310-152 braindumps | Real exam Questions | Practice Tests - coqo.com

Get our up to date and valid 310-152 dumps with real exam questions and practice tests that you just memorize and take the test and pass with high marks - coqo.com

Killexams 310-152 braindumps | Pass4sure 310-152 VCE drill Test | http://coqo.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 designation : Sun Certified Backup and Recovery Engineer (emphasis on Solstice Backup)
Vendor designation : 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 ameliorate Your lore 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 reclaim you from lot of problems. It makes your concept about 310-152 objectives crystal lucid and manufacture you confident to face the existent 310-152 exam. manufacture your own notes. You will espy that some questions will looks very smooth to answer, but when you will try at vce exam simulator, you will espy that you reply them wrong. This is just because, those are tricky questions. SUN specialists manufacture such questions that looks very smooth but actually there are lot of techniques inside the question. They profit you understand those questions with the profit of their 310-152 questions and answers. Their vce exam simultor will profit you to memorize and understand lot of such questions. When you will reply those 310-152 dumps again and again, your concepts will be cleared and you will not discombobulate when SUN change those questions to manufacture certain techniquest. This is how they profit candidates pass their exam at first attempt by actually boosting up their lore 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 profit you gain ample score in the exam, but issue is not just passing the 310-152 exam some time. They provide VCE exam simulator to ameliorate your lore about 310-152 topics so that you can understand the core concepts of 310-152 objectives. This is really important. It is not at everyone easy. Their team has prepared 310-152 questions bank that will actually deliver you ample understanding of topics, along with surety to pass the exam at first attempt. Never under rate the power of their 310-152 VCE exam simulator. This will profit 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 enjoy ipad, iphone, PC, smart tv, android to read and memorize the 310-152 dumps. disburse as much time on reading 310-152 Questions and answers as you can. Specially taking drill tests with VCE exam simulator will profit you memorize the questions and reply them well. You will maintain to recognize these questions in existent exam. You will gain 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
-> much 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 full 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 ample source after a long time. Everyone here is cooperative and competent. Team provided me very ample 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 ample marks so that I would manufacture a ample impress 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 grand prize of best scores in the 310-152 exam.


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


Where must I badge in for 310-152 exam?
Like many others, I actually maintain 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 purchase your 310-152 exam, you could completely depend on this internet site.


The course to read for 310-152 exam in shortest time?
passed 310-152 exam a few days in the past and got an pattern score. however, I cannot purchase 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 enjoy I knew the Answers to any question that will reach my manner. and I actually did. every question I exam at the 310-152 exam, I had already seen it at the same time as practising. If now not each, then tremendous majority of them. the entire thing that turned into in the practice% turned out to be very material 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 - portion I | 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill Test

any individual involved within the certification trade will command you that these are complicated instances. in the days before the dot com bust, IT certifications maintain been a course for any individual with a technical inkling and a dinky money to gain licensed and, without doubt, gain 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 portion of the IT trade, storage providers maintain been brief to recognise that they too might present certifications, and they too could profit because of this. The most efficacious 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 set of taking a spy 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 manufacture identifying one a tricky task. most of the dealer certain 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 reach to a decision to crawl 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 traffic enterprise who's looking for a specific capabilities set and so a extremely specific certification. during this admire, there are basically no difficult and rapidly rules - you exigency to simply motif out which course you are looking to crawl after which head in that course. Of direction there's nothing to pretension that you can not just purchase 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 same 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 gain pissed off at having to linger up for a dealer to gain their house so as.

TestingNearly everyone of the certification suppliers elect to exhaust 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 general sufficient. If this might be your first certification spy at various the process is elementary. After registering with one of the two suppliers, that you may booklet a pc based mostly examine which may besides be taken at certainly one of lots of trying out facilities worldwide. checks compass from 45 minutes to about 2.5 hours and are normally closed e-book assorted preference affairs. In nearly everyone situations your effects are given at the conclusion of the spy at various enabling you instant gratification (or commiseration) on your efforts.

The fees of exams disagree drastically between certification providers however are frequently between $a hundred and $200 per test. If the enterprise makes exhaust of both testing suppliers, the suffuse and content of the check could be the equal for both, so the alternative of testing company will circle 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 privilege here, it's censorious to endure in mind that now not every certification is going to be acceptable to every grownup. in case you are just nascence out in storage certification, be positive to spy against one of the vital greater favorite skills so that you can provide you with extra breadth than depth. if you're a seasoned storage administrator, you are in a plenty improved set to manufacture 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 familiar storage concepts, there is a very heavy emphasis 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 certain 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, besides comprises tips about the premier Brocade licensed SAN Architect certification, even though particulars are scant on precisely when the censorious tests to attain this stage should be obtainable.

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

earlier than even starting into one of the most 'tracks', candidates should pass the EMC traffic Storage Fundamentals exam, which covers simple storage networking ideas along with a lucky 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 purchase a certification exam. even if this makes the Gadzoox certs as efficacious as others will depend on your personal viewpoint or that of your existing or potential corporation. extra information on the certifications may besides be discovered on the Gadzoox website.

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

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

community ApplianceStorage reply manufacturer network gear has created a certification software with two diverse tracks designed to focus the candidates consideration on community gear 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 same benevolent of path (with diverse checks) exists for the NetApp licensed affiliate (NetCache) and NetApp licensed expert (NetCache) certifications. For more guidance on network gear 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 respect is a ample or a foul element depends on your perspective.

latest SNIA choices comprise 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 observe someday later this year. The certifications can besides 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 besides be organize at the SNIA website.

solar Microsystems solar's enormously developed storage certification application includes three several 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 solitary examination, and the certs can besides 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 excessive availability, though a search of the VERITAS web site yielded no further suggestions on the courses than that.

in portion Two......partially two of this text, they are going to confer with some traffic figures about certifications and gain the reply to at least one very censorious query. Are certifications charge your time, funds and energy? they will besides 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 diligent year. in this theme they report on 4 new and pending certifications.

Microsoft declares New .internet Developer CredentialsAs a portion of the stupendous 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 measure 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, espy 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 character of sizzling theme matter in recent months that it can reach as no shock that the Computing expertise traffic 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 theme matters. The trustworthy designation 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 tumble 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 remedy 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 crawl on to purchase two exams. the first exam is in the time-honored, desktop-primarily based format administered by Prometric testing centers. The 2d is a purchase home useful examination that requires analyzing proof info and producing a document. espy the full 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 tide either the VERITAS NetBackup and Solstice Backup exam to rate the designation. The tests are designed to measure lore of professional backup methodology, restoring records and meeting design requirements and value $150 each and every. They can be organize through Prometric checking out centers.

The complete present problem of Certification Watch will besides 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 gain certified and gain forward. She besides is the founder of GoCertify.com.

related tidings 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 course 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 lore of: Product Overview and perception

    characteristic |  by course 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 stint Debater might repair fb

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

  • IBM broadcasts strongest AI pains 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 exhaust 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 lore of For ITSM goals

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  by course 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 area and useful resource middle for individuals interested in desktop professional certification.

    1. Microsoft Cancels Plans to Decertify home windows NT 4 MCSEsIn a theatrical reversal of their previous plans, Microsoft has cancelled plans to decertify everyone MCSEs who don't ameliorate to the windows 2000 song by means of the discontinuance of this yr. in its place, the MCSE title will develop into music certain - 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 rate the new title. The core exams can besides be chosen from home windows 2000, .internet, or XP skilled working gear 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 compund of COMPTIA certifications in set 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 manufacture up its new network Storage skilled software. The solar certified facts administration Engineer covers the lore required to reclaim 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 focus 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 decision of paths: either Solstice DiskSuite or VERITAS extent supervisor utility. tests are at the measure solar rate - $150.

    four. Linux+ LiveCompTIA formally launched its Linux+ certification previous this month. This one exam certification is hypothetical 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 gain a reduction). trying out is obtainable by the exhaust 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 rate 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 everyone 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 maintain to renew yearly, which contains paying an annual charge. MCTs maintain to convey as a minimum 10 days of Microsoft official Curriculum (MOC) and rate 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 besides be applied to the Oracle 8i music. youngsters, when you respect that Oracle is likely to retire the 8i track through the discontinuance 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 organize at GoCertify.com.

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

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

    characteristic |  by course 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 lore 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 course of Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s venture Debater may fix facebook

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

  • IBM declares strongest AI pains 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 course of Andy Patrizio, September eleven, 2018

  • artificial Intelligence Salaries: Paychecks Heading Skyward

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Andy Patrizio, August 28, 2018

  • synthetic Intelligence exhaust 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 gain 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 reach to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams cheerfully and effectively. They never trade off on their review, reputation and trait 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 espy any unsuitable report posted by their rivals with the designation killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com dissension or something enjoy this, simply recollect there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of ample administrations because of their advantages. There are a much 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 pilot | 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 pilot | 1K0-001 study pilot | 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 pilot | 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 pilot | 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 positive 310-152 dumps | Killexams.com 310-152 existent Questions | http://coqo.com/

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

    Tests on returning troops insinuate sedate health consequences of depleted uranium exhaust 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 status National Guardsman got home, he scholarly that a bunkmate, Sgt. Ray Ramos, and a group of N.Y. Guard members from another unit had accepted an present by the New York Daily tidings 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 gain tested too. It turned out he was the most contaminated of them all.

    Matthew immediately urged his wife to gain an ultrasound check of their unborn baby. They discovered the fetus had a condition common to those with radioactive exposure: atypical syndactyly. The privilege 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 squander 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 exhaust 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 enjoy 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 area and remain radioactive for billions of years. If inhaled, these particles can lodge in lungs, other organs or bones, irradiating tissue and causing cancers.

    Worse yet, uranium is besides a highly toxic heavy 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 element has an affinity for bonding with DNA, where even vestige amounts can understanding 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 course to exhaust the weapons. Rokke says the Pentagon responded by denouncing him, after earlier commending his work.

    No one knows how many U.S. soldiers maintain 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 maintain to worry unless they had DU fragments in their body,” says Matthew. His buddy, Sgt. Ramos, who exhibits symptoms resembling radiation sickness and heavy metal poisoning, adds that at Walter Reed Medical focus 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 crawl near Iraq because of security concerns.

    “It doesn’t look privilege that they are poisoning the places they are hypothetical to be liberating,” Ramos says.

    The Pentagon continues to insist, on the basis of no sphere evidence, that DU is safe. To date, only some 270 returned troops maintain 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 corpse or migrated into bones or organs.

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

    Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut status Representative Pat Dillon (D-New Haven), a Yale-trained epidemiologist, has crafted state-level legislation that Connecticut and Louisiana maintain 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 tumble under state, rather than federal, jurisdiction.

    “This was not a Democratic or a Republican issue,” Dillon says. “These are their kids and someone needs to protect them.” She says that since passage of her bill, which takes consequence this October, military groups and family organizations, status legislators, and even National Guard unit commanders maintain 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 pains 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 dynamic duty troops and veterans will exact similar access to rigorous tests, which can cost upwards of $1000 per person.

    One course or another, the Pentagon will pay a price. “DU is a war crime. It’s that simple,” Rokke says. “Once you’ve scattered everyone this stuff around, and then refuse to clean 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 organize at This Can't be Happening.

    if you enjoy this, check out:

    Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years | killexams.com 310-152 existent Questions and VCE drill Test

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

    Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years

    A comprehensive examination of USA professional radio demographics requires a reference as to the numbers of the various classes of license. There is only one proper reference, the public FCC database. Other sources of statistics are everyone derived from this. Two such sites used here are Hamdata and ARRL. ARRL statistics expound only those licensee numbers within their 10-year efficacious period. Hamdata shows everyone licensees including their 2-year Grace term 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 preference of date was arbitrary, picked to launch 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 professional radio Restructuring. Those three are lumped as one group under the acronym TPNA.

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

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

    Majority of number changes look 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 subside in Technician class numbers as well as the TPNA group and a step-increase in general 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 appealing 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%. professional Extra increased by +8,034 or 7.09% and general class was final with +6,673 or 4.41% increase. Attrition in the TPNA group seems measure considering that no renewals maintain been available for years.

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

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

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

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

    According to Hamdata, the peak of everyone USA professional license grants happened on 2 July 2003 with a total of 737,938. Total professional license grants maintain been less than that following that date of 6 years ago. To gain 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 term 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 look to be STAYING in that class. Note that Class Changes maintain 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 general interest in professional 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 final five years of USA professional 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 hold background colors and advertisements which did not transfer to PDF. In everyone cases the statistics numbers transferred correctly.

    Member Comments: This article has expired. No more comments may be added. Trends in USA professional 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 look to be STAYING in that class. <<

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

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

    The repose are just the habitual ones who once they gain their license maintain no interste in ever getting on the air. Those will everyone crawl away in about 7 to 10 years. In the meantime they disburse their days on Hamsexy or EHam under anonymous logins.

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 everyone in professional radio.

    Craig

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 maintain enough of it in their jobsBuffalo Gil W2/G3LBS   Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by WA9PIE on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I would enjoy to espy these stats by age group. Obviously, in order to sustain the hobby, they exigency an influx of adolescent people with new ideas.

    Mike, WA9PIE

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

    73,TerryN8RGQ

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

    Not true. I renewed my Advanced class license, and spy 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 manufacture it available. They would probably "grandfather" Advanced class licensees to Extra Class to carry out away with it, and they've repeatedly said they won't carry out this.

    73, -KR4WM

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 hale one either.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by N5TGL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I respect (opinion, not statistics) that about a third of those would be the EmComm Whackers that gain tech licenses so they can exhaust ham radio in their jobs. They don't progress to an HF license because everyone they keeping about is Saving The World with minimal investment in the hobby. "

    That's the EXACT same conclusion I came to.

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

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

    ---------I am sorry to swear 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 maintain dinky to no interest in professional radio. The license is simply a appliance to exhaust equipment, often owned by a city or county, not the "ham". It is turn-key process for them. purchase a one day license class, pass a simple test, exhaust equipment. Much enjoy taking any other certification class.

    This is not cynicism speaking. These are not inert or dumb people. They simply carry out not maintain an interest in the hobby.

    73 - Luke

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 diligent promoting WinLink, so non-hams can exhaust ham frequencies for email. WinLinkers besides want to reclaim the world, pass everyone 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 spy 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 carry out not comprise expired licenses in the grace period)

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

    Modify and gain a vanity call, too.

    This isn't the first time the Advanced was closed to new issues. At the discontinuance 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 portion 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 carry out away with it, and they've repeatedly said they won't carry out this."

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

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

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

    The auto-renewal of Tech Pluses as Tech means that in a few months the Tech Plus license will simply disappear. It's besides one understanding the Technician license numbers maintain 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 anything at all.

    Since 1951, the only other FCC-issued license class to fade was the archaic Conditional, which went away in the mid-1970s. FCC did it the same course - everyone 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 professional 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 smooth to espy the trends.

    For example, it's smooth to espy 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 expound 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K4ZN on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I observe that the sentiment 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 carry weight that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to support 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 maintain 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 carry out not presently maintain a passion for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will manufacture more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become dynamic 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 everyone bands, everyone modes, 24-7-365. What is participation? Holding a license? Being on the air twice a day, once a day, once a week, once a month, one contest a year?

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

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

    In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being. A major thrust between ARRL and emcomm support agencies encouraged people to gain 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, scholarly that their first focus was on developing a sustainable water and food supply, and learning how to linger properly sheltered. They started putting time into that instead of ham radio.

    And, they scholarly quickly that ARES/RACES maintain stultifylingly complicated hierachies, pseudo-government, that nobody in their privilege mind would want to be portion of - although power mongers enjoy 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 ersatz bubble had passed, and they returned to a more measure 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 trait Engineer - these people are the world's best at understanding what statistics and population studies show.

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

    I noticed at the final few hamfests I attended, that there were course more adolescent people than I maintain ever seen at ham functions. They don't crawl 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 swear here, some people would call me young. I carry out clubs and I carry out Twitter, so I'm a tweenie, I suppose....

    - k

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 manufacture a ample thing into a imperfect one !"

    Not at all. It is merely a dispassionate spy 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 enjoy it that the changes maintain worked !"

    Wrong. The "auther" [sic] is myself and my solitary license concede in the professional radio service is portion of the data presented. My license concede was achieved by passing everyone 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 professional radio license obtained anywhere on this planet. It should besides be eminent that I've held a First-Class Commercial Radiotelephone license since passing those four test elements in one sitting at an FCC sphere Office in Chicago, Illinois, during a weekday in March, 1956. Later, that "First Phone" became a general Radiotelephone License and, eventually, was made lifetime, no renewals required. I've been involved in radio communications professionally since age 19, a mere 58 years. :-)

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

    As a so-called "new" person in radio, I didn't gain into professional radio thinking it would be a loser. But, I'm portion of a new group now and hoped that conditions in professional radio would maintain changed after my professional license was granted. I espy dinky change, therefore the study to espy if a understanding could be determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Over the long term, the continued existance of USA professional radio requires enough national interest to warrant its existance to the federal government. Your professional radio license concede is nothing more than a federal license 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 righteous virtue or righteousness. Licensing is just a regulatory agency appliance to maintain order in the EM spectrum, to mitigate interference.

    From a cursory glance at content of e-ham articles by respondents, the majority look to be those who maintain been licensed in the professional radio service for a large 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 purchase sedate objective looks at the status of this radio service now. Further, long-timers watch to view today's unlicensed (in professional radio) citizens as having the same 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 maintain much more available to them for hobbies and recreation than existed ten, twenty, or thirty years ago.

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

    One badge of decline is the market in professional radio goods. Witness the folding of two of the four USA periodicals specializing in professional 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 final two decades. While numerical data is more difficult to collect about such areas, there is enough to observe individually by anyone...with objectivity filters.

    AF6AY (who has never upgraded his USA professional 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 everyone bands, everyone 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 maintain no station and no interest, or 500,000 hams, 90% of whom maintain 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 carry out emcomm and lost interest over time, they'd quiet be in the numbers for 10 or 12 years (depending on whether you weigh grace-period licenses or not).

    Here's another factor: Cell phones. Early models were big, expensive and had limited coverage. From the nascence of the repeater era, a significant number of new hams got licenses to exhaust 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 trait Engineer - these people are the world's best at understanding what statistics and population studies show.

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

    I maintain to question the "average age of hams" numbers often cited. How are such numbers determined? The FCC database doesn't maintain birthdate data for everyone US hams. voluntary surveys are notoriously unscientific. Observing who goes to hamfests, club meetings, etc., isn't trustworthy either. And is that middling 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 smooth to understand why: Americans are living 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 stupendous controlled blocks. A person can crawl online, text, tweet, etc. whenever they maintain a few minutes free and maintain access to a device. Club meetings usually befall on weekday nights and require an investment of a pair hours.

    Good points all.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 look to gain a general OR EXTRA license. THUS THEY SHOULD liquidate everyone CLASSES OF LICENSES TODAY AND JUST CONSOLIDATE IT INTO/ manufacture IT ONE CLASS..

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

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

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

      Trends in USA professional 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 professional radio gear or publications as one sample of many, for most of us the statistics are dinky more than entertainment or curiousities.

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

    Don't, however, forget this:

    AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU manufacture IT FOR YOURSELF.

    All the complaints, everyone the dumb comments tossed aside, YOU are professional radio. It is everyone in your hands. manufacture the most of it.

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! One could respect 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 carry out away with the lic structure under the same requirements??   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by N3OX on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Some other reasons to gain a Tech license and never upgrade:

    Race communication for things enjoy Solar Car competitions.

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

    Radio control airplanes.

    Legal tinkering with long compass high power high hurry network links just for the heck of it.

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

    There's a lot of stuff you can carry out 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 enjoy long compass telemetry.

    There's a stupendous 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 positive there are plenty of people who gain it just for EMCOMM or who gain it and gain bored because 2m FM has dinky to offer, but the fact of the matter is being licensed by the FCC to exhaust a wide variety of types of communication at high power levels on a large swath of the VHF/UHF/microwave spectrum is a rather valuable thing for people interested in certain things that aren't really about being interested in RADIO itself.

    73Dan

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

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

    I was not a stupendous fan of the no-code General, Extra, etc.......but I know of a lot of friends who maintain really excelled who were not able to gain into HF professional radio due to code. I promote "Know Code" vs "No Code" but I respect the hobby has benefited.

    That said, lighthearted I am not the only one who wonders what 10M is turning into.........I respect 1/2 the hardship does not even maintain a license on that band-

    Thanks for the much report- BTW, per a call I placed into the ARRL final year for research, you can not gain age breakdowns as the FCC license contour no longer tracks this- That is crazy- seems enjoy really censorious information.

    73 Paul N0AH

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 carry out hear a lot more of them on the air lately.

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

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

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

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

    73, Bill - WA8MEAhttp://HamRadioFun.com

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

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

    The incentive which will gain 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 adolescent people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most favorite wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who crawl to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV.

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

    G0GQK

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

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

    (c) Encouragement and improvement of the professional 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 professional radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.

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

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! The recruitment should ameliorate and the trait of recruits extend if the entrance training were experimental.W2/G3LBS   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by W5HTW on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I accord with those who swear that a very large percentage of new Technician class licensees are EMCOM types who maintain no other plans in the hobby. I carry out think, and I carry out hope, that trend is dying, so they can gain back to existent hams with a existent interest in professional radio, but it has not died yet.

    As confirmation, two people I know from non-ham context maintain just expressed an interest in learning more about professional radio. Both of them espy it as a character of emergency communications, but for personal use, such as "if I maintain an emergency I can gain help." Both besides respect of it in the measure 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 professional radio faded in the late 1990s.

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

    That means as this EMCOM "fad" (and I respect 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 preserve in finger with family" FRS hams and the "free cell phone" hams. The radios maintain 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 respect it is on the downhill undulate now, with the new clarification by both the FCC and the ARRL. Thousands of 'heros' will become discouraged, and those radios too will crawl 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 purchase everyone the stuff currently required for the Tech, general and Extra and roll it into a solitary 120 question test. Anybody who wants a US professional license just has to pass that test, and they gain full 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 full reciprocity. They changed the policy recently.

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

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

    Now I'll concede that those adolescent 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 gain started. But they weren't child prodigies, just smart and hard-working.

    Can anyone *really* swear the tests are or were "discriminatory" when shimmering adolescent elementary school children could pass everyone 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 manufacture IT FOR YOURSELF."

    That really sums it everyone up. Thank you.

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

    Most of everyone the privilege attitude.

    73 es TNX de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI4HO on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Was licensed in 1995 as KE4WAF, was dynamic for a pair years, due to a toil relate injury, raising a family, dealing with doctors, lawyers, etc, I was inert for about 4.5 years. Once the status of Fl decided to retire me. had this dinky light bulb, or LED came on, and I got VERY dynamic in this wonderful hobby. So dynamic in fact that I upgraded, yes I did purchase the 5 wpm code test, it was then that I organize that I was tone deaf, very tone deaf. Despite that one drawback I managed to pass the code test the written test, and then 3 months after getting my general, I took and passed my professional extra. Maybe some who got licensed in the 90's did so just to swear they did or for the EMMCOMM aspect of the hobby, most of em maintain 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 gain where I did, fortunately through family and friends I maintain been able to linger as dynamic as I can be under my circumstances. Just give them time and hopefully one day some will reach around and connect the fun, if not then it wasn't meant to be.

    73 de MarkW3LZK

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 adolescent people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most favorite wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who crawl to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV. This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the overcome of Japan !"

    I might add that the MOST-used/manufactured antenna has been the Yagi-Uda parasitic beam invented IN Japan during the 1930s. :-) It was the basis for millions of 1950s "TV antennas" privilege 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 much stuff there since the mid-1970s, first trying out the Gingell polyphase network (Mike Gingell besides being a Brit) for phasing SSB modulation/demodulation, then working on AMTOR and then innovating PSK-31 and getting a lot of Europeans to test it on-air before the USA published anything on it.

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

    The Wadley Loop was a privilege 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 ample enough that Drake used it over here and Radio Shack had it in their top-of-the-line SWL BC receivers.

    The first circumstantial scheme 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 reclaim DETAIL in how it could toil along with antenna footprints on the surface.

    Americans may maintain invented the transistor, then the Integrated Circuit (which revolutionized the entire world's electronics) but such new-fangled things weren't loved by the American amateurs even two decades after their inventions. Yes, they besides invented the hand-carried scientific calculator but hams don't enjoy 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 manufacture 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 accord with you but only in stating that USA radio amateurs haven't invented everyone that much for professional radio purposes...they are quiet "pounding brass" and promoting it as the "best" course to communicate in their four-decade tenures as mighty gurus of the ionosphere. :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Most posters on this thread respect that the FCC license is a sacred cow. It is not. If for some understanding (and carry out hope this does not occur) the FCC were to suspend everyone licenses or carry out away with professional radio, the endeavor would quiet crawl on. Some folks enjoy myself would quiet build and reclaim 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 understanding 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 swear a few words of appreciation for those who maintain an inner calling for professional emcomm. For the most part, these ample spirited folks maintain a genuine interest in and espy a existent practical exigency for national participation in emergency communication. May God bless them for their calling. Just as the national soldier stands ready to reply the call of arms to safeguard his family, his community, his state, his nation, so besides the national emcomm volunteer stands ready to serve these same purposes should a disaster arouse 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 departed wrong to try to reclaim them down. They belong as much as the ret of us.

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

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K5TED on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! When's the final time any of you advanced the technique of radio?   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB2WIK on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! This is enjoy reading actuarial tables.

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

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 adolescent 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 gain this "We must only gain adolescent people licensed"obsession.

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

    73s John AA5JG

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB0RXL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Ray.I accord with your comment. One time when I was working with HCJB Radio (HC1QH) they received a listener letter 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 circle on his rig and chat with fellow hams around the world. There is just something about electronics in general and ham radio in particuliar that got into my blood when I was just six years archaic and has stayed with me ever since.JohnWB0RXL   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can anyone *really* swear the tests are or were "discriminatory" when shimmering adolescent elementary school children could pass everyone of them?

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

    Thus why stop at the CW testing. Why not just maintain 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 manufacture it what YOU want it to be and no one can say..."Well I'm better because I maintain a higher license than you do... which some find vile and thus the wars on the radio when the others crawl off and exhaust frequencies that are reserved for them. Thats discrimination and prejudice when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't exhaust 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 enjoy they did with the troupe plan, cw and other issues. After everyone why should someone gain special treatment... preferential treatment... from the same government that they everyone pay their taxes to??

    So by going back and looking as to why things changed... I respect you can espy 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 professional 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 final time any of you advanced the technique of radio?"

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

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

    No, KC5NY, let not your heart be troubled. If you preserve within you the privilege attitude, you are a member of one of the greatest fellowships in the world and one of most efficacious contributors to the advancement of radio ever known - professional radio!

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

      Trends in USA professional 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 mount above the petty squabbles, the tired archaic snobbery, the imperfect attitudes, the gloom and doom, the designation calling, and everyone the repose of it. You maintain to focus on what was and should always be your attraction to radio communication. This is what makes you a ham, and what you carry out with that spark of inspiration is what keeps you a ham.

    Forget everyone 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 maintain to carry out away with the CW test?"

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

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

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

    What handicap issue? From whom?

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

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

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

    And I hunt information from again: How can anyone swear the tests are "discriminatory" when shimmering kids who aren't even 10 years archaic maintain passed everyone of them?

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

    Just reclaim everyone the stuff in everyone 3 question pools in one 120 question test.

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

    "Thats discrimination and prejudice when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't exhaust 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 understanding for having multiple license classes is to manufacture it easier to gain full privileges, not harder. If there were only one class of license, it would maintain to comprise everything in everyone three license tests, and everyone newcomers would maintain 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 carry out with professional radio. For example, if a prospective ham had to be at least 14 years archaic before being allowed to purchase the tests or be issued a license, *that* would be discrimination.

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

    ??They didn't remove the troupe plan.

    "After everyone why should someone gain special treatment... preferential treatment... from the same government that they everyone pay their taxes to??"

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio...   by AB0RE on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In my neck of the woods (SW MN) it'd issue ~3/4 of new licenses are obtained for em-com purposes. Of those new licenses, ~1/4 eventually gain 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 purchase new hams however they can gain them. It's up to us seasoned hams to expound the newbie "emcom" hams what they're missing.

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

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

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

      Trends in USA professional 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 tumble of 2007 and then passed the general class test in October 2008. I am now studying for my extra class. My dad was a ham and so I maintain always had an interest in ham radio. He passed away in 2006 and I maintain taken his original call sign, the one I heard him exhaust 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 enjoy to eventually toil CW. I am very grateful to the lifting of the requirement though, because it opened the door to me. I am dynamic daily on two meters and listen to HF daily. I generally toil HF on the weekends when I maintain more time to dedicate to it, but my Icom 718 is always on around 3878 or 7180 kHz every evening. I maintain joined the two local ham clubs in my county and am besides a member of the ARRL. As far as getting people interested in ham radio and retaining new hams, I would embolden everyone of us to be visible and talk it up. I am by profession a tidings broadcaster at the local radio station here in Ste. Genevieve and I try to gain the local hams on my interview expound at least once a year, usually just ahead of sphere day (in fact I was doing that before I became a ham). I besides manage the local cable access tv channel and maintain had the hams on my programs there. I respect as long as they maintain a core group of dynamic hams who are visible in the community and seen as a positive portion of a their community they will be okay.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by VE7IG on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Re NN4RH ----Where were they then? I recently reclaim up a new 4 element 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 professional and not CB. I didn't hear ANY CB character activity at all.

    73 Reg, VE7IG

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

    I care! What is the exhaust of getting a new licensee, if they really aren't a ham-don't keeping about communicating or getting on the air? Why is the number of licensees they maintain 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 professional Radio License Classes Over T   by KF4HR on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Since (as the saying goes) there's might in numbers. This is especially valuable considering the ever increasing exact for the commercial uses of the RF spectrum.

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

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

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

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

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

    There's latitude for everybody. There's might in numbers. As time goes on things change, try to manufacture it better, and gain over it.

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

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

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

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

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

    Again you prove my point about someone smart vs the ADA person. It makes no incompatibility to them if they can't badge their designation correctly. If they can't gain 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 reclaim the privilege shoe in the left foot...like duhhhh expound 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 hunt information from dummy questions yet maintain EXTRA class licenses. One only has to spy at the sidebar on eham too... hunt information from one what a volt is and you will gain the deer caught in the headlight spy 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 miracle if it doesn't profit the gene pool out by elimination ... Hi voltage ..what's that!!! oh and everyone them warning stickers just don't apply to 'em after everyone they are EXTRA hams... dead... but it looks impressive on the grave marker where it says.. he was a Extra Class ham... Too imperfect he smoked... smile

      Trends in USA professional 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KB6QXM on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! As in everyone stats, the numbers can be spun one course or another to expound bias.

    As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not espy 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 maintain just renewed my advanced class license and will carry out 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 much hobby, I truly hope that they carry out not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

    If any Advanced class licensees are reading this, you everyone know that the theory test for Advanced was large 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 purchase the time or maintain the disipline to be proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for dinky 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 gain that. It was besides tradition from the very nascence of the hobby.

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

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

    Why disburse everyone 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 prejudice of the author. If you want to espy the stupendous picture, there is a lot more number crunching that needs to happen.

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 stupendous trouble.

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

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

    For example, I maintain a much interest in PSK31 and other digital modes that purchase very dinky power, yet can QSO at much distances. I don't keeping about contests (but I don't complain about contesters), but I really bask in a 20 minute QSO with a ham thousands of miles away. I gain a kick out of having to spy at a map to find a ham's QTH, perhaps some dinky island I didn't even know existed. Or a town in Spain I maintain not heard of.

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

    And I'm one of those guys that passed everyone of the tests in one test session. carry out you really respect I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't maintain 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 enjoy 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 respect I maintain that portion of the hobby down pretty well. I had subscriptions to favorite Electronics and Electronics Illustrated as a kid, and built a number of projects from those pages, as well as Knight and Heathkits.

    But that some would elect 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 positive I maintain the aptitude to learn Morse, too. But I'm really not interested.

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

    PaulAE5JU

      Trends in USA professional 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 professional Radio License Classes Over T   by AE5JU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Exactly!

    I'm trying to maintain fun here!

    ;-)

    Paul - AE5JU

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 gain sustained propagation on 10 meters, and assuming they'll eventually motif out there's more than one "channel" on the ham bands.

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

    "I observe that the sentiment 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 carry weight that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to support the anecdotal observation."

    That has been a long-standing problem in USA professional radio...but the "Rise of the Tech" numbers had different reasons of anecdotal evidence everyone along the short time between the continuing extend in numbers of the Technician class from 1991 to 2009. Nearly everyone 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 maintain 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 understanding I prefer Hamdata figures is that they present much more information on license history over the long term, maintain 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 reply on the number of members it has...to fully-paid-up members. They did finally comprise it on their 2008 Annual Report...............K4ZN: "Even people who carry out not presently maintain a passion for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will manufacture more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become dynamic 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 term by the incompatibility between everyone licensees in a class and ARRL data which counts only those in their 10-year license term. I would respect 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 everyone bands, everyone 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 everyone of those. Everyone has the ONLY "true" understanding and others not going along with those reasons "have a imperfect attitude." It is enjoy nailing jelly to a tree. :-).............K4ZN: "Kudos to Len AF6AY for presenting the tabular contour of the data. It is food for thought."

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

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 course or another to expound bias."

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

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

    For another example, a prime understanding 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 maintain 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 course to spy at it.

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

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

    KB6QXM: "I maintain just renewed my advanced class license and will carry out 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 much hobby, I truly hope that they carry out 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 everyone know that the theory test for Advanced was large 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 stupendous deal.

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

    The ARRL didn't carry out that - FCC did. recollect 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 clean up CB that way.

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

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

    KB6QXM: "Why disburse everyone 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 imperfect apples stick out because most hams, archaic and new, are nice people who at least try to be ample ops.

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

    And even then, the numbers won't swear much. For example, they won't swear anything about how many hams are dynamic on the air at some level, and how many are simply archaic entries in the database. They won't swear 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, gladden 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 weigh the number of hams that maintain told me, "In my heyday I could carry out 25 wpm, but I haven't done CW in years. I probably can't carry out 10 wpm now." Why not?"

    People gain rusty at things.

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

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

    Of course.

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

    Not at all.

    AE5JU: "And I'm one of those guys that passed everyone of the tests in one test session. carry out you really respect I just memorized the answers? I did, to a few questions. The electronic theory and safety, no, I didn't maintain 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 enjoy 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 gain licensed anyway.

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

    AE5JU: "But that some would elect 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 maintain others telling me whether I am "a existent ham" or not based on their criteria, not mine."

    I respect you've got it backwards.

    I respect a lot of things really are determined by how others espy a person.

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

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

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

    In similar fashion, existent hams don't crawl around telling people they're "Real Hams" - because they don't maintain to.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    A percentage of those carry out gain interested in radio and promote to general or gain more involved in the hobby aspects of it. They carry out maintain 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 manufacture 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 respect the numbers demonstrate that. They espy a significant extend in the upper flat licensees. Those are the people who really preserve the hobby alive.

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

    I respect 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 maintain too many that reach into the hobby expecting to maintain daily contacts with India, running 5 watts to a G5RV on the back fence. Far, far too many of the requests for profit I espy start off "...I live in a hollow where no outside antennas are allowed ... I maintain no money... but I want to toil the world on HF...".

    We exigency to strongly embolden their newbies to exhaust their CW privileges. I would enjoy to espy more of them try CW using computers if they just don't respect they can carry out it by ear. There's nothing to preclude Techs from doing this, and it's something they exigency to 'push'.

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

      "Strength in numbers" can be used against you, too   by KASSY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I recollect when grand-dad was with NTIA. One of the most-often cited reasons why "it's OK to purchase 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 maintain more licensees that carry out not gain on the air. "They" are watching!

    - k

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by K7ESU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I maintain just renewed my advanced class license and will carry out 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 much hobby, I truly hope that they carry out not try to completely liquidate the Advanced class licenses.

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

    My thoughts exactly!

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

    Alan, KØBGwww.k0bg.com

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 everyone stats, the numbers can be spun one course or another to expound bias. As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not espy 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 maintain 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 maintain started my data collection about 7 to 8 years earlier since the renewal time is after 10 years. From your beligerance I respect 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 purchase the time or maintain the disipline to be proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for dinky work."

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

    YOU are running around with pre-built prejudice on the supposition that everyone new license applicants aredummies and maintain 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 middling in 1955 for the Far East Command Headquarters then in Tokyo. not anything 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 final half of 1954). They scholarly "on the job." not anything of us "failed" or were transferred out. They were in "the stupendous 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 maintain 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 keeping to play old-time telegrapher I must be some benevolent of "dummy," right? Cubed if I had an evil CB, right?

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

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

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

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

    Me, I scholarly how to connect "UHF" connectors back in 1952 with solder. I don't respect the "crimp" style connector was on the market then but I could be wrong. Not long after I scholarly how to DESIGN circuits that worked, laid out PCBs, did the required environmental testing, did work-related computer programming, wrote drafts for instruction manuals, did customer site sphere 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 professional station, though, it was reclaim there by some astronauts for NASA.............KB6QXN: "At least train these new hams safety."

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

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

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

    Haven't you had enough indigestion for one day?...............KB6QXN: "These stats paint a picture based on prejudice 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 enjoy to commission a portrait painting? I'm open but the rate isn't anywhere near professional economy class. However, I've got 2 cents for you for a new professional radio statistics set:

    Show us How It Is Done and "without bias." expound 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 professional 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KC8FRJ on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I enjoy you Len! I maintain not seen the likes of your character since my mentor. You two would gain 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 safeguard his position. This makes his reaction less childish than those who provoked him. As long as the point counter point stays logical, it seems preempt to me.

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

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

    I'll just preserve tinkering around,

    Best Regards to all!

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 archaic 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 departed language enjoy incentive licensing?   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KG6WLS on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! RE: Trends in USA professional 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, enjoy 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 archaic 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 discourse for everyone kids everywhere, I quiet recollect what it was about Radio, and professional 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 archaic 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 professional radio, had built foxhole sets and a 2 tube regenerative, and was learning the code. (I didn't know it was hypothetical to be "hard", so I just scholarly it by listening to hams using it on the 80 meter band).

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

    Back in the mid-1960s, everyone US hams with a General, Conditional, Advanced or Extra had full 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 dinky sense to me that there were four different license classes that everyone had the same privileges. Even stranger was the fact that the Advanced was quiet carried on the books as a sever license class even though no new ones had been issued by FCC since the discontinuance of 1952. But that's how it was, and what mattered to me was getting on the air, then working my course from Novice to general and finally to Extra.

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

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

    Some were up in arms, everyone upset that they'd maintain to purchase more exams to preserve their privileges. There were dire predictions that the changes would slay ham radio, that used gear values would plummet and new gear 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 same 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 enthusiastic to purchase on the challenge and gain whatever license was needed to carry out what they wanted to carry out in ham radio.

    I became one of that final group.

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

    They came in three stages. First, the archaic 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 tumble of 1967.

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

    Disaster, right? discontinuance of ham radio, right? Well, not exactly. In fact, some very freakish 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 adolescent folks enjoy 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 course a 14 year archaic professional would swear 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 archaic 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 carry out what needs to be done.

    I suspect that more than a few archaic buffers, then and now, don't enjoy the fact that younger and to them less-worthy people just went ahead and did things enjoy earning licenses and getting on the air, while they hemmed, hawed and complained. One archaic buffer, who wouldn't even gain an professional license until 2007, disliked the sentiment of adolescent people being hams so much that, about a decade ago, he proposed a minimum-age restrict of 14 years for any class of US professional 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 dinky about schools. And the schools I know are everyone about learning, with assessment tacked on because it's required.

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

    I enjoy 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 departed 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 discontinuance of your arm'

    But most of all, I accord with AI2IA, who summed it everyone up the best:

    "Amateur radio is what you manufacture it for yourself"

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K9ZF on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! some folks maintain course 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 connect 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 archaic 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 departed language enjoy 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 reach adulthood and gain professional radio licenses, they are always "smarter, more knowledgeable, more intelligent, more accomplished, better than everyone" because they swear 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 preempt but the market objected and the phrase was quietly dropped. The technical trait 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 professional Radio License Classes Ov   by KE5WDI on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I am assuming the ORZ... what ever you call yourself is not an professional radio operator, but just someone that has organize his course on to eham to downgrade anyone and everyone that will read his divel....

    I could sit back without observation until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to maintain 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 respect it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a stop to it.

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

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

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

    I've been considering buying a table saw to build some DIY full compass stereo speakers. If I crawl 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 professional Radio License Classes Ov   by WS4E on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I maintain 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 respect getting Extra is smooth now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not maintain had a study ally who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him expound some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

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

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

    In fact I maintain been practicing code since summer, with my goal to participate in Straight Key Night this year. My goal was carry out CW in 1 year but thats close enough. I can read at about 20wpm, but I am trying to build some fist skills to exhaust 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 exhaust CW, I don't espy anything to worry about CW going away. I besides don't espy the no-code Extra as a imperfect thing either.

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

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

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

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

    When you ASSUME you know it everyone 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 repose is just troll'n for loathe and discontent.

    As to my abilites in CW... I respect I middling around 40-45 wpm in morse and faster using american.. as they maintain 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 gain 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 same handicapped people who belong to the ADA? The same whiners who for the sheer fun of it crawl around looking for people to sue when they don't gain their way? They maintain seen a lot of them gain "in your face" when they exigency a extra bux. Some carry out it just to "get in your face" as they are frustrated troll's)

    As to your enuendo abou the ARRL... When they crawl to the the FCC and say..."WE represent everyone 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"... crawl figure. they are quick to connect which ever side is winning (or can manufacture them money) ...and popular... be it politically remedy or not from what they maintain seen.

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

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! WS4E on December 8, 2009I maintain 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 respect getting Extra is smooth now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not maintain had a study ally who had a degree in electronics engineering, I don't know if I made it. But lots of study plus having him expound some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

    In fact I maintain 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 exhaust 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 exhaust CW--------------------------------------------------

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

    Nothing wrong with 15 wpm.. its a nice hurry to QSO on ... and they will be looking for your call badge on SKN...congrats.CW is more than just code... its a course of thinking.. enjoy 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 enjoy you did)

    We hope others supervene 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 ample thing...from what they maintain heard... I am positive some of the 5sneylanders are quiet contemplateing months later what the thrust 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 call yourself is not an professional radio operator, but just someone that has organize his course 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 gain in. That's unfortunate for the existent professional community. But it is their policy and they are everyone stuck with the benevolent of frustrated, bitter-bile-filled vomit from an anonymous coward that badly needs some psychologic therapy............KE5WDI: "I could sit back without observation until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to maintain 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 respect it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a stop to it."

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

    On "policy" I can understand an objection and complete blocking-out from participation even on the basis of using an alliteration to a swear word. I've been blocked out for using the phonetic alphabet substitute for two words. Okay, I toughed it out, complained to e-ham management, eventually re-instated. I didn't apologize for that. I've been a national for a long time and am a voluntary enlistee in the US Army during a wartime (the dynamic aspect of the Korean War). No one on e-ham article forums is required to reclaim 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 carry out what can be described as a total loathe CRIME observation as this "QRZ..." anonymous coward did such as (quoting):

    QRZ...: "We hope others supervene 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 ample thing...from what they maintain heard... I am positive some of the 5sneylanders are quiet contemplateing months later what the thrust 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 professional way?!? Yes...it is bad, bad, imperfect to exhaust even an alliteration to a swear word, but it is perfectly "okay" to vent TOTAL loathe and DENIGRATION against one activity interest group!? Yes, I guess it is.

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

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

    On the other hand, these traditionalist super-patriots may be simply USING professional radio to puff themselves up in importance, significance in the alleged sense of yesterday. Some of those try to CONTROL others...by insults, intimidation, denigration in order to carry out as THEY say. They remind me of little, tiny dictators trying to RULE by any means possible. The aptitude 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 cloak 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 professional radio lore is that of the PAST, their references being copious material published in the PAST. When faced with a future, they maintain dinky to crawl on. The future is an UNKNOWN, scary in its uncertainty, especially when they don't know how to handle it. The smooth course is to linger with archaic things that the invisible cowards pretension to "know." That is EASY. No effort. A "security blanket" for their warped souls.

    I maintain seen evidence that there ARE long-timers who are generous 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 professional radio is a voluntary activity with plenty of OPTIONS available within allocations. There is NO regulatory exact that licensees MUST exhaust any particular mode/modulation over any other allocated mode/modulation. Just linger within frequency boundaries, supervene regulations, and play nice. But, the super-patriotic traditionalist DEMANDS that they carry out as they command. When they don't, these traditionalists gain irate and spiteful. everyone of this "brotherhood of hams" is a lot of hypocritical BS concerning them. They only want everyone 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 maintain so many OPTIONS in their current USA professional 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 enjoy to exhaust 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 haughty enough of my call badge and designation to badge my posts on this site everytime I write something."

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

    I'll maintain to preserve 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 swear what a measure person can in 1 min) maintain you thought about running for ARRL political office. You would be great.. only problem is most don't know (or care) what you crawl on... and on talking about... that is so far off theme that they can crawl purchase a nap, a shower, maintain lunch, carry out their taxes and reach 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.. ample thing they invented transistors and FETs or the transmitting tube industry would be showing a stockmarket booming extend and your back yard littered with archaic worn out finals) Only one other person you maintain 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 respect his wife shot him (7 times with a 6 shooter). Something about sleep depervation..or stress..or something enjoy that... LOLLLLLLL

    would cherish it... if you could crawl back and give us a exec summary of what you were trying to say... espy them guys down in 5sneyland... are quiet stuck on espy 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 cherish it if you could carry out it in 10 words or less. (again for the benifit of them 5sneylanders' )

    Awww...You know how us archaic guys are. If its not stimulating... they gain bored and tumble 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 miracle why CW is growning in popularity...

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

    oh well be heedful who you call a coward... one might purchase that as being vile and you gain 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 crawl to HRO n buy a key and carry out enjoy the other guy did.).... .. --... ...-- ... --.- .-. --.. -.. .-. ..--- .-.-.-

      Trends in USA professional 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 haughty to hold the class of Ham Radio Operator. I quiet am haughty to this day as a Tech. My plans to upgrade to general are there, but time,work, cost of gear and family life watch to overshadow this dream. I will eventually upgrade and bask in the HF bands. One day.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AD7VH on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "When's the final time any of you advanced the technique of radio?" KC5NYJ:

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham maintain done many things to promote the technique of radio, so I don't know where you gain off. I maintain been doing quite a bit of toil to ameliorate mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to promote 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 dinky over 2 weeks, with a qualify hearing loss (coupled with tinnitus), and working 50 hours a week. I am not able to copy code very well anymore because of the ringing in my ears, but I am positive that I could 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 gain in the course of getting the Extra class. I didn't keeping what would maintain been required to gain it... I was going to gain it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more lore than was required to pass the test, that is everyone that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

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

    Actually, quite a few of us on eham maintain done many things to promote the technique of radio, so I don't know where you gain off. I maintain been doing quite a bit of toil to ameliorate mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to promote 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 dinky over 2 weeks, with a qualify hearing loss (coupled with tinnitus), and working 50 hours a week. I am not able to copy code very well anymore because of the ringing in my ears, but I am positive that I could 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 gain in the course of getting the Extra class. I didn't keeping what would maintain been required to gain it... I was going to gain it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more lore than was required to pass the test, that is everyone that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I know an American guy who passed everyone the exams in one day but can't connect two pieces of wire together. He boasts about his achievement and suffers contour xenophobia. Maybe he will try to connect two wires and thereby electrocute himself.Of course they in England had to be more heedful because they maintain the superior 250 volts. This means they can maintain thinner more resilient cables on everyone 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, enjoy Kings Bush and Obama.Get a life guys ham radio is (a) a hobby, (b) life itself, not a course of life. It is almost as ample 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 material fact is one way. Another course is to status an sentiment - or a wish - as if it is a fact.

    Errors in logic are everyone over the set too. The most common IMHO are the "ad hominem" error and its mirror image, the "appeal to authority" error. Both are the attempt to exhaust the identity of the speaker to supersede a heedful examination of the reasoning and facts. When you espy someone giving their resume as a understanding 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 exhaust 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 manufacture someone a troll nor change the veracity of what they say. Their statements quiet maintain to be judged by the same 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 maintain the latitude and the money, respect a ample radial-arm saw. I always preferred one to a table saw. Helped build a pair of folded horns with one.

    To WS4E: ample on ya! I hope to toil you in SKN. What bands carry out you work?

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

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

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To many long-winded posts.   Trends in USA professional 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 cognizant that, quote---"On 25 February 2007 I took (and passed) everyone test elements in front of a four-member ARRL VEC examination team. everyone four team members separately checked my reply sheets. I got NO special favors. Not even being 74 at the time". Congratulations Len. Now give it a rest   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by AC9HE on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Of everyone the hobbies that I maintain ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than everyone of them reclaim together.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Even counting marriage?   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WS4E on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! >Of everyone the hobbies that I maintain ever enjoyed, this one>has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative,>bassackwards people than everyone of them reclaim together.

    Nah, computer technology forums are even worse.

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

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

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by N8QBY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To G3LBS: What does my exhaust of the word, "To" maintain to carry out with my commenting on how long some posts are. The word to is used as a function 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 maintain control of your own faculties.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KB6QXM on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KC6HCJ wrote: Of everyone the hobbies that I maintain ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than everyone of them reclaim 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 espy 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 gain a license. That was it. The PC police to manufacture positive everyone is included as they carry out not want to affront 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 swear Oh I espy 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 same should crawl for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax everyone the course around.

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

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

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

    Feel free to flame me. carry out 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 generous minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries.

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

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

    73

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

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

    I hunt information from this because the late 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 gain a license. That was it."

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

    KB6QXM: "The PC police to manufacture positive everyone is included as they carry out not want to affront 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 appealing to gain the question pool from, say, 1984 and compare it to today's. I miracle 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 gain a lot more people to flee 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 purchase two years of Latin. I'd maintain been much better off if they'd let me purchase typing, or more science courses, or Basic computing. Latin was a departed language even then.

    KB6QXM: "The same should crawl for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax everyone the course around."

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

    btw, nowhere in portion 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 carry out I want to be lumped into a group with some people that actually had to carry out a lot of difficult toil to gain their extra class license and besides people that had to carry out very little. NO!!"

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

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

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

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

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

    The restructuring of 2000 took set under the Clinton administration

    The discontinuance of code testing took set under the second Bush administration.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by N4JTE on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can they reclaim a fork in this?   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 everyone the hobbies that I maintain ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than everyone of them reclaim 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 espy 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 everyone the NPRMs, 18 (!) Petitions that eventually led to the December 2006 Notice that code testing would be eliminated from USA professional radio license examinations. That is a 9 year span of time. What is MISSING from them are everyone 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 oblige in 1991. The FCC does not maintain everyone those NPRM documents on-line yet but copies of the 1990 Notice maintain been obtained and circulated.

    The alleged "pressure" came from INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS who were seeking to modernize regulations. It was a LEGAL process and allowed everyone 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 ample preservative since the acid 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 gain a license. That was it."

    Incorrect. That requirement was in the LAW and reclaim 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 professional radio license, an applicant had to meet the lawful requirements AT THE TIME. Those requirements maintain been changing. Witness three major recent milestones: Incentive Licensing; Restructuring; Elimination of code testing entire. everyone of those major changes were achieved by democratic process with the FCC hearing everyone sides. That included the ARRL and its legal difficult 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 final few decades..................KB6QXN: "The PC police to manufacture positive everyone is included as they carry out not want to affront 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 expound business. :-)

    Since privatization of everyone radio operator license testing, commercial or amateur, the NCVEC Question Pool Committee has authored everyone 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 observation between onset of Restructuring and before the NPRM on eliminating morse code testing]...............KB6QXN: "There is something about NOT pleasing everyone. When I was testing for my black belt in"

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

    KB6QXN: "In college when I was getting my degree, did my professors swear Oh I espy 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 same should crawl for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax everyone the course around."

    When you attempt "analogies" that cannot apply you are either going bananas or maintain a needy 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 everyone those existing when YOU were FIRST LICENSED IN professional RADIO are to be kept forever. If you quiet respect that, then you are exhibiting selfish, very self-centered viewpoints. Laws CAN be changed. The USA has a process by which to carry out such changes. That CHANGE happened that you did not accord with is NOT the "fault" of the Law. It falls back on selfish individuals who will never avow "losing."..................KB6QXN: "I know that I will never change what happened. Political Correctness and generous minded individuals are taking over this and many other countries."

    I detect your irritation that everyone will not spy 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 maintain many hobbies."

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

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

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

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

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

    The restructuring of 2000 took set under the Clinton administration

    The discontinuance of code testing took set 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 professional 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 solitary commenter on one NPRM could NOT manufacture a convincing change, the only "blame" to manufacture is by pointing to and identifying yourself. It is lucid that your political orientation is to the Democratic party. That has NO existent presence on the matter that affected the change or not-change of trends in USA professional radio license classes over the final three years.

    If you really, really looked at the final Notice of decisions on matters before the FCC, you would find everyone of the respondents to NPRMs listed. If you really, really read everyone 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 everyone civil radio services in the USA. It isn't just about professional radio. professional radio is one of the SMALLER radio services in the USA. It is "politically" the smallest since it directly affects a minority national demographic. "Mass Media" (formerly known as Broadcasting) is perhaps the largest because there is direct consequence to any national or household that has a broadcast receiver, audio or video.

    As to your observation about "slow eorsion of standards" in USA professional radio, it demonstrates that YOU respect yourself far better than any government agency in knowledge, law, and many other things. There is ONE federal agency to regulate everyone civil radio in the USA. There are NO "supreme leaders" of any radio service except for some delusional types who respect 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 everyone decisions on change are published in the Federal Register. In some cases, decisions maintain reach 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 espy only themselves as some benevolent of "role-model" and/or "standard bearer." Those who fancy themselves "better" than the law can await to be up against others who respect selfishly about being the "boss of all" and only one of you will (think) you "won." Neither one won anything except disfavor of everyone of us who accepted change. They outnumber you. respect about that.

    AF6AY

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

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

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

    Come to respect of it, new borns might programed to wail if they maintain to learning CW?

    Best from TucsonBob

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

    Why?

    It's just a discussion about the number of US professional 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 reach zero - in portion 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 anything of that really answers the difficult questions such as "how dynamic 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 professional in the 1960s. The situation then had a lot of parallels with today.

    From the discontinuance of WW2 until the early 1960s, US professional radio numbers had grown steadily, both in absolute numbers and as a percentage of the population. Lots of new hams, lots of ham gear manufacturers, lots of adolescent people getting licenses. Some swear it was a Golden Age.

    But in the early 1960s the growth in US professional 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 charge and complexity of the new SSB gear shut out too many people.

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

    Some gear manufacturers disappeared from the professional radio market. Others reduced their lines, or kept selling modified versions of their archaic 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 preserve up with the baby boom! When the archaic codgers died off, that would be the discontinuance - 1980 at the latest!

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

    And they quiet maintain the doomsayers.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by N3QE on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > The same should crawl for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it> is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering> standard, you lax everyone the course around.

    What standards maintain 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 sphere office, and the tests were everyone about tube radios and dipoles and the CW and phone troupe edges.

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

    Finally, I gain back on the air again (CW - it had always been my proper love) just a few years ago and elect to upgrade to Extra. I open the study bespeak and everyone I can swear is:

    WOW.

    I mean, back when I was a kid, I did manage to motif out how to prejudice tube amplifiers, spy at trapezoid patterns on scopes to adjust modulation, portray how to exhaust VR tubes to carry out 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 everyone the new modes and rules and accompanying regulations I had to know for the new 21st century Extra test. Space operation? professional TV? everyone 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 everyone of the advances in technology, and I didn't maintain a huge problem with that side of the test. But rule-wise, wow, almost everything was new to me.

    Am I haughty of what I scholarly as a kid about pile and adjusting tube rigs? Yeah, sure. But it positive would circle off any new kids wanting to gain into the hobby for us to oblige 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 entangle up on).

    And I quiet toil exclusively CW.

    Tim.

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 call 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 support it.

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

    Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I maintain my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the gear that I have. I would enjoy to gain my general and my extra some day down the road but for now this is the extent that I intend to endulge myself into this hobby. I find it more or less taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are quiet very diligent with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they bask in the hobby, they carry out so at the flat in which they choose. I exhaust my gear maybe three four times a week and bask in doing so very much. I maintain other hobbies as well and carry out not emerse myself into them any more than I wish 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 bask in the hobby at this level.

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

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

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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, professional Radio licenses havevery much kept up with the extend in thecountry's population.

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

    Today, they comprise over 0.2% of the USpopulation.

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

    73Scott W5ESE

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 professional licenses held by individuals is 681,637.

    Works out to 0.223%

    Next year is the census. Will be appealing to espy 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 maintain a bunch of different things in mind.

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

    In the archaic days they didn't maintain access to the actual mp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass everyone tests for a given license on the first try at the same session. 30 day wait to retest, you couldn't just pay another fee and gain 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 watch to thrust out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today watch to cover a lot of subjects, but not in much depth. The archaic tests covered fewer subjects in a lot more detail. Which is better is a matter of opinion.

    What it everyone 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 positive of a pass on the first go. purchase Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what contour the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to be absolutely positive of being able to decipher any benevolent of Ohm's Law problem. But when you know exactly what the questions will be, it makes sense to focus on being able to decipher those problems only.

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

    There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which swear to purchase someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone maintain 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 full CEPT reciprocal license, after years and years of accepting the US general license as well.

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

    Boil it everyone down to this: Which would you respect easier to pass:

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

    or

    An exam where you knew the general subjects that would be tested AND could espy 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 large 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 sphere offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost everyone 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 gain involved in the actual regs too much, they set the general policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding. spy at everyone the support Bush II gave to BPL for just one example. spy at how they got medical code-test waivers back in 1990 for another.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 carry out 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 gain more accurate calculations.

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

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

    No amps, just ample antennas & ample 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 circle it on. You don't maintain clue.

    The inability to adopt to progressive communications methods & truly serve the community has stunted the growth of a once much 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 maintain BEEN!

    The quest for control, endless "You can't carry out 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 maintain been licensed long enough to espy it...

    Rafwifidx@gmail

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 gain licenses. But I doubt many illegals would give their personal info to a Federal agency!

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 appealing 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 crawl back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the grand person they believe themselves to be."

    I've encounterd the very same attitudes for a helf century. Kinda reminds me of the amusing saying, "When I was adolescent they whittled their own ICs out of wood!" :-)................KC9HGJ: "Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I maintain my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the gear that I have. I would enjoy to gain my general and my extra some day down the road but for now this is the extent that I intend to endulge myself into this hobby. I find it more or less taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are quiet very diligent with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they bask in the hobby, they carry out so at the flat in which they choose. I exhaust my gear maybe three four times a week and bask in doing so very much. I maintain other hobbies as well and carry out not emerse myself into them any more than I wish 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 bask in the hobby at this level."

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

    Hear ya! ample on you for writing that.

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

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

    Good on you again! I totally accord with you on that. I swear again that professional 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, professional radio has become a raison d'etre, their "reason for being." They maintain this terrible 'need' to be 'better than others' anddon't falter to attempt beating on those who just want to bask in the hobby independently, personally, the course THEY want to bask in it.

    In the USA the FCC gives us much liberty in personal OPTION of preference in choosing what they want to carry out in professional radio. THEY are not lesser or greater for doing separate, individual things within it.

    Contrary to professional radio folklore, ANY radio operator license is simply a license to operate on certain frequencies under certain 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 certain conditions as codified in law.

    In a rough analogy, it is enjoy the Cartage Driver License, a license to carry cargo for hire and engage in legal traffic of such cartage, but being required to obey the very same roadway laws as everyone other drivers of any vehicle type. The ONLY advantage a "30 ton tractor and box" is physical mass that can overrun minuscule vehicles in defiance of the law. In another course the petty dinky professional tyrant tries to BULL their course 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 carry out not have, not carry out I at this time own HF gear so carry out not exigency a general or Extra license."

    I got an professional 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 suffer and lore to pass some professional tests. I besides had the funds to purchase an entire station new. That was done for MY convenience, not to "prove" myself to anyone. Ah, but that opened another two cans of worms of absolute resentment to certain others.

    According to certain others "I maintain to launch as a teen-ager and slowly toil my course up the proficiency ladder and crawl through everyone the class levels to warrant my aptitude to others in the professional 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 professional radio licenses). That VEC QPC was the ONLY "community." :-)

    Time-travel has not yet been invented. I cannot crawl 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 everyone of us then.

    Just WHY in #### designation must they "progress slowly, step-by-step through everyone the classes of license?" professional radio is a HOBBY. It isn't a Union or Guild. It positive as #### isn't professional by federal definition. WE, everyone of us are allowed to enter or progress as far as THEY keeping to. I've been a PROFESSIONAL in electronics and radio, that is earning MONEY for my toil services. A few Others expressed much 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 enjoy that. I could maintain 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 everyone 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 positive that sticklers for EXACTNESS will scream "that isn't a QSO!" It was a radio contact nonetheless. Q-codes were devised by professional radiomen, not amateurs. Amateurs picked up the exhaust so that they could counterfeit to be "professional." Roger that. :-) In everyone the history or radio communications the ACTUAL invention/innovations of advancing any status of the radio technique by amateurs were done before 1940. I don't keeping what the ARRL writes, I've got many other sources of historical information on electronics which are not out trying to gain 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 maintain commented on UNverified 'trends' that are more half-truths, folklore, repetitions of what others claim. I swear that anyone who enjoys whatever activity they are in are very free to bask in it. I besides swear that anyone who wants to ordain what anyone else "should" bask in is one sick puppy and treated with momentary compassion for their mental illnesses. <shrug>

    73, Len AF6AY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Commenting on eHam.net is enjoy 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, much prose Len--easy to supervene datum presentation."

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

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

    Thanks for the nice words, Bob.

    Unfortunately, some folks respect 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 espy if there was an repercussion from the elimination of everyone morse code testing for any USA professional 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 professional radio to enable them to study a situation dispassionately...............W7ETA: "Come to respect of it, new borns might programed to wail if they maintain to learning CW?"

    :-)

    Heh heh, I can't command 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 hunt information from THEIR "permission to purchase a test)" :-)

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

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

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

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

    73, Len AF6AY

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

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

    N2EY: "Sure, there's the code testing reduction and elimination. But that's not everyone that changed. In the archaic days they didn't maintain access to the actual mp;A. No CSCEs either; you had to pass everyone tests for a given license on the first try at the same session. 30 day wait to retest, you couldn't just pay another fee and gain 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 professional radio licensing stopped in early 2007. Code testing for Commercial Radiotelegraphy operators continues...but before COLEMs, not VECs. Just think, you could crawl commercial and actually rate money as a radiotelegraphy operator on the much 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" train of books on just about every trade that had license testing, commercial radio and professional radio included. Hardbound in 1956. I tried to gain 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 everyone the rules from a borrowed copy (fit into a half-inch lax leaf). I didn't maintain any thought of re-taking any test in Chicago at an FCC sphere Office. Gollee, if there was some regulation or something on re-taking atest, I would maintain failed to recollect it. Tsk, tsk, I didn't maintain to retake anything. Oh, yes, one other thing, I didn't interrupt my school classes since I was 23 and newly released from dynamic duty with the US Army. <shrug>

    I can't swear what the test fee was at the FCC because I didn't bother remembering it. I had earned the exotic "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 carry out 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 watch to thrust out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today watch to cover a lot of subjects, but not in much depth. The archaic tests covered fewer subjects in a lot more detail. Which is better is a matter of opinion."

    Gosh and golly, it positive sounds as though THE HAM TEST was a existent toughie long ago. I don't know since I never bothered to purchase one until 2007. I've heard differently but then both you and K8MN maintain publicly agreed that I was "too dumb to pass a ham test." Of course that was before I asked for your license to purchase one. Undaunted, I just took it and passed everyone three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-)...............N2EY: "What it everyone 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 positive of a pass on the first go. purchase Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what contour the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to be absolutely positive of being able to decipher any benevolent of Ohm's Law problem. But when you know exactly what the questions will be, it makes sense to focus on being able to decipher 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 everyone three courses in The Calculus in collitch, yeah... :-)................N2EY: "The changes don't carry weight everyone today just memorizes the mp;A and doesn't learn anything in the process. Far from it! But it does carry weight that the test method is very different - and that's a change in standards."

    I quiet maintain the one-inch thick looseleaf notebook filled with verbatim questions and answers of everyone three test elements applicable to an professional radio license examination for February 2007. I can't find my sheet of the exact numbers of the Question Pool questions but, for everyone 120 questions of 3 total tests there were about 13 times the required minimum. The professional Extra Question Pool had about 16 times the required minimum or about 430 for Extra alone. I could re-count everyone the allowed questions in the Question Pool but it would be a wasted pains 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, everyone characters plus positions and lots of other dinky notes in the script. The only observation 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 issue as correct), everyone questions AND answers exigency to be "memorized." But, I guess everyone you long-time amateurs maintain SUPERHUMAN powers thus you maintain evolved into superbeings or something. It must be the exotic status of the radio technique that long-timers gain doing everyone that morse code stuff?............N2EY: "There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which swear to purchase someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone maintain 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 maintain been granted since the year 2000.

    You preserve saying that Technician Pluses are "automatically renewed" as Technician since no newTechnician plus licenses maintain 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 large BEFORE 'restructuring' came into effect. Numbers of the two just don't add up to your "theory." [don't let that stop you, accurate data verification hasn't stopped you yet].............N2EY: "Nobody is saying that hams today should maintain to pass the exact same tests as those given 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. But at the same time, it seems rather odd when an Extra doesn't know how to manufacture a simple wire dipole."

    Weird comment, Jimmy. Morse code testing has been required for professional radio ever since the first USA radio regulatory agency existed (created in 1912). Now, I look to recall one James Miccolis as being ADAMANT about absolutely KEEPING the morse code test privilege on through November 2006, then saying its elimination would be the "worst thing that can happen" [to USA professional 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 efficacious 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 everyone down to this: Which would you respect 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 besides want to pass my written California driver exam which I am now hypothetical to purchase every 5 years or so now. I've passed everyone of those...without "waivers."

    Ya see, I passed everyone the required tests for professional Extra in the USA and will never maintain to worry about taking another professional test in my life. Just preserve on renewing and it is mine for life. Even if I gain a Vanity callsign modification. That applies to everyone who renew within the required time period. Imagine, the mighty status of the technique of radio KNOWN by everyone licensees even after more than three decades since they've taken their final test. :-)................N2EY: "None of those test-method changes came about because the ARRL, ADA or large 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 sphere offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost everyone 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 professional activities and certainly was not operated in any professional 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 professional radio test by a Volunteer Examiner in 1969 and that same professional was besides your first QSO contact. Can they detect some "favoritsm" in there, perhaps "kindness" to a teener? Hmmm? Could they detect some same "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 term 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 gain involved in the actual regs too much, they set the general policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding."

    Sorry, the FCC is an INDEPENDENT federal agency, James. gladden 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 maintain been named George Herbert Walker Bush II. On everyone those "waivers" that troubles you so, WHO out there in professional land got code-test waivers? You maintain talked SO much about that but never revealed WHO got one. Since you are this mighty "insider" into government you just haven't fleshed out your mythology of "right v. wrong." 1990 was besides the year the Technician class (having no code test) NPRM was released. Technician class (of modern times) was made law in 1991. Are you confusing things or what?

    I respect you've been working too difficult as a "radio manufacturer" running the "Southgate Radio" company since the early 1970s. Relax, try to gain your mind clear. Try watching TV, enjoy re-runs of "Sanford and Son."

    Bye,

    AF6AY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KE7RYM on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I maintain been licensed for about two years, upgraded to General, and will upgrade to AE next year. The clubs in this area don't want new members, or at least they act that way. Despite this, I am getting on the air next year, finances permitting. I'm interested in vlf, HF, decrepit signal digital (all bands), and respect that the ARRL prints the troupe 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 lore in those areas when the next WARC rolls around and (fill in the blank) Telecomm wants the entire EHF troupe 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 everyone three test elements in one afternoon, no retakes. :-) ". I'll swear 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 enjoy spitting into the wind."

    It can look enjoy that sometimes. But to paraphrase what you wrote about professional radio, "Eham is What You manufacture Of It For Yourself".

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

    A classic troll-move on eham is to post something that seems plausible but is inaccurate, misleading or just unpretentious untrue. Those who know the facts then remedy 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 keeping about the veracity at all. What the troll wants is attention, and the occasion to nettle others and insult them. The responders carry out keeping about the truth, and preserve trying to set the record straight and concentrate on the facts, which simply keeps the game going.

    The troll will exhaust everyone the habitual tools of rational fallacy to preserve the responses coming. Common ones are the Appeal to Authority, Presuming the Conclusion, sentiment as Fact, Ad Hominem, controversy from Verbosity, misquoting, and various semantic games, but there are many others.

    The solution in everyone cases is to simply ignore the trolls completely and not purchase the bait.

    You can command when a troll is getting desperate when the inaccuracies circle 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 certain thing. No proof is given, just the unsuitable 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 course or another and crawl on to other ways of keeping the game going. Remember, the troll doesn't keeping about the veracity at all, only about the attention. The "Prove it!" response is attention, which is exactly what the troll wants.

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    However, there's one thing missing from everyone 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 status the AGE of their current licensees!

    It is besides valuable to recollect that, because their licenses are everyone on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you everyone are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us maintain 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 steep decline in their numbers stems from my dynamic toil as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the final several years, I maintain been able to weigh on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm besides getting the same feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly maintain contact.

    Indeed, most of my candidates for a "new" license in their Service maintain been what I call "retreads". These are folks who may maintain always wanted to gain 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 swear they were kept out of their Service by their collective, ongoing obsession with Morse testing.

    Another large group of people I test held a ham ticket at one time long ago, but life (in the contour of job, family or income) prevented them from actively pursuing the hobby until now. In the interim, they simply let whatever license they may maintain 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 maintain said, there is rarely an "under twenty something" in the lot.

    Now, don't gain me wrong. I'm more than lucky to maintain these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then everyone 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 departed and gone.

    The bottom line here is that, while their numbers may spy enjoy they maintain "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 launch dropping enjoy 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 maintain 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 maintain "advanced" everyone the course to Extra Class.

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

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

    It simply hasn't happened.

    It would now look that almost HALF of those in their current ranks maintain told the FCC to "take a hike" with their dumb "incentive" nonsense. Indeed, for whatever reason, today's Technicians maintain 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 circle professional Radio into the "No Budding RF Engineer Left Behind" Radio Service.

    It would everyone be comic if it wasn't so sad.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

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

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

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

    Nobody knows and it doesn't matter because the same was proper in 1999.

    KB1SF: "while their numbers may spy enjoy they maintain "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 rapidly or as far as they might enjoy but they ARE rising. Graph the numbers from the AH0A site and you'll see. (Graphs are excellent ample 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 maintain "advanced" everyone the course to Extra Class.

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

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

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

    Now spy 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 gain 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 everyone this very clearly.

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

    Also, if someone is only interested in VHF and above, why should they upgrade? Tech gives them everyone operating privileges above 30 MHz, which is more than 97% of the spectrum allowed to US hams, and everyone modes. If a ham doesn't want to carry out 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 crawl on to a master's degree?

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

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

    I respect not.

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

    Didn't circle out that way.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 everyone 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 status the AGE of their current licensees!"

    Thank you, Keith, but that age data is out of their control. FCC records of professional radio licensees don't maintain (or no longer have) data on age, or gender, and certainly not race. But, spy through several current or past professional radio publications in the USA and anyone can espy 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 espy that. I'm not going to speculate on HOW everyone 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. everyone had the appearance of being male, everyone appeared to be "over 40 in age.".................KB1SF: "It is besides valuable to recollect that, because their licenses are everyone on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you everyone are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us maintain died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?"

    I disagree more or less there. I did not carry out anywhere close to a "demographic picture" in my article for the simple understanding that there wasn't enough data to support anything close to a full demographic workup.

    The Hamdata website daily presentations carry out expound EXPIRATIONS of USA professional 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. professional 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 carry out NOT expound expirations. That is their choice. I would infer that the ARRL "sins by omission" because showing license expireation numbers is/has the appearance of a decided negative interest. Note besides that the ARRL does NOT expound or testify 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 connect them...they require many members to insure a profit for their efforts and pay everyone the paid staff, preserve 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 gain any motif 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 professional radio product maker/seller to gain current numbers of members. In other words, ARRL members cannot gain full information on their own 'national representative.' Members gain ONLY what membership headquarters decides.

    In Hamdata's case, they maintain stored past copies of FCC database downloads and derive some information by what I call "secondary sorting." (not an I.T. erm) "Primary sorting" consists of searching through the identified data fields in a database download to sever classes and to cross-check everyone licensee names against the previous day's download to espy 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 involved sorting program.

    ARRL statistics carry out not expound evidence of any such "secondary sorting." I don't know the details ofwww.qrz.com sorting methods; QR-zed is a private traffic 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 maintain "come back." [I maintain 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 steep decline in their numbers stems from my dynamic toil as an accredited examiner in both the USA and Canada. For the final several years, I maintain been able to weigh on the fingers of one hand the number of "under twenty somethings" I've administered examinations to for their Service. I'm besides getting the same feelings expressed by a number of other examiners with whom I regularly maintain contact."

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

    In general I carry out not personally espy the "need" to gain "younger people" so interested, especially teeners. Yes, I've read the scripts about everyone who were introduced to 'radio' as teeners and instantly fell in enjoy and made it their "life work." <shrug> Some bitterly resent ANY negativism expressed towards teener newcomers and a very few purchase it as a "personal insult!" The status of the technique of electronics (which includes the subset of 'radio') has been constantly evolving and advancing for the final 100 years (and change). With the advent of the PRACTICAL transistor and then the integrated circuit the status of the technique would change rapidly, usually less than half of onegeneration.

    Conditioned thinking (aka 'brainwashing') seems to toil best on teeners. That's about the only understanding I can espy for getting teeners into professional radio. That course the older generations can maintain someone upon which to imprint them with their own exigency to be parental and "show them the proper way" and everyone that stuff. When one gets older, swear into twenty-something ages, most maintain acquired a much variety of input into social mores, activities, sciences, trades, etc., etc., etc. They've besides gotten a better feeling about themselves and their capabilities and start questioning some of the 'older' folks who look to maintain quaint ideas (to the 'younger' folk). "Middle aged" folks watch to resent (sometimes bitterly) any unenthusiastic responses after they maintain told 'younger' folk "I know what is ample for you and you'd better listen!" :-)...............KB1SF: "Now, don't gain me wrong. I'm more than lucky to maintain these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then everyone 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 departed and gone."

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

    Worse yet, I don't maintain 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 spy enjoy they maintain "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 maintain objected strenuously against ANY "decline" in USA professional radio and I expectthey will continue. Most of their views are very PERSONAL and their opinions look set in stone sothat they are not violated by 'outsiders.' Still, very few of them will purchase any action on their own to circle it around. It takes some personal courage to present something dispassionately in public. One can be reviled for presenting truth, facts that don't lucky others preconceived notions, even personal fantasies. Medical doctors gain that a lot from patients who are diagnosed with imperfect diseases (from anecdotal input of two MDs).

    I'm reminded of a song from the archaic musical "South Pacific." A lyric goes "...younger than springtime am I..." So many are clinging desperately to the long-ago time of their own youth and refuse to promote to the present time. Oh, they may maintain the bling of ready-builts of today with lots of bells and whistles but so many quiet respect that Ohm's Law of Resistance is quiet some benevolent of "rocket science." <shrug>

    Heh, heh, back in the early 1960s I was tasked to measure a DIELECTRIC antenna made for a USN missle. It mounted very close to the tail and was exposed to the missle's rocket exhaust. Its physical measurements did NOT lucky 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 professional radio one MUST exhaust a WIRE dipole and linger on HF where everyone the "experts" are. The "experts" maintain already told me so. Long ago. :-)...............KB1SF: "As others maintain 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 maintain "advanced" everyone the course to Extra Class."

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

    Well, having spent a half century in electronics engineering, I can't recollect even up to 17% of everyone of my co-workers being professional 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 professional Extra class license "out of the box" (as the disparaging soubriquet goes) because it was relatively smooth for me to carry out so. Sure, I didn't gain 100% remedy on 120 questions total but then I don't await to exhaust professional radio in Outer Space...so I scored about 95%. :-) I got it to carry out 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 technique 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 snug with it...as evidenced by the professional radio publications' contents of ancient times. droll thing is, the vast majority of my toil colleagues ALREADY organize electronics fascinating enough to toil at it, to promote the existent status of the art. THEY did it, not professional dabblers, contrary to what the ARRL tries to manufacture everyone believe...................Good discussing things with you, Keith. Thank you. linger warm and maintain lucky 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 everyone sorts ofno-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response isalways the same: 'just pass the tests'. I respect onereason is that it would cost them everyone sorts of adminwork.

    What? That's everyone 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 respect it would be more toil to process everyone those test results. Not that I care, I don't maintain an Advanced class license anyway.

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 spy to the person on their left and then to their right. Then he told us that 2 out of 3 students that launch college don't graduate. He told us that if they respect they are going to manufacture it then those other 2 people must not. Of course statistics don't actually toil that course 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% sample but then enjoy N2EY pointed out, that's just a bachelor's. I'm positive you could weigh on one hand the number of people in that latitude who made it everyone the course to doctorate.

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

    You maintain to recollect that FCC is portion of The Government, so it's probably not nearly as simple as you imagine. For example, there are probably everyone kinds of safeguards to preclude simply upgrading a license class, let alone doing it for everyone Advanceds.

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

    There's besides the question of whether FCC would maintain to route out everyone new license documents.

    As for processing the tests, FCC doesn't carry out 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 everyone of them upgraded.

    But perhaps the biggest understanding FCC has turned down no-test upgrades is that FCC thinks they would set a imperfect precedent.

    Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 gain 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 manufacture up nearly half the total. And that fact indicates that their Technician license has increasingly become their "destination license". To me, that fact alone provides irrefutable proof (as if they quiet exigency any) that "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure.

    I've besides been told (by someone who has actually seen the numbers) that the ARRL, too, has been very quietly doing some of their own "scientific" sampling as of late along these lines and their "scientific" sampling data tends to track pretty closely with my "anecdotal" data.

    Indeed, their survey data very clearly shows a disturbing downward trend in their numbers that, unless things quickly circle around and they launch 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 espy and ears to hear.

    Indeed, everyone one REALLY has to carry out these days is to simply spy around the latitude at the advancing age (in the contour of graying (or balding!) heads and expanding waistlines) of the bulk of participants at various professional radio-related gatherings to espy these very lucid demographic trends.

    By any measure, they ARE, as a group, getting ever older. What's more, these days, their once dynamic bands (even during sunspot minimums) are increasingly less crowded. reclaim for the occasional contest weekend or 75 meter net, overall, their bands are becoming ever more reticent as compared to just a few years ago.

    I often miracle how many others maintain called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to maintain that troupe very quickly reach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the same 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 dynamic 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 repose of the day, usually everyone one hears…sometimes for hours at a stretch and up and down the band…are repeater IDs.

    Hamfests, too, are feeling the pinch. Even the "granddaddy" hamfest of them everyone 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 course you reduce it, that's an ABYSMAL showing for a so-called "world class" extravaganza that, in years past, has routinely attracted upwards of 35,000 participants.

    What's more, other, once very favorite hamfests (like the Miami hamfest) maintain now gone the course of the dinosaur from want of participation. Countless other smaller 'fests maintain long since evaporated as well.

    Now, granted, each of these trends and observations, when viewed in isolation, probably wouldn't be understanding 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 maintain eminent in previous posts, they really maintain nobody but ourselves to blame for it.

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

    Or, to reclaim it another way, it now appears we've been very successfully (and very happily) "eating" an ever-larger portion of their "young" along the course for everyone those years. And, predictably, their Service is now paying a very high charge for keeping everyone that ARRL-inspired, FCC-imposed regulatory malfeasance (in the contour of arcane Morse tests and increasingly impertinent "achievement tests") firmly in set LONG after it had outlived any regulatory purpose. This, of course assumes that everyone 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 maintain 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 maintain everyone determined that such operationally baseless approaches to federal licensing are "systemically discriminatory". Those findings, in turn, maintain made such certification approaches illegal under a entire plethora of 1990s-era US federal equal access laws.

    Unfortunately, I call that their ongoing, collective obsession with keeping everyone that (now blatantly illegal) 1950s era, ego-stroking, "achievement-based" nonsense firmly in set in the licensing and regulatory systems for THEIR Service LONG after it served any regulatory purpose may besides very well prove to be their undoing.

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

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

    Unfortunately, the imperfect tidings is that there are fewer and fewer forward thinking youngsters now taking their set in their ranks. My hunch is that this could very well be because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" maintain been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their enthusiast insistence that such newcomers can never hope to be "real hams" unless and until, for example, they've taken and passed a dumb Morse test.

    And then they maintain the nerve to miracle 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 course you reduce these numbers, to me, they everyone add up to a very lucid recipe for their Service's continued skid into sociological and technological irrelevance.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 material 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 expound what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a general Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I maintain yet to gain a straight answer…or ANY reply 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 understanding 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 look to me that the FCC certainly qualifies as a "public entity" under the terms of this Act.

    However, the ADA is not the only federal statute that deals with such issues. Another federal statute is the "Rehabilitation Act". And, as I read it, among other things, it besides specifically prohibits Federal Executive Agencies (such as the FCC) from excluding persons with disabilities from obtaining the benefits of federal programs as a result of their disability.

    Specifically, Section 504(a) of the Rehabilitation Act (which relates to nondiscrimination Under Federal Grants and Programs) reads in portion as follows:

    "No otherwise qualified individual with a disability in the United States, as defined in section 7(20), shall, solely by understanding 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 monetary assistance OR UNDER ANY PROGRAM OR ACTIVITY CONDUCTED BY ANY EXECUTIVE AGENCY…"(emphasis mine)

    The law goes on to swear 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 ample class action barrister could manufacture a very tough case that their entire 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 professional Radio Service in the United States.

    That’s because their licensing system withholds full 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 expound below), but besides crawl WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines insinuate should be the MINIMUM qualifications for full participation in their professional Service.

    The term they educators exhaust to portray such tests is "invalid" because such tests measure skills and abilities that endure dinky or no relationship to what candidates actually exigency to know in order to successfully achieve in their new roles. When constructing such tests, one must always hunt information from the question: "Does the test actually measure what it is hypothetical to measure?"

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

    Let me cite an sample that may profit 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 manufacture that person's hiring decision 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 manufacture them. And while a lore of how boxes are made is certainly "nice to know", it is NOT an essential element 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 reply a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an professional 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 final few KHz of their HF bands now reserved for Extra Class operators. In fact, ANYONE with a valid professional License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of professional satellites.

    Likewise, asking an Extra Class applicant the question "How many times per second is a new frame transmitted in a fast-scan television system?" is besides an illegal question because, once again, professional television operation is NOT an exclusive operational privilege granted solely to Extra Class operators.

    As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a valid professional Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an professional 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 reply that particular question maintain absolutely NOTHING to carry out with the lore 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 valuable in determining the legal validity of their tests.

    And, sadly, BOTH the general AND Extra Class exam pools are now CHOCK full of these equally "nice to know" questions that often endure absolutely NO direct relationship to the added privileges granted. True, such questions discuss professional operation in general. But, under today's federal equal-access laws, that's simply no longer ample 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 concede of an Extra Class license becomes systemically discriminatory because it perpetuates a SYSTEM of discrimination by forcing everyone applicants (not just the disabled) to demonstrate lore and skills that are either irrelevant, or are not required for the exclusive privileges associated with the class and character 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 a certain degree 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 call signs.

    THAT prior management decision 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 maintain absolutely NOTHING directly to carry out 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 final few KHz of their HF bands is overkill. Beyond knowing where the new lower-end frequency boundaries are, that skill set should maintain ALREADY been tested on the general Class exam.

    Likewise, it DOES NOT purchase 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" call sign.

    Yet, as I've said, under their arcane FCC "incentive licensing" farce, those are the ONLY TWO added operational privileges an Extra Class license grants to those who successfully complete such impertinent tests.

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

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

    But, what this DOES carry weight is that, in order to be in full compliance with US equal access law, federal agencies enjoy the FCC can no longer arbitrarily set regulatory barriers in front of people seeking full and complete access to federally administered programs enjoy professional Radio without just cause. That besides 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 maintain 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 reach up with 50 UNIQUE questions that relate SPECIFICALLY to the scanty additional operational privileges their Extra Class license now grants.

    It is besides valuable to recollect that no person needs to specifically prove they've been discriminated against in order for a federal agency to be organize guilty of systemic discrimination under these laws. everyone 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 maintain clearly and unequivocally done in the paragraphs above.

    I've always organize it dismal that, everywhere else in the world, governments maintain left it up to they Hams to elect which operating mode goes where on their bands. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the organization that governs everyone radio services internationally, has set out broad (VERY broad) frequency allocations for their Service...usually consisting of only an upper and lower troupe restrict and a specified bandwidth for the emissions to be conducted therein.

    It is only in the United States that those broad limits maintain been further restricted by license class and operating mode in their portion 97. And that is because the FCC, back in the 1950s and 60s, decided to ground differences in their license classes (and the incentive for us to upgrade) on ego-stroking "exclusivity" (i.e access to so-called "exclusive" operating frequencies and modes) rather than on specific operational considerations such as limits on power output, constructing transmitters "from scratch", operating a repeater or club station, or giving exams.

    And, as I maintain besides said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a valid (spelled: "legal") understanding for a US Government agency to concede full 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 reply exam questions that are either duplicative, impertinent and/or unrelated to the SPECIFIC additional operating privileges such new licenses will grant.

    CANADA'S SYSTEM

    By contrast, and unlike the "ego-based" tests proscribed for applicants to their Service in the USA, the Canadian license system for their Service ties the successful completion of THEIR advanced test to specific operational needs. In exchange for successfully passing it, Canadian hams are given just a very minuscule number of very specific additional privileges that are far more commensurate with the technical material examined. These comprise being able to build transmitters "from scratch", flee 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 much 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). everyone of those activities absolutely require a modicum of additional technical lore to achieve safely and without interfering with other operators or other Services.

    And, because the Canadian test criteria are largely based on such clearly delineated operational and safety needs (rather than on simply granting Extra Class operators "exclusive" access to artificially walled-off frequency spectrum that general Class operators ALREADY maintain 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 everyone of their internationally allocated professional Bands. The only frequency restrictions such Basic Certificate holders maintain are by emission BANDWIDTH, NOT by license class or operating mode. And, usually, for HF, that bandwidth restrict is set at 6 KHz (except for 30 Meters where it is set at 1 KHz).

    Or, to reclaim it another way, the only operational restrictions set 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 elect 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 professional Radio License Classes   by WA4KCN on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I was a ham back in the 1960s and I recollect everyone the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would be the discontinuance of ham radio by 1980 at the latest - back when there were maybe 250,000 US amateurs.

    Didn't circle out that way.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim your analysis on the theme 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 befall in much numbers. In other words to hang your hat on the sentiment adolescent people becoming licensed radio amateurs in the coming years should result in the total growth of ham radio operators is well a dumb belief. adolescent folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and archaic age folks. Let us suppose a high priced expert marketing concern is hired to develope and implement a marketing strategy for professional radio with the specific intent of growing the professional radio base. The marketing firm's suffuse is to grow the ground to a specific goal and to carry out so with the resources given. After completing market research what age group would they elect to target. Suppose the ARRL hires such a difficult hoping more licensees carry weight more members and the conclusion from the marketing concern is the members difficult earned money should crawl toward an advertising drive directed and focused on the young. Applying nothing more than the rule of understanding they know the conclusion would be to target older age groups. IN other words the occasion to recruit new ham operators is with older folk. Heck the fellow that wrote this article is an older gentleman who wisely took advantage of the new codeless license. So for anyone who says professional radio cannot attract older folk especially with the easier testing requirements just spy at the the fellow who wrote the trends article. He is an excellent sample of the much new occasion for older and middle aged folks to reach into the hobby. Now having established the sentiment of adolescent folk driving professional radio growth as dimwitted, it is time to examine the more plausible proposition that middle aged and older folk new to the hobby can sustain or even grow professional radio in the future. One course to reply this question is to bench impress other orgainzations who are in fact growing by targeting older people. There are some really ample examples that give credence to the faith 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 sentiment of targeting adolescent folk to reclaim ham radio.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 material 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 reclaim on my most objective observation on this (good) question, I would swear NO. Not in a regulatory sense. Very definitely YES in the ego-stroking sense.

    Looking back over history of USA professional radio regulations, the fact that there are only three license classes granted New in the final 8 1/2 years (give or take) is beside the point. The USA could very easily maintain just TWO for HF access. But that would raise a terrible Hue and wail from the very established 'oldsters' who would safeguard to the discontinuance their "right" to hold certain cheished Title, Rank, Privilege, etc. It was acerbic enough during the observation aspect on the 'Reconstruction' NPRM, and I can espy it would be as great, perhaps even more acerbic now.

    The SIX different classes in the USA professional radio service were slowly grown from the so-called Incentive scheme long ago established. I was not directly involved in that but watched it happen, heard everyone the acerbic recriminatory comments and took no portion 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, maintain HAD to be familiar with certain services' regulations when toil needs arose. professional radio was not one of those radio services. Other radio services are more USE-specific in the USA. In fact and by definition, USA professional radio is NON-professional. By everyone its definitions the de jure regulatory language indicates it is a HOBBY. That is exactly what it is de facto. USA professional 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 professional radio is NOT any sort of "vital need" for homeland security, defense of the nation, or as a backup of civilian communications infrastructure. That many ALLEGE it is "vital" is due to their own curious self-promotional, self-grandiosing attitudes.

    Case in point on Hobby activities. A pair of decades ago, model hobby folks lobbied for and got a specific troupe 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 status of the aeronautics art. It is basically for a HOBBY activity. So, they were able to prevail the FCC to preempt a troupe around 72 MHz just for model radio-control activities. The professional radio organizations gain everyone caught up in their presumptuous and fairly unsuitable notion that professional radio is answerable for everyone 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 professional radio modes/modulations since the discontinuance of WWII. Voice SSB isn't new; SSB was used in the 1930s commercially. Voice FM isn't new; that was used prior to WWII. Radiotelegraphy wasn't new...it existed in wired contour a half century before the first public demonstrations in 1896. Neither is TTY, having progressed from wired to frequency-multiplexed AFSK to commercial-format AFSK on SSB. "Slow-scan TV?" The Bell System had in PicturePhone (didn't gain enough subscribers). Facsimile? That was in exhaust commercially prior to WWII. "Fast-scan TV?" TV broadcasts by RCA were done commercially at thhe 1939 World's honest 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 discontinuance of WWII. Really, the only mode/modulation that is 'new' is that which is new to individuals because they maintain no previous suffer in it or are ignorant 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 expound what the fundamental OPERATIONAL differences are between the privileges granted to a general Class licensee an and Extra Class licensee in their Service in the United States. So far, I maintain yet to gain a straight answer…or ANY reply for that matter."

    Good luck on that, Keith. :-) await 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 respect they are 'entitled' (enobled?) or something. :-)..................................KB1SF: "As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a valid professional Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an professional television transmitter."

    To crawl further, since there are NO - repeat NO - age barriers, a cute dinky 6-year-old can LEGALLY operate a full-gallon transceiver and "accidentally" understanding interference to others or to other radio services. to a certain degree this lack-of-age AND responsibility got in the course of Common Sense. Any parent who isn't a moron will KNOW that wee children maintain NOT acquired adequate lore and responsibility to act "correct" everyone 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 reply that particular question maintain absolutely NOTHING to carry out with the lore and skills needed to safely and courteously exercise the uniquely exclusive privileges an Extra Class License grants."

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

    I hear ya. But, the middling USA ham will simply shrug it off and maintain the ARRL or VEC QPC "know what is best for ham radio." The middling 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 a certain degree 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 call signs."

    "THAT prior management decision 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 maintain absolutely NOTHING directly to carry out 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 dinky crack in that: Privatization and its aftermath. In between the Notice of Restructuring coming and actual begainning in law, the FCC reclaim everyone 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 dinky observation in forums, but it would set a slightly different tone in required lore of written tests........................KB1SF: "And, as I maintain besides said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a valid (spelled: "legal") understanding for a US Government agency to concede full privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another."

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

    The Hue and wail would be fierce for everyone those extra egos out there. They've become addicted to Rank, Status, Privilege, and Perquisite they can get. While you maintain some ample (apparently legal) reasons, those would be pushed aside by everyone the extras NEEDING to preserve 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 purchase what you wrote at face 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 familiar with that material...even though I maintain sedate doubts about EVER doing ham radio in space. :-) :-) :-)

    Sorry, I won't accept just the on-line drill tests. A FORMAL test would maintain your entire ham 'career' riding on it. No kindly proctor with which to maintain your first ham QSO. Let's manufacture it tough and reclaim the test location in an unfamiliar place, a bit noisy, filled with strangers. crawl ahead, manufacture their day...

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "Maybe the percentage of Techs to other licenses is a bit lower today than it was in 2000 by a few percentage points"

    No maybe about it. The numbers prove that the number and percentage of US hams with a Novice, Tech or Tech Plus license has dropped since 2000, while the number and percentage of US hams with one of the other classes has increased.

    KB1SF: " "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure."

    Not at all.

    1) If a person is satisfied with the license they have, they usually won't upgrade?

    2) inert hams usually don't upgrade

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

    4) FCC has been renewing everyone Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the same class. If you carry out that, and spy 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 circle around and they launch 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. everyone that matters for growth is that they preserve 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 carry out these days is to simply spy around the latitude at the advancing age of the bulk of participants at various professional radio-related gatherings to espy these very lucid 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 disburse his/her time other ways.

    KB1SF: "we ARE, as a group, getting ever older."

    You can't prove that scientifically because they don't maintain accurate age data on everyone US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a entire is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will expound the trend continuing.

    "our bands are becoming ever more reticent as compared to just a few years ago."

    Maybe. But if that's true, there are lots of workable reasons. Antenna restrictions alone are a stupendous one.

    KB1SF: "how many others maintain called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to maintain that troupe very quickly reach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the same 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 dynamic 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 course you reduce 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 maintain changed everyone that.

    KB1SF: "the imperfect tidings is that there are fewer and fewer forward thinking youngsters now taking their set in their ranks."

    You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion.

    What was the age-of-hams distribution enjoy 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago? Can you expound us existent data? I respect 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 corpse of several thousand. This was in a middle-class suburb with few if any antenna restrictions, back when used, homebrew and surplus gear was very common.

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

    Dinosaurs? I recollect a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US professional license. Is that what you mean?

    KB1SF: "And then they maintain the nerve to miracle why potential youthful newcomers to their hobby are now "voting with their feet" in ever increasing numbers!"

    I respect the existent problem is that people adolescent and archaic don't even know professional radio exists.

    There's besides the problem that many of those who carry out maintain a very distorted image of it.

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

    Just spy at how many articles, posts and such privilege here on eham are devoted to hams in no-antennas situations trying to gain on the air.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF: "It's not the "difficulty" of the Extra Class exam that is at issue here"

    It's the perceived difficulty.

    A ham who passes Tech can try the general at the same session without paying another VE fee. same for Extra. So why don't everyone hams testing at VE sessions try everyone the exams they can? everyone it takes is a few minutes' time.

    Why don't more hams crawl everyone the course to Extra?

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

    Of course for some folks, the perceived hardship 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 understanding 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 saying that there are lots of folks who can't pass the Extra because they're disabled? Even though that same 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 full participation in their Service...based on applicants passing...written examinations that are not only internally duplicative (as I will expound below), but besides crawl WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines insinuate should be the MINIMUM qualifications for full participation in their professional Service."

    Yet CEPT only recognizes the Advanced and Extra as meeting the minimum requirements for full CEPT reciprocal licensing.

    KB1SF: "when hiring a person to stack boxes in a government warehouse, you can no longer legally manufacture that person's hiring decision 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 reply a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an professional satellite?" is an absolutely invalid and illegal question under current US law."

    No it isn't.

    1) That question - or any question - isn't a must-know decider of who gets an Extra and who doesn't.

    2) The general lore of professional satellite operation is material to professional 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 professional License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of professional 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 hardship is what it's everyone 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 privilege - you want to expand the Technician question pool to comprise many if not most of the questions now in the general and Extra pools.

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

    For example, since Techs maintain full privileges above 30 MHz, and can exhaust any authorized mode, they can purchase any and everyone questions dealing with operation above 30 MHz and crawl them to the Tech question pool.

    And since Generals maintain full power and full mode privileges below 30 MHz, they can crawl everyone HF questions to the general pool.

    That will manufacture the Tech question pool enormous, the general pool will probably be larger, and the Extra pool will be very small. The perceived hardship of the Extra will then decrease, but the perceived hardship of the Tech will probably increase.

    Is that what you really want? Is that a ample 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 gain 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 reduce to the chase.

    We currently maintain 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 final Tech Pluses are renewed as Tech or expire. Novice and Advanced will purchase longer but will ultimately fade if nothing is done.

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

    Move large numbers of general and Extra questions to the Technician pool?

    Increase the number of questions on the Technician exam?

    Give Generals and Advanceds full privileges?

    Have disability waivers for the written tests?

    Put everyone the questions in one pool and maintain just one class of license with a 120 question test?

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

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

    Allow data modes in the 'phone subbands?

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

    Then let's espy how the professional community reacts, starting privilege 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 theme is excellent"

    Thanks for the benevolent words.

    WA4KCN: "On the matter of youngsters joining ham radio, it is excuse me rather dimwitted to believe this could befall in much numbers...Young folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and archaic age folks."

    I don't know if that's really true. In fact, I maintain to disagree, I respect the existent issues are very different from what is usually discussed in these forums.

    Here's what I respect is really going on:

    1) want of efficacious publicity. How often carry out you espy professional Radio portrayed in the movies, on TV, etc.? Even more telling, how often carry out you espy it portrayed accurately, and as something that's being done today, not decades ago?

    If people don't know that professional Radio exists, they won't become hams. If people who might be interested maintain a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either.

    A stupendous portion of efficacious publicity is having a description that's smooth to recollect and which sums up the main points. That's why I enjoy 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 repercussion on publicity, because those areas watch to maintain few hams, and the hams who carry out 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 everyone about.

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

    3) Perceived complexity and high cost of a station. spy at archaic ham radio magazines and books, and you'll espy article after article that seemed to leap off the page and swear "BUILD THIS RADIO!" There were lots of simple designs for receivers, transmitters, antennas and accessories that could gain 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 large numbers of new hams. Showing a involved transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to maintain the same draw.

    I carry out accord with you this much about attracting adolescent people: If they portray professional 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 motif out we're doing it, and it will be just another ad to ignore.

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

    ---

    One of the things I clearly recollect about the professional 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 adolescent people, but instead challenged them to meet the standards.

    This was and quiet is one of the much things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for adolescent people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you command them. Nor can they command what gear 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 adolescent people.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      A Data Point About adolescent 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" maintain been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their enthusiast insistence that such newcomers can never hope to be "real hams" unless and until, for example, they've taken and passed a dumb Morse test."

    Here's some data that refutes that idea.

    Back in 1996, the ARRL had an outfit called Readex carry out 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* support for Morse Code testing were the *youngest* amateurs!

    How about that?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 espy how the professional community reacts, starting privilege 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 same 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 purchase in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to purchase the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

    When I spy at the horrific inaction by their FCC on these issues, I really maintain to miracle whether they are simply waiting for everyone of us to die and their Service to whither away so they won't maintain to deal with us anymore. It is painfully obvious that, much enjoy the CB Radio Service, they maintain since become dinky more than a "pimple on the rear discontinuance of progress" in the grand scheme of things.

    I besides well realize that, just enjoy it took a federal lawsuit filed by the ARRL to gain 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 deep enough pockets actually files a similar federal lawsuit against the FCC and/or initiates a Congressional investigation into the matter.

    This means that, contrary to your call to "see how the professional 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 organize to be in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law.

    Indeed, lots of people "wanted" to preserve racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in set in their country back in the 1960s. But a rising tide of revolt for such blatantly discriminatory practices in the contour of sweeping civil rights legislation eventually trumped everyone those "wants". Today, those changes maintain since become an accepted portion 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 eminent physicist, Max Planck once said, "An important… innovation rarely makes its course by rapidly winning over and converting its opponents; it rarely happens that Saul becomes Paul. What does befall is that its opponents gradually die out and that the growing generation is familiarized with the new sentiment from the beginning."

    Indeed, their highly vocal (mostly older) generation of rabid obstructionists to such long-needed change to their licensing and regulatory system are besides now aging and dying in ever-increasing numbers.

    But, even so, their licensing system remains chockablock full of "unnecessary regulatory barriers" (to exhaust the FCC's own words when they dropped everyone forms of Morse testing) to full access to their Service (an Extra Class license). By any measure, those clearly excessive licensing requirements remain course out of harmony 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 entire plethora of 1990s-era federal laws.

    So, as I espy it, the only question now remaining is what, if anything, their FCC is going to carry out 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 positive as hell pester my Congresspersons about it. Indeed, I (and a number of others) are already doing so. But only time will command 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 besides well realize that everyone 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 theme 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 professional Radio License Classes Over T   by N9ZAS on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! And then of course there are those of us who are quite content with their current privledges and are NOT influenced by the masses to upgrade to general or above,simply to listen to a much higher noise floor and reclaim up with inconsiderate ops.I enjoy vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to general or advanced to which I would NEVER exhaust 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 maintain bought a cb!I carry out enjoy the international sw bands for useful overseas tidings coverage. minuscule unobtrusive antennas,Versatile in nature and efficient with low power are besides a perk.So you see,just because they prefer to maintain tech. flat licenses doesn't carry weight they don't cherish the hobby.It simply means they are lucky where they are and espy no understanding for a useless upgrade to a useless license!As far as I'm concerned hf is becoming obsolete.n9zas   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 same 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 purchase 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 saying in any detail how the US professional 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 organize to be in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Only is somebody thinks the issue is worth pursuing.

    KB1SF: "lots of people "wanted" to preserve racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in set 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 carry out 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 professional radio, everyone anyone without a criminal record has to carry out is to pass the required tests to gain a license. Those tests are objective (no judgement calls on the portion 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 maintain passed everyone of them. How they could be "discriminatory" to anyone really qualified to be a radio professional is not clear.

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

    In other words, you refuse to reply material questions, refuse to give details, and refuse to actually discuss the issue.

    OK, fine.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    Since ARRL does NOT expound past numbers, one has to depend on Hamdata numbers of 2 years ago. Those reclaim the Technician class at 310,286 out of 711,936 or 43.58 percent of individual licesees. The incompatibility 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 saying "the FCC renews Technician Plus as Technician" with the implication that Technician class has so very dinky actual growth. Considering that Technician-plus can either drop out entirely or "renew" into another class (with preempt test element passing), your rationalization doesn't maintain validity.

    Note: Constantly bringing up 'Restructuring' ordered in 1999 and efficacious in 2000 doesn't maintain much presence on the subject. That happened 10 to 9 years ago, time enough for a newborn to reach about 3rd grade in public school....................N2EY: "FCC has been renewing everyone Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the same class. If you carry out that, and spy 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, everyone FCC records available to the public expound Technician and Technician-Plus as sever license classes. Even the ARRL considers them sever classes on their biased tabulations. What more carry out 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 circle around and they launch 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. everyone that matters for growth is that they preserve 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 professional 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 professional radio licensees, I'll advert to the Hamdata tallies for 12 December 2009: As of 12 MONTHS AGO there were 30,702 new licensees and 26,833 expirations. That is an overall extend of 3,869 but only 0.054 percent compared to the total of 716,639 individual licensees. The "growth" is HALF A PERCENT in one year's time.

    I thought that my nascence tabulation would maintain shown that this "growth" has picked up towards the discontinuance of the three year period. I'm sorry you can't espy that. [not that you keeping to observe, anyway...you look stuck on the efficacious year of Restructuring of a decade ago]....................N2EY: "You can't prove that scientifically because they don't maintain accurate age data on everyone US amateurs. And even if it's true, so what? The US population as a entire is getting older. Compare the median age of Americans in the 1990 and 2000 Census for proof. The results of the 2010 Census will expound the trend continuing."

    Jimmy, hardly ANY of your conjectures you've presented here carry out NOT maintain any third-party proof. everyone they espy 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 maintain some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recollect a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US professional license. Is that what you mean?"

    Oh, you petty spiteful baby! You are quiet wound by the Reply to Comments on NPRM 98-153 I made to Michael Deignan. I authored that and the FCC posted it on their collection of comments on that docket on 13 January, 1999. It is 14 pages of text in PDF contour on the FCC website. It is quiet there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, ample luck, I'm not going to bother.

    Oh, and I quiet maintain the copy of the ARRL letter 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 maintain made it a full attachment.

    What I was unaware of at the discontinuance of 1998 was that one James Miccolis had gotten his FIRST professional 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. dinky Jimmy is quiet smarting and bringing up that one "age" matter TEN YEARS LATER. He should GROW UP!

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

    On the "age" thing, to supervene Keith's appealing points in respect 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, everyone alone, and literally PLAY with an professional radio without any full lore of RESPONSIBILITY of operation. CHILDREN carry out not everyone maintain some intrinsic "responsibility" guidelines automatically...not even if they hold everyone sorts of written test certificates from a federal agency. That responsibility must be scholarly and UNDERSTOOD and it is the job of PARENTS to launch teaching them that, reinforced by other adults as much as possible.

    I'm not going to bring up six-year-olds' marvelous aptitude to read and UNDERSTAND written test questions! Apparently those adorable children of a decade ago were smart and knowledgeable beyound their years (which is what most parents swear 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 professional radio, professional radio will overrule rational thinking according to childish fanatics in ham radio. That is, to me, illogical idiocy.

    Len, AF6AY

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

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

    On the night of 11 December 2009, the hit TV expound "CSI: Crime Scene Investigation" had a scene where four CSI off-duty officers were stranded at a closed diner. Out of compass of any cell phones they tried to call in to LVPD using a "ham radio set" they organize in a back latitude 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 organize some clip leads in another room, climbed up a telephone pole, connected a modern telephone handset to a telephone J-box, was able to contact LVPD. Note: the telephone infrastructure is "supposed" to fail in emergencies and only ham radio will continue to 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 final NIGHT. Is everybody so busy, diligent playing with their ham radios that they don't bask in some "other" recreation? Must be... :-).................N2EY: "If people don't know that professional Radio exists, they won't become hams. If people who might be interested maintain a very distorted view of what we're about, they won't become hams either."

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

    The ARRL is "supposed" to be "our national representative." They swear that every haphazard they can. But ARE they? I don't respect so...by the membership numbers, by their want of efficacious leadership in forming legislation "for" professional radio, by their want OF efficacious PUBLICITY to the general public. Oh, they trumpet that the ARRL has "lots of material" but to a certain degree everyone those things gain LOST on the course to the Mass Media outlets.

    My wife and I live in a large urban area 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 saying goes. My wife is detached to professional radio but she would notice if there are any tidings items or publicity about that because I am a licensed professional radio operator. miracle 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 maintain seen more tidings about model radio control lately than any professional radio events over the final 3 to 4 years.

    WHERE are the 'fabulous' videos the ARRL was hypothetical to maintain made available 'to the public?' Does the ARRL await that 'the public' everyone 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 everyone 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 stupendous portion of efficacious publicity is having a description that's smooth to recollect and which sums up the main points."

    Jimmy, despite your several claims on Marketing Expertise, the FIRST THING and MOST valuable THING is TO be VISIBLE, TO be AUDIBLE. It does no ample whatsoever to be INVISIBLE and then natter and gromish about "how ample they are and what they have" in ARRL letter after ARRL Letter. everyone those CLAIMS maintain long since dropped into the random noise floor with everyone the QRN.................N2EY: "More and more of the housing in the USA is antenna-restricted. This has a direct repercussion on publicity, because those areas watch to maintain few hams, and the hams who carry out 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 everyone 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 maintain 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 maintain a TWO HUNDRED FOOT TOWER at my residence? NO. Not because my wife wouldn't enjoy it, *I* wouldn't enjoy it. It is their RESIDENCE. Oh, and I maintain 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 espy the dim green fiberglass-covered upright in the back yard.

    I maintain a ample 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 crawl with implied socialism again. So, THEY can't maintain something expensive because YOU don't maintain anything expensive?!? Sorry, Jimmie, I'm not going to disburse the repose of my life diving in dumpsters to build frankenboxes a la pre-1970 style so that I can be some benevolent of "real ham.".................N2EY: "Look at archaic ham radio magazines and books, and you'll espy article after article that seemed to leap off the page and swear "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 gain 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, everyone I've said is that "morse-code-centricsm" is restrictive in the face 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 genial on accepting losing status. That's a nice boy....................N2EY: ",,. Showing a involved transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to maintain the same draw."

    No? You better inform the auto makers of that. adolescent people with new driver's licenses are always looking at EXPEN$IVE cars, mentally wanting one. A few buy them and carry out 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 maintain WORKED everyone THEIR LIVES maintain managed to accumulate some monies to actually (gasp!) BUY CASH a lot of things they couldn't gain when younger. You RESENT that. TS. Either toil to gain 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 much things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for adolescent people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you command them. Nor can they command what gear 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 reclaim it in other words, you can be INVISIBLE using "CW." enjoy 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 carry out the transgender thing with "CW." Who is going to know? :-)

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

    There IS an alternative: Invent a TIME MACHINE, crawl back to that existent radio-pioneering time of CW-uber-alles that happened before your present life began. Bye, bye...

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 espy how the professional community reacts, starting privilege here on e-ham"."

    Keith, in the decade I've encountered dinky Jimmy in professional radio forums, I've never eminent 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 espy that this "amateur community" is FAR BIGGER and so numerous that only a tiny, tiny fraction can lucky into e-ham. That's not a imperfect impress against e-ham, that is realistic since about 700,000 licensees just couldn't lucky into this website, let alone a solitary 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 course I would swear 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) flee for any ARRL position, yet he ORATES as if he is an Evangelist of that Olde-Tyme Religion. He will Never excuse 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 same 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 respect would be more preempt is to toil up a sever ARTICLE on that subject. I don't respect the e-ham overseers would approve it but I'm an optimist most of the time. On further reflection, I respect 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 dinky study was done to answer my own curiosity on USA professional radio changes, to espy if there was any discernible change. I didn't espy 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 everyone in the final 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 certain regulations, I began in earnest too late, yet kept at it...without that "badge of courage" that some respect a mighty professional radio license. :-) I had been too long the professional in radio-electronics, diligent pushing the performance envelope here and there, and thus considered a "beginner," a "newby," and "too stupid/ignorant" to pass any three test element professional radio test. Gotta enjoy some of those comments. :-) I had much amusement at getting the reaction of everyone those mighty Extrss who thought I was just a inarticulate nobody and "could never carry out 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 respect them - objectively - to maintain merit. I tossed in an archaic theme of mine as a workable addition...but only because dinky Jimmy brought it up lately (a benevolent of 10th "anniversary?" :-). Seriously, I've been involved in trying to change a minuscule set of USA professional regulations for a decade now, achieved what I set out to do, then decided to gain one of those mighty professional radio licenses for myself, doing that at age 74. I'm tired of these others trying to hold back the dawn of progress, to preserve the professional radio service the same as when they first began in it. I'm quiet an idealist, quiet open for a ample understanding to fight, but life is limited and I would enjoy to bask in more of it. Getting into local politics here there's a lot to carry out there, too, issues that directly impress us in this region. Otherwise, I'd connect you as a volunteer for another ample Cause...................KB1SF: "This means that, contrary to your call to "see how the professional 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 organize to be in legal compliance with the repose of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Little Jimmy has - by observation - lived in an imaginary world for a long time. I don't respect he undertands the terrible expense of waging any large legal war on an established government agency. The ARRL can't profit because they are quiet entrenched in the USA professional radio of yesteryear and they've already spent a bundle on this BPL thing. Of course they NEEDED to carry out that in order to "protect" their core membership, a probable minority within a provable minority membership organization. workable aid must reach from Congress forcing the issue...but they must carry out so without the mistrust (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 full face masks instead of makeup. I would (internally) classify the stay-with-the-past-curmudgeons as Noh players, masks provided by a familiar 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 maintain a ample Holiday time!

    73, Len AF6AY

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

    The only reasons I can imagine are:

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

    I stake there are a lot of folks who feel the same way.

    Also, if someday you to a certain degree develop an interest in the bands below 50 MHz, the license to carry out so will quiet be there, requiring only that you purchase 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 professional radio than that. But to find much of it, you maintain to exhaust 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 carry weight they don't cherish the hobby.It simply means they are lucky where they are and espy no understanding for a useless upgrade to a useless license!"

    I would swear "unused" rather than "useless" but the sentiment is basically the same. Why gain a CDL if you're only going to drive cars and light trucks?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KC9GLC on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Wow... everyone the talk and razz of lic. classes.I got into professional radio for ECOM reasons at first. then a friend of mine invited me to their local sphere 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 exhaust and toil cw but since i didnt maintain to purchase that portion of the test does that manufacture me any less than any of you who did purchase it.Instead of berating the ham community for not advancing to higher classes, gain them involved and interested. If it wasnt for my friend i quiet would not maintain advanced.

    Its not that most of the Tech maintain no interst in going higher, they maintain no one to educate them. So enough with the berating and start educating.

      Trends in USA professional 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 joy of seeing one's designation "published".

    (2) For the most part, it was a knock off of the works of AH0A and other authors.

    (3) Nothing unexpected was revealed. The Code test went away, "upgrades" briefly surged as was predicted, and then things went back to "status quo".

    (4) The rantings of a numerically few but incessantly vocal "No Code" sect that insisted that the demise of Morse Code testing would result in throngs of "new blood" in the professional ranks were proven to be the fertilizer that they were everyone along.

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 gain into professional radio thinking it would be a loser. But, I'm portion of a new group now and hoped that conditions in professional radio would maintain changed after my professional license was granted. I espy dinky change, therefore the study to espy if a understanding could be determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

    Seeing change occur requires that one actually gain involved in making the change occur.

    You and I both know that you've been one of professional Radio's loudest critics, Mr. Anderson, but you're besides not exactly a "contibuting member".

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: 2003 was due to a bubble   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In 1993 the no-code tech license came into being.

    Actually, it was Valentine's Day, 1991

    73

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: adolescent 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 maintain some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recollect a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US professional license. Is that what you mean?"

    Oh, you petty spiteful baby! You are quiet wound by the Reply to Comments on NPRM 98-153 I made to Michael Deignan. I authored that and the FCC posted it on their collection of comments on that docket on 13 January, 1999. It is 14 pages of text in PDF contour on the FCC website. It is quiet there, anyone can view it. If anyone wants to "re-argue" a TEN-YEAR-OLD document that NO LONGER applies, ample luck, I'm not going to bother.

    I espy 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 dinky more complicated than that - but not much more.

    It everyone 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 same 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 call 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 maintain been a few 'challenges' on "old data" of professional radio statistics. For those I present the following correspondence copy that dates back to PRE-Internet days. Note that the Internet did not crawl public until 1991, therefore it was saved by someone unidentified from one of the commercial services (such as Compuserve). I carry out 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 professional 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 everyone 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 professional radio license database public dissemination but in shorter contour such as grouping by ZIP coding and available (generally) only on a weekly basis. Later improvements in Information Technology resulted in the combined solitary large professional radio license database currently in-use that requires high-speed Internet connectivity to download within an 8-hour period. Note besides that database information of nearly two decades ago carried licensee ages.

    I alluded to this information, properly attributing source, in e-ham article 21114 "Aren't They everyone In This Together?" [ www.eham.net/articles/21114 ] I did not exhaust everyone of the data then so I've presented it here in its fixed-font-spacing needed to properly view the tabulations. This is presented as-is, as I organize it final year. I manufacture no claims as to accuracy or inaccuracy of this. I respect the author, Richard Hoffbeck, tried his best to be accurate and dispassionate about the results.

    ====[ exhaust 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 - everyone 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 press (larger peak).The immediate population is not a problem, but the fact that only 3% of allhams are 20 years of age or less may prove troublesome in the next 20 years ofso.

    I besides thought that the age distribution was a pressing problem until I got acopy of the callsign database and actually calculated the numbers. The secondissue, a 'aliasing' due the the shift from a 5 year to 10 year license term isalso of dubious value. In scanning through the Region 0 data (I don't preserve thewhole thing on-line), I organize that only 97% of the licenses listed in 1988 hadbeen issued or renewed since the change in license terms in 1983. Of theremaining 3%, 2/3 of those were due to expire in the term 1989 - 1992 -- theremaining 1% due to expire in 1988. Anyway, the maximum loss workable due tosilent keys, etc is only on the order of 3%.

    On the other hand, there was a piece that made the rounds on packet,WorldRadio, etc, to the consequence that since the number of hams has been growingat a faster rate than the population as a entire there is no problem. That typeof analysis is faulty in assuming that society as a entire has remained at thesame flat of technology. I respect that ham radio has definitely declined inimportance due to technological advances across the board.

    rick, N0LOX

    ======[ discontinuance 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 everyone 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 professional radio classes and requirements had not yet been reclaim into a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It was done before there were 18 following Petitions to change USA professional radio submitted in response to the 'Reconstruction.' It was done well before thare was the stupendous pains by many to liquidate the code test altogether.

    As to the "technological advances across the board" alluded to by Richard Hoffbeck in his final paragraph, I will just point to some advances open to the USA public in the final 19 years: mount of cell sites and miniaturization of handsets to manufacture 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' minuscule mass-storage systems) in the 1980s changed to 2600 MHz clock rates with 100 MHz middling 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 everyone new peripherals to be within the new "plug-and-play" standards. The Personal Data coadjutant 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 crawl into the "games" category suffice to swear 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 maintain automatic calibration by radio for accuracy within 1 second on any day. Automobiles advanced with increased on-board computation capabilites, wireless audio, on-board video, closed-circuit TV for viewing impossible-to-see areas such as just behind and below rear bumpers, and the first of the jolt warning systems. Electric cars, from hybrid gas-electric to all-electric drive appeared on the market. Those are just the tip of the iceberg of advances and everyone were available to the ordinary citizen, IN the marketplace.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: professional 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 carry out 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 maintain everyone heard of what happened on Valentine's Day in Chicago.

    Valentine's day 1993 was the day that was the nascence of the discontinuance for ham radio, as I and many hams knew it. I recollect that day well.

    Fitting that the new rule was implemented on that day.

      US professional Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 14, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Here's some data on the number of US professional operators over the years. Source of each set of numbers is besides shown.

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

    It's valuable to know the history surrounding the license rules if one wants to intelligently resolve the data. Failure to purchase 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 enjoy everyone 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 sever class of license equivalent to a General-by-mail until the mid-1970s. It was phased out by renewal of everyone Conditionals as Generals.

    4) The license term of renewable US professional licenses was 5 years until 1984, when it became ten years. One result of this was that no US professional 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 everyone Technicians had to pass a 5 wpm code test. In 1991 the FCC dropped the code test for Technician, but did not immediately create a new license class or other method of differentiating code-tested Technicians, who had some HF privileges, from non-code-tested Technicians, who did not.

    In June, 1994, the Technician Plus license was created by FCC to sever the two groups, with code-tested Technicians be reclassified as Technician Pluses upon renewal.

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

    The discontinuance result is that since 1991 the Technician class has consisted of a compund of code-tested and noncodetested amateurs. Since 2007 they maintain everyone had the same privileges. However it is an error to assume that the growth or subside 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 discontinuance 1948 (from QST March 1949, referencing FCC tabulation)

    76,666 operators, 77,338 stations.

    ---

    1963 (from: QST December 1963, referencing Radio professional 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 discontinuance 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 professional Radio License Numbers   by KB6QXM on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY.

    Good research. Well written. ample Job.

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

    "Good research. Well written. ample Job."

    TNX, but it wasn't much, really.

    What would be really gelid IMHO would be to gain the numbers from everyone of the various Callbooks down through the years and reclaim them on a website. Complete with graphs to expound the changes.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by K6LHA on December 15, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM, applauding "CW," wrote on December 15, 2009:

    "Jim, N2EY. ample research. Well written. ample Job."

    In reality, his numbers maintain NO presence on the three years following the elimination of morse code testing in USA professional radio license examinations. That three year term was stated as such in the title of this article. He could just as well maintain cribbed statistics nascence with the creation of the FCC in 1934 and be just as "applicable."

    At NO time since the 'Restructuring' of USA professional radio NINE YEARS AGO has there been any stoppage of the aptitude and OPTION of everyone to exhaust International Morse Code on USA professional radio bands. There maintain been regulations FORBIDDING modes/modulations other than "CW" in most USA professional radio bands, yet "CW" is allowed almost anywhere in USA professional radio bands NOW. The only "elimination" was to EXCLUSIVITY on some HF bands such as expansion of voice modes in the 80-75m troupe nearly a decade ago. Legally any USA radio professional can operate "CW" in the upper portion of 80m band. It is IN the USA (FCC) regulations.

    The curious portion of these "CW Bigotry" displays by a few long-timers overlooks the legal aptitude and OPTION for *ANY* USA radio professional licensee to exhaust 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 exhaust the mode of code, any class! [amazing, but true]

    A few barracks lawyers supervene the ARRL measure in "sinning by omission." For example, a constant 'rebuke' is "Since 2000 Technician-Plus maintain been renewed as Technician." N2EY uses that often, almost always after I maintain made some remark in professional radio forums that mentions Technician class. :-) Jimmy never states that, of the SIX classes of USA professional 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 final 9 1/2 years; NO NEW Advanced class licenses were granted in the final 9 1/2 years. everyone 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 professional 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 professional 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 face it, the FCC was created in 1934 and is 75 years archaic this year. It is the ONLY civil radio regulatory agency in the USA. To bicker some nebulous connection to regulations of the 1930s, the 1940s, the 1950s, the 1960s, the 1970s, etc. for "keeping certain regulations (forever and ever)" in the USA amaetur radio service is invalid, facetious, and quite a bit ludicrous. The insistance of some that certain regulations be KEPT because those 'somebodies' met regulations of LONG AGO is merely self-serving and empty on their part. They respect they can stance 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 ample for the USA professional radio service to MAINTAIN and NOURISH the deep divide in the service created by these long-timers who favor certain modes and modulations. That is the antithesis of "keeping up the status 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 large group such as over-700-thousand licensed radio amateurs in the USA.

    USA professional 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 everyone class examinations needing code testing. That came after a long, protracted observation term (extended twice) on NPRM 98-143 and a final decision published by the FCC in December 1999. That was NINE YEARS AGO. The decision was LAW.

    Following the Report and Order on 'Restructuring' came no less than EIGHTEEN Petitions, everyone aimed at trying to repeal Restructuring or to change it EVEN MORE, most regressing to the status of older regulations. Those might maintain 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 expound their decisions clearly in every Memorandum Report and Order. That a particular decision "goes against" some clique is only unfortunate for them. That clique LOST and does not maintain 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 everyone 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 efficacious 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 decision is LAW.

    The FCC does NOT maintain any charter to nourish the prideful hunger of long-timers seeking to preserve their braggadoccio well-fed indefinitely. That anyone passed a federal test in some skill a long time ago does not carry weight it defines these individuals as being superior to ordinary folk for eternity. In NO course is their sentiment to a certain degree "better" than ordinary folk, nor is it imprimateur of their being some benevolent of "boss" who can establish "what is ample for all." Stubbornly, so many respect that some or everyone of those syndromes carry out not apply to their own selfish illness. Thus the deep divide is maintained in USA professional radio, proper hobbyists on one-hand, the vocal bigots who want desperately to CONTROL professional radio in their own image on the other side. They cannot maintain it both ways.=========================There IS some hope for the code cliques and those who exact 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 sentiment of the FCC. However, there were 18 Petitions up before public scrutiny between establishment of 'Restructuring' and the NPRM on code test elimination. Several of those Petitions were a cross-purposes of other Petitions. Two more Petitions were disseminated AFTER the code test elimination law, both demanding a recrudesce of code testing. Those two ('Ward' and 'Gordon') were eventually dismissed.

    The fact that a Petition is published does NOT carry weight it is universally liked/worshipped/damned. It is merely up in the public eye, a public that does NOT participate your divine wisdom nor guru-guidance. One has to be mentally tough to reclaim up a Peition and then face the consequences of public opinion.==========================Cliques can forget the Petition sentiment and just sit in forums and newsgroups and bitch and moan for ever, damning newcomers via everyone sorts of pejoratives. That only reinforces evidence of continuing division in professional radio. That division was there earlier than 15 years ago and shows no badge of ceasing. The pollyanish phrasing "amateur brotherhood" is a hypocritical nonsense statement. It is a vaporous myth.==========================Fair warning: Code cliques will eventually 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 everyone individual licensees. In the final 12 months 30,865 NEW licensees were added to the USA total but 26,727 EXPIRED. The net gain in numbers is not much but it is more fantasy voyaging to assume those newcomers are everyone favoring morse mode.

    AF6AY

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

    What would be really gelid IMHO would be to gain the numbers from everyone of the various Callbooks down through the years and reclaim them on a website. Complete with graphs to expound the changes.

    Jim,

    I will build the website for you, if you desire.

    Let me know.

    73

      RE: US professional 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 maintain lots of archaic Callbooks.

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

    --

    There maintain 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. everyone 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 manufacture rational conclusions about the growth as well. For example, the number of Novice licenses was very minuscule 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 portion 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 dinky 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 burden of travel it would impose on hams who didn't live near exam points.

    Another rules-change consequence is vanity calls. Normally, an professional license can only be renewed in the final 90 days before expiration, or in the two-year grace term after expiration. (FCC defines "expiration" as the discontinuance of the 10 year license term, not the final removal from the database after the grace term ends).

    But a vanity call 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 contort the entire how-long-to-expiration picture.

    Since April 15, 2000, the Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses maintain been closed to new issues. This is the second time this has happened to the Advanced; the first time was at the discontinuance of 1952. And just enjoy 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 appealing to espy how long it takes for the final Novice and Advanced class licenses to crawl away, either from upgrade or cancellation. Some Advanceds maintain vowed never to upgrade to Extra, so it may be a very long time.

    The fastest decline of everyone 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 course that is different from everyone other license classes. Also, any Novice who passes the Tech written gets a Technician, not a Technicians Plus.

    So the Technician class isn't just growing because of new hams, but because of upgrades from Novice and automatic class change from Technician Plus. This is almost identical to what happened to the general back in the 1970s when the Conditional was phased out.

    IOW, if you spy at the number of Technicians without reference to the rules changes, it can (erroneously) issue 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 spy 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 valuable things:

    How many *active* amateurs are there?

    What are they doing on the air?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US professional 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 disburse their hobby time in online discussions such as these, and what are they writing about?

    Are they assisting others in some course 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 professional Radio License Numbers   by W5ESE on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > There maintain 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. everyone 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 bespeak '200 Meters and Down'.

    1928 169281929 168291930 189941931 227391932 303741933 415551934 463901935 455611936 46850

    By 1934-1935, the growth spurt had reach to an end.

    The bespeak cited several reasons for the growth:

    o term of the license extended to 3 yearso sever license required for portable worko extend in leisure time owing to unemploymento decline in cost of gear between 1929 to 1934($150 -> $50)o migration from the shortwave listening hobby

    73Scott W5ESE

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by KB9MWR on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! The most alarming trend I noticed in the final three years was that most of the new hams in my area maintain no electronics background or interest. Most of the new guys are community emergency response ARRL boyscouts.

    These numbers carry weight dinky to me. They are far more valuable to the ARRL's membership department and for the commercial ham manufactures, etc.

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

    Both of these questions you can't command by parsing a FCC database.... Both are besides the result of ham radio PR from a national level.

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! W5ESE: appealing numbers!

    Couple more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were everyone 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 professional Radio. It was at that conference that professional Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a sever and several radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was besides a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could produce 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 everyone countries that issued professional licenses.

    The US ham bands were reduce 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 everyone back then.

    You'd respect that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would maintain a reclaim a existent damper on growth, but the contradictory happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by K6LHA on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on December 16, 2009:

    "How many licensed amateurs disburse their hobby time in online discussions such as these, and what are they writing about?"

    As one out of nearly three quarter million USA professional radio licensees, I wrote up a minuscule study of the changes in USA professional radio classes since the elimination of the code test from everyone USA professional 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 swear they SHOULD!" :-).................NI0C: "Are they assisting others in some course 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 professional General) who has authority under the UCAJ (Un-unified Code of AmateurJustice)? Are you going to suffuse some of us with a violation of "Article 31" of the UCAJ and maintain us tried before a Summery Court of "winter-haired elders in amateurism?" :-)

    Ya know, "elder statesman," I examined the Regulations of USA professional Radio service very carefully prior to my license tests of 2007. Ya know what? NOWHERE in those regulations does it swear a licensee MUST operate an RF emitter within USA-allocated professional bands for any length of time during their 10-year license term. [amazing but true!] They aren't even required to manufacture a LOG to expound authorities except for Spread Spectrum. Not even to the Raddio Kops!

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

    Go ahead, manufacture 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? carry out you maintain some bipolar disorder that compels you to jump into forums and snarl at everyone you don't like? That is NO course to "help" the "cause" of USA professional radio, is it?=================Well, now, you just crawl back to 160m "CW" and maintain ever so much fun. Nobody is stopping you. Odd it is that you jump in here minimize others writing about regulations in here and then call 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 everyone be respectful of everyone you old-timers diligent going back to the non-future past in amateurism...because YOU swear they should. <shrug>

    Have a wonderful Holiday time Grinch.

    AF6AY

      RE: US professional 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 bespeak '200 Meters and Down'."

    "1928 16928"

    I'm positive that is "interesting" to historians. Feel free to compare the USA professional radio regulations of 1928 to those of 2008, a mere 80 years later. :-)

    If a comparison is needed, research the entire 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 same year...by a well-to-do Italian entrepreneur and a Russian academician..................W5ESE: "By 1934-1935, the growth spurt had reach to an end."

    By July 2, 2003, the growth spurt in MODERN USA professional radio licensees, everyone classes totalled, had reach 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 bashful 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 technique of everyone electronics is so much by now that a comparison would be ludicrous. I can cite several sources for the simple understanding 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 minuscule quantities. The term "semiconductor" wasn't in the electronics lexicon. The only semiconductor-like diodes were the Galena crystal detector (a contour of point-contact diode), the selenium rectifier with its wonderful aroma when overheated, and a cadmium sulphide "photocell." Frequency control in professional 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 maintain been Neverland for radio amateurs due to its "strange, involved 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 solitary IC and at very low DC power demand. AM voice can be emitted using the very same RF power amplifier used for "CW" or Data modes; it is the measure in ready-built professional radios and does not require a large 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 professional radio troupe allocations below the bottom of the AM BC troupe yet the Europeans maintain had such for years. professional troupe allocations maintain long since been approved on up to the 300 GHz international allocation restrict and ready-built VHF-UHF transceivers are on the market to crawl above the 70cm band. Data modes can easily crawl as high as USA professional allocations allow thanks to modern solid-state circuitry and devices. There are a (few) VNAs or Vector Network Analyzer that yield very ample involved impedance-admittance data on any frequency from the bottom of MF on up to UHF. Anyone can design, build, innovate anything they want now with assurance that lumped constant components are fully characterized in frequency. Very few carry out 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 bespeak 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 term for renewal. NO ONE granted a new license in the final 9 years requires ANY testing in their entire life as long as they manufacture mail or e-mail renewals within the regulated time.

    "o sever license required for portable work"

    No such thing needed now, but then that regulation would maintain been imposed by a predecessor to the FCC. The FCC was created in 1934. The concept of "portability" with a radio of tube architecture in the 1928-1934 era is ludicrous. :-)

    "o extend in leisure time owing to unemployment"

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

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

    Had you mentioned 'radio' to anyone in the public THEN they would maintain thought of the then-new home entertainment medium of BROADCASTING. Few in the public knew about professional radio THEN just as few in the general public know about professional radio NOW. There are lots of copies of archaic radio gear 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 portray those 1928 receivers insofar as "features," stripping away the marketing laguage phrases? Were they even comparable? I don't respect so, but then, despite being born in that era, I maintain no enjoy 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 maintain a listening hobby requires stations there to listen to. In the 1928-1934 term AM broadcasting on MF had expanded to purchase 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 general public) would not really become large until AFTER 1945 with most of the hostilites in Europe and Asia much reduced. Note: It will purchase considerable historical data searching to find ANY term of time when hostilities maintain 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 term may be "interesting" to some but so few here maintain LIVED IN it, let alone 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 manufacture 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 professional Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C:

    y'know, I respect you maintain a very ample point

    I can't carry out 160 but I can carry out 80 CW.

    Maybe I'll espy you there.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    - pair more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were everyone 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 professional Radio. It was at that conference that professional Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a sever and several radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was besides a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could produce 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 everyone countries that issued professional licenses.

    The US ham bands were reduce 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 everyone back then.

    You'd respect that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would maintain a reclaim a existent damper on growth, but the contradictory happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim maintain you considered writing a bespeak on the history of professional radio picking up where 200 Meters And Down left off. I respect it would sell.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US professional 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 reclaim everyone my eggs in the Top troupe basket in order to maintain a better antenna that will handle more power.

    Top troupe is experiencing some periods of outstanding propagation this year, and I'm having a ample 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 maintain a few hours of daylight available for a rupture from DX'ing top troupe and amusement on Top Bnad.

    Jim, your contributions concerning licensing history(as well as W5ESE's) are appreciated.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, sorry for the typo on your name, and manufacture that "amusement on eHam."   RE: US professional 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 troupe is very interesting,will be tuning up there a dinky bit more this winter. Your comments were spot-on.73.   RE: US professional Radio License Numbers   by KD7YVV on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Well, I spy at it this way.If I can find someone to ragchew with, I'm happy.There are people who just gain 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 espy the molecular sized componentsused today. I carry out enjoy reading a lot of the older QSTmagazines and seeing the different projects that wereconsidered status of the technique at the time.Ham radio isn't only what you manufacture of it for yourself,it's what you give back to the hobby by course 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 maintain 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 ample band, lots of sunspots, and a ample antenna and radio to tune them by.......And don't forget the fiery chocolate for those coldwinter nights!

    --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

      RE: US professional 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 professional 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 maintain only one Top troupe QSO in my log, but it was quite memorable!

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

    ---

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

    I respect the phrase "ham radio is what you manufacture of it for yourself" includes what you give back. IOW the person who gives back ample stuff will find they gain more out of ham radio.

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

    I *like* that!

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

    Earl Grey tea for me...

    73 & TNX everyone de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by WA2ONH on December 18, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY Jim

    --- and your Fifty Years of professional Radio Licensing (1950-2000) History portion Four is at:

    http://www.qsl.net/arrlsb/Digest/Pages/story04.html

    Good reading!

    73 de WA2ONH Charlie

      RE: USA professional 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 professional 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 same material can be organize at:

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

    That is the linking page for everyone 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 maintain besides been reprinted in the Marin ARC newsletter out of San Rafael, CA. Some of those "Wayback" columns' material has besides been organize on audio and Twitter sites. Bill Continelli retired from the IRS after 30 years in 2009 and formed his own Tax traffic in upper New York status and quiet contributes material to several amateur-interest websites.

    There is a much deal of HISTORY on the theme of radio, everyone radio services, available on the Internet and in print. Rewriting of past material is just rewriting. It is better to manufacture history than cribbing available sources.

    AF6AY

      RE: US professional Radio License Numbers & History   by WA4KCN on December 18, 2009 Mail this to a friend! RE: US professional 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 professional radio licensing from 1950 to 2000 that I wrote about 9 years ago:__Thanks Jim I spy 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 bespeak on the more recent history since 200 Meters is needed and no doubt you are the person to write it.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US professional 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 professional Radio isn't just getting everyone 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 repercussion of gear changes, Sputnik, incentive licensing, cb, Vietnam, the 1960s counterculture and much more.

    Maybe someday. Thanks for the benevolent words.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    Make no mistake about it, the past dozen years maintain had a SIGNIFICANT change in USA professional radio regulations, each easily on-par or greater than "Incentive Licensing" of four decades ago. The first was the decision in 1999 to enact "Restructuring." The second was the decision to liquidate everyone code testing for USA professional 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 course it resembled a highly-amplified horror and nettle that surfaced in 1958 when the FCC "took away the 11m HAM troupe that was 'rightfully' THEIRS" and "gave it away" to ordinary citizens to exhaust as Class C and D Citizens Band. everyone that nettle 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 same Bigotry against the (hack, ptui) "no-coders" will probably live on a century from now. Bigotry is difficult to eradicate. It is an emotional status deep inside minds, used as a personal refuge, a surcease of personal frustration by taking it everyone out on some target. Those targets "are not enjoy US!" wail the bigots (the only ones who know the "truth"). :-)

    One course to alleviate some individual frustrations are to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Yes. Retreat to the PAST. There is SAFETY there because everyone 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, maintain endless arguments over dinky 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 set to HIDE. It is a wonderful set to vicariously "live" AS IF one was "there."

    No thanks, I've "been there, done that" and would rather spy to the future. <shrug> :-)

    My dinky 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 enjoy the outcome since those that applied for licenses were "not enjoy Them, did not carry out as They had to do." The crowd-pleasing types, trying to guage which course to go, generally sided with the uber-conservatives. In the final dozen years the sky literally fell on them yet the repose of us were unscathed. Only a few respondents expressed independent opinions; those seemed to respect for themselves, unaffected by any exigency to crawl 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 professional radio are "prologue" then it is a unbecoming mistake, a wrong definition. Since just 75 years ago and the creation of the FCC, USA professional radio regulations maintain been constantly EVOLVING, CHANGING...just as they maintain with every other radio service. Is history "important?" Or is it just a record of what went on before NOW?

    WE are living in the PRESENT. Most of us maintain lived through the final 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 professional radio regulatory law. enjoy it or not, changes were made. Did any of these changes impress any long-timer or uber-conservative operating privileges? Nary a one, hardly any repercussion at all. Then WHY everyone the denunciatory labels and epithets thrown out against change? Sorry, no reasonable person can accept individual's personal feelings about changes that apply to everyone 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 enjoy to find out about long-past events in radio. It IS appealing to many, but it is not a model for the future they are in NOW. Just don't drop current history unfolding before you in order to live vicariously in the past.

    As an archaic anonymous tagline went, "Today is the tomorrow you worried about yestersday." :-)

    Len, AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future portion 314159....   by KB6QXM on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll stake he believes that the United States should maintain 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 reach out because of the politically remedy FCC and greedy ARRL will be a no-test license. That will be the first step. They will sit back and espy how that goes over and then they will liquidate everyone testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they carry out 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 reach out because of the politically remedy 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 spy at the history...

    Before the restructuring of 1951, there were just three classes of US professional 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 everyone over again in front of an FCC examiner before being allowed to even try the Class A.

    All US hams had access to everyone professional frequencies at full power, but only Class A could operate 'phone on the bands between 2.5 and 25 MHz.

    And yet 9-year-old Jane, W3OVV earned a Class B in 1948. Front cover of QST, December 1948.

    In 1951 the license structure was changed to add the Novice, Technician and Extra licenses, and to rename the A, B and C as Advanced, general and Conditional.

    There was outrage in some circles because the Novice allowed newcomers on the professional 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 maintain everyone sorts of imperfect habits, but who mostly were just ample 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, full operating privileges were granted to everyone US amateurs except Novices and Technicians, so there was no understanding to crawl 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 carry out it right.

    And yet over time the vast majority of those Novice newcomers scholarly the privilege ways and went on to carry out much things in professional Radio. Their numbers caused US professional radio to grow everyone 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 archaic Timers of today.

    KB6QXM: "What is next?"

    I don't respect anything, at least for a while. There are no proposals to change the license structure in front of the FCC now, nor maintain there been for a while.

    If you purchase a ample difficult spy at the license question pools from the standpoint of someone who has a background in electronics, they spy 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 professional exam except for the rules and regs.

    But if you spy at them from the standpoint of someone who *doesn't* maintain a background in electronics, they spy a lot different! Lots of new stuff there for the non-technical person.

    The really stupendous incompatibility is that, in the imperfect archaic days, they didn't maintain access to the actual mp;A. Which is a change in test method, not material. But recollect *why* that change took place: FCC wanted to reclaim money by not doing the tests themselves any more.

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

    I don't espy a no-test license as a possibility. First off, it violates the ITU-R treaty. Second, and more important, the imperfect suffer of cb is more than enough understanding not to carry out it.

    The one thing anyone who is concerned about the current testing can carry out 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 course to a passing grade.

    There are many things a person who is concerned about the new hams can do. One of them is to profit out at sites enjoy this one, answering newcomer questions and writing articles.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Novice 1967Technician/Advanced 1968Extra 1970

      RE: Back to the Future portion 314159....   by K6LHA on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB6QXM snarled angrily on 19 Dec 09:

    "In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll stake he believes that the United States should maintain open borders also! How about Socialism also? One world government? everyone 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 professional 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 maintain tested in? Yours? :-)..................KB6QXN: "Mark my word, the next incentive licensing that will reach out because of the politically remedy FCC and greedy ARRL will be a no-test license. That will be the first step. They will sit back and espy how that goes over and then they will liquidate everyone testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they carry out not want to exclude anyone."

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

    A quick spy at the Federal Register doesn't expound ANY badge of what you swear is "true." No new "incentive licensing plan." Not even from the mighty folks at Newington. NO badge of "eliminating everyone testing."

    In case you haven't looked, the FCC establishes USA professional radio regulations along with every other USA civil radio service. [amazing but true] Since its nascence 75 years ago the FCC has an orderly and legal process to which anyone can Petition for new regulations, observation and Reply to Comments on any docket up for discussion...or swear anything it wants. Those can be submitted and recognized from ANY citizen, with or without some federal license in that particular radio service! [really improbable when one thinks of it] Yes, anyone can post a observation or Reply to Comments about an professional radio docket without any professional callsign whatsoever! [wow, isn't that "left-leaning," though!] Not only that, everyone those who submit documents maintain their names (and callsigns if applicable) listed in decision-making Memorandum Reports and Orders! I cheer that sort of democratic-process government and served my country in the military to back that up. In case you never served, everyone who enter the military reclaim their LIFE on the line when they purchase that oath. Did YOU reclaim your life on the line for your ham license?

    The ARRL just doesn't maintain the controlling influence on the FCC it thinks (and implies) it has, not from the professional radio dockets up for discussion in the final dozen years...compared to what it had long ago. Not my problem. I was a full 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 enjoy under the reign of one Josip Broz long ago in another large country, doesn't it? A NO-party "election.".................KB6QXM: "The license exams are so watered down now, that they are basically giving away the licenses now."

    No, the ground fee was $14 when I took my professional 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. everyone 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 espy and download everyone the questions and answers at www.ncvec.org for nothing. The NCVEC Question Pool Committee MUST be composed of already-licensed professional radio license grantees. That is an FCC regulation.

    In preparation for my professional radio license exams, I downloaded the Question Pool directly from the NCVEC site. On checking that out I was pleased to espy that the NCVEC QPC had MORE than the required 10 questions (for random selection by VE groups) for each required question. The middling for everyone 120 questions was 13 times the required test questions; for professional Extra it averaged about 16 times the required 50 questions. The so-called "anyone can 'memorize' the answers" suffuse would apply ONLY if an applicant was eidetic (one who has a "photographic memory"). NOT knowing ahead of time which questions would issue 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 reply MIGHT issue right.

    I might maintain agreed that the number of illustrations MIGHT maintain 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 professional radio tests. :-)

    I will concede that I maintain some suffer in 'radio' (a subset of electronics) that isn't common to many professional license applicants. Was it "hard" for me? No. Would it be "hard" for someone just off the street? Yes. But...the middling license applicant ALREADY knows SOMETHING about the subject. ample grief there maintain been everyone sorts of "Handbooks" (and over-priced "test guides") published by the ARRL alone for a half century.

    Now they gain to the crux of the matter, the Nobel-laureate International Morse Code test! I didn't maintain to purchase one. In fact, the ARRL-VEC team didn't maintain any code sound reproducing gear 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 latitude or on-line! [another improbable but truemoment!] How about that? A democratic-process time for ANYONE to manufacture their case on NPRM 05-143 and then maintain each and every Reply and Reply to Comments made available for the PUBLIC to see! Is that "left-leaning?" Or is it just darn ample democracy at work? I'll crawl with the latter.

    You maintain to recollect that USA professional radio has NEVER been considered "professional" nor is it in any course "academic" (FCC was not chartered as a school). professional 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 middling of more than 220 thousand messages a MONTH for the Far East Command Hq. not anything of those messages required any sort of morse code skill to send; they were everyone teleprinter, connecting the Command with everyone 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 exhaust 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 professional ond HAD to pass a morse test...all the course to early 2006. It was hypothetical 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 archaic 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 respect it was because of an attitude of "I had to purchase a test in it and everyone who supervene better purchase one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as unpretentious 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 surprise me one bit if your local John Bitch Society demands recrudesce of SPARK! It was the traditional means of USA professional radio transmission in the beginning. :-) OK, so it isn't narrowband, it is TRADITIONAL! Never mind that it was outlawed in 1927, crawl back further, when hams were HAMS! Not a solitary transistor or IC around then to discombobulate long-timers, nossir, nothing complicated about early radio! crawl for that crystal detector and spark transmitter DXCC! Pioneer radio everyone over again, expound us how it's done, expound 'em who is boss!

    Oh, and lucky Holidays! :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future portion 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 respect it was because of an attitude of "I had to purchase a test in it and everyone who supervene better purchase one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as unpretentious 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 understanding (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" respect it was "selfish as well as unpretentious 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 discourse for ourselves, thank you, so don't crawl putting words in their mouths. Over and over again, you maintain used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and rip him down again.

    You're a verbose person, Len. You look to maintain a lot of radio lore and opinions about ham radio. I may maintain easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever saying where you hang out-- what's your favorite professional troupe to listen to; maintain you ever made a QSO; what kinds of gear and antennas carry out you enjoy to try out; maintain you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with professional radio applications, etc.

    As you well know (and enjoy to point out) there's no requirement, legal or otherwise, that you carry out any of these things. I bet, though, I'm not the only one who wonders once in a while-- why carry out you maintain a license? Is it merely so you can brandish a callsign in these forums and vaunt again and again about passing the professional Extra test? That's how you reach across.

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

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: Back to the Future portion 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 respect it was because of an attitude of "I had to purchase a test in it and everyone who supervene better purchase one too!" On the eve of the new millennium that sort of attitude was selfish as well as unpretentious 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 understanding (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" respect it was "selfish as well as unpretentious dumb" to remove that requirement."

    Well, reclaim it this way: I was "wrong" IF and only IF I had attributed that particular statement to you or your immediate professional friends. As it was, I made a general statement based on a LOT of observation of other amateurs' statements in-person, in-print, in-uendo. <shrug>

    Well, then, to "navigate the [radio] waves" I would maintain 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 final REQUIRE OOK CW skill, MANDATORY on any troupe except the low discontinuance 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 troupe on up to 300 GHz. The "awful, fateful, end-of-the-world (aa many know it)" decision to drop everyone code testing requirements was in regards to getting IN professional radio. Getting IN, not for immediately dropping in to be a "qualified" operator as is some commercial practice.Now you crawl privilege ahead and bask in your morse mode everyone 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, everyone saved on a CD), that feeling is NOT mutual...............NI0C: "We'll discourse for ourselves, thank you, so don't crawl putting words in their mouths."

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

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

    I maintain a "lot" of lore AND opinions about LOTS of things. I was not cognizant 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 understanding 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 gain guidance in what to carry out and what to "enjoy." That is unfortunate to those many. I carry out not feel obligated in any course 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 maintain easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever saying where you hang out-- what's your favorite professional troupe to listen to; maintain you ever made a QSO; what kinds of gear and antennas carry out you enjoy to try out; maintain you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with professional radio applications, etc."

    So, I am now to Submit to Interrogation by some inspector Clue-no? :-)

    Those similar questions maintain been asked of me before...usually by those who are pile up some dossier to exhaust 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 preference of wife, the foods I prefer, the entiertainment I like, why I chose to live where I do, and everything else under the sun. That is impertinent to the theme and you know it. But, Inspector Clue-no, I maintain explained everyone that BEFORE and I'm not going into such IRRELEVANCY here AGAIN.

    OH, and I maintain made QSOs on ham bands. I've besides made radio contacts on seven OTHER radio services, six of which carry out NOT accept an professional radio license as a "qualification" for operation. <shrug>

    WHY carry out 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 carry out you maintain a license?"

    BECAUSE I COULD. spy at your own wording and alleged inquisitiveness, nee snarly interrogation. If you are going to gain everyone huffy and pretension "insult" from my answer, spy at your own attitude..................NI0C: "Is it merely so you can brandish a callsign in these forums and vaunt again and again about passing the professional Extra test? That's how you reach 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 portray the WHY from my point of view but there will be many who WILL reclaim "words in my mouth" in denigrating everyone that I say. That is EXPECTED and I KNOW the character of yahoos that are bound to carry out it...because they maintain already done that. What is more material is TAKING THE TEST(S).

    Not wanting to sound enjoy a Motivational Speaker, I'll just portray a successful method to purchase 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 professional Extra class test and a LOT of assorted tests on other things in between:===================================1. PREPARE. gain to know the subject, gain to know the test method, gain to know the reaquirements, gain to know the test site environment. You CAN carry out 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 profit you, it is everyone your own doing. You WILL pass it.

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

    5. carry out IT. Carefully. purchase your time. Watch out for distractors in multiple-choice answers. Ignore the test site environment and distractions from other test takers. carry out 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 same as a one-shot academic class test (some academic rules require taking a entire course over if a 'final' test is failed). professional radio is a hobby, NOT a union, NOT a Guild, NOT a tradecraft. Your JOB does NOT depend on the outcome of this test, certainly not the repose of your life..................NI0C: "BTW, there used to be a requirement that one needed to log a certain number of hours of on the air activity in order to renew one's license."

    Yes, I know there was. That is IRRELEVANT. I keeping not what USA professional radio regulations WERE in 1912 or 1932 or 1952 or 1972 or 1992 or 2002. USA radio regulations maintain CHANGED much over the years. Note I swear "radio regulations" without specific definitions as to which radio service. If you are cognizant and informed about MORE radio than just professional radio service, you will maintain to accord with that because CHANGE has happened to everyone of them during the final 75 years of FCC existance.

    Once the test is passed, that is IT. USA radio regulations carry out NOT, maintain 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 flee "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 professional 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. crawl ahead and round up YOUR troops for some close-order drill...in the oh, so PROPER course to "enjoy ham radio." Thanks but no thanks, I can motif out what *I* want to carry out everyone by myself. Really.

    AF6AY

    Oh, and lucky Holidays...:-)

      RE: Back to the Future portion 314159....   by NI0C on December 20, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To AF6AY: Congratulations on achieving your professional Extra Class license. Best wishes for the new year.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      US professional License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C writes: "A much better understanding (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 espy 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 lore of everyone the other modes is tested in the written exam. Even modes which are used far less on the professional bands than Morse Code.

    It should besides be remembered that the 5 wpm code test is just the most basic level, not really "proficiency".

    What's really appealing 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 archaic 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 preserve on. But in neither case were there lots of new people flooding in. Nor did they espy a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* reach 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 efficacious antennas are rather large - and it's a CW-only contest! It will be appealing to espy this year's results.

    On sphere Day 2009 I was portion 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 everyone the repose of the pains 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 preserve track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not everyone simple QRP sets.

    Pretty ample for a mode that gets almost no publicity and which requires some skill to use.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US professional 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 sentiment were not even qualified to hold an sentiment on the subject.

    “It should besides 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 scholarly that there was nobody to talk to at this level. One of the ample things about the archaic 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 ameliorate their skills before actually getting on the air. As I recall, the median hurry 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 appealing 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 archaic tests weren't really a "barrier" at all.”

    No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available.

    “Nor did they espy a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* reach in.”“

    I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a imperfect review here on eHam, saying 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 everyone the repose of the pains 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 maintain operated sphere Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always manufacture 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 preserve track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not everyone simple QRP sets.”

    There has besides been continuous improvement in electronic keyers– most notably the chips designed by K1EL. Reception of CW has been remarkably improved by DSP filtering, AGC action, and noise reduction.

    Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US professional 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 maintain hams that manufacture everyone of the technically savvy hams spy bad.

    How can you maintain an Extra class ham that:

    1) Does not know how to reclaim a connector on the discontinuance of a piece of coax

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

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

    4) Cannot expound the incompatibility between resistance and reactance.

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

    In the days of the highly technical testing that was required to gain a license, when you told someone you were a ham radio operator, they respected you for your knowledge. Not now!

    73

      RE: US professional License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C: "some of those who expressed the minority sentiment were not even qualified to hold an sentiment on the subject."

    I'd express that sentiment rather differently:

    Everyone can maintain 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 ample things about the archaic 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 ameliorate their skills before actually getting on the air."

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

    1) Prospective ham scholarly code and theory well enough to maintain a crawl at the exam.

    2) Prospective ham organize volunteer examiner (no capitals) who would give the test, and set up time and place.

    3) Volunteer examiner gave code tests (receiving and sending). If prospective ham passed them, volunteer examiner sent away contour requesting written test.

    4) When written exam came in the mail, volunteer examiner and prospective ham would set up time and set for written exam.

    5) At written exam session, sealed test envelope would be opened, prospective ham would purchase test. When done, volunteer examiner would seal up everyone papers in FCC-provided envelope and route off for grading. everyone volunteer examiner did was manufacture positive prospective ham didn't cheat.

    6) FCC would process the entire thing and route either a minuscule envelope or a stupendous one. minuscule envelope was preferred because it contained only the license. stupendous envelope contained paperwork to carry out the entire thing everyone over again.

    Getting anything through FCC took 6 to 8 weeks back then, so the entire process could easily purchase 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 hurry on the Novice bands was probably about ten wpm. They knew they had to hit the ground running if they were to qualify for a renewable license before their non-renewable Novice tickets expired."

    As you say, the nonrenewable Novice with its limited one- or two-year term besides had the consequence of encouraging newcomers to hit the ground running. Most of the new hams I knew had a key, receiver and antenna set up and working long before they had the license, and used the processing detain to gain a transmitter set up and ready to crawl so there would be no detain when the license arrived. In my case I used the time to build a transmitter from scratch.

    NI0C: "No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available."

    Since 1990. besides accomodations in the tests. But at least some folks I maintain encountered were too haughty to purchase advantage of them.

    NI0C: "I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a imperfect review here on eHam, saying it was DOA out of the box. Turns out he didn’t install the fuses in the primary power line!"

    That's not a weakness 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 inarticulate questions and mistakes that various rigmakers had encountered from customers. enjoy 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 everyone the lax screws....

    The article appeared about 1956.

    One stupendous incompatibility between the archaic days and now is that, in the archaic days, a mistake enjoy that would generally be known only by a few, rather than being on array at a favorite website enjoy eham.

    Another incompatibility is that most gear nowadays is relatively inexpensive compared to yesteryear, when you adjust for inflation. There besides wasn't the expectation of plug-and-play.

    None of which is a result of changes in testing.

    NI0C: "In recent years my son and I maintain operated sphere Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always manufacture over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms."

    We maintain probably worked each other many times, just not using their own calls. The local club rotates the call used each year so that everyone the regulars gain a chance.

    NI0C: "There has besides been continuous improvement in electronic keyers– most notably the chips designed by K1EL. Reception of CW has been remarkably improved by DSP filtering, AGC action, and noise reduction."

    Besides everyone of that, there are better crystal filters, better rig designs, etc. The Elecraft K2 is an sample of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW...

    NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from professional Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the same 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 large numbers of amateurs today continue to exhaust Morse Code/CW on the air, because nothing has reach along that does the same 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 sentiment were not evenqualified to hold an sentiment on the subject.

    Ahem, not to rupture up the hate-the-nocoders-cuz-we-morsemen-are-the-GREATEST imitation of Muhammed Ali (formerly known as Cassius Clay) but the FCC allows any national to observation on any docket up for public comment. NPRM 05-235 was about GETTING INTO USA professional radio, not an "upgrading" or anything else. GETTING INTO, as in the regulations required by an applicant to pass an professional radio license exam. There are NO "qualifications" necessary to post Comments or Replies to Comments. <shrug> By that curious illogic of alleged "qualifications" stated above, one cannot observation about GETTING INTO a radio service if one is ALREADY IN that radio service. :-)

    On NPRM 05-235 there were 3,786 documents filed between 15 July 2005 and 14 November 2005 (official ending day). On 25 November 2005 I submitted an EXHIBT which was a week-by-week tally of everyone documents posted on that docket. Anyone can access that through the FCC Electronic observation System under docket 05-235. That was just an informational exhibit, not "official" and quite probably not "qualified" under the coders' curious we-are-the-only-qualified-people "rule."

    Having saved each and every publicly-available document under docket 05-235, the exhibit results are as "qualified" as is workable to anyone literate. In that, it shows that the intial months of commentary, the CITIZENS of the USA were FOR the NPRM; i.e., for removal of the code test. There was a much deal of later DENIAL by long-ago-code-tested professional 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 espy what "qualifications" are necessary. Anyone NOT a national can besides post on that docket but one can await the FCC staffers to be literate and cognizant 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, everyone of them supposedly "qualified" having professional radio licenses.

    The logic of "qualifications" ONLY by having an existing, active-license term is itself FAULTY given the lawful charters of the FCC. Anyone NOT engaged in Mass Media (broadcasting) radio services may observation on matters concerning such broadcasting. Anyone NOT engaged in Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) without being IN either broadband data communications or electric power distribution activities. Anyone NOT owning/using/licensed-in the Private Land Mobile Radio Service (PLMRS) can observation on any matter in a docket affecting only PLMRS regulations. Each of those would apply for any radio service or portion of regulations of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations.

    FCC 06-178, the Memorandum Report and Order eliminating USA professional 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. everyone of the FCC decision 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 professional 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 appealing 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 archaic 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 everyone 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 espy a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* reach in.”“

    Now, that's a new excuse/rationalization. :-) I'm not positive where THAT was some benevolent of "reason" for removing the code test, but I'm positive N2EY will kluge together some benevolent of "justifying" statement. more or less similar to his early-1970s "design" for a low-HF transceiver using vacuum tubes. Very advanced. [see listing of his "silver" photos positive to follow...:-)}...............NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up withtechnology."

    My apologies, I wasn't born until 1932. "Spark" was prohibited in the USA by 1927. Outside of some EMP testing, the only "spark" in my lifetime was with automobile sparkplugs, including early model gas engines (up to about 1948 or 1949, then replaced with "glow plugs").

    However, the TECHNOLOGY of COMMUNICATIONS - as used by other radio services - were already sending continuous teleprinter signals of eight such circuits plus two voice channels everyone 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 exhaust in the late 1920s. Of course that was for commercial and military "carrier" services and would not be organize in professional radio. The FCC forbids communications carrier service in the USA professional bands.

    On the other hand, the FCC does permit SOME Spread Spectrum operation above 30 MHz in USA professional radio bands. They will besides permit Forward-Error-Correction for Data IF and only IF the format has been published elsewhere and is considered "public knowledge." Then there is PSK-31, a slow-speed data system that takes no more bandwidth than an OOK CW signal. Of course PSK-31 was innovated in the UK and air-tested in Europe before the ARRL bothered to publish anything about it. NIH factor? Well, there are "radio modems" in exhaust by radio amateurs today but the FCC does not yet permit high-rate modems (such as organize in commercial radio services) for USA radio amateurs.

    The pre-(about)-1960 teleprinter rates used to 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 reclaim having reels and reels of tape, paper or magnetic. everyone that mass storage in PCs besides allows very quick retrieval of text data for smooth viewing off-line or on-line.

    But, I digress. The mighty morsemen of the professional persuasion insist and insist on "Back to the Future" (easy as pi) modes as a "necessary qualifier" to swear anything at all. :-) Only They "know what is ample for everyone 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 professional 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 professional License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"NI0C: "Those who drop CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from professional Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the same 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 professional License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"The Elecraft K2 is an sample of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW... "

    The K2 is indeed a remarkable radio. In terms of picking up decrepit signals, it's extremely close to its stupendous brother, the K3. I maintain 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 professional 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 portion of the story. A spark signal can actually be made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques.

    What really made the incompatibility was that spark, being a damped (modulated) wave, was not as efficient in operation as an undamped (unmodulated/continuous) wave. This was particularly proper 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 exhaust after 1912.

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

    That was the discontinuance of spark in professional radio.

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

    (If you respect technology changes rapidly these days, just spy at a typical 1920 professional station, and then one from 1930).

    In fact, the exhaust of spark for back-up purposes in the maritime radio service was not outlawed until the 1960s.

    NI0C: "The K2 is indeed a remarkable radio. In terms of picking up decrepit signals, it's extremely close to its stupendous brother, the K3."

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

    It besides has very low power requirements for its flat of performance. On receive, my K2 typically requires about 250 mills at a nominal 12 volts. A typical Yaecomwood HF rig will draw four to ten times that!

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US professional 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 status of the technique in "communications bandwidth efficiency." :-)

    Disregarding commercial and military SSB formats that can carry two voice channels and eight TTY channels on the same 12 KHz bandwidth over HF radio paths since the 1930s, the following are proper advancements in "communications bandwidth efficiency:"

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

    4. Spread Spectrum techniques, at first classified only for government use, now organize in millions of cellular telephone sets/sites that allow many users to coexist WITHOUT INTERFERENCE in the same bandspace and close geographical spacing. Makes exhaust of both Shannon's Laws and Information Theory techniques. There are quiet drastic limitations in FCC regulations on such techniques in USA professional radio.

    5. Digitized voice, first used over wired telephone systems by individuals in the early 1970s expanded to commercial exhaust ON HF broadcasting, most prominanet method being DRM (Digital Radio Mondial) that has been in-use now for six years. Digitized voice AND data has been in-use in small-unit portable radio of the DoD SINCGARS family, operational since 1989, and capable of selectable in-clear or on-line encrypted communications, besides adopted by most NATO military member forces. [digitization allows smooth 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 rapidly Fourier Transform signal characteristic detection. Such Sonar systems resulted in the "waterfall" array now used in professional experimentation for weak-signal communications, notably on LF (which the ARRL has not seen lucky to promote although many European countries and the UK already maintain professional radio bands on LF). Yes, there is an underwater communications system in exhaust but it doesn't exhaust RF. :-)

    A common hybrid system is the "radio watch" and "radio clocks" now in exhaust by the (?) millions for automatic self-calibration that exhaust exceptionally-slow data rates permitting the miniature radio demodulators to reduce noise with decrepit signals on LF (60 KHz in the USA and UK). Mine was "terribly expensive" three weeks ago ($27.45 with free shipping from Amazon for a Casio model that came out of the box already self-calibrated). I maintain another, older radio watch which cost less than $30 including tax and shipping, does not maintain the selectable UTC or exotic time zone display.

    Another "hybrid system" is the USA DTV broadcast format that uses everyone available techiques of Information Theory to collapse at least 18 MHz of bandwidth into a solitary 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 decrepit 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 professional radiotelegrapher. <shrug>

    I could portray some more systems which permit as much (in a few cases greater, but those are not allowed in USA professional radio) an advancement. And, I don't maintain the personal suffer with them as with those just listed...but that spoils your glory worship of the FIRST mode in everyone 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 professional 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 preempt dockets before the Commision on NPRMs 98-143, 05-235, and some of the 18 Petitions made public by the FCC. call it LOBBYING in the mildest sense, availing myself of the liberty that any national of the United States of America has to discourse 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 everyone civil radio in the USA) does NOT require any Commissioners or staff to hold any radio licenses! [gasp, freakish but true...]

    You will refuse to believe it, but my "campaign" (exaggerated description) was solely to attempt modernization of existing USA professional radio regulations. Having worked IN radio communications since 1953 and NEVER having had to know or exhaust it as portion of that work, I had no prejudice 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 final remaining radio service to require International Morse Code testing for a license was professional 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 privilege 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 same way. For the repose of the 2006-2007 holiday time I made NO attempt nor worked up any interest in achieving my "own" license nor in "having my very own radio station." I enjoyed the Holiday time with friends who were not concerned with preserving the past forever, much less glorying in the alleged miracle 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 traffic troupe 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 professional 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 everyone the "campaigning" I'd done, they suggested I crawl for it. So I decided to carry out just that. Not a problem. Once decided I set about to carry out IT, disregarding everyone of those who had thought me "unqualified" in anything over the past half century. :-) There was no emotional motivator, simply a personal decision made to carry out IT. As the archaic Hawaiian colloquial phrase has it, "Go for broke!" :-)

    I was in a personal monetary 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 carry out so, and many of them vent their frustrations on me. I cannot nor will not profit such resentful individuals, certainly not everyone those who insist and insist that "I should maintain done what they did" from teen years through their middle age. professional 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 ample laugh in days!

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

    Thanks but no thanks. I maintain my very own, rather plain, austere "license certificate" from the ONLY legal issuer in the USA, the FCC. I quiet maintain everyone my archaic 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 gain as much or more sustenance from a meal at Home Town Buffet or satisfaction for corpse solace from a three-pack of cotton socks from Target (upscale Hanes brand), and maintain money left over from either one. I don't maintain 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 everyone when she was quiet working. Those three certificates are in storage up north. THEY don't exigency them for array to others...................NI0C: "Maybe the ARRL will endorse your certificate for your special efforts. Perhaps they will even print a billboard sized certificate for you."

    Let's see, in getting into the spirit in the second week of March, 2007, I joined the ARRL on-line. My QST subscriptions were mis-labled in address for four months, despite the ARRL having my remedy 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 connect and gain a freebie from them if I did. Six weeks LATER? Departments in Newington appeared to NOT being on communication terms. After a mannerly letter by surface mail asking if I could quiet avail myself of their freebie offer, I got a terse e-mail saying "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 call 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 reply me immediately on the understanding 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 respect 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 everyone kinds of "certificates" which looked very, very "authentic" and would maintain WOWED a casual observer. It was everyone in sarcasm and humor at others' exigency for wallpaper bling. Some were devastatingly droll but in a sneaky subtle way. :-)

    I carry ONE non-standard item in my wallet, a miniaturized photocopy of my DD-214 contour I got in 1956. If you are a veteran of the US armed forces you will know what a "DD-214" is (still used today but changed slightly to reflect different military regulations), non-veterans probably don't and don't much care. It is there because it can be there. I don't exhaust 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 lucky Holidays...:-)AF6AY

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

    Please accept my sympathies on USA professional 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 respect CHANGING your personal antipathic commentary to the e-ham Forum sentiment section. There you may vent everyone you want without touching any of the article subjects that you look to despise.

    Meanwhile some of us keeping to spy to the FUTURE and attempt to espy where USA professional 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 professional License History...   by K6LHA on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on December 22, 2009, desperately trying to preserve 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 portion 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 maintain an infinitely narrow bandwidth (as with an ideal, but impossible to achieve, Dirac filter). Such would besides maintain an infinitely minuscule power output.

    An arc discharge has extremely rapidly conduction/non-conduction transients...in terms of picoseconds or less, conditional on the hurry 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 portion of the EM spectum) is very small. Passive networks connected to an arc discharge will not magically transform frequencies far from the desired frequency into the desired spectral region, they simply fling them away letting them dissipate that far-from-desired energy as HEAT. Heat is just wasted energy far above maximum-allocated radio frequencies (above 300 GHz).

    "Damped wave oscillaton" by arc-discharge into a resonant circuit, better known as "Spark transmitters" can be analyzed once everyone the characteristics of the entire network are known/measured. There will be variables of everything in the total analysis which can purchase weeks to compute. But WHY bother? Measurement instruments to accurately measure/characterize everything just weren't available to the middling professional experimenter prior to the 1930s and very few CARED to carry out 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 handle hand tools could build one out of available wood and metal parts and wire. It was technically CRUDE. Cruder than a kluge.Spark transmitters, even with the most involved of tuned networks were basically noise Generators.

    Very early radio used a beastly oblige system of high power RF sources with essentially-passive detectors as receivers, everyone 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 proper Continuous Wave generators in the power category. Yes, alternators had harmonics, relatively low-power, nothing at everyone enjoy the noise GENERATORS of Spark.

    Now, James, you should maintain KNOWN this from your early toil with Spark transmitters and your scholarly lessons in advanced radio theory obtained at the university later. Instead, you portrayed the very archaic 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 gear 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 professional radio equipment; there is no exigency to carry out so.===========================

    This article was not remotely considered to be a treatise on archaic radio nor archaic regulations. It started off simply as a study of the number of license classes in USA professional radio over a term of time following a milestone change in USA professional radio regulations. As usual, it was hijacked by some certain 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 spy towards the FUTURE, not to live in the relected glory of past radio pioneers...or to counterfeit to be pioneers of radio (just of HF) by developed skill in manual radiotelegraphy or reading archaic copies of professional 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 everyone users of the EM spectrum. Laws of physics carry out NOT recognize human desires, imaginations, nor the "history" aspect of early primitive radio.

    AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by KB0RDL on December 24, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I've been a certified county storm spotter for nearly 15 years and over half of their group hold advanced license, which is a bit more then the general ham population. I don't know of anyone who doesn't maintain gear of their own. The greatest impediment to wanting to become a general 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 portion of professional radio that interests them is high.   RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over T   by N2EY on December 26, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB0RDL writes: "The greatest impediment to wanting to become a general class or above ham isn't 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 espy 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 professional Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KJ4KKI on December 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Wow, that is a much idea! 'Nuff said... 73   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 carry out maintain some "experience," they maintain a few intermittent college students and had some ladies recently become Techs. Their nightly ARES net turns into a rag chew after any official traffic is taken keeping of, and they always maintain at least 20 members checking in. They besides gain 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 respect promoting ham radio should be a portion of any public school science or communications/technology course. I besides respect there should be more ham clubs in colleges.   RE: Trends in USA professional 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 fearful that I couldn't learn code and reclaim off getting my Tech license for several years. I got it with the no-code; studying for hours daily, taking numerous on-line exams and answering every question in the back of the book. I besides bought a second ham bespeak and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%. I scheme to learn code...when I maintain a time in my life to study it and drill it. privilege now, I'm studying for my General. I carry out 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 spy at the overall mission of something. While I admit that the Tech manual isn't circumstantial when compared to the general or Extra manuals/tests, it certainly gets one started with an HT or mobile FM rig...to gain their feet damp and chew on...so to speak. It showed me how much more I wanted to gain involved and learn. In my profession and flat of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the course it used to be." Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they gain there and adjust to it. And for the fellow complaining that an Extra didn't know how to build a dipole...it's in the Tech manual and the General. He's obviously an idiot who either forgot the formula or got lucky on tests (2 in a row?). My consensus: The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know. Not because a Tech or general license is "dumbed down," but due to my own self-realization. At least, that's my page worth.   Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K5ZTY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! Regarding the large numbers of non renewals, professional Radio, enjoy 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 everyone 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 maintain to learn or array any lore of the hobby at everyone to obtain any class of license. Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to exhaust it, no interest in renewing.We exigency to crawl back to an entry flat license that is ample for one year. Upgrade or you're out. Publish the question pool but no answers. They wouldn't gain as many applicants but they would gain more Hams.   Don't blame 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 support it.

    FCC did it to reclaim 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 everyone sorts of short cuts to obtaining a license."

    Again, blame the FCC. They refused to crawl 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 crawl back to an entry flat license that is ample for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

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

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

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

    --

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

    The trick is to find those changes that will ameliorate the system *without* requiring FCC to carry out more.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional Radio License Classes Ov   by N2EY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! KJ4KKI writes: "I was fearful that I couldn't learn code and reclaim off getting my Tech license for several years."

    But did you actually try to learn it?

    KJ4KKI: "studying for hours daily, taking numerous on-line exams and answering every question in the back of the book. I besides bought a second ham bespeak and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%."

    GREAT!

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

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

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

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

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

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

    And sometimes, in the end, change isn't good. Sometimes the folks who said "That's NOT a ample 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 maintain stupendous gaping holes in the stuff tested and quiet gain the license.

    FCC doesn't keeping how somebody gets the privilege reply as long as they don't cheat. FCC doesn't keeping 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 sentiment that a person could memorize their course to a passing grade, given the size of the question pools. But "memorization" doesn't carry weight somebody has to memorize everyone the questions and answers verbatim. In the existent world, everyone it means is that a person has to recognize the privilege reply out of the given ones - 74% of the time.

    There's besides a stupendous incompatibility between being able to reply the questions on the exam, and actually knowing how to carry out something.

    KJ4KKI: "My consensus: The more I learn, the more I realize I don't know."

    That's not a consensus - it's wisdom!

    KJ4KKI: "Not because a Tech or general license is "dumbed down," but due to my own self-realization."

    The problem is, too many hams of everyone vintages don't maintain that self-realization.

    73 es GL de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA professional 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 large numbers of non renewals, professional Radio, enjoy 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 professional radio operator licenses...for BUDGET reasons. besides done was to establish frequency coordination groups for traffic troupe radio users plus a much overhaul of radio licenses for minuscule boats and general aviation aircraft, public safety agencies. The ARRL has NO POWER to manufacture regulations. The ARRL was besides 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 advert to portion 97, Title 47 C.F.R.].................K5ZTY: "The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to everyone 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 maintain to learn or array any lore of the hobby at everyone to obtain any class of license."

    That's your opinion, of course. When did you carry out your final formal professional radio license exam? I took mine on 25 Feb 07. For everyone three test elements then, the Question Pool had an middling of 13 times the minimum required pool questions of 10. So, for 120 questions total, there would maintain to be 1560 questions to "memorize," 6240 answers to "memorize" (have to avoid distractor-worded answers that look privilege but are wrong), for a total of 7,800 items "memorized." That's much more than I keeping to memorize for any hobby test.

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

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

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

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

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

    If someone just doesn't know "WHY" to exhaust it, then I doubt they will ever pass a test for it. Just purchase a spy at the current NCVEC QP contents. You should hunt information from WHY they are AT a VEC test site if they "don't know why." That portion is a nonsense question. <shrug>.................K5ZTY: "We exigency to crawl back to an entry flat license that is ample for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

    By golly, then I "failed" this draconian pecification! I got my professional 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 carry out professional radio for years before being licensed in professional radio!!! :-) Ah, no matter, I've been called everyone of those names by already-licensed amateurs because I've been a professional in radio-electronics since 1952 and just didn't TRY to gain an professional license until age 74. Oh, oh, OH, such a terrible, terrible attitude! :-)

    Oh, and how did you carry out in your federal tests for golf, archery, and girl scouting? I'm really interested in HOW you passed the latter...;-)

    AF6AY

      Email SubscriptionYou are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

    Subscribe!My SubscriptionsSubscriptions Help

    Other Recent ArticlesRSGB ARDF Championships:Fire District Agrees to Sponsor CERT:Man's Electronics Disrupt Entire Neighborhood's Car Keys, Garage Openers:Bench Therapy Video -- AQRP Antenna Analyzer:Special Event for 75th Anniversary of the Battle of Cassino:





    Back to Main Page





    Killexams 310-152 exams | Killexams 310-152 cert | Pass4Sure 310-152 questions | Pass4sure 310-152 | pass-guaratee 310-152 | best 310-152 test preparation | best 310-152 training guides | 310-152 examcollection | killexams | killexams 310-152 review | killexams 310-152 legit | kill 310-152 example | kill 310-152 example journalism | kill exams 310-152 reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review 310-152 | review 310-152 quizlet | review 310-152 login | review 310-152 archives | review 310-152 sheet | legitimate 310-152 | legit 310-152 | legitimacy 310-152 | legitimation 310-152 | legit 310-152 check | legitimate 310-152 program | legitimize 310-152 | legitimate 310-152 business | legitimate 310-152 definition | legit 310-152 site | legit online banking | legit 310-152 website | legitimacy 310-152 definition | >pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | 310-152 material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure 310-152 exams | pass4sure 310-152 reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure 310-152 security | pass4sure cisco | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure 310-152 dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure 310-152 braindumps | pass4sure 310-152 test | pass4sure 310-152 torrent | pass4sure 310-152 download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |

    www.pass4surez.com | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com | http://coqo.com/