement that one needed to log a unavoidable number of hours of on the air activity in order to renew one's license. I mediate it was a sensible requirement, even though it's one (small) intuition there was a 13 year gap in my dilettante radio activity.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: Back to the Future fragment 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 quiet adamant about keeping the morse test. Why? Mostly, I mediate it was because of an attitude of "I had to select a test in it and utter who succeed better select one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as plain 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 intuition (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" mediate it was "selfish as well as plain dumb" to remove that requirement."

    Well, achieve 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 common 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 endure 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 band except the low cease of 6 and 2 meters? Hmmm?..............NI0C: "We, the "stalwart morsemen" are quiet 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 quiet be used just as it is permitted everywhere on every ham band on up to 300 GHz. The "awful, fateful, end-of-the-world (aa many know it)" determination to drop utter code testing requirements was in regards to getting IN dilettante radio. Getting IN, not for immediately dropping in to be a "qualified" operator as is some commercial practice.Now you bolt perquisite ahead and devour your morse mode utter 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, utter saved on a CD), that passion is NOT mutual...............NI0C: "We'll talk for ourselves, thank you, so don't bolt putting words in their mouths."

    Oh, wow. Yeah. Thanks for the ORDERS, but I will mediate FOR MYSELF and achieve my OWN conclusions...............NI0C: "Over and over again, you endure used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and rip him down again."

    Over and over again, you and others endure "used bandwidth" to build up your own strawmen and rip down those who would talk against them. Once in a while I would near along with an obsolete Zippo and set fire to them. <shrug> Makes a nice night-time scene with utter those olde-tyme shibboleth strawmen burning merrily...............NI0C: "You're a verbose person, Len. You appear to endure a lot of radio learning and opinions about ham radio."

    I endure a "lot" of learning AND opinions about LOTS of things. I was not watchful 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 intuition than to be the "leaders/managers" because THEY wanted to it (i.e., ego-driven). I am an independent thinker and try to be objective about many things. That is resented by many longing for a group to belong to, to secure guidance in what to Do and what to "enjoy." That is unlucky to those many. I Do not feel obligated in any passage 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 endure easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever maxim where you hang out-- what's your favorite dilettante band to listen to; endure you ever made a QSO; what kinds of outfit and antennas Do you like to try out; endure 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 endure been asked of me before...usually by those who are pile up some dossier to consume 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 altenative 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 irrelevant to the matter and you know it. But, Inspector Clue-no, I endure explained utter that BEFORE and I'm not going into such IRRELEVANCY here AGAIN.

    OH, and I endure made QSOs on ham bands. I've likewise made radio contacts on seven OTHER radio services, six of which Do NOT accept an dilettante radio license as a "qualification" for operation. <shrug>

    WHY Do 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 Do you endure a license?"

    BECAUSE I COULD. witness at your own wording and alleged inquisitiveness, nee snarly interrogation. If you are going to secure utter huffy and pretension "insult" from my answer, witness 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 near 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 recount the WHY from my point of view but there will be many who WILL achieve "words in my mouth" in denigrating utter that I say. That is EXPECTED and I KNOW the ilk of yahoos that are bound to Do it...because they endure already done that. What is more apposite is TAKING THE TEST(S).

    Not wanting to sound like a Motivational Speaker, I'll just recount a successful routine to select 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. secure to know the subject, secure to know the test method, secure to know the reaquirements, secure to know the test site environment. You CAN Do it.

    2. PURPOSE. be single-minded about the test, let it be the focus of your efforts. You ARE going to pass it.

    3. CONCENTRATE. No one else is going to back you, it is utter your own doing. You WILL pass it.

    4. CONFIDENCE. endure it in yourself. Ignore the doomsayers and pompous jocks and insulters. You set out to Do it and you WILL SUCCEED.

    5. Do IT. Carefully. select your time. Watch out for distractors in multiple-choice answers. Ignore the test site environment and distractions from other test takers. Do 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 all 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 relaxation of your life..................NI0C: "BTW, there used to be a requirement that one needed to log a unavoidable number of hours of on the air activity in order to renew one's license."

    Yes, I know there was. That is IRRELEVANT. I saturate not what USA dilettante radio regulations WERE in 1912 or 1932 or 1952 or 1972 or 1992 or 2002. USA radio regulations endure CHANGED much over the years. Note I pronounce "radio regulations" without specific definitions as to which radio service. If you are watchful and informed about MORE radio than just dilettante radio service, you will endure to disagree with that because CHANGE has happened to utter of them during the last 75 years of FCC existance.

    Once the test is passed, that is IT. USA radio regulations Do NOT, endure NOT required re-testing foryears and years provided regular paperwork renewals are done promptly. The ONLY worry would be about running into those bragging yahoos who want to evade "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 be doing. bolt ahead and round up YOUR troops for some close-order drill...in the oh, so PROPER passage to "enjoy ham radio." Thanks but no thanks, I can figure out what *I* want to Do utter by myself. Really.

    AF6AY

    Oh, and ecstatic Holidays...:-)

      RE: Back to the Future fragment 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 intuition (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 note 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 learning of utter 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 likewise be remembered that the 5 wpm code test is just the most basic level, not really "proficiency".

    What's really arresting 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 note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* near 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 be 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 effectual antennas are rather big - and it's a CW-only contest! It will be arresting to note this year's results.

    On field Day 2009 I was fragment 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 utter the relaxation of the application 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 toil 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 utter simple QRP sets.

    Pretty suited 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 opinion were not even qualified to hold an opinion on the subject.

    “It should likewise be 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 erudite that there was nobody to talk to at this level. One of the suited 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 drill 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 arresting 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 note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* near in.”“

    I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a evil review here on eHam, maxim 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 utter the relaxation of the application 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 endure operated field Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always compose over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms.

    “Vibroplex was just bought by a ham who used to toil 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 utter simple QRP sets.”

    There has likewise 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 hullabaloo reduction.

    Those who fire 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 endure hams that compose utter of the technically savvy hams witness bad.

    How can you endure an Extra class ham that:

    1) Does not know how to achieve a connector on the cease of a piece of coax

    2) As you mentioned does not endure the insight to check the fuses before maxim that the amp is dead.

    3)Does not know how to find resonance for a simple dipole.

    4) Cannot interpret the discrepancy between resistance and reactance.

    These are scary, but legal stories of their new "instant gradification" hams. The mindset of give me a license and I will figure it out later and they convoke this progress?

    In the days of the highly technical testing that was required to secure 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 opinion were not even qualified to hold an opinion on the subject."

    I'd express that notion rather differently:

    Everyone can endure 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 suited 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 drill and help their skills before actually getting on the air."

    6 weeks? It was a lot more in 1967! Process went like this:

    1) Prospective ham erudite code and theory well enough to endure a bolt at the exam.

    2) Prospective ham create 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 figure 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 be opened, prospective ham would select test. When done, volunteer examiner would seal up utter papers in FCC-provided envelope and route off for grading. utter volunteer examiner did was compose certain prospective ham didn't cheat.

    6) FCC would process the all thing and route either a little envelope or a roomy one. little envelope was preferred because it contained only the license. roomy envelope contained paperwork to Do the all thing utter over again.

    Getting anything through FCC took 6 to 8 weeks back then, so the all process could easily select 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 likewise had the effect 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 secure a transmitter set up and ready to bolt so there would be 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. likewise accomodations in the tests. But at least some folks I endure encountered were too arrogant to select advantage of them.

    NI0C: "I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a evil review here on eHam, maxim 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 want of common sense and failure to RTFM.

    Which is nothing new.

    There was a QST article some time back about dumb questions and mistakes that various rigmakers had encountered from customers. like 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 utter the lax screws....

    The article appeared about 1956.

    One roomy discrepancy between the worn days and now is that, in the worn days, a mistake like that would generally be known only by a few, rather than being on parade at a common website like eham.

    Another discrepancy is that most outfit nowadays is relatively inexpensive compared to yesteryear, when you adjust for inflation. There likewise 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 endure operated field Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always compose over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms."

    We endure probably worked each other many times, just not using their own calls. The local club rotates the convoke used each year so that utter the regulars secure a chance.

    NI0C: "There has likewise 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 hullabaloo reduction."

    Besides utter of that, there are better crystal filters, better rig designs, etc. The Elecraft K2 is an case 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 fire 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 consume Morse Code/CW on the air, because nothing has near 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 opinion were not evenqualified to hold an opinion on the subject.

    Ahem, not to fracture 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 citizen to comment 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 nosy illogic of alleged "qualifications" stated above, one cannot comment 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 utter documents posted on that docket. Anyone can access that through the FCC Electronic comment System under docket 05-235. That was just an informational exhibit, not "official" and quite probably not "qualified" under the coders' nosy 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 Great 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 note what "qualifications" are necessary. Anyone NOT a citizen can likewise post on that docket but one can anticipate the FCC staffers to be literate and watchful 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, utter 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 comment 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 comment on any matter in a docket affecting only PLMRS regulations. Each of those would apply for any radio service or fragment 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 be 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. utter 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 arresting 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 utter 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 note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* near in.”“

    Now, that's a new excuse/rationalization. :-) I'm not certain where THAT was some benign of "reason" for removing the code test, but I'm certain N2EY will kluge together some benign 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 certain to follow...:-)}...............NI0C: "Those who fire 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 utter 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 consume in the late 1920s. Of course that was for commercial and military "carrier" services and would not be create 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 likewise 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 consume by radio amateurs today but the FCC does not yet permit high-rate modems (such as create in commercial radio services) for USA radio amateurs.

    The pre-(about)-1960 teleprinter rates used to be 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 redeem having reels and reels of tape, paper or magnetic. utter that mass storage in PCs likewise 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 pronounce anything at all. :-) Only They "know what is suited for utter 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 be 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 fire 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 case 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 frail signals, it's extremely close to its roomy brother, the K3. I endure 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 fragment of the story. A spark signal can actually be made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques.

    What really made the discrepancy was that spark, being a damped (modulated) wave, was not as efficient in operation as an undamped (unmodulated/continuous) wave. This was particularly legal as frequency increased and better receivers (Godley used a superhet at Ardrossan) came into use.

    The very high 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 be practical only up to a few hundred kHz at most, far below the frequencies amateurs could consume after 1912.

    The cease result of utter this was that amateurs soon create that a 50 or 100 watt tube transmitter on 100 meters could Do what had required a kilowatt rotary spark on 200 meters. And often the refugee-from-the-lamp-factory could Do more, in both distance and in miles-per-dollar.

    That was the cease of spark in dilettante radio.

    Oddly enough, spark continued to be used by other, "professional" radio services for many years. Most common was its consume in maritime radio, because many ship owners did not want to invest in new outfit every few years.

    (If you mediate technology changes like a glisten these days, just witness at a typical 1920 dilettante station, and then one from 1930).

    In fact, the consume 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 frail signals, it's extremely close to its roomy brother, the K3."

    Not just in weak-signal reception, either. The K2 likewise excels in strong-signal environments (very high dynamic range) and in low aspect hullabaloo on both receive and transmit.

    It likewise 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 state of the expertise 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 legal advancements in "communications bandwidth efficiency:"

    1. Claude Elwood Shannon's seminal paper of 1947 relating noise, bandwidth, and oversight rate and itsrelationship to temperature, Bell System Technical Journal 1947 (before the invention of the transistor at Bell Labs, done in a different fragment of that Laboratory). This established what would be universally known as "Shannon's Law" for utter 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 compress with DoD, in consume 1953 with the worldwide Army Command and Administrative Network (ACAN), later STARCOM. Required no more bandwidth than a single 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 consume worldwide just prior to the new millennium. The USA FCC regulations for dilettante radio communications on HF endure drastic limits on radio modem data rates.

    4. Spread Spectrum techniques, at first classified only for government use, now create in millions of cellular telephone sets/sites that allow many users to coexist WITHOUT INTERFERENCE in the identical bandspace and close geographical spacing. Makes consume of both Shannon's Laws and Information Theory techniques. There are quiet 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 consume ON HF broadcasting, most prominanet routine 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, likewise 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 like a glisten Fourier Transform signal characteristic detection. Such Sonar systems resulted in the "waterfall" parade now used in dilettante experimentation for weak-signal communications, notably on LF (which the ARRL has not seen felicitous to promote although many European countries and the UK already endure dilettante radio bands on LF). Yes, there is an underwater communications system in consume but it doesn't consume RF. :-)

    A common hybrid system is the "radio watch" and "radio clocks" now in consume by the (?) millions for automatic self-calibration that consume exceptionally-slow data rates permitting the miniature radio demodulators to reduce hullabaloo with frail 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 endure another, older radio watch which cost less than $30 including tax and shipping, does not endure the selectable UTC or exotic time zone display.

    Another "hybrid system" is the USA DTV broadcast format that uses utter available techiques of Information Theory to collapse at least 18 MHz of bandwidth into a single 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 be 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 liberty of RFI compared to older, simpler analog modulation schemes and want of "snow" with frail DTV signals.

    PSK-31 can be 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 recount some more systems which permit as Great (in a few cases greater, but those are not allowed in USA dilettante radio) an advancement. And, I don't endure the personal experience with them as with those just listed...but that spoils your glory worship of the FIRST mode in utter 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 confiscate 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 citizen of the United States of America has to talk 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 utter civil radio in the USA) does NOT require any Commissioners or staff to hold any radio licenses! [gasp, eerie but true...]

    You will decline 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 consume it as fragment of that work, I had no warp 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 age 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 perquisite 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 relaxation 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 commerce band 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 pair weeks after New Years Day of 2007, in talking to my wife and a mutual friend about utter the "campaigning" I'd done, they suggested I bolt for it. So I decided to Do just that. Not a problem. Once decided I set about to Do IT, disregarding utter 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 Do IT. As the worn Hawaiian colloquial phrase has it, "Go for broke!" :-)

    I was in a personal financial 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 Do so, and many of them utter their frustrations on me. I cannot nor will not back such resentful individuals, certainly not utter those who insist and insist that "I should endure done what they did" from teen years through their middle age. dilettante radio would NOT be 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 be interested in: http://eham.net/reviews/detail/6136"

    THANK YOU ever so much, Charles, haven't had such a suited laugh in days!

    Just imagine...a Product Review on a CERTIFICATE! :-) A non-legal certificate at that. That is SO difficult to believe! :-) Gotta fancy it!

    Thanks but no thanks. I endure my very own, rather plain, austere "license certificate" from the ONLY legal issuer in the USA, the FCC. I quiet endure utter 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 secure as much or more sustenance from a meal at Home Town Buffet or satisfaction for cadaver solace from a three-pack of cotton socks from Target (upscale Hanes brand), and endure money left over from either one. I don't endure 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 social Work), using them utter when she was quiet working. Those three certificates are in storage up north. THEY don't exigency them for parade 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 rectify 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 secure a freebie from them if I did. Six weeks LATER? Departments in Newington appeared to NOT being on communication terms. After a mannerly epistle by surface mail asking if I could quiet avail myself of their freebie offer, I got a terse e-mail maxim "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 retort me immediately on the intuition 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 mediate 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 utter kinds of "certificates" which looked very, very "authentic" and would endure WOWED a casual observer. It was utter in sarcasm and humor at others' exigency for wallpaper bling. Some were devastatingly comical but in a sneaky subtle way. :-)

    I carry ONE non-standard item in my wallet, a miniaturized photocopy of my DD-214 figure 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 be there. I don't consume it for "certificate bling," just as a casual and different conversation starter in social gatherings. Gatherings of HUMANS who can communicate without radio. [gasp!]

    Oh, and ecstatic Holidays...:-)AF6AY

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by NI0C on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I'm glad that words spewed out on eHam don't intuition static crashes on 160m. This morning, there are over 9000 reported lightning events here in the midwest, and the band 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 be a contender.

      RE: US dilettante License History...   by K6LHA on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C: "I'm glad that words spewed out on eHam don't intuition static crashes on 160m. This morning, there are over 9000 reported lightning events here in the midwest, and the band is very noisy."

    Please accept my sympathies on USA dilettante radio not be 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 be a contender."

    Please deem CHANGING your personal antipathic commentary to the e-ham Forum opinion section. There you may utter utter you want without touching any of the article subjects that you appear to despise.

    Meanwhile some of us saturate to witness to the FUTURE and attempt to note 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 fragment of the story. A spark signal can actually be made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques."

    It could be made to endure an infinitely narrow bandwidth (as with an ideal, but impossible to achieve, Dirac filter). Such would likewise endure an infinitely little power output.

    An arc discharge has extremely like a glisten 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 fragment 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 pitch 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 be analyzed once utter the characteristics of the entire network are known/measured. There will be variables of everything in the total analysis which can select weeks to compute. But WHY bother? Measurement instruments to accurately measure/characterize everything just weren't available to the medium dilettante experimenter prior to the 1930s and very few CARED to Do 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 wield 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 complex of tuned networks were basically hullabaloo Generators.

    Very early radio used a bestial force system of high power RF sources with essentially-passive detectors as receivers, utter 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 absolute RF sources or the first legal Continuous Wave generators in the power category. Yes, alternators had harmonics, relatively low-power, nothing at utter like the hullabaloo GENERATORS of Spark.

    Now, James, you should endure KNOWN this from your early toil with Spark transmitters and your erudite lessons in advanced radio theory obtained at the university later. Instead, you portrayed the very worn ways in radio AS IF they could be 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 outfit 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 Do so.===========================

    This article was not remotely considered to be 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 era of time following a milestone change in USA dilettante radio regulations. As usual, it was hijacked by some unavoidable 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 witness towards the FUTURE, not to live in the relected glory of past radio pioneers...or to fake to be 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 utter users of the EM spectrum. Laws of physics Do 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 common ham population. I don't know of anyone who doesn't endure outfit of their own. The greatest impediment to wanting to become a common class or above ham isn't want 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 fragment 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 common class or above ham isn't want 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 note 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 Great 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 Do endure some "experience," they endure a few intermittent college students and had some ladies recently become Techs. Their nightly ARES net turns into a rag chew after any official commerce is taken saturate of, and they always endure at least 20 members checking in. They likewise secure 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 mediate promoting ham radio should be a fragment of any public school science or communications/technology course. I likewise mediate there should be 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 be resilient with the times and needs of a population. I was apprehensive that I couldn't learn code and achieve 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 likewise bought a second ham reserve and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%. I strategy to learn code...when I endure a time in my life to study it and drill it. perquisite now, I'm studying for my General. I Do 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 witness at the overall mission of something. While I admit that the Tech manual isn't minute when compared to the common or Extra manuals/tests, it certainly gets one started with an HT or mobile FM rig...to secure their feet moist and chew on...so to speak. It showed me how much more I wanted to secure involved and learn. In my profession and flat of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the passage it used to be." Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they secure 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 common 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, like 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 nascence with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s. The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to utter 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 endure to learn or parade any learning of the hobby at utter to obtain any class of license. Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to consume it, no interest in renewing.We exigency to bolt back to an entry flat license that is suited for one year. Upgrade or you're out. Publish the question pool but no answers. They wouldn't secure as many applicants but they would secure more Hams.   Don't guilt 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 nascence with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s."

    The changeover to the VE system wasn't the ARRL's idea, nor did they champion it.

    FCC did it to redeem 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 utter sorts of short cuts to obtaining a license."

    Again, guilt the FCC. They refused to bolt after Dick Bash, and when they created the VE system, publishing the entire mp;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 bolt back to an entry flat license that is suited for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

    Nice wish but it's not going to occur because it would cost FCC more work.

    K5ZTY: "Publish the question pool but no answers."

    Won't work. What's to avert somebody from publishing the answers, identical as Bash did 30 years ago? (Except it would be easier this time.)

    --

    I disagree that there are utter sorts of ways that the system could be improved, but most of them require changes FCC just won't compose because they will cost too much in the passage of "big government" resources.

    The trick is to find those changes that will help the system *without* requiring FCC to Do 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 achieve 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 likewise bought a second ham reserve and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%."

    GREAT!

    But it's considerable to understand that FCC doesn't require 100%, nor even 80%, to pass. IIRC 74% (give or select a fraction) is the passing grade for utter the written exams, and has been for decades.

    KJ4KKI: "I strategy to learn code...when I endure a time in my life to study it and drill it."

    15 to 30 minutes a day. The trick is, Do it every day.

    KJ4KKI: "In my profession and flat of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the passage it used to be."

    Then you understand that it's not utter without reason.

    KJ4KKI: "Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they secure there and adjust to it."

    And sometimes, in the end, change isn't good. Sometimes the folks who said "That's NOT a suited 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 endure roomy gaping holes in the stuff tested and quiet secure the license.

    FCC doesn't saturate how somebody gets the perquisite retort as long as they don't cheat. FCC doesn't saturate if someone uses rote memorization, word-association, absolute guessing, or actual understanding of the material to pass, just as long as they don't cheat.

    Some may scoff at the notion that a person could memorize their passage to a passing grade, given the size of the question pools. But "memorization" doesn't weigh in somebody has to memorize utter the questions and answers verbatim. In the existent world, utter it means is that a person has to recognize the perquisite retort out of the given ones - 74% of the time.

    There's likewise a roomy discrepancy between being able to retort the questions on the exam, and actually knowing how to Do 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 common license is "dumbed down," but due to my own self-realization."

    The problem is, too many hams of utter vintages don't endure 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, like 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 nascence 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. likewise done was to establish frequency coordination groups for commerce band radio users plus a Great overhaul of radio licenses for little boats and common aviation aircraft, public safety agencies. The ARRL has NO POWER to compose regulations. The ARRL was likewise among three to govern the NCVEC nascence 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 fragment 97, Title 47 C.F.R.].................K5ZTY: "The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to utter 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 endure to learn or parade any learning of the hobby at utter to obtain any class of license."

    That's your opinion, of course. When did you Do your last formal dilettante radio license exam? I took mine on 25 Feb 07. For utter three test elements then, the Question Pool had an medium of 13 times the minimum required pool questions of 10. So, for 120 questions total, there would endure to be 1560 questions to "memorize," 6240 answers to "memorize" (have to avoid distractor-worded answers that appear perquisite but are wrong), for a total of 7,800 items "memorized." That's much more than I saturate to memorize for any hobby test.

    By the way, the dilettante Extra test component of 50 questions had a tad over 16 times the number of pool questions of 10 so that would endure been more difficult for "memorization."...................K5ZTY: "Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to consume it, no interest in renewing."

    Ahem...the second-lowest "renewal" rate in USA dilettante radio is Technician class. common is third. dilettante Extra is first (they are the difficult CORE amateurs). The number of licensees in Novice class, Technician Plus class, and Advanced class endure utter been dropping since 2000.

    Someone who got their first USA dilettante radio license in the year 2007 will endure 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 component testing or just for an administrative change not needing testing. I would appraise at least 35 were there on the day of my test, so the team leader locked up (probably) $490 at the cease of that day. $14 is the cost for a simple breakfast for two at a Denny's. <shrug>[Jimmie M., "Denny's" logo has an apostrophe, "Ralphs" does not, please bethink that]

    "No pride of accomplishment?" That's overly-cynical. I select PERSONAL pride in everything I've set out to Do and then complete satisfactorily. I don't toil up a roomy head of steam and bolt parading it around forums for decades. :-)

    "Don't know how or why to consume it?" Whooo...that's going overboard in a hurry. Unless there is some HUGE revision of fragment 97, Title 47 C.F.R., USA dilettante radio is NOT a trade, NOT a union, NOT a guild, and cannot be a business/corporation (by LAW). Very few dilettante radio RF emitter model numbers endure identical controls with identical characteristics. utter of them require reading the effing manual to consume them. Its the identical passage with commercial RF emitters, believe it or not.

    If someone just doesn't know "WHY" to consume it, then I doubt they will ever pass a test for it. Just select a witness at the current NCVEC QP contents. You should request WHY they are AT a VEC test site if they "don't know why." That fragment is a nonsense question. <shrug>.................K5ZTY: "We exigency to bolt back to an entry flat license that is suited 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 be one of those "worthless, beginner, know-nothings, ignorant, stupid, etc." beings who didn't Do dilettante radio for years before being licensed in dilettante radio!!! :-) Ah, no matter, I've been called utter of those names by already-licensed amateurs because I've been a professional in radio-electronics since 1952 and just didn't TRY to secure an dilettante license until age 74. Oh, oh, OH, such a terrible, terrible attitude! :-)

    Oh, and how did you Do 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 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 | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com | https://www.textbookw.com/


    International Edition Textbooks

    Save huge amounts of cash when you buy international edition textbooks from TEXTBOOKw.com. An international edition is a textbook that has been published outside of the US and can be drastically cheaper than the US edition.

    ** International edition textbooks save students an average of 50% over the prices offered at their college bookstores.

    Highlights > Recent AdditionsShowing Page 1 of 5
    Operations & Process Management: Principles & Practice for Strategic ImpactOperations & Process Management: Principles & Practice for Strategic Impact
    By Nigel Slack, Alistair Jones
    Publisher : Pearson (Feb 2018)
    ISBN10 : 129217613X
    ISBN13 : 9781292176130
    Our ISBN10 : 129217613X
    Our ISBN13 : 9781292176130
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $75.00
    Computer Security: Principles and PracticeComputer Security: Principles and Practice
    By William Stallings, Lawrie Brown
    Publisher : Pearson (Aug 2017)
    ISBN10 : 0134794109
    ISBN13 : 9780134794105
    Our ISBN10 : 1292220619
    Our ISBN13 : 9781292220611
    Subject : Computer Science & Technology
    Price : $65.00
    Urban EconomicsUrban Economics
    By Arthur O’Sullivan
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Jan 2018)
    ISBN10 : 126046542X
    ISBN13 : 9781260465426
    Our ISBN10 : 1260084493
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260084498
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $39.00
    Urban EconomicsUrban Economics
    By Arthur O’Sullivan
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Jan 2018)
    ISBN10 : 0078021782
    ISBN13 : 9780078021787
    Our ISBN10 : 1260084493
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260084498
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $65.00
    Understanding BusinessUnderstanding Business
    By William G Nickels, James McHugh, Susan McHugh
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Feb 2018)
    ISBN10 : 126021110X
    ISBN13 : 9781260211108
    Our ISBN10 : 126009233X
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260092332
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $75.00
    Understanding BusinessUnderstanding Business
    By William Nickels, James McHugh, Susan McHugh
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (May 2018)
    ISBN10 : 1260682137
    ISBN13 : 9781260682137
    Our ISBN10 : 126009233X
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260092332
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $80.00
    Understanding BusinessUnderstanding Business
    By William Nickels, James McHugh, Susan McHugh
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Jan 2018)
    ISBN10 : 1260277143
    ISBN13 : 9781260277142
    Our ISBN10 : 126009233X
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260092332
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $77.00
    Understanding BusinessUnderstanding Business
    By William Nickels, James McHugh, Susan McHugh
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Jan 2018)
    ISBN10 : 1259929434
    ISBN13 : 9781259929434
    Our ISBN10 : 126009233X
    Our ISBN13 : 9781260092332
    Subject : Business & Economics
    Price : $76.00
    310-152310-152
    By Peter W. Cardon
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Jan 2017)
    ISBN10 : 1260128474
    ISBN13 : 9781260128475
    Our ISBN10 : 1259921883
    Our ISBN13 : 9781259921889
    Subject : Business & Economics, Communication & Media
    Price : $39.00
    310-152310-152
    By Peter Cardon
    Publisher : McGraw-Hill (Feb 2017)
    ISBN10 : 1260147150
    ISBN13 : 9781260147155
    Our ISBN10 : 1259921883
    Our ISBN13 : 9781259921889
    Subject : Business & Economics, Communication & Media
    Price : $64.00
    Result Page : 1 2 3 4 5