Killexams.com 310-152 real questions | Pass4sure 310-152 real questions |

Killexams 310-152 braindumps | Pass4sure 310-152 VCE practice Test | http://heckeronline.de/



Killexams.com 310-152 Dumps | actual Questions 2019

100% actual 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
real questions : 115 actual Questions

Download 310-152 braindumps with telling actual 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 gather the 310-152 Questions and Answers is'nt only to pass the 310-152 exam at the first attempt but Really ameliorate Your information about the 310-152 exam topics.

If you are really worried about the 310-152 exam dumps. You should just download 310-152 actual questions from killexams.com. It will reclaim you from lot of problems. It makes your concept about 310-152 objectives crystal lucid and compose you confident to pan the actual 310-152 exam. compose your own notes. You will note that some questions will looks very easy to answer, but when you will try at vce exam simulator, you will note that you acknowledge them wrong. This is just because, those are tricky questions. SUN specialists compose such questions that looks very easy but actually there are lot of techniques inside the question. They back you understand those questions with the back of their 310-152 questions and answers. Their vce exam simultor will back you to memorize and understand lot of such questions. When you will acknowledge those 310-152 dumps again and again, your concepts will subsist cleared and you will not befuddle when SUN change those questions to compose certain techniquest. This is how they back candidates pass their exam at first attempt by actually boosting up their information 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 actual exam questions and answers of 310-152 exam that will back you collect much score in the exam, but issue is not just passing the 310-152 exam some time. They provide VCE exam simulator to ameliorate your information about 310-152 topics so that you can understand the core concepts of 310-152 objectives. This is really important. It is not at everysingle easy. Their team has prepared 310-152 questions bank that will actually deliver you much understanding of topics, along with surety to pass the exam at first attempt. Never under estimate the power of their 310-152 VCE exam simulator. This will back you lot in understanding and memorizing 310-152 questions with its braindumps PDF and VCE.

You can download 310-152 dumps PDF at any gadget relish ipad, iphone, PC, smart tv, android to read and memorize the 310-152 dumps. spend as much time on reading 310-152 Questions and answers as you can. Specially taking practice tests with VCE exam simulator will back you memorize the questions and acknowledge them well. You will occupy to recognize these questions in actual exam. You will collect better marks when you practice well before actual 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 actual 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 much source after a long time. Everyone here is cooperative and competent. Team provided me very much 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 much marks so that I would compose a much print on everyone. In order to accomplish this I needed outside aid and killexams.com was willing to provide it to me. I studied over here and used 310-152 questions to prepare. I got the majestic prize of best scores in the 310-152 exam.


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


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


The pass to read for 310-152 exam in shortest time?
passed 310-152 exam a few days in the past and got an ideal score. however, I cannot bewitch complete credit score for this as I used killexams.com to prepare for the 310-152 exam. two weeks after kicking off my practice with their exam simulator, I felt relish 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 identical time as practising. If now not each, then tremendous majority of them. the gross thing that turned into in the practice% turned out to subsist very relevant and beneficial, so I can not thank enough to killexams.com for making it manifest for me.


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

Storage Certifications - piece I | 310-152 actual Questions and VCE practice Test

any individual involved within the certification trade will narrate you that these are complicated instances. in the days before the dot com bust, IT certifications occupy been a pass for any individual with a technical inkling and a diminutive money to collect licensed and, without doubt, collect 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 piece of the IT trade, storage providers occupy been brief to recognise that they too might offer certifications, and they too could profit because of this. The most efficient problem become, simply as probably the most storage carriers started merchandising their certification classes, the bottom fell out of the economy and the certification market that fed off it. could subsist certification candidates nascence searching more toward preserving the job they had in Place of taking a leer at getting licensed and lamentable 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 subsist scorching over the arrival years is storage networking certifications.

What's obtainable?The latitude of certifications accessible can compose identifying one a tricky task. most of the dealer certain certifications will, rather reasonably, focus on that companies products and it subsist related applied sciences. whereas this might possibly subsist 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 straggle to an additional enterprise that uses diverse items. The draw back is that one of the vital more typical certifications can subsist viewed as less advantageous through an industry enterprise who's looking for a specific capabilities set and so a extremely specific certification. during this admire, there are basically no hard and mercurial rules - you need to simply device out which pass you are looking to travel after which head in that course. Of direction there's nothing to title that you can not just bewitch multiple certification, which could subsist the reply to the conundrum.

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

One factor they did locate at the identical time as learning storage certifications is that many companies classes are nevertheless below construction. This means that the first step towards certification can subsist 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 collect pissed off at having to linger up for a dealer to collect their house so as.

TestingNearly everysingle of the certification suppliers choose to exercise 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 subsist general sufficient. If this might subsist your first certification leer 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 moreover subsist taken at certainly one of lots of trying out facilities worldwide. checks purview from 45 minutes to about 2.5 hours and are normally closed e-book assorted option affairs. In nearly everysingle situations your effects are given at the conclusion of the leer at various enabling you instant gratification (or commiseration) on your efforts.

The fees of exams differ drastically between certification providers however are frequently between $a hundred and $200 per test. If the enterprise makes exercise of both testing suppliers, the imbue and content of the check could subsist 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 critical to tolerate in irony that now not every certification is going to subsist acceptable to every grownup. in case you are just nascence out in storage certification, subsist certain to leer against one of the vital greater current 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 Place to compose an informed resolution a few really expert certification.

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

AdaptecWhen it comes to specialized certifications, there aren't too many who are more particularly concentrated than Adaptec's licensed Storage skilled. despite the fact the program covers familiar storage concepts, there is a very massive accent 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 need to subsist taken first. The Brocade certification roadmap, which is purchasable at Brocade's website, moreover comprises tips about the premier Brocade licensed SAN Architect certification, even though particulars are scant on precisely when the critical tests to attain this stage should subsist obtainable.

EMCOf everysingle of the corporations discussed here, EMC has possibly the most developed, complicated 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 industry Storage Fundamentals exam, which covers simple storage networking ideas along with a meet 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 smooth accreditation, the change being the smooth 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 bewitch a certification exam. even if this makes the Gadzoox certs as efficient as others will depend on your personal viewpoint or that of your existing or potential corporation. extra information on the certifications may moreover subsist 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 unreasonable conclusion Disk options to identify just two. each and every domain has a sole exam associated with it. For extra tips seek counsel from the IBM certification website.

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

community ApplianceStorage acknowledge manufacturer network apparatus has created a certification software with two diverse tracks designed to focus the candidates consideration on community apparatus items. the two tracks are NetApp licensed associate (Filer) certification, which requires three tests to subsist taken earlier than candidates can movement on to the NetApp licensed knowledgeable (Filer) cert which requires a further two tests. The identical kindhearted of path (with diverse checks) exists for the NetApp licensed affiliate (NetCache) and NetApp licensed expert (NetCache) certifications. For more guidance on network apparatus certification 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 account is a much or a foul factor depends on your perspective.

latest SNIA choices comprehend 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 solemnize someday later this year. The certifications can moreover subsist 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 moreover subsist found at the SNIA website.

solar Microsystems solar's enormously developed storage certification application includes three distinct tracks together with sun certified records management Engineer, solar certified Backup and recovery Engineer and sun certified Storage Architect. each certification requires the passing of a sole examination, and the certs can moreover subsist taken in any order. For extra counsel seek 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 unreasonable availability, though a search of the VERITAS web site yielded no further suggestions on the courses than that.

in piece Two......partially two of this text, they are going to consult with some industry figures about certifications and collect the acknowledge to at least one very critical query. Are certifications charge your time, funds and energy? they will moreover dissect some extra components that you'll want to believe when opting for a certification.


Certification Watch: Microsoft adds .web Developer Credentials | 310-152 actual Questions and VCE practice 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 sedulous year. in this theme they report on 4 new and pending certifications.

Microsoft declares New .internet Developer CredentialsAs a piece of the tremendous 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 standard inspecting necessities and Defining solution Architectures. latest MCSDs are not required to supersede to the .internet music to continue to subsist certified. For the complete story, note the GoCertify.com article, figuring out Microsoft's New Developer Credentials.

https://o1.qnsr.com/log/p.gif?;n=203;c=204660774;s=9478;x=7936;f=201812281339040;u=j;z=TIMESTAMP;a=20403972;e=iCompTIA To build New Entry-stage safety CertificationComputer and community security has been this type of sizzling theme matter in recent months that it can reach as no shock that the Computing expertise industry 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 reliable designation of the brand new certification has now not been determined yet, however Certification Watch has discovered that it may not subsist 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 redress 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 travel on to bewitch two exams. the first exam is in the time-honored, desktop-primarily based format administered by Prometric testing centers. The 2d is a bewitch home useful examination that requires analyzing proof info and producing a document. note 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 current either the VERITAS NetBackup and Solstice Backup exam to win the designation. The tests are designed to measure information of professional backup methodology, restoring records and meeting design requirements and value $150 each and every. They can subsist found through Prometric checking out centers.

The complete present problem of Certification Watch will moreover subsist 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 collect certified and collect forward. She moreover 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 pass 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 information of: Product Overview and perception

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

  • AWS SageMaker: Product Overview and perception

    synthetic INTELLIGENCE |  via Samuel Greengard, February 14, 2019

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

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s chore Debater might repair fb

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

  • IBM broadcasts strongest AI application Yet: The start of sage 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 exercise 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 information of For ITSM goals

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


  • Certification Watch: community Storage Certifications | 310-152 actual Questions and VCE practice Test

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

    1. Microsoft Cancels Plans to Decertify home windows NT 4 MCSEsIn a histrionic reversal of their previous plans, Microsoft has cancelled plans to decertify everysingle 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 reliable 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 win the new title. The core exams can moreover subsist chosen from home windows 2000, .internet, or XP skilled working apparatus checks. The non-obligatory alternate options consist of the usual Microsoft alternative, masking such issues as Proxy Server, alternate Server, SQL Server and others. Microsoft will additionally accept a mixture of COMPTIA certifications in Place of the optionally available - both A+ and community+ OR A+ and Server+.

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

    3. sun Rolls Out network Storage CertificationsSun Microsystems has simply launched the first of three certifications that will compose up its new network Storage skilled software. The solar certified facts administration Engineer covers the information required to Place 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 subsist 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 standard solar rate - $150.

    four. Linux+ LiveCompTIA formally launched its Linux+ certification previous this month. This one exam certification is reputed 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 collect a reduction). trying out is obtainable by the exercise 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 win 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 everysingle 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 occupy to renew yearly, which contains paying an annual charge. MCTs occupy to convey as a minimum 10 days of Microsoft official Curriculum (MOC) and win 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 travail for a Microsoft CTEC).

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

    The comprehensive existing issue of Certification Watch can subsist found at GoCertify.com.

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

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

    characteristic |  by pass 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 information 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 pass of Daniel Dern, February 08, 2019

  • How IBM’s venture Debater may fix facebook

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

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

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

  • IBM Spectrum discover: AI at Scale

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

  • The proper Cloud-based mostly AI functions

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

  • artificial Intelligence Salaries: Paychecks Heading Skyward

    artificial INTELLIGENCE |  through Andy Patrizio, August 28, 2018

  • synthetic Intelligence exercise 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 hard assignment to pick solid certification questions/answers assets concerning review, reputation and validity since individuals collect 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 property because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer certainty is vital to us. Uniquely they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report grievance, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. In the event that you note any incorrect 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 relish this, simply recall there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of much 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 practice test | 650-126 braindumps | 210-455 actual questions | E20-655 free pdf | C2050-219 practice questions | C9050-042 VCE | 1T6-215 dump | HP2-H05 actual questions | 000-433 dumps questions | C2150-614 study sheperd | AXELOS-MSP questions and answers | C9010-252 practice test | EE0-515 practice 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 practice questions | 1Z0-935 exam questions | C2180-606 practice test | DNDNS-200 free pdf | 1Z0-066 examcollection | SAT study sheperd | 1K0-001 study sheperd | 1T6-222 dump | HP2-K21 questions answers | CTAL-TTA-001 test prep | PTCB test prep | VCS-323 practice questions | A2040-910 exam prep | CLAD study sheperd | 000-633 questions and answers |


    View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


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


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

    Pass 4 certain 310-152 dumps | Killexams.com 310-152 actual Questions | http://heckeronline.de/

    Radioactive Wounds of War | killexams.com 310-152 actual Questions and VCE practice Test

    Tests on returning troops hint sober health consequences of depleted uranium exercise in Iraq

    Gerard Matthew thought he was lucky. He returned from his Iraq tour a year and a half ago alive and in one piece. But after the New York condition National Guardsman got home, he scholarly that a bunkmate, Sgt. Ray Ramos, and a group of N.Y. Guard members from another unit had accepted an offer by the New York Daily tidings and reporter Juan Gonzalez to subsist 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 collect tested too. It turned out he was the most contaminated of them all.

    Matthew immediately urged his wife to collect 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 angry at a government that never warned him about DU’s dangers.

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

    The Pentagon has expanded DU beyond tank and A-10 shells, for exercise 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 relish they’re butter.

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

    Worse yet, uranium is moreover a highly toxic massive 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 factor has an affinity for bonding with DNA, where even trail amounts can occasions cancers and fetal abnormalities.

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

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

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

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

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

    Even harder evidence may soon arrive. Connecticut condition Representative Pat Dillon (D-New Haven), a Yale-trained epidemiologist, has crafted state-level legislation that Connecticut and Louisiana occupy 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, condition legislators, and even National Guard unit commanders occupy contacted her for copies of her bill to promote in their states. Bob Smith, a veteran in Louisiana who got hold of Dillon’s bill and spearheaded a successful application to pass similar legislation in Louisiana, claims that 14 to 20 other states are considering similar measures.

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

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

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

    if you relish this, check out:

    Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years | killexams.com 310-152 actual Questions and VCE practice Test

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

    Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years

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

    For purposes of examination of trends, six dates were chosen at 6- month intervals, the 18th of May and 18th of November, for years of 2007, 2008, 2009. The option of date was arbitrary, picked to begin 3 months after the cessation of license examination code test requirements.* New license classes of Technician-Plus, Novice, and Advanced would not subsist granted after USA dabbler 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 dabbler Extra 111,464 111,559 TPNA 145,886 145,438 Total Individual 711,232 711,063

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

    Longer-term class numbers can subsist 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 titillating 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%. dabbler 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 timehonored considering that no renewals occupy been available for years.

    A psychologically-sensitive region is Expirations. License expirations may subsist due to death, disablement, or simply from disinterest in continuing to retain a license renewed. So far, this author has found that only Hamdata displays Expirations as well as New licensees, Class Changes, plus motley data such as Administrative changes (mailing address changed, designation changed, etc.). New licensee numbers are a bellwether datum to bespeak interest in joining dabbler radio. The following is a tabulation from Hamdata on New, Expired, Class- Changes on the Prior 6-month period 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 subsist that New licensees are nascence to overtake Expirations but that may subsist 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 occupy dropped off in the three-year period. That may subsist due to a lessening of dabbler radio attractiveness to the general public. A general trend appears to subsist that the covet to upgrade is slowly decreasing.

    Radio amateurs in their Grace period may subsist 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 dabbler Extra, the "hard core" amateur, has the lowest Grace period 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 dabbler radio history.

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

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

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

    Another third are the CBers who collect their Techs so they can exercise 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 silent on CB Hamsexy.com.

    The relaxation are just the usual ones who once they collect their license occupy no interste in ever getting on the air. Those will everysingle travel away in about 7 to 10 years. In the meantime they spend their days on Hamsexy or EHam under anonymous logins.

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 everysingle in dabbler radio.

    Craig

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

    Mike, WA9PIE

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

    73,TerryN8RGQ

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

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

    73, -KR4WM

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

    That's the EXACT identical conclusion I came to.

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

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

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

    The EmComm people occupy diminutive to no interest in dabbler radio. The license is simply a implement to exercise equipment, often owned by a city or county, not the "ham". It is turn-key process for them. bewitch a one day license class, pass a simple test, exercise equipment. Much relish taking any other certification class.

    This is not cynicism speaking. These are not idle or dumb people. They simply consequence not occupy an interest in the hobby.

    73 - Luke

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 sedulous promoting WinLink, so non-hams can exercise ham frequencies for email. WinLinkers moreover want to reclaim the world, pass everysingle 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 leer 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 consequence not comprehend expired licenses in the grace period)

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

    Modify and collect 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 vanish by attrition. 15 years later, in 1967, Advanced was reopened to new issues as piece of the first wave of changes that came to subsist known as "incentive licensing".

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

    Yep, FCC has turned down everysingle sorts of no-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response is always the same: 'just pass the tests'. I believe one judgement is that it would cost them everysingle 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 moreover started renewing everysingle 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 moreover one judgement the Technician license numbers occupy 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 subsist notabit at all.

    Since 1951, the only other FCC-issued license class to vanish was the stale Conditional, which went away in the mid-1970s. FCC did it the identical pass - everysingle 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 dabbler 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 easy to note the trends.

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

    Would it subsist viable for you to prove 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K4ZN on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I solemnize that the conviction that people interested in ECOM are inflating the TECH class appears to subsist an offering of anecdotal observation, and to this point is not documented from a statistically significant population sample. This does not denote that it is not so. It simply means that there is no SCIENTIFIC data to champion the anecdotal observation.

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

    Even people who consequence not presently occupy a fervor for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will compose more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become 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 everysingle bands, everysingle modes, 24-7-365. What is participation? Holding a license? Being on the air twice a day, once a day, once a week, once a month, one contest a year?

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

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

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

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

    And, they scholarly quickly that ARES/RACES occupy stultifylingly complicated hierachies, pseudo-government, that nobody in their privilege irony would want to subsist piece of - although power mongers admire them. So, they lost almost the entire "generation" of new hams that came into the hobby in 1993 - their licenses expired in 2003.

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

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

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

    He said that while the average age of ham radio has increased from 59 to 61 since the mid-70s, the average 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 pass more young people than I occupy ever seen at ham functions. They don't travel to clubs, though - their generation communicates on Twitter and by texting, not at in-person meetings. Clubs may well subsist dying, but not because ham radio is dying. It's just that the youth are not so interested in clubs.

    Gotta watch what I convey here, some people would call me young. I consequence clubs and I consequence Twitter, so I'm a tweenie, I suppose....

    - k

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

    "This is another Article spun to compose a much thing into a infamous one !"

    Not at all. It is merely a dispassionate leer 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 relish it that the changes occupy worked !"

    Wrong. The "auther" [sic] is myself and my sole license grant in the dabbler radio service is piece of the data presented. My license grant was achieved by passing everysingle 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 dabbler radio license obtained anywhere on this planet. It should moreover subsist notable that I've held a First-Class Commercial Radiotelephone license since passing those four test elements in one sitting at an FCC domain 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 leer requires removal of rose-tinted glasses and dropping the "we are always the best and biggest" pep-rally attitude and leer at reality. If there IS a "growth" then its percentages are down in timehonored statistical noise. The best filter to achieve a elevated reality-to-noise ratio is through OBJECTIVITY. In HF terms, USA dabbler radio licensing "growth" is down there barely touching "S1."

    As a so-called "new" person in radio, I didn't collect into dabbler radio thinking it would subsist a loser. But, I'm piece of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dabbler radio would occupy changed after my dabbler license was granted. I note diminutive change, therefore the study to note if a occasions could subsist determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

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

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

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

    One mark of decline is the market in dabbler radio goods. Witness the folding of two of the four USA periodicals specializing in dabbler 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 gather about such areas, there is enough to solemnize individually by anyone...with objectivity filters.

    AF6AY (who has never upgraded his USA dabbler 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 everysingle bands, everysingle 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 occupy no station and no interest, or 500,000 hams, 90% of whom occupy 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 subsist exact.

    That's a minor detail, though; the main point you're making is telling in that if someone was licensed in the early 1990s to consequence emcomm and lost interest over time, they'd silent subsist in the numbers for 10 or 12 years (depending on whether you matter 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 exercise VHF/UHF repeaters and their autopatches. When cell phones became inexpensive, small, and common, a lot of those folks drifted away. And a source of numerous new hams disappeared.

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

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

    I occupy to question the "average age of hams" numbers often cited. How are such numbers determined? The FCC database doesn't occupy birthdate data for everysingle US hams. willing surveys are notoriously unscientific. Observing who goes to hamfests, club meetings, etc., isn't reliable either. And is that average 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 easy to understand why: Americans are animated longer, having fewer kids, and having them later in life.

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

    It may not subsist a matter of interest as much as having the time available in tremendous controlled blocks. A person can travel online, text, tweet, etc. whenever they occupy a few minutes free and occupy 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 dabbler 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 silent holding CLASS LICENSES.. which discriminates against the minority who can't look to collect a general OR EXTRA license. THUS THEY SHOULD eradicate everysingle CLASSES OF LICENSES TODAY AND JUST CONSOLIDATE IT INTO/ compose IT ONE CLASS..

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

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

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

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

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

    Don't, however, forget this:

    AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU compose IT FOR YOURSELF.

    All the complaints, everysingle the dumb comments tossed aside, YOU are dabbler radio. It is everysingle in your hands. compose the most of it.

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

    Race communication for things relish Solar Car competitions.

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

    Radio control airplanes.

    Legal tinkering with long purview elevated power elevated quicken 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 equitable 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 equitable number of them renewed. That's much news. But the spot checks didn't relent any upgrades.

    There's a lot of stuff you can consequence 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 relish long purview telemetry.

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

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

    73Dan

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

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

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

    That said, joyful I am not the only one who wonders what 10M is turning into.........I believe 1/2 the cataclysm does not even occupy 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 collect age breakdowns as the FCC license figure no longer tracks this- That is crazy- seems relish really critical information.

    73 Paul N0AH

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 consequence hear a lot more of them on the air lately.

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

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

    It was Bill Cosby who said; "The judgement why grandparents and grandchildren collect along so well is because they partake 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by G0GQK on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I suppose the figures you extrapolated prove that the dabbler radio fraternity is in the dolrums relish everything else, and is probably slowly sliding back.The identical applies in Britain, they are moreover sliding back.

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

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

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

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

    G0GQK

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by W1ITT on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Numbers are entertaining, but they don't speak to the property of Amateurs. FCC piece 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 dabbler 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 dabbler radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.

    I seriously doubt that those who occupy 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 subsist uninterested in further education once a ticket is in hand, and I'm not certain that many of them will ever subsist any asset to the electronics or communications industries. Sooner or later, some Washington solicitor will leer at "Basis and Purpose", then leer at the dabbler Service and settle they are not fulfilling their obligation, then settle that someone else should subsist profiting from some or everysingle of "our" spectrum. I only hope that I will subsist breakfasting with Mssrs Kennely and Heaviside before they ensnare up with us.

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

    As confirmation, two people I know from non-ham context occupy just expressed an interest in learning more about dabbler radio. Both of them note it as a type of emergency communications, but for personal use, such as "if I occupy an emergency I can collect help." Both moreover believe of it in the timehonored 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 dabbler 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 believe it is exactly that, as was the FRS ham fad and the cell phone ham fad) fades away, many of these Techs will lock the radio in the bureau drawer and totally forget about it. That is what happened to the "you can retain in feel with family" FRS hams and the "free cell phone" hams. The radios occupy been junked, sold, or parked in a closet.

    And EMCOM definitely will die. As rapidly as it has expanded, public safety radio has expanded even more, with more capabilities making EMCOM unnecessary at best, and unwanated at worst. I believe it is on the downhill oscillate now, with the new clarification by both the FCC and the ARRL. Thousands of 'heros' will become discouraged, and those radios too will travel into a desk drawer, to subsist 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 bewitch everysingle the stuff currently required for the Tech, general and Extra and roll it into a sole 120 question test. Anybody who wants a US dabbler license just has to pass that test, and they collect 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 shining elementary-school children. IIRC, the current youngest Extra was 7 years stale when the licensed was earned - and that was before 2007. Going back into the 1990s, the stale 20-wpm-code/5-written-exams Extra was earned by an 8 year stale in the third grade.

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

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

    Can anyone *really* convey the tests are or were "discriminatory" when shining young elementary school children could pass everysingle of them?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

    That really sums it everysingle up. Thank you.

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

    Most of everysingle the privilege attitude.

    73 es TNX de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 travail relate injury, raising a family, dealing with doctors, lawyers, etc, I was torpid for about 4.5 years. Once the condition of Fl decided to retire me. had this diminutive 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 bewitch the 5 wpm code test, it was then that I found 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 dabbler extra. Maybe some who got licensed in the 90's did so just to convey they did or for the EMMCOMM aspect of the hobby, most of em occupy either let their license lapse or renew even though they are not active. Who knows why, but even though they may only subsist 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 collect where I did, fortunately through family and friends I occupy been able to linger as dynamic as I can subsist under my circumstances. Just give them time and hopefully one day some will reach around and join the fun, if not then it wasn't meant to be.

    73 de MarkW3LZK

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 subsist an infux of young people with new ideas. Ha ! What new ideas ?The most current wire antenna which every ham knows about, those who travel to a hamfest and buys one, is a G5RV. This was designed in 1946! In England! Not long after the beat 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 moreover 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 subsist better known as "Barlow-Wadley" since its introduction in a receiver produced in South Africa. It was much enough that Drake used it over here and Radio Shack had it in their top-of-the-line SWL BC receivers.

    The first minute design 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 Place DETAIL in how it could travail along with antenna footprints on the surface.

    Americans may occupy 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 moreover invented the hand-carried scientific calculator but hams don't relish them...calculators travail with NUMBERS and some USA hams need GRAPHS! [Texas Instruments has graphing claculators now] :-)

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

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

    73, Len AF6AY

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

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

    In addition, let me convey a few words of appreciation for those who occupy an inner calling for dabbler emcomm. For the most part, these much spirited folks occupy a genuine interest in and note a actual practical need for national participation in emergency communication. May God bless them for their calling. Just as the national soldier stands ready to acknowledge the call of arms to preserve his family, his community, his state, his nation, so moreover the national emcomm volunteer stands ready to serve these identical purposes should a cataclysm stir the need to subsist there, and they practice hard for it on their own time, mostly with their own gear, and at their own expense. It is inanimate wrong to try to Place them down. They belong as much as the ret of us.

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

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 dabbler 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB2WIK on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! This is relish reading actuarial tables.

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

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 need an influx of young people with new ideas."

    WRONG! That is not obvious either. In order to sustain the hobby, they just need 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 collect this "We must only collect young people licensed"obsession.

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

    73s John AA5JG

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by WB0RXL on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Ray.I agree 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 travail 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 stale and has stayed with me ever since.JohnWB0RXL   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Ov   by QRZDXR2 on December 6, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can anyone *really* convey the tests are or were "discriminatory" when shining young elementary school children could pass everysingle of them?

    Ya then why did they occupy to consequence 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 moreover 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 discontinue at the CW testing. Why not just occupy one class of lic.. Ham. let the other go. If you want to play. got it... if you want to Ecomm.. got it... no one is better or honored more than the other.

    You then can compose it what YOU want it to subsist and no one can say..."Well I'm better because I occupy a higher license than you do... which some find loathsome and thus the wars on the radio when the others travel off and exercise frequencies that are reserved for them. Thats discrimination and prejudice when the government sets aside priviliged resources that others can't exercise 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 subsist removed relish they did with the corps plan, cw and other issues. After everysingle why should someone collect special treatment... preferential treatment... from the identical government that they everysingle pay their taxes to??

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

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 subsist troubled. Every sole time a actual ham goes on the air, he advances the technique of radio.

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

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

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

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 need one.

    To subsist a ham you must rise above the petty squabbles, the tired stale snobbery, the infamous attitudes, the gloom and doom, the designation calling, and everysingle the relaxation of it. You occupy to focus on what was and should always subsist your attraction to radio communication. This is what makes you a ham, and what you consequence with that spark of inspiration is what keeps you a ham.

    Forget everysingle the petty stuff. subsist 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 occupy to consequence away with the CW test?"

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

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

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

    What handicap issue? From whom?

    "The ARRL moreover 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 subsist retained for Extra, not completely removed. FCC said no.

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

    And I require again: How can anyone convey the tests are "discriminatory" when shining kids who aren't even 10 years stale occupy passed everysingle of them?

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

    Just Place everysingle the stuff in everysingle 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 exercise until they comply with standards that maybe they can't understand... handicap or not its discrimination that was set up by the ARRL and approved by the FCC."

    Nope.

    The judgement for having multiple license classes is to compose it easier to collect full privileges, not harder. If there were only one class of license, it would occupy to comprehend everything in everysingle three license tests, and everysingle newcomers would occupy 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 subsist discriminatory only if there were requirements that had nothing to consequence with dabbler radio. For example, if a prospective ham had to subsist at least 14 years stale before being allowed to bewitch the tests or subsist issued a license, *that* would subsist discrimination.

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

    ??They didn't remove the corps plan.

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

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

    Lenny felt a need to collect up on his soap box again. SSDD

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 occupy always had an interest in ham radio. He passed away in 2006 and I occupy taken his original call sign, the one I heard him exercise 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, travail etc., never was able to consecrate the time to learn it. I am definitely not anti-code though and would relish to eventually travail 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 travail HF on the weekends when I occupy more time to consecrate to it, but my Icom 718 is always on around 3878 or 7180 kHz every evening. I occupy joined the two local ham clubs in my county and am moreover a member of the ARRL. As far as getting people interested in ham radio and retaining new hams, I would encourage everysingle of us to subsist 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 collect the local hams on my interview prove at least once a year, usually just ahead of domain day (in fact I was doing that before I became a ham). I moreover manage the local cable access tv channel and occupy had the hams on my programs there. I believe as long as they occupy a core group of dynamic hams who are visible in the community and seen as a positive piece of a their community they will subsist okay.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over T   by VE7IG on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Re NN4RH ----Where were they then? I recently Place up a new 4 factor 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 dabbler and not CB. I didn't hear ANY CB type activity at all.

    73 Reg, VE7IG

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

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

    73s John AA5JG

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

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

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

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

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

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

    There's latitude for everybody. There's energy in numbers. As time goes on things change, try to compose it better, and collect over it.

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

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

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

    You best travel check the ADA group. They were the ones that occupy 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.. easy money)

    Again you prove my point about someone smart vs the ADA person. It makes no contrast to them if they can't mark their designation correctly. If they can't collect 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 Place the privilege shoe in the left foot...like duhhhh prove 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 require dummy questions yet occupy EXTRA class licenses. One only has to leer at the sidebar on eham too... require one what a volt is and you will collect the deer caught in the headlight leer 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 marvel if it doesn't back the gene pool out by elimination ... Hi voltage ..what's that!!! oh and everysingle them warning stickers just don't apply to 'em after everysingle they are EXTRA hams... dead... but it looks impressive on the grave marker where it says.. he was a Extra Class ham... Too infamous he smoked... smile

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KB6QXM on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! As in everysingle stats, the numbers can subsist spun one pass or another to prove bias.

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

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

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

    I occupy just renewed my advanced class license and will consequence 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 consequence not try to completely eradicate the Advanced class licenses.

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

    I am really upset that the FCC and the ARRL took away the challenge of 20 WPM. If they wanted to give away spectrum to people that did not to bewitch the time or occupy the disipline to subsist proficent at 20 WPM, then give them another license class, not just give people a license will unlimited privledges for diminutive 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 collect that. It was moreover tradition from the very nascence of the hobby.

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

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

    Why spend everysingle 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 note the tremendous picture, there is a lot more number crunching that needs to happen.

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 actual ham"? If so, they are in tremendous trouble.

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

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

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

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

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

    And yes, I know how to solder PL-259's to coax. I've been soldering, let's see, carry the 2... 50 years. I believe I occupy that piece of the hobby down pretty well. I had subscriptions to current 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 settle whether I'm "a actual ham" based on whether or not I can route code at 20 wpm? I would imagine that since I can listen to a piece of music once or twice, then write every note played by each instrument, I am pretty certain I occupy the aptitude to learn Morse, too. But I'm really not interested.

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

    PaulAE5JU

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

    I'm trying to occupy fun here!

    ;-)

    Paul - AE5JU

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

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

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

    That has been a long-standing problem in USA dabbler radio...but the "Rise of the Tech" numbers had different reasons of anecdotal evidence everysingle along the short time between the continuing extend in numbers of the Technician class from 1991 to 2009. Nearly everysingle of those anecdotal 'reasons' were depreciatory of the Technicans (see "shack on a belt" descriptors silent 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 subsist hobbyists in the traditional hobbyist sense - and may not occupy an interest in the radio art; nevertheless, it is hard to imagine a better demographic to target for the growth of the hobby."

    The only available data is in the FCC Database. The judgement I prefer Hamdata figures is that they present much more information on license history over the long term, occupy 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 acknowledge on the number of members it has...to fully-paid-up members. They did finally comprehend it on their 2008 Annual Report...............K4ZN: "Even people who consequence not presently occupy a fervor for the hobby of ham radio - someday they will retire, or the kids will leave home - or they will compose more money later in life and can then afford the 'dream station'. How many hams are at some point QRT and then later become dynamic again?"

    That is impossible to accurately quantify. It must subsist interpreted, just as I "interpreted" the number in each class who are in their Grace period by the contrast between everysingle licensees in a class and ARRL data which counts only those in their 10-year license term. I would account it fairly nigh 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 everysingle bands, everysingle 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 subsist endless OPINIONS on everysingle of those. Everyone has the ONLY "true" judgement and others not going along with those reasons "have a infamous attitude." It is relish nailing jelly to a tree. :-).............K4ZN: "Kudos to Len AF6AY for presenting the tabular figure of the data. It is food for thought."

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

    73, Len AF6AY

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

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

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

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

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

    Here's a snapshot of how the numbers occupy 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 pass to leer at it.

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

    We collect 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 occupy upgraded or left, while almost 2 out of 3 Advanceds silent hold that license.

    KB6QXM: "I occupy just renewed my advanced class license and will consequence 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 consequence not try to completely eradicate 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 everysingle know that the theory test for Advanced was big and significant."

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

    No tremendous deal.

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

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

    And the challenge is silent 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 cleanly up CB that way.

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

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

    KB6QXM: "Why spend everysingle 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 infamous apples stick out because most hams, stale and new, are nice people who at least try to subsist much ops.

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

    And even then, the numbers won't convey much. For example, they won't convey anything about how many hams are dynamic on the air at some level, and how many are simply stale entries in the database. They won't convey 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 actual ham"?"

    No.

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

    People collect rusty at things.

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

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

    Of course.

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

    Not at all.

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

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

    AE5JU: "But that some would settle whether I'm "a actual 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 occupy others telling me whether I am "a actual ham" or not based on their criteria, not mine."

    I believe you've got it backwards.

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

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

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

    IOW, actual experts don't travel around telling people they're experts - because they don't occupy to.

    In similar fashion, actual hams don't travel around telling people they're "Real Hams" - because they don't occupy to.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

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

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

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

    We need to strongly encourage their newbies to exercise their CW privileges. I would relish to note more of them try CW using computers if they just don't believe they can consequence it by ear. There's nothing to prevent Techs from doing this, and it's something they need to 'push'.

    I moreover believe they need to return to the past to find piece of their future. One of the things that made ham radio current 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 occupy today, with one tremendous difference. They had night time voice capability on 160 meters. I believe their newbies need nighttime voice privileges on HF, too. 160 meters is not the best place, but it would subsist better than what they occupy now.

      "Strength in numbers" can subsist used against you, too   by KASSY on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I recall when grand-dad was with NTIA. One of the most-often cited reasons why "it's OK to bewitch 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 travail against us to occupy more licensees that consequence not collect on the air. "They" are watching!

    - k

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Ov   by K7ESU on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! "I occupy just renewed my advanced class license and will consequence 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 consequence not try to completely eradicate the Advanced class licenses.

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

    My thoughts exactly!

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

    Alan, KØBGwww.k0bg.com

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 everysingle stats, the numbers can subsist spun one pass or another to prove bias. As I crunch a lot of data in my job, what I did not note is stats such as the following:

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

    I did not occupy 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 travail 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 occupy started my data collection about 7 to 8 years earlier since the renewal time is after 10 years. From your beligerance I believe you only "want" that for your own biased outlook. <shrug>..........KB6QXM: "The amount of Advanced class licensees. Are the numbers stable. They cannot increase, they know, but at what rate are they falling as far as license renewals."

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

    "Little work?" Let's not travel off the map about "biased" stuff here. On 25 February 2007 I took (and passed) everysingle test elements in front of a four-member ARRL VEC examination team. everysingle four team members separately checked my acknowledge 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 everysingle new license applicants aredummies and occupy 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 average in 1955 for the Far East Command Headquarters then in Tokyo. notabit 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 subsist on-site until final half of 1954). They scholarly "on the job." notabit of us "failed" or were transferred out. They were in "the tremendous 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 occupy 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 care to play old-time telegrapher I must subsist some kindhearted of "dummy," right? Cubed if I had an evil CB, right?

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

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

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

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

    Me, I scholarly how to connect "UHF" connectors back in 1952 with solder. I don't believe the "crimp" style connector was on the market then but I could subsist 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 domain 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 dabbler station, though, it was Place there by some astronauts for NASA.............KB6QXN: "At least educate these new hams safety."

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

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

    By golly, NOTHING seems to satisfy 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 relish to commission a portrait painting? I'm open but the rate isn't anywhere near dabbler economy class. However, I've got 2 cents for you for a new dabbler radio statistics set:

    Show us How It Is Done and "without bias." prove 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 dabbler 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KC8FRJ on December 7, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I relish you Len! I occupy not seen the likes of your type since my mentor. You two would collect along great! Must subsist a Defense industry thing....

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

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

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

    I'll just retain tinkering around,

    Best Regards to all!

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 hard day being assessed at school, and hearing stale buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will subsist more assessment than learning in the schools and in the ham clubs.I recommend the motto 'Discimus faciendo' to ham radio. Can you recommend one? Or is Latin a inanimate language relish incentive licensing?   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KG6WLS on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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, relish 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 hard day being assessed at school, and hearing stale bufferstalking about incentive licensing."

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

    And while I can't speak for everysingle kids everywhere, I silent recall what it was about Radio, and dabbler 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 stale 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 dabbler radio, had built foxhole sets and a 2 tube regenerative, and was learning the code. (I didn't know it was reputed to subsist "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 pass to find one, because for some judgement K3RTR wasn't into doing that. Navy MARS was his thing; I scholarly a lot about RTTY from Sam.

    Back in the mid-1960s, everysingle 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 diminutive sense to me that there were four different license classes that everysingle had the identical privileges. Even stranger was the fact that the Advanced was silent carried on the books as a separate 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 pass 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 subsist of three kinds.

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

    Some had a wait-and-see attitude.

    And some were keen to bewitch on the challenge and collect whatever license was needed to consequence what they wanted to consequence 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 stale 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 relaxation of those bands became more crowded.

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

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

    Second, more and more US hams studied for the Advanced and Extra exams - and passed them. More than a few were young folks relish me, who didn't realize how hard 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 pass a 14 year stale dabbler would convey 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 stale 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 consequence what needs to subsist done.

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

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

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

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

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

    G3LBS: "Can you recommend one?"

    'Ne permitas bastardi te carborundum'

    is one.

    But Latin really is a inanimate language.

    Here are some more:

    'If you believe, you can achieve'

    'If it happens, it must subsist possible'

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

    But most of all, I agree with AI2IA, who summed it everysingle up the best:

    "Amateur radio is what you compose it for yourself"

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K9ZF on December 8, 2009 Mail this to a friend! some folks occupy pass 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 join 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 hard day being assessed at school, and hearing stale buffers talking about incentive licensing. Soon there will subsist more assessment than learning in the schools and in the ham clubs. I recommend the motto 'Discimus faciendo' to ham radio. Can you recommend one? Or is Latin a inanimate language relish 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 collect dabbler radio licenses, they are always "smarter, more knowledgeable, more intelligent, more accomplished, better than everyone" because they convey 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 commandeer but the market objected and the phrase was quietly dropped. The technical property of Civil Aviation's products had already been proven prior to an "outsider" within thinking it needed Latin to sex it up in advertising. <shrug>

    AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 dabbler radio operator, but just someone that has found his pass on to eham to downgrade anyone and everyone that will read his divel....

    I could sit back without remark until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to occupy 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 believe it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a discontinue to it.

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

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

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 purview stereo speakers. If I travel that route, I can build better looking enclosures for my home made CW transmitter, regen receiver and power supplies. they would certainly subsist more artful.

    Bob

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

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

    I know lots of people believe getting Extra is easy now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not occupy 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 interpret some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

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

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

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

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

    I silent believe that there are many of us out there that silent want to LEARN and exercise CW, I don't note anything to worry about CW going away. I moreover don't note the no-code Extra as a infamous thing either.

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

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

    Danny LoydKE5WDI

    Gee Loyd... I didn't know people down in 5sneyland knew how to read. I find it laughable that you everysingle retain coming up with enuendoes that you profess to know what is wrong with others. Must subsist in the water down their as the relaxation 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 everysingle and that one is better than the other.. well as someone else said.. you people from 5 land only know where that blot on your dipers comes from... and the relaxation is just troll'n for loathe and discontent.

    As to my abilites in CW... I believe I average around 40-45 wpm in morse and faster using american.. as they occupy 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 collect burned out just shortly after 25 wpm. Was doing CW while you were sitting in front of you TV set watching bugs bunny and knawing on your fudgebar... well maybe that wasn't a fudge bar...LOLLLL

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

    As to your enuendo abou the ARRL... When they travel to the the FCC and say..."WE limn everysingle 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"... travel figure. they are quick to join which ever side is winning (or can compose them money) ...and popular... subsist it politically redress or not from what they occupy seen.

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

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

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

    I know lots of people believe getting Extra is easy now that there is no code, but frankly if I would not occupy 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 interpret some things better to me (inductance I am looking at you), made it possible.

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

    In fact I occupy 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 exercise a straight key at something nigh to 15wpm.

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

    I silent believe that there are many of us out there that silent want to LEARN and exercise CW--------------------------------------------------

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

    Nothing wrong with 15 wpm.. its a nice quicken to QSO on ... and they will subsist looking for your call mark on SKN...congrats.CW is more than just code... its a pass of thinking.. relish 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 travail for it relish you did)

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

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

    "I am assuming the ORZ... what ever you call yourself is not an dabbler radio operator, but just someone that has found his pass 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 collect in. That's unlucky for the actual dabbler community. But it is their policy and they are everysingle stuck with the kindhearted of frustrated, bitter-bile-filled vomit from an anonymous coward that badly needs some psychologic therapy............KE5WDI: "I could sit back without remark until your statements about people with disabilities and their needing to occupy 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 believe it is very insulting that there is no one from eham reading your crap and putting a discontinue to it."

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

    On "policy" I can understand an objection and complete blocking-out from participation even on the basis of using an alliteration to a swear word. I've been blocked out for using the phonetic alphabet substitute for two words. Okay, I toughed it out, complained to e-ham management, eventually re-instated. I didn't apologize for that. I've been a national for a long time and am a willing 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 Place 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 consequence what can subsist described as a total loathe CRIME remark as this "QRZ..." anonymous coward did such as (quoting):

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

    That was just a sample of the "atitudinal BILE" vomited by this creature...freely, without any censorship efforts. Done ANONYMOUSLY to avoid any identification and viable 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 dabbler way?!? Yes...it is bad, bad, infamous to exercise even an alliteration to a swear word, but it is perfectly "okay" to utter TOTAL loathe and DENIGRATION against one activity interest group!? Yes, I guess it is.

    Until e-ham management takes a much leer 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 convey that this palpable BIGOTRY of OLD-style "ham radio must-do" silent exists AFTER regulations occupy legally changed. I occupy stored textual references to that, visible in NPRM comments and replies to comments on every matter of USA dabbler 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 consequence what the old-timers convey they MUST do.

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

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

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

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

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

    I'll occupy to retain 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 silent not convey what a timehonored person can in 1 min) occupy you thought about running for ARRL political office. You would subsist great.. only problem is most don't know (or care) what you travel on... and on talking about... that is so far off theme that they can travel bewitch a nap, a shower, occupy lunch, consequence 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 subsist akin to the national debt if you transmitt that long.. much thing they invented transistors and FETs or the transmitting tube industry would subsist showing a stockmarket booming extend and your back yard littered with stale worn out finals) Only one other person you occupy to overcome to subsist No 1. and that was WA6GVG.. now that was a guy who could flatten finals nightly. But, not to worry.. he died. I believe his wife shot him (7 times with a 6 shooter). Something about sleep depervation..or stress..or something relish that... LOLLLLLLL

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

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

    Awww...You know how us stale guys are. If its not stimulating... they collect 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 marvel why CW is growning in popularity...

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

    oh well subsist observant who you call a coward... one might bewitch that as being loathsome and you collect ban again for innuendoes.

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

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

      Trends in USA dabbler 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 disdainful to hold the class of Ham Radio Operator. I silent am disdainful to this day as a Tech. My plans to upgrade to general are there, but time,work, cost of apparatus and family life mind to overshadow this dream. I will eventually upgrade and baskin the HF bands. One day.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 occupy done many things to advance the technique of radio, so I don't know where you collect off. I occupy been doing quite a bit of travail to ameliorate mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to advance 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 diminutive 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 certain that I could silent 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 collect in the pass of getting the Extra class. I didn't care what would occupy been required to collect it... I was going to collect it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more information than was required to pass the test, that is everysingle that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 occupy done many things to advance the technique of radio, so I don't know where you collect off. I occupy been doing quite a bit of travail to ameliorate mobile operations on 160m and 75m, so that is something to advance 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 diminutive 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 certain that I could silent 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 collect in the pass of getting the Extra class. I didn't care what would occupy been required to collect it... I was going to collect it. They dropped the code, fine; They dumb-downed the test, whatever. I could give a crap less. I know that I possess more information than was required to pass the test, that is everysingle that matters!

    73, John, AD7VH, east central Nevada

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by KW4JX on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I know an American guy who passed everysingle the exams in one day but can't join two pieces of wire together. He boasts about his achievement and suffers figure xenophobia. Maybe he will try to join two wires and thereby electrocute himself.Of course they in England had to subsist more observant because they occupy the superior 250 volts. This means they can occupy thinner more resilient cables on everysingle 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, relish Kings Bush and Obama.Get a life guys ham radio is (a) a hobby, (b) life itself, not a pass of life. It is almost as much 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 subsist subtle or obvious. Leaving out a relevant fact is one way. Another pass is to condition an conviction - or a wish - as if it is a fact.

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

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

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Various Things   by N2EY on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! To W7ETA: If you occupy the latitude and the money, account a much radial-arm saw. I always preferred one to a table saw. Helped build a pair of folded horns with one.

    To WS4E: much on ya! I hope to travail you in SKN. What bands consequence you work?

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

    To AD7VH: I believe if a person is satisfied with their license, they shouldn't subsist 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 everysingle discussions are not griping; it's principal to know what actually happened, and why. And to note how things occupy really changed or stayed the same.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    Nah, computer technology forums are even worse.

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

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

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

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

    In the earlier days before the need to always subsist Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not collect a license. That was it. The PC police to compose certain everyone is included as they consequence not want to insult 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 convey Oh I note that you are having difficulty, so forget this requirement. Either you passed, changed your degree program, or you repeated the course. Educational standards based on tradition.

    The identical should travel for Ham radio. Yes Yes, I know it is hobby, but when you dilute something by lowering standard, you lax everysingle the pass around.

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

    Do I want to subsist in a class of license where the requirements were known or consequence I want to subsist lumped into a group with some people that actually had to consequence a lot of hard travail to collect their extra class license and moreover people that had to consequence very little. NO!!

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

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

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

    I am not a conservative, but I would convey 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 occupy many hobbies.

    73

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

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

    I require this because the unhurried 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 need to always subsist Politically Correct, either you took passed the license requirements or you just did not collect a license. That was it."

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

    KB6QXM: "The PC police to compose certain everyone is included as they consequence not want to insult 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 subsist really titillating to collect the question pool from, say, 1984 and compare it to today's. I marvel 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 collect a lot more people to hasten the marathon if the distance was reduced from the traditional 26 miles 385 yards.

    KB6QXM: "Educational standards based on tradition."

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

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

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

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

    btw, nowhere in piece 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 subsist in a class of license where the requirements were known or consequence I want to subsist lumped into a group with some people that actually had to consequence a lot of hard travail to collect their extra class license and moreover people that had to consequence very little. NO!!"

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

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

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

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

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

    The restructuring of 2000 took Place under the Clinton administration

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by N4JTE on December 9, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Can they Place a fork in this?   RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 everysingle the hobbies that I occupy ever enjoyed, this one has the most opinionated, snobbish, argumentative, bassackwards people than everysingle of them Place together."

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

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

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

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

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

    Since privatization of everysingle radio operator license testing, commercial or amateur, the NCVEC Question Pool Committee has authored everysingle 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 silent not satisfied, write a PETITION and present it to the FCC Wireless Telecommunications Bureau. [there were no less than 18 Petitions up for remark 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 convey Oh I note that you are"

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

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

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

    I detect your irritation that everysingle will not leer 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 occupy many hobbies."

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

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

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

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

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

    The restructuring of 2000 took Place under the Clinton administration

    The discontinuance of code testing took Place 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 dabbler radio licenses...nor were they "controlling" any aspect of the FCC. The FCC operates under LAWS of Congress passed by the Senate and the House.

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

    The INFLUENCE GROUP that bore weight on the FCC decisions on Notices of Proposed Rule Making were INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS making their case. If you, as a sole commenter on one NPRM could NOT compose a convincing change, the only "blame" to compose is by pointing to and identifying yourself. It is lucid that your political orientation is to the Democratic party. That has NO actual bearing on the matter that affected the change or not-change of trends in USA dabbler 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 everysingle of the respondents to NPRMs listed. If you really, really read everysingle of the Comments and Replies to Comments on any NPRM, it would subsist rare indeed to find any overt political party influences by commenters.

    The FCC decides on NPRMs of everysingle civil radio services in the USA. It isn't just about dabbler radio. dabbler 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 remark about "slow eorsion of standards" in USA dabbler radio, it demonstrates that YOU account yourself far better than any government agency in knowledge, law, and many other things. There is ONE federal agency to regulate everysingle civil radio in the USA. There are NO "supreme leaders" of any radio service except for some delusional types who believe THEY are far more knowledgeable than any government agency.

    The FCC has been in existance for 75 years, chartered by the Communications Act of 1934. It has tested and approved methods of CHANGING regulatory laws and everysingle decisions on change are published in the Federal Register. In some cases, decisions occupy 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 subsist defined as low-level anarchists, even small-time dictators who note only themselves as some kindhearted of "role-model" and/or "standard bearer." Those who fancy themselves "better" than the law can hope to subsist up against others who believe selfishly about being the "boss of all" and only one of you will (think) you "won." Neither one won anything except disfavor of everysingle of us who accepted change. They outnumber you. believe about that.

    AF6AY

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

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

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

    Come to believe of it, new borns might programed to yowl if they occupy to learning CW?

    Best from TucsonBob

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

    Why?

    It's just a discussion about the number of US dabbler 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 piece 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 notabit of that really answers the hard 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 dabbler in the 1960s. The situation then had a lot of parallels with today.

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

    But in the early 1960s the growth in US dabbler 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 apparatus shut out too many people.

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

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

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

    Some apparatus manufacturers disappeared from the dabbler radio market. Others reduced their lines, or kept selling modified versions of their stale 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 retain up with the baby boom! When the stale codgers died off, that would subsist the discontinuance - 1980 at the latest!

    Now it's 40+ years later. dabbler radio is silent here. There are more hams, more things to consequence in ham radio, more bands/modes/technologies to choose from.

    And they silent occupy the doomsayers.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    What standards occupy 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 domain office, and the tests were everysingle about tube radios and dipoles and the CW and phone corps edges.

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

    Finally, I collect back on the air again (CW - it had always been my privilege love) just a few years ago and settle to upgrade to Extra. I open the study engage and everysingle I can convey is:

    WOW.

    I mean, back when I was a kid, I did manage to device out how to prejudice tube amplifiers, leer at trapezoid patterns on scopes to adjust modulation, relate how to exercise VR tubes to consequence 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 subsist honest I was stunned with everysingle the new modes and rules and accompanying regulations I had to know for the new 21st century Extra test. Space operation? dabbler TV? everysingle 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 everysingle of the advances in technology, and I didn't occupy a huge problem with that side of the test. But rule-wise, wow, almost everything was new to me.

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

    And I silent travail exclusively CW.

    Tim.

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 champion it.

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

    Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I occupy my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the apparatus that I have. I would relish to collect 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 moderately taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are silent very sedulous with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they baskin the hobby, they consequence so at the smooth in which they choose. I exercise my apparatus maybe three four times a week and baskin doing so very much. I occupy other hobbies as well and consequence not emerse myself into them any more than I covet or that my economic smooth will allow. I would imagine that there are other "tech" operators that read these post that belittle those of us that "choose" to baskin the hobby at this level.

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

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

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

    Works out to 0.223%

    Next year is the census. Will subsist titillating to note what the numbers are then.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

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

    What it everysingle meant in practice was that the typical ham would learn the things that might subsist on the test backwards, forwards and upside down to subsist certain of a pass on the first go. bewitch Ohm's Law: Since they didn't know what figure the Ohm's Law questions would take, it made sense to subsist absolutely certain of being able to solve any kindhearted of Ohm's Law problem. But when you know exactly what the questions will be, it makes sense to focus on being able to solve those problems only.

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

    There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which covenant to bewitch someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone occupy 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 epigram that hams today should occupy to pass the exact identical tests as those given 20, 30, 40, 50 years ago. But at the identical time, it seems rather odd when an Extra doesn't know how to compose a simple wire dipole.

    Boil it everysingle down to this: Which would you account easier to pass:

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

    or

    An exam where you knew the general subjects that would subsist tested AND could note every one of the actual actual questions mp;A that could subsist on the test ahead of time?

    None of those test-method changes came about because the ARRL, ADA or big numbers of hams or would-be hams asked for them. They were the result of cost-saving moves by FCC, driven by the budget-cuts and policies of various administrations. Running test sessions at FCC domain offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost everysingle of the travail 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 collect involved in the actual regs too much, they set the general policies, pick the commissioners and determine the funding. leer at everysingle the champion Bush II gave to BPL for just one example. leer at how they got medical code-test waivers back in 1990 for another.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 consequence they lower the number to 294 Million? That would skew the percentage a bit! Many are not citizens, but visitors on travail visas.

    Can these people obtain ham radio licenses???

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

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

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

    No amps, just much antennas & much radios. Are they hurting anyone? Not likely. They are actually serving folks who depend on them. Note to hams: IF you need a power amp or heliax on 802.11(x) OFDM, don't even circle it on. You don't occupy 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 subsist 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 occupy BEEN!

    The quest for control, endless "You can't consequence 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 occupy been licensed long enough to note it...

    Rafwifidx@gmail

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 travail visas, they're not here illegally.

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 titillating 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 travel back five times through out the day to re read their own post re assuring theirselves that they are the majestic person they believe themselves to be."

    I've encounterd the very identical attitudes for a helf century. Kinda reminds me of the amusing saying, "When I was young they whittled their own ICs out of wood!" :-)................KC9HGJ: "Now back to the initial post in this thread and some of the comments. I occupy my license, it is a tech license and for now that is what I "need" to utilize the apparatus that I have. I would relish to collect 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 moderately taken back when people want to "brand" those of us that are silent very sedulous with employment, children and other ventures in their lives and although they baskin the hobby, they consequence so at the smooth in which they choose. I exercise my apparatus maybe three four times a week and baskin doing so very much. I occupy other hobbies as well and consequence not emerse myself into them any more than I covet or that my economic smooth will allow. I would imagine that there are other "tech" operators that read these post that belittle those of us that "choose" to baskin the hobby at this level."

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

    Hear ya! much on you for writing that.

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

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

    Good on you again! I totally agree with you on that. I convey again that dabbler 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, dabbler radio has become a raison d'etre, their "reason for being." They occupy this terrible 'need' to subsist 'better than others' anddon't hesitate to attempt beating on those who just want to baskin the hobby independently, personally, the pass THEY want to baskin it.

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

    Contrary to dabbler radio folklore, ANY radio operator license is simply a leave 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 subsist 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 uneven analogy, it is relish the Cartage Driver License, a leave to carry cargo for hire and engage in legal industry of such cartage, but being required to obey the very identical roadway laws as everysingle other drivers of any vehicle type. The ONLY handicap a "30 ton tractor and box" is physical mass that can overrun diminutive vehicles in defiance of the law. In another pass the petty diminutive dabbler tyrant tries to BULL their pass 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 consequence not have, not consequence I at this time own HF apparatus so consequence not need a general or Extra license."

    I got an dabbler Extra class license just because I could. It was a personal handicap 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 sustain and information to pass some dabbler tests. I moreover 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 simple resentment to certain others.

    According to certain others "I occupy to begin as a teen-ager and slowly travail my pass up the proficiency ladder and travel through everysingle the class levels to warrant my aptitude to others in the dabbler 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 dabbler radio licenses). That VEC QPC was the ONLY "community." :-)

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

    Just WHY in #### designation must they "progress slowly, step-by-step through everysingle the classes of license?" dabbler radio is a HOBBY. It isn't a Union or Guild. It certain as #### isn't professional by federal definition. WE, everysingle of us are allowed to enter or progress as far as THEY care to. I've been a PROFESSIONAL in electronics and radio, that is earning MONEY for my travail 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 relish that. I could occupy 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 everysingle by myself that I might subsist done in 10 or 12 years. I'm 77 now, so I should wait until I'm near 90 to "make my first QSO?" :-) :-) :-)

    Well, my first 'solo' radio contact, NON-amateur, was done in 1952 while in the US Army. I'm certain that sticklers for EXACTNESS will 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 exercise so that they could fake to subsist "professional." Roger that. :-) In everysingle the history or radio communications the ACTUAL invention/innovations of advancing any condition of the radio technique by amateurs were done before 1940. I don't care what the ARRL writes, I've got many other sources of historical information on electronics which are not out trying to collect 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 occupy commented on UNverified 'trends' that are more half-truths, folklore, repetitions of what others claim. I convey that anyone who enjoys whatever activity they are in are very free to baskin it. I moreover convey that anyone who wants to dictate what anyone else "should" baskin is one sick puppy and treated with momentary compassion for their mental illnesses. <shrug>

    73, Len AF6AY

      Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by AI2IA on December 10, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Commenting on eHam.net is relish 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 succeed datum presentation."

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

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

    Thanks for the nice words, Bob.

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

    I specifically targeted just three years and only three years to note if there was an repercussion from the elimination of everysingle morse code testing for any USA dabbler 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 dabbler radio to enable them to study a situation dispassionately...............W7ETA: "Come to believe of it, new borns might programed to yowl if they occupy to learning CW?"

    :-)

    Heh heh, I can't narrate 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 require THEIR "permission to bewitch a test)" :-)

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

    I picked my study chronological period because: (1) I had third-party data from two independent sources; (2) Cessation of USA dabbler radio code testing can subsist considered an epochal point in USA dabbler radio history; (3) Some acquaintences suggested six-month periods as suitable enough for a venue having limited space. Note: I occupy the tools and aptitude to compose "graphs" but saw no justification for a diminutive 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 occupy insisted that "nothing can subsist seen for a 'short time' period." They would stretch it everysingle out for years, a time sufficiently long enough for it everysingle to dim in history and thus become a NON-subject. I classify that as just unpretentious denial by those who can't tolerate to note their mode (at which they title expertise) no longer "loved" or an attempt to compose themselves better than others, indeed 'superior' because they met standards of long ago.

    Newborns yowl because it is a natural act, calling for a need for sustenance, a need for security, a need for physical comfort. Lots of adults "cry" and cuss and convey nasty to others when evidence is presented that doesn't meet their personal idea/experience/brainwashed notions of what dabbler 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 everysingle authority, wrote on December 10, 2009:

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

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

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

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

    Oh, and well before the Dick Bash books, there were the "real questions mp;A" progression of books on just about every trade that had license testing, commercial radio and dabbler radio included. Hardbound in 1956. I tried to collect 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 everysingle the rules from a borrowed copy (fit into a half-inch lax leaf). I didn't occupy any thought of re-taking any test in Chicago at an FCC domain Office. Gollee, if there was some regulation or something on re-taking atest, I would occupy failed to recall it. Tsk, tsk, I didn't occupy 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 convey what the test fee was at the FCC because I didn't bother remembering it. I had earned the fantastic "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 consequence recall that the 90-mile train fare to Chicago and back cost more than the test fee..................N2EY: "Yes, there are lots of rules/regs questions in the modern tests. Yet the size and number of tests is smaller, so those rules/regs questions mind to shove out the technical questions. IMHO, the tests today mind to cover a lot of subjects, but not in much depth. The stale tests covered fewer subjects in a lot more detail. Which is better is a matter of opinion."

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

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

    I showed a local stage actor acquaintence my QPC notebook a few years ago and asked him if he couldmemorize it. Stage actors need to memorize just about every line in a play, everysingle characters plus positions and lots of other diminutive notes in the script. The only remark I got was "ya gotta subsist 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 subsist 1560 questions with 6240 answers. The 120 test questions (and 480 answers) would subsist (or should be) selected randomly out of those 6240 total items. Since many answers are "distractors" (almost-correct answers written so as to loom as correct), everysingle questions AND answers need to subsist "memorized." But, I guess everysingle you long-time amateurs occupy SUPERHUMAN powers thus you occupy evolved into superbeings or something. It must subsist the fantastic condition of the radio technique that long-timers collect doing everysingle that morse code stuff?............N2EY: "There are "Technician In A Day" courses offered now which covenant to bewitch someone from no license to passing the Tech in one day of class. And their success rate is very high! Would anyone occupy 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 occupy been granted since the year 2000.

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

    Weird comment, Jimmy. Morse code testing has been required for dabbler 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 epigram its elimination would subsist the "worst thing that can happen" [to USA dabbler radio] by January 2007 (repeated at least twice since in ham forums). The FCC published a Notice that code test would subsist eliminated in December 2006, exact efficient date to subsist published in the Federal Register. Gee, how quickly they forget... :-)

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

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

    I'd moreover want to pass my written California driver exam which I am now reputed to bewitch every 5 years or so now. I've passed everysingle of those...without "waivers."

    Ya see, I passed everysingle the required tests for dabbler Extra in the USA and will never occupy to worry about taking another dabbler test in my life. Just retain on renewing and it is mine for life. Even if I collect a Vanity callsign modification. That applies to everysingle who renew within the required time period. Imagine, the mighty condition of the technique of radio KNOWN by everysingle 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 big numbers of hams or would-be hams asked for them. They were the result of cost-saving moves by FCC, driven by the budget-cuts and policies of various administrations. Running test sessions at FCC domain offices cost a lot more tax dollars than having almost everysingle of the travail done by unpaid Volunteer Examiners."

    Ahhh, having been assigned to station ADA in the military for 3 years, it was never involved then in dabbler activities and certainly was not operated in any dabbler fashion. Station ADA is silent 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 dabbler radio test by a Volunteer Examiner in 1969 and that identical dabbler was moreover your first QSO contact. Can they detect some "favoritsm" in there, perhaps "kindness" to a teener? Hmmm? Could they detect some identical "kindness" about the VEs who passed a pair of six-year-olds back in 1998 or so (cute picture was in the ARRL Letter). Are they silent licensed? It is about 11 years later now. They must subsist in their grace period 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 collect 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 occupy been named George Herbert Walker Bush II. On everysingle those "waivers" that troubles you so, WHO out there in dabbler land got code-test waivers? You occupy 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 moreover the year the Technician class (having no code test) NPRM was released. Technician class (of modern times) was made law in 1991. Are you confusing things or what?

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

    Bye,

    AF6AY

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

    It can look relish that sometimes. But to paraphrase what you wrote about dabbler radio, "Eham is What You compose Of It For Yourself".

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

    A classic troll-move on eham is to post something that seems colorable but is inaccurate, deceptive or just unpretentious untrue. Those who know the facts then redress 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 care about the verity at all. What the troll wants is attention, and the opportunity to wrathful others and insult them. The responders consequence care about the truth, and retain trying to set the record straight and concentrate on the facts, which simply keeps the game going.

    The troll will exercise everysingle the usual tools of analytic fallacy to retain the responses coming. Common ones are the Appeal to Authority, Presuming the Conclusion, conviction as Fact, Ad Hominem, controversy from Verbosity, misquoting, and various semantic games, but there are many others.

    The solution in everysingle cases is to simply ignore the trolls completely and not bewitch the bait.

    You can narrate 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 incorrect 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 pass or another and travel on to other ways of keeping the game going. Remember, the troll doesn't care about the verity at all, only about the attention. The "Prove it!" response is attention, which is exactly what the troll wants.

    The only pass 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 dabbler Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Excellent analysis, Len!

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The bottom line here is that, while their numbers may leer relish they occupy "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 silent 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 begin dropping relish 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 occupy 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 occupy "advanced" everysingle the pass to Extra Class.

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

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

    It simply hasn't happened.

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

    It would everysingle subsist comic if it wasn't so sad.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by KW4JX on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Precisely Place - supporting the basic fact that everysingle 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 dabbler Radio License Classes   by AC9HE on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! IT...........is ..........a..........hobby.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by AC9HE on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! If you believe that it is more than that........you need to re medicate.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF: "It is moreover principal to recall that, because their licenses are everysingle on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you everysingle are citing were only completely accurate in 1999."

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

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

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

    KB1SF: "while their numbers may leer relish they occupy "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 silent 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 mercurial or as far as they might relish but they ARE rising. Graph the numbers from the AH0A site and you'll see. (Graphs are excellent much 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 occupy "advanced" everysingle the pass to Extra Class.

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

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

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

    Now leer 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 collect 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 everysingle this very clearly.

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

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

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

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

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

    I believe not.

    I was a ham back in the 1960s and I recall everysingle the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would subsist 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 dabbler 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 everysingle the data that you gents are bantering about that I believe will eventually prove to subsist their undoing. It’s that NOWHERE in the public FCC database does it condition the AGE of their current licensees!"

    Thank you, Keith, but that age data is out of their control. FCC records of dabbler radio licensees don't occupy (or no longer have) data on age, or gender, and certainly not race. But, leer through several current or past dabbler radio publications in the USA and anyone can note that those licensees in photos are overwhelmingly of WHITE MALES. Yes, there are females, yes, there are youngsters (and a sprinkling of teen-agers) and some who are not caucasoid. No statistics or polls are necessary to note that. I'm not going to speculate on HOW everysingle 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. everysingle had the appearance of being male, everysingle appeared to subsist "over 40 in age.".................KB1SF: "It is moreover principal to recall that, because their licenses are everysingle on a 10 year renewal cycle, the demographics you everysingle are citing were only completely accurate in 1999. Who knows how many more of us occupy died, or have, for whatever reason, chosen to leave the hobby altogether since then?"

    I disagree moderately there. I did not consequence anywhere nigh to a "demographic picture" in my article for the simple judgement that there wasn't enough data to champion anything nigh to a full demographic workup.

    The Hamdata website daily presentations consequence prove EXPIRATIONS of USA dabbler 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 subsist supplied with death notices of licensees. dabbler radio service in the USA is essentially a hobby activity, not working in conjunction with the companionable Security people as an example.

    ARRL statistics and at least one other statistics site consequence NOT prove 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 moreover that the ARRL does NOT prove or bespeak 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 join them...they require many members to insure a profit for their efforts and pay everysingle the paid staff, retain 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 collect any device on ARRL membership numbers except once a year in their Annual Reports. One has to subsist a potential advertising buyer, identity questioned if not a recognized dabbler radio product maker/seller to collect current numbers of members. In other words, ARRL members cannot collect full information on their own 'national representative.' Members collect ONLY what membership headquarters decides.

    In Hamdata's case, they occupy 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 separate classes and to cross-check everysingle licensee names against the previous day's download to note if they are silent within the 12-year total term. "Secondary sorting" would subsist 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 complicated sorting program.

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

    I'm joyful you identified your own evidence as "anecdotal." The general figure of commentary on e-ham and other venues is that whatever numbers they pull out of hat are everysingle simple and done everysingle by themselves, therefore should not subsist questioned by anyone! :-)

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

    Conditioned thinking (aka 'brainwashing') seems to travail best on teeners. That's about the only judgement I can note for getting teeners into dabbler radio. That pass the older generations can occupy someone upon which to imprint them with their own need to subsist parental and "show them the proper way" and everysingle that stuff. When one gets older, convey into twenty-something ages, most occupy acquired a much variety of input into companionable mores, activities, sciences, trades, etc., etc., etc. They've moreover gotten a better feeling about themselves and their capabilities and start questioning some of the 'older' folks who look to occupy quaint ideas (to the 'younger' folk). "Middle aged" folks mind to resent (sometimes bitterly) any unenthusiastic responses after they occupy told 'younger' folk "I know what is much for you and you'd better listen!" :-)...............KB1SF: "Now, don't collect me wrong. I'm more than cheerful to occupy these folks (back) in the fold. And I welcome then everysingle with open arms. But my own personal periences are increasingly showing that they simply are NOT attracting enough YOUTHFUL newcomers to their Service these days to supersede us ever-aging curmudgeons when they (and most of their predominantly older newcomers) are inanimate and gone."

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

    Worse yet, I don't occupy 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 leer relish they occupy "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 silent 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 occupy objected strenuously against ANY "decline" in USA dabbler 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 bewitch any action on their own to circle it around. It takes some personal courage to present something dispassionately in public. One can subsist reviled for presenting truth, facts that don't meet others preconceived notions, even personal fantasies. Medical doctors collect that a lot from patients who are diagnosed with infamous diseases (from anecdotal input of two MDs).

    I'm reminded of a song from the stale 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 reject to advance to the present time. Oh, they may occupy the bling of ready-builts of today with lots of bells and whistles but so many silent believe that Ohm's Law of Resistance is silent some kindhearted 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 nigh to the tail and was exposed to the missle's rocket exhaust. Its physical measurements did NOT meet 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 dabbler radio one MUST exercise a WIRE dipole and linger on HF where everysingle the "experts" are. The "experts" occupy already told me so. Long ago. :-)...............KB1SF: "As others occupy 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 occupy "advanced" everysingle the pass to Extra Class."

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

    Well, having spent a half century in electronics engineering, I can't recall even up to 17% of everysingle of my co-workers being dabbler radio licensees or going for one or even having one in their past. It wasn't any handicap 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 dabbler Extra class license "out of the box" (as the disparaging soubriquet goes) because it was relatively easy for me to consequence so. Sure, I didn't collect 100% redress on 120 questions total but then I don't hope to exercise dabbler radio in Outer Space...so I scored about 95%. :-) I got it to consequence 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 subsist cozy with it...as evidenced by the dabbler radio publications' contents of ancient times. laughable thing is, the vast majority of my travail colleagues ALREADY found electronics fascinating enough to travail at it, to advance the actual condition of the art. THEY did it, not dabbler dabblers, perverse to what the ARRL tries to compose everyone believe...................Good discussing things with you, Keith. Thank you. linger warm and occupy cheerful 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 everysingle sorts ofno-test free-upgrade proposals. Their response isalways the same: 'just pass the tests'. I believe onereason is that it would cost them everysingle sorts of adminwork.

    What? That's everysingle sorts of admin work? If it's any harder than typing "UPDATE `hams` SET `class` = 'Extra' WHERE `class` = 'Advanced';" then they are doing something wrong. I'd believe it would subsist more travail to process everysingle those test results. Not that I care, I don't occupy an Advanced class license anyway.

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 subsist 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 leer to the person on their left and then to their right. Then he told us that 2 out of 3 students that begin college don't graduate. He told us that if they believe they are going to compose it then those other 2 people must not. Of course statistics don't actually travail that pass 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 silent larger than your 17% case but then relish N2EY pointed out, that's just a bachelor's. I'm certain you could matter on one hand the number of people in that latitude who made it everysingle the pass to doctorate.

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

    You occupy to recall that FCC is piece of The Government, so it's probably not nearly as simple as you imagine. For example, there are probably everysingle kinds of safeguards to prevent simply upgrading a license class, let alone doing it for everysingle Advanceds.

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

    There's moreover the question of whether FCC would occupy to route out everysingle new license documents.

    As for processing the tests, FCC doesn't consequence 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 everysingle of them upgraded.

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

    Is the Extra test REALLY that difficult?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 collect 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 silent compose 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 silent need any) that "incentive licensing" has, indeed, been a dismal failure.

    I've moreover 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 begin 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 subsist becoming blatantly obvious to anyone in their Service in the United States who silent holds a license and who has eyes to note and ears to hear.

    Indeed, everysingle one REALLY has to consequence these days is to simply leer around the latitude at the advancing age (in the figure of graying (or balding!) heads and expanding waistlines) of the bulk of participants at various dabbler radio-related gatherings to note 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 reserved as compared to just a few years ago.

    I often marvel how many others occupy called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to occupy that corps very quickly reach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the identical dismal results as before. This tells me that their bands are absolutely wide open most of the time. It's just that there are fewer and fewer people actively OPERATING these days as compared with just a few years ago.

    Moreover, their once dynamic VHF and UHF repeaters, too, are falling increasingly silent…if they are even silent on the air. Nowadays, the bulk of repeater activity occurs during commuter "drive time". The relaxation of the day, usually everysingle 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 everysingle 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 pass you slit 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 current hamfests (like the Miami hamfest) occupy now gone the pass of the dinosaur from want of participation. Countless other smaller 'fests occupy long since evaporated as well.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    And then they occupy the nerve to marvel 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 pass you slit these numbers, to me, they everysingle add up to a very lucid recipe for their Service's continued glide into sociological and technological irrelevance.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 need for the license itself) is relevant to the added operational privileges it grants. That is, does that license (and the exam one takes to obtain it) fulfill a specific, "regulatory purpose"?

    In other forums I've continually asked YOU to interpret 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 occupy yet to collect a straight answer…or ANY acknowledge for that matter.

    Could it subsist that (gasp!) there ARE none?

    Indeed, ONE of the federal laws that applies to the federal regulatory and licensing system for their Service is the "Persons with Disabilities Act of 1990"…the so-called ADA. Specifically, Section 202 of that law titled "Discrimination" reads as follows:

    "Subject to the provisions of this title, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by judgement of such disability, subsist excluded from participation in or subsist denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or subsist 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 moreover 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 piece as follows:

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

    The law goes on to convey that, "The head of each such agency shall promulgate such regulations as may subsist 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 much class action solicitor could compose a very strong case that their gross FCC incentive licensing system unfairly "excludes participation in…denies the benefits of…or subjects disabled persons to discrimination under" the FEDERALLY administered licensing system for the dabbler 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 prove below), but moreover travel WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines hint should subsist the MINIMUM qualifications for full participation in their dabbler Service.

    The term they educators exercise to relate such tests is "invalid" because such tests measure skills and abilities that tolerate diminutive or no relationship to what candidates actually need to know in order to successfully fulfill in their new roles. When constructing such tests, one must always require the question: "Does the test actually measure what it is reputed to measure?"

    What's more, when such tests require a information of predominantly "nice to know" rather than "need to know" information, then, according to a gross host of equal access legislation in the USA (like those I've cited above), such tests become what's called "systemically discriminatory". That's because, taken together, they create a SYSTEM that makes a license grant contingent on applicants successfully answering questions that occupy diminutive or no DIRECT relationship to the privileges they grant.

    Let me cite an case that may back to illustrate my point.

    Under current US federal law, when hiring a person to stack boxes in a government warehouse, you can no longer legally compose that person's hiring 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 compose them. And while a information of how boxes are made is certainly "nice to know", it is NOT an essential factor in the job they are being hired for.

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

    Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly acknowledge a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an dabbler 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 subsist qualified to operate in the final few KHz of their HF bands now reserved for Extra Class operators. In fact, ANYONE with a telling dabbler License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of dabbler 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 moreover an illegal question because, once again, dabbler television operation is NOT an exclusive operational privilege granted solely to Extra Class operators.

    As with satellite operation, ANYONE with a telling dabbler Radio License in the USA (including Technicians) can legally operate an dabbler 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 acknowledge that particular question occupy absolutely NOTHING to consequence with the information 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 principal 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 tolerate absolutely NO direct relationship to the added privileges granted. True, such questions discuss dabbler operation in general. But, under today's federal equal-access laws, that's simply no longer much enough.

    Frankly, BOTH of the questions I've shown above belong in the TECHNICIAN question pool, NOT in the one for Extra Class. And making correctly answering such misplaced questions contingent on the grant of an Extra Class license becomes systemically discriminatory because it perpetuates a SYSTEM of discrimination by forcing everysingle applicants (not just the disabled) to demonstrate information and skills that are either irrelevant, or are not required for the exclusive privileges associated with the class and type 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 anyway DIRECTLY RELATE the skills and knowledges being examined to a SPECIFIC operational or safety need 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 subsist withheld from lower class licensees in their system would subsist 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 occupy absolutely NOTHING directly to consequence with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant.

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

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

    Likewise, it DOES NOT bewitch 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 immaterial tests.

    And, as I've moreover shown by citing just TWO questions from the current Extra Class exam pool, there remains a glaring (and I convey blatantly illegal) disconnect between the content and the comprehensiveness of the questions on their exams (particularly those for an Extra Class license) and the (meager) additional (predominantly frequency-access-based) privileges they grant.

    Sadly, for FAR too many crusty curmudgeons in their ranks, it has now become an inconvenient verity that new US federal equal access laws relish the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act now require that EVERYONE subsist given an equal opportunity for full, "barrier free" access to public services and resources relish the dabbler Radio Service. Clearly, such laws are now threatening to crash up their horrifically entrenched, government protected, members only "Country Club".

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

    But, what this DOES denote is that, in order to subsist in full compliance with US equal access law, federal agencies relish the FCC can no longer arbitrarily Place regulatory barriers in front of people seeking full and complete access to federally administered programs relish dabbler Radio without just cause. That moreover means that the content and comprehensiveness of their exams need to subsist DIRECTLY tied to some very specific operational needs.

    Right now (and as I occupy 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 spare additional operational privileges their Extra Class license now grants.

    It is moreover principal to recall that no person needs to specifically prove they've been discriminated against in order for a federal agency to subsist found guilty of systemic discrimination under these laws. everysingle that's necessary is that it can subsist 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 occupy clearly and unequivocally done in the paragraphs above.

    I've always found it miserable that, everywhere else in the world, governments occupy left it up to they Hams to settle which operating mode goes where on their bands. The International Telecommunications Union (ITU), the organization that governs everysingle radio services internationally, has set out broad (VERY broad) frequency allocations for their Service...usually consisting of only an upper and lower corps confine and a specified bandwidth for the emissions to subsist conducted therein.

    It is only in the United States that those broad limits occupy been further restricted by license class and operating mode in their piece 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 occupy moreover said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a telling (spelled: "legal") judgement for a US Government agency to grant full privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another.

    Indeed, such differentiation can no longer subsist legally based on applicants being forced to correctly acknowledge exam questions that are either duplicative, immaterial 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 diminutive number of very specific additional privileges that are far more commensurate with the technical material examined. These comprehend being able to build transmitters "from scratch", hasten a KW of power (vice 250 Watts), subsist 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 elevated power) if you don't know what you are doing, or are activities with much greater probabilities of causing harmful interference to others on the Ham bands or other services (building transmitters from scratch or running a club station or a repeater). everysingle of those activities absolutely require a modicum of additional technical information to fulfill safely and without interfering with other operators or other Services.

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

    Or, to Place it another way, the only operational restrictions Place 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 settle 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 dabbler Radio License Classes   by WA4KCN on December 11, 2009 Mail this to a friend! I was a ham back in the 1960s and I recall everysingle the prophecies of doom about incentive licensing. How it would subsist 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 concept young people becoming licensed radio amateurs in the coming years should result in the total growth of ham radio operators is well a dumb belief. young folk are not likely to populate any hobby of primary interest to middle and stale age folks. Let us suppose a elevated priced expert marketing concern is hired to develope and implement a marketing strategy for dabbler radio with the specific intent of growing the dabbler radio base. The marketing firm's imbue is to grow the ground to a specific goal and to consequence so with the resources given. After completing market research what age group would they choose to target. Suppose the ARRL hires such a solid hoping more licensees denote more members and the conclusion from the marketing concern is the members hard earned money should travel toward an advertising crusade directed and focused on the young. Applying nothing more than the rule of judgement they know the conclusion would subsist to target older age groups. IN other words the opportunity to recruit new ham operators is with older folk. Heck the fellow that wrote this article is an older gentleman who wisely took handicap of the new codeless license. So for anyone who says dabbler radio cannot attract older folk especially with the easier testing requirements just leer at the the fellow who wrote the trends article. He is an excellent case of the much new opportunity for older and middle aged folks to reach into the hobby. Now having established the concept of young folk driving dabbler radio growth as dimwitted, it is time to examine the more colorable proposition that middle aged and older folk new to the hobby can sustain or even grow dabbler radio in the future. One pass to acknowledge this question is to bench stamp other orgainzations who are in fact growing by targeting older people. There are some really much examples that give credence to the credit older people can sustain and even lead to the growth of an organization.

    I hope ham radio can attract some youngsters but lets sage up on the concept of targeting young folk to reclaim ham radio.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 need for the license itself) is relevant to the added operational privileges it grants. That is, does that license (and the exam one takes to obtain it) fulfill a specific, "regulatory purpose"?"

    Trying to Place on my most objective observation on this (good) question, I would convey NO. Not in a regulatory sense. Very definitely YES in the ego-stroking sense.

    Looking back over history of USA dabbler 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 occupy just TWO for HF access. But that would raise a terrible Hue and yowl from the very established 'oldsters' who would preserve to the discontinuance their "right" to hold certain cheished Title, Rank, Privilege, etc. It was acrid enough during the remark aspect on the 'Reconstruction' NPRM, and I can note it would subsist as great, perhaps even more acrid now.

    The SIX different classes in the USA dabbler radio service were slowly grown from the so-called Incentive design long ago established. I was not directly involved in that but watched it happen, heard everysingle the acrid recriminatory comments and took no piece on either side. The number of classes grew from that until the USA "led" other countries with the most classes. That isn't actual 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, occupy HAD to subsist familiar with certain services' regulations when travail needs arose. dabbler radio was not one of those radio services. Other radio services are more USE-specific in the USA. In fact and by definition, USA dabbler radio is NON-professional. By everysingle its definitions the de jure regulatory language indicates it is a HOBBY. That is exactly what it is de facto. USA dabbler 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 dabbler radio is NOT any sort of "vital need" for homeland security, defense of the nation, or as a backup of civilian communications infrastructure. That many ALLEGE it is "vital" is due to their own nosy self-promotional, self-grandiosing attitudes.

    Case in point on Hobby activities. A pair of decades ago, model hobby folks lobbied for and got a specific corps at VHF for 100 channels of frequencies for radio control of model aircraft, boats, lots of remote-controlled devices such as in special effects companies in the entertainment industry. The AMA was a gathering point for this lobbying. Not a medical association, this AMA is the Academy of Model Aeronautics, headquartered in Ohio. That AMA has more paying members than the ARRL. <shrug>

    NOBODY in the AMA or its membership thinks their hobby is advancing the condition of the aeronautics art. It is basically for a HOBBY activity. So, they were able to prevail the FCC to earmark a corps around 72 MHz just for model radio-control activities. The dabbler radio organizations collect everysingle caught up in their presumptuous and fairly incorrect notion that dabbler radio is answerable for everysingle 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 dabbler 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 figure a half century before the first public demonstrations in 1896. Neither is TTY, having progressed from wired to frequency-multiplexed AFSK to commercial-format AFSK on SSB. "Slow-scan TV?" The Bell System had in PicturePhone (didn't collect enough subscribers). Facsimile? That was in exercise commercially prior to WWII. "Fast-scan TV?" TV broadcasts by RCA were done commercially at thhe 1939 World's equitable 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 occupy no previous sustain 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 interpret 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 occupy yet to collect a straight answer…or ANY acknowledge for that matter."

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

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

    To travel further, since there are NO - repeat NO - age barriers, a cute diminutive 6-year-old can LEGALLY operate a full-gallon transceiver and "accidentally" occasions interference to others or to other radio services. anyway this lack-of-age AND responsibility got in the pass of Common Sense. Any parent who isn't a moron will KNOW that wee children occupy NOT acquired adequate information and responsibility to act "correct" everysingle 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 acknowledge that particular question occupy absolutely NOTHING to consequence with the information and skills needed to safely and courteously exercise the uniquely exclusive privileges an Extra Class License grants."

    At this point, I elect to consequence a cop-out. "I've got mine." I answered correctly for my test, so there, nyah, nyah. :-) [my license is much for my gross lifetime as long as I renww]................KB1SF: "Note that the "easiness" or the "hardness" of the questions (or the test) is not the issue here, Jim. Rather, it's the RELEVANCE of the questions asked to the SPECIFIC privileges a particular class of license grants that is principal in determining the legal validity of their tests."

    I hear ya. But, the average USA ham will simply shrug it off and occupy the ARRL or VEC QPC "know what is best for ham radio." The average 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 anyway DIRECTLY RELATE the skills and knowledges being examined to a SPECIFIC operational or safety need 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 subsist withheld from lower class licensees in their system would subsist 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 occupy absolutely NOTHING directly to consequence with the (predominantly frequency-based) privileges those tests grant."

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

    I can understand that progression. But, there was one diminutive crack in that: Privatization and its aftermath. In between the Notice of Restructuring coming and actual begainning in law, the FCC Place everysingle 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 diminutive remark in forums, but it would set a slightly different tone in required information of written tests........................KB1SF: "And, as I occupy moreover said, simply "stroking egos" no longer cuts it as a telling (spelled: "legal") judgement for a US Government agency to grant full privileges to one class of licensees in their Service while arbitrarily and capriciously withholding them from another."

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

    The Hue and yowl would subsist fierce for everysingle those extra egos out there. They've become addicted to Rank, Status, Privilege, and Perquisite they can get. While you occupy some much (apparently legal) reasons, those would subsist pushed aside by everysingle the extras NEEDING to retain 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 bewitch what you wrote at pan value. It certainly seems logical. Thank you.

    Down here in the USA I can almost hear the angry 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 silent familiar with that material...even though I occupy sober doubts about EVER doing ham radio in space. :-) :-) :-)

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

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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) torpid hams usually don't upgrade

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

    4) FCC has been renewing everysingle Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the identical class. If you consequence that, and leer 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 begin 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. everysingle that matters for growth is that they retain 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 consequence these days is to simply leer around the latitude at the advancing age of the bulk of participants at various dabbler radio-related gatherings to note these very lucid demographic trends."

    But are those gatherings a scientific sample? A ham who has a job, family, home, etc., may not subsist able to attend them, or may prefer to spend his/her time other ways.

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

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

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

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

    KB1SF: "how many others occupy called "CQ" with no results just before a contest into a seemingly "dead" HF band, only to occupy that corps very quickly reach alive with DX contesters once the contest begins. Then, once the contest is over, again calling "CQ" seems to garner the identical dismal results as before. This tells me that their bands are absolutely wide open most of the time. It's just that there are fewer and fewer people actively OPERATING these days as compared with just a few years ago."

    But there are plenty during the contest, aren't there?

    KB1SF: "our once dynamic VHF and UHF repeaters, too, are falling increasingly silent"

    Could it subsist 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 pass you slit 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 subsist in a continuous block.

    Hamfests used to subsist a major source of new info and bargains. The internet, ebay, and the rising cost of attendance occupy changed everysingle that.

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

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

    What was the age-of-hams distribution relish 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago? Can you prove us actual data? I believe not.

    Here's an observation: When I was in elevated school, (class of 1972) they had no more than half a dozen licensed hams in a student cadaver of several thousand. This was in a middle-class suburb with few if any antenna restrictions, back when used, homebrew and surplus apparatus was very common.

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

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

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

    I believe the actual problem is that people young and stale don't even know dabbler radio exists.

    There's moreover the problem that many of those who consequence occupy a very distorted image of it.

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

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    It's the perceived difficulty.

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

    Why don't more hams travel everysingle the pass to Extra?

    The acknowledge is often that they perceive the test to subsist too difficult for them to pass.

    Of course for some folks, the perceived vicissitude is the challenge. But those aren't the folks we're talking about.

    A man I admire greatly said: "If you believe, you can achieve". He's right.

    KB1SF: "Subject to the provisions of this title, no qualified individual with a disability shall, by judgement of such disability, subsist excluded from participation in or subsist denied the benefits of the services, programs, or activities of A PUBLIC ENTITY (emphasis mine), or subsist subjected to discrimination by any such entity."

    So you're epigram that there are lots of folks who can't pass the Extra because they're disabled? Even though that identical Extra has been passed by children in elementary school whose ages haven't even reached double digits?

    Seems kinda far fetched to me.

    KB1SF: "our licensing system withholds full participation in their Service...based on applicants passing...written examinations that are not only internally duplicative (as I will prove below), but moreover travel WELL BEYOND what the international ITU guidelines hint should subsist the MINIMUM qualifications for full participation in their dabbler 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 compose 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 subsist OK.

    Amateur radio isn't a job.

    KB1SF: "Likewise, forcing applicants for an Extra Class License to correctly acknowledge a question like: "What is the direction of an ascending pass for an dabbler 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 information of dabbler satellite operation is relevant to dabbler 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 telling dabbler License in the United States (including Technicians!) can operate via their fleet of dabbler 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 subsist easy, you wouldn't subsist making these claims.

    Perceived vicissitude is what it's everysingle 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 comprehend many if not most of the questions now in the general and Extra pools.

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

    For example, since Techs occupy full privileges above 30 MHz, and can exercise any authorized mode, they can bewitch any and everysingle questions dealing with operation above 30 MHz and straggle them to the Tech question pool.

    And since Generals occupy full power and full mode privileges below 30 MHz, they can straggle everysingle HF questions to the general pool.

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

    Is that what you really want? Is that a much 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 collect 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 slit to the chase.

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

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

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

    Increase the number of questions on the Technician exam?

    Give Generals and Advanceds full privileges?

    Have disability waivers for the written tests?

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

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

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

    Allow data modes in the 'phone subbands?

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

    Then let's note how the dabbler 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 kindhearted 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 stale age folks."

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

    Here's what I believe is really going on:

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

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

    A tremendous piece of efficient publicity is having a description that's easy to recall and which sums up the main points. That's why I relish 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 mind to occupy few hams, and the hams who consequence 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 everysingle about.

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

    3) Perceived complexity and elevated cost of a station. leer at stale ham radio magazines and books, and you'll note article after article that seemed to leap off the page and convey "BUILD THIS RADIO!" There were lots of simple designs for receivers, transmitters, antennas and accessories that could collect you started, and lead to more-complex stuff. Of course most of that stuff was HF- and Morse-Code-centric, which we've been told is bad. Yet it worked to bring in big numbers of new hams. Showing a complicated transceiver costing hundreds of dollars as the entry-level isn't going to occupy the identical draw.

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

    IOW, what they need to consequence is not to target any particular age group, but to simply collect the word out.

    ---

    One of the things I clearly recall about the dabbler radio books and magazines when I became a ham was that they didn't exclude anyone. They were inclusive, not exclusive. They didn't talk down to young people, but instead challenged them to meet the standards.

    This was and silent is one of the much things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for young people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you narrate them. Nor can they narrate what apparatus you're using. The CW op is judged on the air by skill, courtesy, technique and signal quality, not by brand of rig, age, income level, etc. That whiz-bang traffic handler or contester you just worked might just subsist 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 subsist faked. Yet it is those features which will attract many young people.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      A Data Point About young People   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "My hunch is that this could very well subsist because their vocal cadre of "dinosaurs" occupy been so very successful in systematically driving youthful newcomers away with their enthusiast insistence that such newcomers can never hope to subsist "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 consequence a "scientific survey" of a selected sample of amateurs on their views of license structure and test requirements.

    And when the results were published, it turned out that the age group with the *strongest* champion for Morse Code testing were the *youngest* amateurs!

    How about that?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by KB1SF on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, N2EY asked (among a flurry of other questions): "Then let's note how the dabbler 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 identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service.

    Indeed, as Machiavelli said back in 1532, "There is nothing more difficult to bewitch in hand, more perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, than to bewitch the lead in the introduction of a new order of things."

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

    I moreover well realize that, just relish it took a federal lawsuit filed by the ARRL to collect the FCC to comply with the provisions of the Administrative Procedures Act over BPL, nothing is going to fundamentally change in their systemically discriminatory FCC regulatory and licensing structure unless and until someone (or some organization) with profound enough pockets actually files a similar federal lawsuit against the FCC and/or initiates a Congressional inquest into the matter.

    This means that, perverse to your call to "see how the dabbler community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T subsist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately subsist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually found to subsist in legal compliance with the relaxation of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law.

    Indeed, lots of people "wanted" to retain racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in Place in their country back in the 1960s. But a rising tide of repel for such blatantly discriminatory practices in the figure of sweeping civil rights legislation eventually trumped everysingle those "wants". Today, those changes occupy since become an accepted piece 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 notable physicist, Max Planck once said, "An important… innovation rarely makes its pass 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 concept 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 moreover now aging and dying in ever-increasing numbers.

    But, even so, their licensing system remains chockablock full of "unnecessary regulatory barriers" (to exercise the FCC's own words when they dropped everysingle forms of Morse testing) to full access to their Service (an Extra Class license). By any measure, those clearly unreasonable licensing requirements remain pass out of harmony to any operational or regulatory need when compared to the ITU's minimalist licensing guidelines for their Service as well as the strict, equal access legal requirements now levied on federal agencies contained in a gross plethora of 1990s-era federal laws.

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

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

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

    For, I moreover well realize that everysingle 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 sober discussion on what has now become a VERY inconvenient truth.

    73,

    KeithKB1SF / VA3KSF

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 hubbub floor and Place up with inconsiderate ops.I relish vhf/uhf and 900mhz. so WHY spoil that by upgrading to general or advanced to which I would NEVER exercise the privledges? Contesting seems to subsist the primary activity on hf besides the occasional op. talking about his "bodily functions"! IF I wanted to hear that,I would occupy bought a cb!I consequence relish the international sw bands for useful overseas tidings coverage. diminutive unobtrusive antennas,Versatile in nature and efficient with low power are moreover a perk.So you see,just because they prefer to maintain tech. smooth licenses doesn't denote they don't treasure the hobby.It simply means they are cheerful where they are and note no judgement for a useless upgrade to a useless license!As far as I'm concerned hf is becoming obsolete.n9zas   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by N2EY on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF writes: "I've once again stirred up a ton of controversy here, seeing as I am once again being vilified by many of the identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service."

    Who is "vilifying" you, Keith? Certainly not I.

    KB1SF: "than to bewitch 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 epigram in any detail how the US dabbler license system should be.

    KB1SF: "this issue absolutely WON'T subsist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately subsist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually found to subsist in legal compliance with the relaxation of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Only is somebody thinks the issue is worth pursuing.

    KB1SF: "lots of people "wanted" to retain racially segregated schools, drinking fountains, bathrooms and hotels firmly in Place 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 consequence 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 dabbler radio, everysingle anyone without a criminal record has to consequence is to pass the required tests to collect a license. Those tests are objective (no judgement calls on the piece of the VEs), public info (real questions mp;A published for more than 25 years, available FREE for the download) and so basic that elementary school children occupy passed everysingle of them. How they could subsist "discriminatory" to anyone really qualified to subsist a radio dabbler is not clear.

    KB1SF: "For, I moreover well realize that everysingle 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 sober discussion on what has now become a VERY inconvenient truth."

    In other words, you reject to acknowledge relevant questions, reject to give details, and reject to actually discuss the issue.

    OK, fine.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: young People and Ham Radio   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on 11 Dec 09"

    "KB1SF writes: "Maybe the percentage of Techs to other licenses is a bit lower today than it was in 2000 by a few percentage points""

    N2EY: "No maybe about it. The numbers prove that the number and percentage of US hams with a Novice, Tech or Tech Plus license has dropped since 2000, while the number and percentage of US hams with one of the other classes has increased."

    WRONG, Jimmy. Golly for someone who has bragged so much about having a graduate degree, you've failed simple arithmetic!

    The no-code-test Technician class has been STEADILY *INCREASING* since 1991. As of this morning, 12 Dec 09: Hamdata has their total license number as 344,323 out of 716,639 individual licensees or 48.05 percent; ARRL has their (10-year-term-only) license numbers at 333,544 out of 681,765 or 48.92 percent. Note the contrast in percentages due to the lesser number of Technician class NOT in their grace period.

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

    Note: Constantly bringing up 'Restructuring' ordered in 1999 and efficient in 2000 doesn't occupy much bearing 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 everysingle Tech Pluses as Techs since 2000. So it makes sense to combine the numbers of those licenses, since to FCC they are the identical class. If you consequence that, and leer 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, everysingle FCC records available to the public prove Technician and Technician-Plus as separate license classes. Even the ARRL considers them separate classes on their biased tabulations. What more consequence you need 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 begin 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. everysingle that matters for growth is that they retain 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 dabbler radio. It is the American Association of Retired People. You could subsist a member with or without a code test examination since you are (claimed) over 50.

    As to "growth" in the number of USA dabbler radio licensees, I'll refer to the Hamdata tallies for 12 December 2009: As of 12 MONTHS AGO there were 30,702 new licensees and 26,833 expirations. That is an overall extend of 3,869 but only 0.054 percent compared to the total of 716,639 individual licensees. The "growth" is HALF A PERCENT in one year's time.

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

    Jimmy, hardly ANY of your conjectures you've presented here consequence NOT occupy any third-party proof. everysingle they note are YOUR wishful-thinking ideas................N2EY: "You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion."

    Jimmy, Jimmy...we can express OPINIONS which is what Keith did. Now, nowhere in YOUR "mighty" rebuttal was there ANY "scientific proof" presented from any third-party source. Present some and you might occupy some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recall a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US dabbler license. Is that what you mean?"

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

    Oh, and I silent occupy 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 occupy made it a full attachment.

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

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

    On the "age" thing, to succeed Keith's titillating points in esteem 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 viable for some otherwise-adorable CHILD to subsist a legal control operator, everysingle alone, and literally PLAY with an dabbler radio without any full information of RESPONSIBILITY of operation. CHILDREN consequence not everysingle occupy some intrinsic "responsibility" guidelines automatically...not even if they hold everysingle sorts of written test certificates from a federal agency. That responsibility must subsist scholarly and UNDERSTOOD and it is the job of PARENTS to begin 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 intelligent and knowledgeable beyound their years (which is what most parents convey 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 dabbler radio, dabbler radio will overrule analytic thinking according to childish fanatics in ham radio. That is, to me, illogical idiocy.

    Len, AF6AY

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

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

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

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

    So, Jimmy, what occupy YOU done? You've been a radio ham for four decades. You must occupy been a member of the ARRL for most of that time, displaying an encyclopedic depth of "knowledge" about everything published in Newington.

    The ARRL is ALMOST the oldest radio-interest membership organization. It was incorporated some five years AFTER the very first, and still-existing, Radio Club of America. The Radio Club of America was incorporated in 1909...but got out of the amateur-interest-specialty region a few decades after incorporation. Seems there was a gross LOT MORE interest in commercial, government, military radio back in the 'twenties.' But I digress into areas where you occupy no interest, only in ham radio.

    The ARRL is "supposed" to subsist "our national representative." They convey that every desultory they can. But ARE they? I don't believe so...by the membership numbers, by their want of efficient leadership in forming legislation "for" dabbler radio, by their want OF efficient PUBLICITY to the general public. Oh, they trumpet that the ARRL has "lots of material" but anyway everysingle those things collect LOST on the pass to the Mass Media outlets.

    My wife and I live in a big urban region of the USA (Los Angeles). They subscribe to two major metropolitan daily newspapers. They watch TV news, listen to radio news, but not overly so. They are "aware and informed" as they epigram goes. My wife is uninterested to dabbler radio but she would notice if there are any tidings items or publicity about that because I am a licensed dabbler radio operator. marvel of wonders in this 'modern age,' they actually discuss things freely, even during and after going together in elevated school (both Class of 1951). THEY occupy seen more tidings about model radio control lately than any dabbler radio events over the final 3 to 4 years.

    WHERE are the 'fabulous' videos the ARRL was reputed to occupy made available 'to the public?' Does the ARRL hope that 'the public' everysingle 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 everysingle genres) and some of the channels are in alien languages. Perhaps those ARRL videos are translated into one of those channels and they can't 'read' them? Must subsist it, yeah...:-)...............N2EY: "A tremendous piece of efficient publicity is having a description that's easy to recall and which sums up the main points."

    Jimmy, despite your manifest claims on Marketing Expertise, the FIRST THING and MOST principal THING is TO subsist VISIBLE, TO subsist AUDIBLE. It does no much whatsoever to subsist INVISIBLE and then natter and gromish about "how much they are and what they have" in ARRL letter after ARRL Letter. everysingle those CLAIMS occupy long since dropped into the random hubbub floor with everysingle 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 mind to occupy few hams, and the hams who consequence 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 everysingle 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 viable "restriction" is from the FAA mandating that I occupy 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 occupy a TWO HUNDRED FOOT TOWER at my residence? NO. Not because my wife wouldn't relish it, *I* wouldn't relish it. It is their RESIDENCE. Oh, and I occupy TWO antennas up and they are NOT "stealth mode." The all-purpose Discone is clearly visible from the street. Anyone walking around to the side (to their front door) can note the sunless green fiberglass-covered upright in the back yard.

    I occupy a much relationship with my thirty-something across-the-street neighbor and his wife. He kids me a bit about my "listening to Mars" antenna and I kid him back about his drum playing. They RESPECT each others' property and its visual appearance and to the neighborhood..................N2EY: "Perceived complexity and elevated cost of a station."

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

    No? You better inform the auto makers of that. young people with new driver's licenses are always looking at EXPEN$IVE cars, mentally wanting one. A few buy them and consequence 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 occupy WORKED everysingle THEIR LIVES occupy managed to accumulate some monies to actually (gasp!) BUY CASH a lot of things they couldn't collect when younger. You RESENT that. TS. Either travail to collect more money but don't try that "everyone-equal-socialsm" rationale again. It just shows your jealousy.................N2EY: "This was and silent is one of the much things about Morse Code, and which served as a draw for young people rather than a barrier. When using Morse Code, nobody knows your age, gender, ethnicity, etc., unless you narrate them. Nor can they narrate what apparatus you're using. The CW op is judged on the air by skill, courtesy, technique and signal quality, not by brand of rig, age, income level, etc. That whiz-bang traffic handler or contester you just worked might just subsist in middle school!"

    To Place it in other words, you can subsist INVISIBLE using "CW." relish 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 consequence the transgender thing with "CW." Who is going to know? :-)

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

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

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes   by K6LHA on December 12, 2009 Mail this to a friend! KB1SF wrote on December 12, 2009:

    "Jim, N2EY asked (among a flurry of other questions): "Then let's note how the dabbler community reacts, starting privilege here on e-ham"."

    Keith, in the decade I've encountered diminutive Jimmy in dabbler radio forums, I've never notable him to actually discuss some telling issues. When pinned to the wall on a contentious subject, he will invariably MISDIRECT into some other area. He is so primed to his inner self that he cannot note that this "amateur community" is FAR BIGGER and so numerous that only a tiny, tiny fraction can meet into e-ham. That's not a infamous stamp against e-ham, that is realistic since about 700,000 licensees just couldn't meet into this website, let alone a sole forum.

    Little Jimmy is a superb product of ARRL brainwashing. His claimed 'reasoning' is straight out of the Church of St. Hiram prayer book. The League is his shepherd. In one pass I would convey he is desiring to subsist 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) hasten for any ARRL position, yet he ORATES as if he is an Evangelist of that Olde-Tyme Religion. He will Never forgive the slightest imaginary bruise to his ego yet will, at the drop of a participle, insult what he considers "lesser beings." sober mental dichotomy at travail there..................KB1SF: "Obviously, I've once again stirred up a ton of controversy here, seeing as I am once again being vilified by many of the identical highly vocal individuals for holding such "blasphemous" views on the arcane, 1950s-era licensing and regulatory system that has now become firmly entrenched in their Service."

    Well, yes and no, in my opinion. What I believe would subsist more commandeer is to travail up a separate ARTICLE on that subject. I don't believe the e-ham overseers would accredit it but I'm an optimist most of the time. On further reflection, I believe it would subsist 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 diminutive study was done to satisfy my own curiosity on USA dabbler radio changes, to note if there was any discernible change. I didn't note much indication. In my view the total elimination of code testing just came too late. There are SO many OTHER pastimes, new ones, much more technologically- challenging ones available to everysingle 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 subsist 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 account a mighty dabbler radio license. :-) I had been too long the professional in radio-electronics, sedulous pushing the performance envelope here and there, and thus considered a "beginner," a "newby," and "too stupid/ignorant" to pass any three test factor dabbler radio test. Gotta admire some of those comments. :-) I had much amusement at getting the reaction of everysingle those mighty Extrss who thought I was just a speechless nobody and "could never consequence 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 account them - objectively - to occupy merit. I tossed in an stale theme of mine as a viable addition...but only because diminutive Jimmy brought it up lately (a kindhearted of 10th "anniversary?" :-). Seriously, I've been involved in trying to change a diminutive set of USA dabbler regulations for a decade now, achieved what I set out to do, then decided to collect one of those mighty dabbler radio licenses for myself, doing that at age 74. I'm tired of these others trying to hold back the dawn of progress, to retain the dabbler radio service the identical as when they first began in it. I'm silent an idealist, silent open for a much occasions to fight, but life is limited and I would relish to baskin more of it. Getting into local politics here there's a lot to consequence there, too, issues that directly move us in this region. Otherwise, I'd join you as a volunteer for another much Cause...................KB1SF: "This means that, perverse to your call to "see how the dabbler community reacts", this issue absolutely WON'T subsist decided based on what you, I, or other hams "want". To the contrary, this issue WILL ultimately subsist decided based on whether or not the regulatory and examination systems for their Service are eventually found to subsist in legal compliance with the relaxation of the US Federal Code by an external government agency or a court of law."

    Little Jimmy has - by observation - lived in an imaginary world for a long time. I don't believe he undertands the terrible expense of waging any big legal war on an established government agency. The ARRL can't back because they are silent entrenched in the USA dabbler radio of yesteryear and they've already spent a bundle on this BPL thing. Of course they NEEDED to consequence that in order to "protect" their core membership, a probable minority within a provable minority membership organization. viable aid must reach from Congress forcing the issue...but they must consequence 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 subsist the more stylized than Kabuki. Noh players wear full pan 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 subsist asked if they would accept CHANGE, they would chorus, "NOh, NOh, NOh!!!" :-) :-) :-)

    Bad word-play aside, Keith, you and your family occupy a much Holiday time!

    73, Len AF6AY

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

    The only reasons I can imagine are:

    1) To subsist a VE2) To collect a 1x2 or 2x1 callsign

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

    Also, if someday you anyway develop an interest in the bands below 50 MHz, the license to consequence so will silent subsist there, requiring only that you bewitch the tests for it.

    N9ZAS: "Contesting seems to subsist the primary activity on hf besides the occasional op. talking about his "bodily functions"!"

    There's a lot more to HF dabbler radio than that. But to find much of it, you occupy to exercise 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. smooth licenses doesn't denote they don't treasure the hobby.It simply means they are cheerful where they are and note no judgement for a useless upgrade to a useless license!"

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by KC9GLC on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Wow... everysingle the talk and rib of lic. classes.I got into dabbler radio for ECOM reasons at first. then a friend of mine invited me to their local domain 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 silent exercise and travail cw but since i didnt occupy to bewitch that portion of the test does that compose me any less than any of you who did bewitch it.Instead of berating the ham community for not advancing to higher classes, collect them involved and interested. If it wasnt for my friend i silent would not occupy advanced.

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

      Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! (1) Was there a point to subsist made here, or simply self-grandizing pontification for the mere delectation of seeing one's designation "published".

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

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

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

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 collect into dabbler radio thinking it would subsist a loser. But, I'm piece of a new group now and hoped that conditions in dabbler radio would occupy changed after my dabbler license was granted. I note diminutive change, therefore the study to note if a occasions could subsist determined just from easily-obtainable statistics.

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

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

    Steve, K4YZ

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

    Actually, it was Valentine's Day, 1991

    73

    Steve, K4YZ

      RE: young People and Ham Radio   by K4YZ on December 13, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY: "You don't know that scientifically. You're just presuming your conclusion."

    Jimmy, Jimmy...we can express OPINIONS which is what Keith did. Now, nowhere in YOUR "mighty" rebuttal was there ANY "scientific proof" presented from any third-party source. Present some and you might occupy some validity.................N2EY: "Dinosaurs? I recall a 60-something non-ham who asked the FCC to require a minimum age of 14 years for any class of US dabbler license. Is that what you mean?"

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

    I note you're silent 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 diminutive more complicated than that - but not much more.

    It everysingle boils down to this:

    From 2000 to 2003, the number of US hams went up

    From 2003 to 2007, the number of US hams went down

    From 2007 to the present, the number of US hams went up.

    It's not yet back to the 2003 peak but it's getting there. pair thousand to go.

    Over the identical time periods, the number of Techs, Generals and Extras went up, and the number of Novices, Tech Pluses and Advanceds went down. Which was expected, since the FCC stopped issuing new Tech Pluses, Novices and Advanceds in April 2000. Also, since that date, any Tech Plus submitted for renewal or vanity 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 occupy been a few 'challenges' on "old data" of dabbler radio statistics. For those I offer the following correspondence copy that dates back to PRE-Internet days. Note that the Internet did not travel public until 1991, therefore it was saved by someone unidentified from one of the commercial services (such as Compuserve). I consequence 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 dabbler 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 everysingle formatting is TEXT using common fixed fonts such as 'Courier.'

    Proportional spacing fonts had yet to subsist standardized and few computer users had GUI Operating Systems in 1990. At the time the FCC had just started the dabbler radio license database public dissemination but in shorter figure such as grouping by ZIP coding and available (generally) only on a weekly basis. Later improvements in Information Technology resulted in the combined sole big dabbler radio license database currently in-use that requires high-speed Internet connectivity to download within an 8-hour period. Note moreover 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 everysingle In This Together?" [ www.eham.net/articles/21114 ] I did not exercise everysingle 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 found it final year. I compose no claims as to accuracy or inaccuracy of this. I believe the author, Richard Hoffbeck, tried his best to subsist accurate and dispassionate about the results.

    ====[ exercise 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 - everysingle 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 throng (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 moreover 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 retain thewhole thing on-line), I found 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 period 1989 - 1992 -- theremaining 1% due to expire in 1988. Anyway, the maximum loss viable due tosilent keys, etc is only on the order of 3%.

    On the other hand, there was a piece that made the rounds on packet,WorldRadio, etc, to the consequence that since the number of hams has been growingat a faster rate than the population as a gross there is no problem. That typeof analysis is faulty in assuming that society as a gross has remained at thesame smooth of technology. I believe 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 everysingle 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 dabbler radio classes and requirements had not yet been Place into a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. It was done before there were 18 following Petitions to change USA dabbler radio submitted in response to the 'Reconstruction.' It was done well before thare was the tremendous application by many to eradicate 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: rise of cell sites and miniaturization of handsets to compose them a mainstay of personal mobile communications; Fully digital television broadcasting enabling snow-free pictures and quadraphonic audio; The Internet going public, resulting in a major change in both commerce and personal communications internationally. Those nearly two decades marked the displacement of magnetic tape video recordings by the DVD...similar to the CD displacing the vinyl disk audio recordings in the 1980s. Personal computers that had top clock rates of 40 MHz (with expnsive hard disks and 'floppy' diminutive mass-storage systems) in the 1980s changed to 2600 MHz clock rates with 100 MHz average RAM access times and internal or external 2 TB hard disk units costing less than $200 new. Visual displays went to flat-screen LCD or plasma technology, flawless linearity, displacing the bulky CRT "monitor." The Universal Serial Bus allowed everysingle new peripherals to subsist within the new "plug-and-play" standards. The Personal Data aide combined a cell phone, video camera, data storage capability, and text transmission in a unit hardly larger than the smallest cell phone. I won't travel into the "games" category suffice to convey 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 occupy 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 repercussion 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 everysingle were available to the ordinary citizen, IN the marketplace.

    73, Len AF6AY

      RE: dabbler 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 travail out. I consequence 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 occupy everysingle 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 recall that day well.

    Fitting that the new rule was implemented on that day.

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

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

    It's principal to know the history surrounding the license rules if one wants to intelligently dissect the data. Failure to bewitch 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 relish everysingle 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 separate class of license equivalent to a General-by-mail until the mid-1970s. It was phased out by renewal of everysingle Conditionals as Generals.

    4) The license term of renewable US dabbler licenses was 5 years until 1984, when it became ten years. One result of this was that no US dabbler 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 viable to hold both classes of license simultaneously.

    6) The Technician license was created in 1951, and until 1991 everysingle 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 separate the two groups, with code-tested Technicians subsist reclassified as Technician Pluses upon renewal.

    In April 2000, FCC reversed direction and began reclassifying everysingle 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 mixture of code-tested and noncodetested amateurs. Since 2007 they occupy everysingle had the identical privileges. However it is an mistake to assume that the growth or decrease of the Technician or Technician Plus is due solely to the 1991 changes.

    The number of current Technician Pluses is now less than 350, down from over 128,000 ten years ago.

    There's more; those are just the elevated points.

    Now for some numbers:

    ---

    Year discontinuance 1948 (from QST March 1949, referencing FCC tabulation)

    76,666 operators, 77,338 stations.

    ---

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

    Good research. Well written. much Job.

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

    "Good research. Well written. much Job."

    TNX, but it wasn't much, really.

    What would subsist really frigid IMHO would subsist to collect the numbers from everysingle of the various Callbooks down through the years and Place them on a website. Complete with graphs to prove the changes.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

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

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

    A few barracks lawyers succeed the ARRL standard in "sinning by omission." For example, a constant 'rebuke' is "Since 2000 Technician-Plus occupy been renewed as Technician." N2EY uses that often, almost always after I occupy made some remark in dabbler radio forums that mentions Technician class. :-) Jimmy never states that, of the SIX classes of USA dabbler 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. everysingle 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 dabbler radio forums.

    A few others, vainly looking for something to subsist negative about, cite things that were "overlooked" such as AGE of licensees. Since that data was not available through the sole source of USA dabbler radio license data (the FCC publicly-available ULS database), it could not subsist shown NOW.

    While PAST history may subsist "interesting" to SOME, let's pan it, the FCC was created in 1934 and is 75 years stale 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 subsist KEPT because those 'somebodies' met regulations of LONG AGO is merely self-serving and hollow on their part. They believe they can posture 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 much for the USA dabbler radio service to MAINTAIN and NOURISH the profound divide in the service created by these long-timers who favor certain modes and modulations. That is the antithesis of "keeping up the condition of the art." It is regressing or stagnation of skills despite their claimed proficiency. For example, in the more recent "Mad Scientist" article on e-ham there was an opening remark about "EMCOM weenies." "Weenies" is a colloquial pejorative, in this case directed as a sneering remark about newcomers. If it was intended as "humor," then it failed a test of applicability to a big group such as over-700-thousand licensed radio amateurs in the USA.

    USA dabbler 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 everysingle class examinations needing code testing. That came after a long, protracted remark period (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, everysingle aimed at trying to repeal Restructuring or to change it EVEN MORE, most regressing to the condition of older regulations. Those might occupy been well-intentioned for a clique(s) but did not address the desires for maintenance of regulations for present and future citizens, licensed in anything or not. The FCC manages to interpret their decisions clearly in every Memorandum Report and Order. That a particular decision "goes against" some clique is only unlucky for them. That clique LOST and does not occupy grace or manners to accept such loss.

    What appears to subsist the most "damaging" to the collective prides of long-timers was NPRM 05-235 released on 19 July 2005. Its main detail was the elimination of everysingle 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 nigh of Comments on 25 Nov 05. Those two Petitions by Mssrs Ward and Gordon were both dismissed. Memorandum Report and Order 06-178 was published on 19 December 2006 with an efficient date to subsist 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 occupy any charter to nourish the prideful hunger of long-timers seeking to retain their braggadoccio well-fed indefinitely. That anyone passed a federal test in some skill a long time ago does not denote it defines these individuals as being superior to ordinary folk for eternity. In NO pass is their conviction anyway "better" than ordinary folk, nor is it imprimateur of their being some kindhearted of "boss" who can establish "what is much for all." Stubbornly, so many believe that some or everysingle of those syndromes consequence not apply to their own selfish illness. Thus the profound divide is maintained in USA dabbler radio, privilege hobbyists on one-hand, the vocal bigots who want desperately to CONTROL dabbler radio in their own image on the other side. They cannot occupy it both ways.=========================There IS some hope for the code cliques and those who require 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 subsist disseminated for public commentary, depending on the conviction of the FCC. However, there were 18 Petitions up before public scrutiny between establishment of 'Restructuring' and the NPRM on code test elimination. Several of those Petitions were a cross-purposes of other Petitions. Two more Petitions were disseminated AFTER the code test elimination law, both demanding a return of code testing. Those two ('Ward' and 'Gordon') were eventually dismissed.

    The fact that a Petition is published does NOT denote it is universally liked/worshipped/damned. It is merely up in the public eye, a public that does NOT partake your divine wisdom nor guru-guidance. One has to subsist mentally strong to Place up a Peition and then pan the consequences of public opinion.==========================Cliques can forget the Petition concept and just sit in forums and newsgroups and bitch and moan for ever, damning newcomers via everysingle sorts of pejoratives. That only reinforces evidence of continuing division in dabbler radio. That division was there earlier than 15 years ago and shows no mark of ceasing. The pollyanish phrasing "amateur brotherhood" is a hypocritical nonsense statement. It is a vaporous myth.==========================Fair warning: Code cliques will eventually subsist 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 everysingle 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 postulate those newcomers are everysingle favoring morse mode.

    AF6AY

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

    What would subsist really frigid IMHO would subsist to collect the numbers from everysingle of the various Callbooks down through the years and Place them on a website. Complete with graphs to prove the changes.

    Jim,

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

    Let me know.

    73

      RE: US dabbler 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 occupy lots of stale Callbooks.

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

    --

    There occupy 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. everysingle 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 subsist known and understood to compose analytic conclusions about the growth as well. For example, the number of Novice licenses was very diminutive 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 piece 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 diminutive 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 affliction of travel it would impose on hams who didn't live near exam points.

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

    But a vanity call can subsist 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 warp the gross how-long-to-expiration picture.

    Since April 15, 2000, the Novice, Technician Plus and Advanced licenses occupy 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 relish 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 subsist titillating to note how long it takes for the final Novice and Advanced class licenses to travel away, either from upgrade or cancellation. Some Advanceds occupy vowed never to upgrade to Extra, so it may subsist a very long time.

    The fastest decline of everysingle 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 pass that is different from everysingle 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 leer at the number of Technicians without reference to the rules changes, it can (erroneously) loom that their numbers are growing only because lots of new hams are getting that license. But in fact there's a built-in additional source of Technicians from upgraded Novices and reclassified Tech Pluses. In fact, if you leer 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 principal things:

    How many *active* amateurs are there?

    What are they doing on the air?

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dabbler Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY writes:"How many *active* amateurs are there?What are they doing on the air?"

    Here's some more questions:

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

    Are they assisting others in some pass 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 dabbler Radio License Numbers   by W5ESE on December 16, 2009 Mail this to a friend! > There occupy 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. everysingle 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 engage '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 engage cited several reasons for the growth:

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

    73Scott W5ESE

      RE: US dabbler 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 region occupy no electronics background or interest. Most of the new guys are community emergency response ARRL boyscouts.

    These numbers denote diminutive to me. They are far more principal to the ARRL's membership department and for the commercial ham manufactures, etc.

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

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

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

    Couple more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were everysingle by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not subsist 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 dabbler Radio. It was at that conference that dabbler Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a separate and distinct radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was moreover a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could bear without modification. simple 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 everysingle countries that issued dabbler licenses.

    The US ham bands were slit 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 everysingle back then.

    You'd believe that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would occupy a Place a actual damper on growth, but the contrary happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

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

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

    Go ahead, compose my day...:-).................NI0C: "There are literally thousands of words written above, and we've heard most of it before. Only a handful of people read this garbage. I'm not one of them. I'm having too much fun on 160m CW this winter."

    Then WHY are YOU here? consequence you occupy some bipolar disorder that compels you to jump into forums and snarl at everysingle you don't like? That is NO pass to "help" the "cause" of USA dabbler radio, is it?=================Well, now, you just travel back to 160m "CW" and occupy 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 subsist 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 everysingle subsist respectful of everysingle you old-timers sedulous going back to the non-future past in amateurism...because YOU convey they should. <shrug>

    Have a wonderful Holiday time Grinch.

    AF6AY

      RE: US dabbler 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 engage '200 Meters and Down'."

    "1928 16928"

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

    If a comparison is needed, research the gross of 'radio' not just amateurs. You will find that 'radio' had just BEGUN to expand in other radio services. 'Radio' is only 113 years old, first demonstrated publicly as a communications medium in 1896. In Italy and Russia that identical year...by a well-to-do Italian entrepreneur and a Russian academician..................W5ESE: "By 1934-1935, the growth spurt had reach to an end."

    By July 2, 2003, the growth spurt in MODERN USA dabbler radio licensees, everysingle 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 silent 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 everysingle electronics is so much by now that a comparison would subsist ludicrous. I can cite several sources for the simple judgement I've been IN the electronics industry for so long and don't need any "official" ARRL publications to prove it.

    Some examples: Vacuum tubes were silent in their childhood in 1928 and costly in diminutive quantities. The term "semiconductor" wasn't in the electronics lexicon. The only semiconductor-like diodes were the Galena crystal detector (a figure of point-contact diode), the selenium rectifier with its wonderful aroma when overheated, and a cadmium sulphide "photocell." Frequency control in dabbler 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 occupy been Neverland for radio amateurs due to its "strange, complicated requirements."

    Compare that to 2008. Transistors were then a mature product and Integrated Circuits made many, many features/options available to cover most of the allocated frequency ranges with rather absolute accuracy down to 1 Hz increments. The Analog Devices AD9851 can provide the QRPer with selectable frequencies down to better than 1 Hz in a sole IC and at very low DC power demand. AM voice can subsist emitted using the very identical RF power amplifier used for "CW" or Data modes; it is the standard in ready-built dabbler radios and does not require a big audio power amplifier to "modulate" a Class C PA stage. FM radio was proven as a communications mode by commercial designers prior to WWII. The USA has NO dabbler radio corps allocations below the bottom of the AM BC corps yet the Europeans occupy had such for years. dabbler corps allocations occupy long since been approved on up to the 300 GHz international allocation confine and ready-built VHF-UHF transceivers are on the market to travel above the 70cm band. Data modes can easily travel as elevated as USA dabbler allocations allow thanks to modern solid-state circuitry and devices. There are a (few) VNAs or Vector Network Analyzer that relent very much complicated 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 consequence 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 engage 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 period for renewal. NO ONE granted a new license in the final 9 years requires ANY testing in their gross life as long as they compose mail or e-mail renewals within the regulated time.

    "o separate license required for portable work"

    No such thing needed now, but then that regulation would occupy 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 convey it was "LEISURE TIME" from the comfort of being well-fed NOW.

    "o decline in cost of apparatus between 1929 to 1934 ($150 -> $50)"

    :-) There was no such thing as "war surplus" radios available then as it was after WWII. I don't know if "dumpsters" (even nigh to the modern design) were available then for amateurs to scrounge for parts. As I recall 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 occupy thought of the then-new home entertainment medium of BROADCASTING. Few in the public knew about dabbler radio THEN just as few in the general public know about dabbler radio NOW. There are lots of copies of stale radio apparatus catalogs on the Internet that cover that time, PRICES included. I've downloaded a few just for old-radio references. Its a curiosity, nothing more.

    How would you relate those 1928 receivers insofar as "features," stripping away the marketing laguage phrases? Were they even comparable? I don't believe so, but then, despite being born in that era, I occupy no admire 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 occupy a listening hobby requires stations there to listen to. In the 1928-1934 period AM broadcasting on MF had expanded to bewitch on a semblance of a mature entertainment industry. It enabled the fledgling "radio parts industry" in the USA to grow prior to WWII. There really wasn't much to listen to on the "shortwave" (HF) bands yet since Europe was getting nigh to a shooting war and most of the European SW BC stations were oriented towards their own languages for coverage to their nations citizens in colonies or embassies elsewhere or to their maritime crews. No SW BC listener could decode commercial SSB data sent along the newly-established message carriers. Expansion into other-country broadcasting (i.e., to the general public) would not really become big until AFTER 1945 with most of the hostilites in Europe and Asia much reduced. Note: It will bewitch considerable historical data searching to find ANY period of time when hostilities occupy 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 period may subsist "interesting" to some but so few here occupy 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 compose a profit). There is data about that era in electronics industry trade publications but those are about (gasp! horrors!) "professional electronics!" :-)

    73, Len AF6AY (two years older than the FCC)

      RE: US dabbler Radio License Numbers   by N2EY on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C:

    y'know, I believe you occupy a very much point

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

    Maybe I'll note you there.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    - pair more factors about the early 1930s boom:

    - back then, licensing records were everysingle by hand, so a license that reached expiration might not subsist 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 dabbler Radio. It was at that conference that dabbler Radio received worldwide treaty recognition as a separate and distinct radio service, with its own bands and regulations written into the treaty. There was moreover a uniform callsign arrangement, so that each country's stations had definitive prefixes.

    But that recognition came at a price. The new rules, which went into consequence in 1929, required much cleaner signals than many ham rigs of the 1920s could bear without modification. simple 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 everysingle countries that issued dabbler licenses.

    The US ham bands were slit 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 everysingle back then.

    You'd believe that the higher transmitter standards plus the narrowed bands would occupy a Place a actual damper on growth, but the contrary happened.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Jim occupy you considered writing a engage on the history of dabbler radio picking up where 200 Meters And Down left off. I believe it would sell.

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US dabbler 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 Place everysingle my eggs in the Top corps basket in order to occupy a better antenna that will wield more power.

    Top corps is experiencing some periods of outstanding propagation this year, and I'm having a much 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 occupy a few hours of daylight available for a crash from DX'ing top corps and amusement on Top Bnad.

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

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dabbler Radio License Numbers   by NI0C on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Jim, sorry for the typo on your name, and compose that "amusement on eHam."   RE: US dabbler Radio License Numbers   by KG4TKC on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C, Chuck,thanks for the comments and info. The info on top corps is very interesting,will subsist tuning up there a diminutive bit more this winter. Your comments were spot-on.73.   RE: US dabbler Radio License Numbers   by KD7YVV on December 17, 2009 Mail this to a friend! Well, I leer at it this way.If I can find someone to ragchew with, I'm happy.There are people who just collect 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 subsist and I don't own anelectron microscope to note the molecular sized componentsused today. I consequence relish reading a lot of the older QSTmagazines and seeing the different projects that wereconsidered condition of the technique at the time.Ham radio isn't only what you compose of it for yourself,it's what you give back to the hobby by pass 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 occupy 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 much band, lots of sunspots, and a much antenna and radio to tune them by.......And don't forget the smarting chocolate for those coldwinter nights!

    --KD7YVV, Kirkland, WA

      RE: US dabbler 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 dabbler 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 occupy only one Top corps QSO in my log, but it was quite memorable!

    Thanks for the kindhearted words. You may find the licensing history referred to above to subsist of interest.

    ---

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

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

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

    I *like* that!

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

    Earl Grey tea for me...

    73 & TNX everysingle de Jim, N2EY

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

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

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

    Good reading!

    73 de WA2ONH Charlie

      RE: USA dabbler 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 dabbler Radio Asscoiation and continued that through 2003 in 35 parts. It had been carried on www.ham-shack.com but that website went commercial. The identical material can subsist found at:

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

    That is the linking page for everysingle 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 occupy moreover been reprinted in the Marin ARC newsletter out of San Rafael, CA. Some of those "Wayback" columns' material has moreover been found on audio and Twitter sites. Bill Continelli retired from the IRS after 30 years in 2009 and formed his own Tax industry in upper New York condition and silent contributes material to several amateur-interest websites.

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

    AF6AY

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

    73 RussWA4KCN

      RE: US dabbler 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 dabbler Radio isn't just getting everysingle 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 apparatus changes, Sputnik, incentive licensing, cb, Vietnam, the 1960s counterculture and much more.

    Maybe someday. Thanks for the kindhearted words.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

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

    Make no mistake about it, the past dozen years occupy had a SIGNIFICANT change in USA dabbler 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 eradicate everysingle code testing for USA dabbler 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 pass it resembled a highly-amplified horror and wrathful that surfaced in 1958 when the FCC "took away the 11m HAM corps that was 'rightfully' THEIRS" and "gave it away" to ordinary citizens to exercise as Class C and D Citizens Band. everysingle that wrathful and resentment silent lives since "CB" is silent considered a "hateful" thing by so many amateurs and its users are silent almost evil incarnate. :-)

    Conditioned Bigotry of the hatred against CB silent lives after 51 years of its creation. The identical Bigotry against the (hack, ptui) "no-coders" will probably live on a century from now. Bigotry is hard to eradicate. It is an emotional condition profound inside minds, used as a personal refuge, a surcease of personal frustration by taking it everysingle out on some target. Those targets "are not relish US!" yowl the bigots (the only ones who know the "truth"). :-)

    One pass to alleviate some individual frustrations are to CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Yes. Retreat to the PAST. There is SAFETY there because everysingle of then is KNOWN. There is safety there...so few were even alive when the first USA radio regulations were made 97 years ago. They can juggle data and events in flawless safety, occupy endless arguments over diminutive 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 Place to HIDE. It is a wonderful Place to vicariously "live" AS IF one was "there."

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

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

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

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

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

    Len, AF6AY

      RE: Back to the Future piece 314159....   by KB6QXM on December 19, 2009 Mail this to a friend! In reading Len's left leaning comments, I'll pot he believes that the United States should occupy 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 redress FCC and greedy ARRL will subsist a no-test license. That will subsist the first step. They will sit back and note how that goes over and then they will eradicate everysingle testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they consequence 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 redress FCC and greedy ARRL will subsist 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 leer at the history...

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

    All US hams had access to everysingle dabbler 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 dabbler 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 occupy everysingle sorts of infamous habits, but who mostly were just much 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 everysingle US amateurs except Novices and Technicians, so there was no judgement to travel 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 consequence it right.

    And yet over time the vast majority of those Novice newcomers scholarly the privilege ways and went on to consequence much things in dabbler Radio. Their numbers caused US dabbler radio to grow everysingle 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 stale Timers of today.

    KB6QXM: "What is next?"

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

    If you bewitch a much hard leer at the license question pools from the standpoint of someone who has a background in electronics, they leer dead-simple except for the regulations, which are really a matter of memorization. Nobody who really knows basic radio should need to study for any US dabbler exam except for the rules and regs.

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

    The really tremendous contrast is that, in the infamous stale days, they didn't occupy access to the actual actual questions mp;A. Which is a change in test method, not material. But recall *why* that change took place: FCC wanted to reclaim money by not doing the tests themselves any more.

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

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

    The one thing anyone who is concerned about the current testing can consequence 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 subsist much easier to learn the material than to word-associate and memorize one's pass to a passing grade.

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

    73 de Jim, N2EY

    Novice 1967Technician/Advanced 1968Extra 1970

      RE: Back to the Future piece 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 pot he believes that the United States should occupy open borders also! How about Socialism also? One world government? everysingle 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 dabbler 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 occupy tested in? Yours? :-)..................KB6QXN: "Mark my word, the next incentive licensing that will reach out because of the politically redress FCC and greedy ARRL will subsist a no-test license. That will subsist the first step. They will sit back and note how that goes over and then they will eradicate everysingle testing to generate a "1 license does all" as the FCC and the ARRL knees will collapse because they consequence not want to exclude anyone."

    Tsk, tsk, you are angry again. travail silent going infamous for you in Silicon Gulch? My sympathies...

    A quick leer at the Federal Register doesn't prove ANY mark of what you convey is "true." No new "incentive licensing plan." Not even from the mighty folks at Newington. NO mark of "eliminating everysingle testing."

    In case you haven't looked, the FCC establishes USA dabbler 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, remark and Reply to Comments on any docket up for discussion...or convey anything it wants. Those can subsist submitted and recognized from ANY citizen, with or without some federal license in that particular radio service! [really unbelievable when one thinks of it] Yes, anyone can post a remark or Reply to Comments about an dabbler radio docket without any dabbler callsign whatsoever! [wow, isn't that "left-leaning," though!] Not only that, everysingle those who submit documents occupy their names (and callsigns if applicable) listed in decision-making Memorandum Reports and Orders! I root that sort of democratic-process government and served my country in the military to back that up. In case you never served, everysingle who enter the military Place their LIFE on the line when they bewitch that oath. Did YOU Place your life on the line for your ham license?

    The ARRL just doesn't occupy the controlling influence on the FCC it thinks (and implies) it has, not from the dabbler 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 relish under the reign of one Josip Broz long ago in another big country, doesn't it? A NO-party "election.".................KB6QXM: "The license exams are so watered down now, that they are basically giving away the licenses now."

    No, the ground fee was $14 when I took my dabbler 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. everysingle of the questions and answers (120 questions for the 3 different test elements) were generated and made available by the National Council of Volunteer Examiner Coordinators. You can note and download everysingle the questions and answers at www.ncvec.org for nothing. The NCVEC Question Pool Committee MUST subsist composed of already-licensed dabbler radio license grantees. That is an FCC regulation.

    In preparation for my dabbler radio license exams, I downloaded the Question Pool directly from the NCVEC site. On checking that out I was pleased to note that the NCVEC QPC had MORE than the required 10 questions (for random selection by VE groups) for each required question. The average for everysingle 120 questions was 13 times the required test questions; for dabbler Extra it averaged about 16 times the required 50 questions. The so-called "anyone can 'memorize' the answers" imbue would apply ONLY if an applicant was eidetic (one who has a "photographic memory"). NOT knowing ahead of time which questions would loom would require "memorizing" about 1560 questions and 6240 answers, the answers necessary to avoid getting a wrong one. In many of the 4-answer multiple-choices,the QPC inserted "distractors," wording such that a wrong acknowledge MIGHT loom right.

    I might occupy agreed that the number of illustrations MIGHT occupy 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 dabbler radio tests. :-)

    I will grant that I occupy some sustain in 'radio' (a subset of electronics) that isn't common to many dabbler license applicants. Was it "hard" for me? No. Would it subsist "hard" for someone just off the street? Yes. But...the average license applicant ALREADY knows SOMETHING about the subject. much grief there occupy been everysingle sorts of "Handbooks" (and over-priced "test guides") published by the ARRL alone for a half century.

    Now they collect to the crux of the matter, the Nobel-laureate International Morse Code test! I didn't occupy to bewitch one. In fact, the ARRL-VEC team didn't occupy any code sound reproducing apparatus at my test site (room donated by the Los Angeles Fire Department at an unused fire house) to give one! The LAW regarding morse code testing had eliminated any such requirement for any class license!

    That elimination had been done in a democratic-process manner, legally and correctly, everything published and silent available at the FCC, either in their Reading latitude or on-line! [another unbelievable but truemoment!] How about that? A democratic-process time for ANYONE to compose their case on NPRM 05-143 and then occupy each and every Reply and Reply to Comments made available for the PUBLIC to see! Is that "left-leaning?" Or is it just darn much democracy at work? I'll travel with the latter.

    You occupy to recall that USA dabbler radio has NEVER been considered "professional" nor is it in any pass "academic" (FCC was not chartered as a school). dabbler 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 subsist operated/tended/maintained sending out an average of more than 220 thousand messages a MONTH for the Far East Command Hq. notabit of those messages required any sort of morse code skill to send; they were everysingle teleprinter, connecting the Command with everysingle 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 exercise 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 subsist an dabbler ond HAD to pass a morse test...all the pass to early 2006. It was reputed to subsist "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 stale 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 silent adamant about keeping the morse test. Why?

    Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to bewitch a test in it and everysingle who succeed better bewitch 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 return of SPARK! It was the traditional means of USA dabbler radio transmission in the beginning. :-) OK, so it isn't narrowband, it is TRADITIONAL! Never irony that it was outlawed in 1927, travel back further, when hams were HAMS! Not a sole transistor or IC around then to befuddle long-timers, nossir, nothing complicated about early radio! travel for that crystal detector and spark transmitter DXCC! Pioneer radio everysingle over again, prove us how it's done, prove 'em who is boss!

    Oh, and cheerful Holidays! :-)

    73, Len AF6AY

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

    Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to bewitch a test in it and everysingle who succeed better bewitch 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 judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies. Many "stalwart morsemen" believe it was "selfish as well as unpretentious dumb" to remove that requirement.

    We, the "stalwart morsemen" are silent on the air and enjoying their privileges, though, despite the rule changes. Many new licensees are joining their ranks, learning and practicing the code even though it's no longer a licensing requirement.

    We'll speak for ourselves, thank you, so don't travel putting words in their mouths. Over and over again, you occupy used eHam bandwidth to build up your straw man and split him down again.

    You're a verbose person, Len. You look to occupy a lot of radio information and opinions about ham radio. I may occupy easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever epigram where you hang out-- what's your favorite dabbler corps to listen to; occupy you ever made a QSO; what kinds of apparatus and antennas consequence you relish to try out; occupy you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with dabbler radio applications, etc.

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

    BTW, there used to subsist 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 believe it was a sage requirement, even though it's one (small) judgement there was a 13 year gap in my dabbler radio activity.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: Back to the Future piece 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 silent adamant about keeping the morse test. Why? Mostly, I believe it was because of an attitude of "I had to bewitch a test in it and everysingle who succeed better bewitch 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 judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies. Many "stalwart morsemen" believe it was "selfish as well as unpretentious dumb" to remove that requirement."

    Well, Place it this way: I was "wrong" IF and only IF I had attributed that particular statement to you or your immediate dabbler 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 occupy 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 corps except the low discontinuance of 6 and 2 meters? Hmmm?..............NI0C: "We, the "stalwart morsemen" are silent 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 silent subsist used just as it is permitted everywhere on every ham corps on up to 300 GHz. The "awful, fateful, end-of-the-world (aa many know it)" decision to drop everysingle code testing requirements was in regards to getting IN dabbler radio. Getting IN, not for immediately dropping in to subsist a "qualified" operator as is some commercial practice.Now you travel privilege ahead and baskin your morse mode everysingle 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, everysingle saved on a CD), that feeling is NOT mutual...............NI0C: "We'll speak for ourselves, thank you, so don't travel putting words in their mouths."

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

    Over and over again, you and others occupy "used bandwidth" to build up your own strawmen and split 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 everysingle those olde-tyme shibboleth strawmen burning merrily...............NI0C: "You're a verbose person, Len. You look to occupy a lot of radio information and opinions about ham radio."

    I occupy a "lot" of information AND opinions about LOTS of things. I was not sensible that such is a CRIME. In my 77 years on this planet I've seen a lot of groupings, gatherings, forums, etc., etc. where SOME, insistent on being "leaders/managers" try to instill THEIR personal wishes/desires on others for no judgement than to subsist the "leaders/managers" because THEY wanted to it (i.e., ego-driven). I am an independent thinker and try to subsist objective about many things. That is resented by many longing for a group to belong to, to collect guidance in what to consequence and what to "enjoy." That is unlucky to those many. I consequence not feel obligated in any pass 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 occupy easily missed it, but I don't recall your ever epigram where you hang out-- what's your favorite dabbler corps to listen to; occupy you ever made a QSO; what kinds of apparatus and antennas consequence you relish to try out; occupy you written any software code to test a DSP algorithm with dabbler radio applications, etc."

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

    Those similar questions occupy been asked of me before...usually by those who are pile up some dossier to exercise themselves into later messaging pejoratives designed to damange my person. I am wiseto how those things work, yet I am unharmed physically or emotionally by such. <shrug>

    You might as well interrogate me about my option of wife, the foods I prefer, the entiertainment I like, why I chose to live where I do, and everything else under the sun. That is immaterial to the theme and you know it. But, Inspector Clue-no, I occupy explained everysingle that BEFORE and I'm not going into such IRRELEVANCY here AGAIN.

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

    WHY consequence you need 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 consequence you occupy a license?"

    BECAUSE I COULD. leer at your own wording and alleged inquisitiveness, nee snarly interrogation. If you are going to collect everysingle huffy and title "insult" from my answer, leer at your own attitude..................NI0C: "Is it merely so you can brandish a callsign in these forums and crow again and again about passing the dabbler 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 relate the WHY from my point of view but there will subsist many who WILL Place "words in my mouth" in denigrating everysingle that I say. That is EXPECTED and I KNOW the type of yahoos that are bound to consequence it...because they occupy already done that. What is more relevant is TAKING THE TEST(S).

    Not wanting to sound relish a Motivational Speaker, I'll just relate a successful method to bewitch 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 dabbler Extra class test and a LOT of assorted tests on other things in between:===================================1. PREPARE. collect to know the subject, collect to know the test method, collect to know the reaquirements, collect to know the test site environment. You CAN consequence it.

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

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

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

    5. consequence IT. Carefully. bewitch your time. Watch out for distractors in multiple-choice answers. Ignore the test site environment and distractions from other test takers. consequence NOT even imagine failure.====================================Radio regulations allow re-taking a test later if it is scored incomplete. Retesting time may vary as regulations are changed. It is NOT the identical as a one-shot academic class test (some academic rules require taking a gross course over if a 'final' test is failed). dabbler radio is a hobby, NOT a union, NOT a Guild, NOT a tradecraft. Your JOB does NOT depend on the outcome of this test, certainly not the relaxation of your life..................NI0C: "BTW, there used to subsist 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 care not what USA dabbler radio regulations WERE in 1912 or 1932 or 1952 or 1972 or 1992 or 2002. USA radio regulations occupy CHANGED much over the years. Note I convey "radio regulations" without specific definitions as to which radio service. If you are sensible and informed about MORE radio than just dabbler radio service, you will occupy to agree with that because CHANGE has happened to everysingle of them during the final 75 years of FCC existance.

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

    AF6AY

    Oh, and cheerful Holidays...:-)

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

    73,Chuck NI0C

      US dabbler License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C writes: "A much better judgement (not the only one) for morse testing is that if you are licensed to operate any modes in bands or sub-bands where others communicate using morse, then it is prudent (if no longer technically necessary) that you acquire some basic morse proficiency in order to navigate those frequencies."

    Of course, but FCC didn't note it that way. Unfortunately.

    Both in 1999 and after 2003, the majority of those who commented on the various proposals to reduce/eliminate Morse Code testing supported retaining at least some of it. But the FCC ignored the majority and went with the no-code-test-at-all minority opinion. FCC actions are not democratic and comments are not votes.

    Basic information of everysingle the other modes is tested in the written exam. Even modes which are used far less on the dabbler bands than Morse Code.

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

    What's really titillating 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 stale 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 retain on. But in neither case were there lots of new people flooding in. Nor did they note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* 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 subsist that they wind up with *more* Morse Code operators overall, both in absolute numbers and percentage of actual use.

    Some indicators:

    You mentioned 160 meters earlier. The ARRL 160 meter contest keeps on growing, despite the fact that efficient antennas are rather big - and it's a CW-only contest! It will subsist titillating to note this year's results.

    On domain Day 2009 I was piece 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 everysingle the relaxation of the application combined, and came very nigh 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 travail for Ten Tec. There are more companies making keys and paddles today than I can retain track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not everysingle simple QRP sets.

    Pretty much for a mode that gets almost no publicity and which requires some skill to use.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: US dabbler 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 conviction were not even qualified to hold an conviction on the subject.

    “It should moreover subsist 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 much things about the stale 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 practice and ameliorate their skills before actually getting on the air. As I recall, the median quicken 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 titillating 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 stale tests weren't really a "barrier" at all.”

    No they weren’t, especially since medical waivers were available.

    “Nor did they note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* reach in.”“

    I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a infamous review here on eHam, epigram 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 everysingle the relaxation of the application combined, and came very nigh 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 occupy operated domain Day with the K9YA club. It’s 1A, CW only. They always compose over 1K qso’s, even when their operating time is limited by thunderstorms.

    “Vibroplex was just bought by a ham who used to travail for Ten Tec. There are more companies making keys and paddles today than I can retain track of. CW-only rigs are getting more and more common - and they're not everysingle simple QRP sets.”

    There has moreover 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 hubbub reduction.

    Those who bounce CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dabbler 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 occupy hams that compose everysingle of the technically savvy hams leer bad.

    How can you occupy an Extra class ham that:

    1) Does not know how to Place a connector on the discontinuance of a piece of coax

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

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

    4) Cannot interpret the contrast between resistance and reactance.

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

    In the days of the highly technical testing that was required to collect a license, when you told someone you were a ham radio operator, they respected you for your knowledge. Not now!

    73

      RE: US dabbler License History...   by N2EY on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C: "some of those who expressed the minority conviction were not even qualified to hold an conviction on the subject."

    I'd express that concept rather differently:

    Everyone can occupy 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 much things about the stale 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 practice and ameliorate their skills before actually getting on the air."

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

    1) Prospective ham scholarly code and theory well enough to occupy a travel at the exam.

    2) Prospective ham found volunteer examiner (no capitals) who would give the test, and set up time and place.

    3) Volunteer examiner gave code tests (receiving and sending). If prospective ham passed them, volunteer examiner sent away figure requesting written test.

    4) When written exam came in the mail, volunteer examiner and prospective ham would set up time and Place for written exam.

    5) At written exam session, sealed test envelope would subsist opened, prospective ham would bewitch test. When done, volunteer examiner would seal up everysingle papers in FCC-provided envelope and route off for grading. everysingle volunteer examiner did was compose certain prospective ham didn't cheat.

    6) FCC would process the gross thing and route either a diminutive envelope or a tremendous one. diminutive envelope was preferred because it contained only the license. tremendous envelope contained paperwork to consequence the gross thing everysingle over again.

    Getting anything through FCC took 6 to 8 weeks back then, so the gross process could easily bewitch 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 quicken 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 moreover 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 delay to collect a transmitter set up and ready to travel so there would subsist no delay 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. moreover accomodations in the tests. But at least some folks I occupy encountered were too disdainful to bewitch handicap of them.

    NI0C: "I recall one newly minted Extra Class licensee who purchased a new HF amplifier, and gave it a infamous review here on eHam, epigram it was DOA out of the box. Turns out he didn’t install the fuses in the primary power line!"

    That's not a failing 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 speechless questions and mistakes that various rigmakers had encountered from customers. relish 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 everysingle the lax screws....

    The article appeared about 1956.

    One tremendous contrast between the stale days and now is that, in the stale days, a mistake relish that would generally subsist known only by a few, rather than being on array at a current website relish eham.

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

    We occupy probably worked each other many times, just not using their own calls. The local club rotates the call used each year so that everysingle the regulars collect a chance.

    NI0C: "There has moreover 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 hubbub reduction."

    Besides everysingle of that, there are better crystal filters, better rig designs, etc. The Elecraft K2 is an case of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW...

    NI0C: "Those who bounce CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from dabbler Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the identical job so much better.

    In 1921, Godley went to Ardrossan, Scotland and received more CW than spark signals on 200 meters - even though most of the spark signals were running higher power and were more numerous than CW rigs at the time. That demonstration, and the 1923 two-way transatlantic QSO on 110 meters changed a lot of minds. By the time spark was outlawed for hams in the late 1920s, it was merely a procedural thing; hams had simply stopped using it.

    Yet big numbers of amateurs today continue to exercise Morse Code/CW on the air, because nothing has reach along that does the identical job better.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      More Back to the Future (easy as pi)   by K6LHA on December 21, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on December 21, 2009:

    [N2EY]: “But the FCC ignored the majority and went with the no-code-test-at-all minority opinion. FCC actions are not democratic and comments are not votes.”

    NI0C: "And, as they well know, some of those who expressed the minority conviction were not evenqualified to hold an conviction on the subject.

    Ahem, not to crash up the hate-the-nocoders-cuz-we-morsemen-are-the-GREATEST imitation of Muhammed Ali (formerly known as Cassius Clay) but the FCC allows any national to remark on any docket up for public comment. NPRM 05-235 was about GETTING INTO USA dabbler radio, not an "upgrading" or anything else. GETTING INTO, as in the regulations required by an applicant to pass an dabbler radio license exam. There are NO "qualifications" necessary to post Comments or Replies to Comments. <shrug> By that nosy illogic of alleged "qualifications" stated above, one cannot remark 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 everysingle documents posted on that docket. Anyone can access that through the FCC Electronic remark System under docket 05-235. That was just an informational exhibit, not "official" and quite probably not "qualified" under the coders' nosy we-are-the-only-qualified-people "rule."

    Having saved each and every publicly-available document under docket 05-235, the exhibit results are as "qualified" as is viable 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 dabbler licensees which skewed the totals towards being "against" the NPRM.

    Note that I said "citizens" above. That is the ONLY qualifier necessary for the USA federal government. Anyone is free to peruse the Communications Act of 1934 or the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (some amendments to regulations) to note what "qualifications" are necessary. Anyone NOT a national can moreover post on that docket but one can hope the FCC staffers to subsist literate and sensible 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, everysingle of them supposedly "qualified" having dabbler 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 remark 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 remark on any matter in a docket affecting only PLMRS regulations. Each of those would apply for any radio service or piece of regulations of Title 47 Code of Federal Regulations.

    FCC 06-178, the Memorandum Report and Order eliminating USA dabbler 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 subsist 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. everysingle of the FCC decision reasons are clearly given in that R&O document. It is LAW.

    Those who wish to invert such a test elimination are free to submit a Petition to re-install it in the USA dabbler 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 titillating 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 stale 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 everysingle licensees, a rate that is not affected by the allegations that "Tech plusses are renewing as Techs," a favorite reiterated "reason" of N2EY. N2EY's reiteration is NOT backed up by a shred of evidence proving his allegation. <shrug>..............[N2EY?] “Nor did they note a techno-revolution from the newcomers who *did* reach in.”“

    Now, that's a new excuse/rationalization. :-) I'm not certain where THAT was some kindhearted of "reason" for removing the code test, but I'm certain N2EY will kluge together some kindhearted of "justifying" statement. moderately similar to his early-1970s "design" for a low-HF transceiver using vacuum tubes. Very advanced. [see listing of his "silver" photos certain to follow...:-)}...............NI0C: "Those who bounce 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 everysingle 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 exercise in the late 1920s. Of course that was for commercial and military "carrier" services and would not subsist found in dabbler radio. The FCC forbids communications carrier service in the USA dabbler bands.

    On the other hand, the FCC does permit SOME Spread Spectrum operation above 30 MHz in USA dabbler radio bands. They will moreover 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 exercise by radio amateurs today but the FCC does not yet permit high-rate modems (such as found in commercial radio services) for USA radio amateurs.

    The pre-(about)-1960 teleprinter rates used to subsist 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. everysingle that mass storage in PCs moreover allows very quick retrieval of text data for easy viewing off-line or on-line.

    But, I digress. The mighty morsemen of the dabbler persuasion insist and insist on "Back to the Future" (easy as pi) modes as a "necessary qualifier" to convey anything at all. :-) Only They "know what is much for everysingle 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 dabbler Extra Class license after petitioning the FCC to reduce the requirements.

    You might subsist 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 dabbler License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"NI0C: "Those who bounce CW with comparisons to spark transmission simply haven't kept up with technology."

    Nor with history. Spark disappeared from dabbler Radio in the early 1920s - not because it was legislated out of existence, but because the new continuous-wave tube transmitters performed the identical job so much better. "

    It was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then.

    73,Chuck NI0C

      RE: US dabbler License History...   by NI0C on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote:"The Elecraft K2 is an case of a rig with a surprisingly low parts count, cost and overall hardware complexity that has "big-rig" performance. Particularly on CW... "

    The K2 is indeed a remarkable radio. In terms of picking up weak signals, it's extremely nigh to its tremendous brother, the K3. I occupy 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 dabbler 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 piece of the story. A spark signal can actually subsist made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques.

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

    The very elevated peak-to-average ratio of a spark signal meant that insulators and other components had to withstand higher voltages and currents than with "continuous" waves.

    There were existing 19-teens technologies that could generate undamped waves, such as Alexanderson alternators and Poulsen arc converters. But they tended to subsist practical only up to a few hundred kHz at most, far below the frequencies amateurs could exercise after 1912.

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

    That was the discontinuance of spark in dabbler radio.

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

    (If you believe technology changes mercurial these days, just leer at a typical 1920 dabbler station, and then one from 1930).

    In fact, the exercise 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 weak signals, it's extremely nigh to its tremendous brother, the K3."

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

    It moreover has very low power requirements for its smooth 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 dabbler License History...   by K6LHA on December 22, 2009 Mail this to a friend! NI0C wrote on 22 Dec 09 on "King Spark":

    "It was a quantum leap in communications bandwidth efficiency, perhaps unequaled in terms of percentage improvement since then."

    Tsk, tsk, tsk. Some folks just haven't kept up with the condition of the technique in "communications bandwidth efficiency." :-)

    Disregarding commercial and military SSB formats that can carry two voice channels and eight TTY channels on the identical 12 KHz bandwidth over HF radio paths since the 1930s, the following are privilege advancements in "communications bandwidth efficiency:"

    1. Claude Elwood Shannon's seminal paper of 1947 relating noise, bandwidth, and mistake rate and itsrelationship to temperature, Bell System Technical Journal 1947 (before the invention of the transistor at Bell Labs, done in a different piece of that Laboratory). This established what would subsist universally known as "Shannon's Law" for everysingle communications circuits on this planet.

    2. Time-multiplexing of four TTY channels over one FSK CW radio circuit at 850 Hz "spread" (Mark to Space frequency shift), USN compress with DoD, in exercise 1953 with the worldwide Army Command and Administrative Network (ACAN), later STARCOM. Required no more bandwidth than a sole TTY FSK circuit at the time.

    3. The first of the voice channel modems faster than the 300 WPM Bell System. Those would peak at the present-day modems on the Internet sending/receiving 56,000 bits per second over a voice-bandwidth channel only 3000 Hz wide. Millions and millions in exercise worldwide just prior to the new millennium. The USA FCC regulations for dabbler radio communications on HF occupy drastic limits on radio modem data rates.

    4. Spread Spectrum techniques, at first classified only for government use, now found in millions of cellular telephone sets/sites that allow many users to coexist WITHOUT INTERFERENCE in the identical bandspace and nigh geographical spacing. Makes exercise of both Shannon's Laws and Information Theory techniques. There are silent drastic limitations in FCC regulations on such techniques in USA dabbler radio.

    5. Digitized voice, first used over wired telephone systems by individuals in the early 1970s expanded to commercial exercise 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, moreover adopted by most NATO military member forces. [digitization allows easy 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 mercurial Fourier Transform signal characteristic detection. Such Sonar systems resulted in the "waterfall" array now used in dabbler experimentation for weak-signal communications, notably on LF (which the ARRL has not seen meet to promote although many European countries and the UK already occupy dabbler radio bands on LF). Yes, there is an underwater communications system in exercise but it doesn't exercise RF. :-)

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

    Another "hybrid system" is the USA DTV broadcast format that uses everysingle available techiques of Information Theory to collapse at least 18 MHz of bandwidth into a sole 6 MHz bandspace AND adding quadraphonic sound, teletext (captions for the hearing impaired), plus a number of technical signals for constant checking of modulation quality. That system would subsist impossible to achieve without an easy-to-manufacture but highly-complex-in-structure Integrated Circuit. The MPEG (Motion Picture Experts Group) extended known Information Theory techniques to the maximum in modulation-demodulation to enable bandwidth reduction. An added plus is the relative license of RFI compared to older, simpler analog modulation schemes and want of "snow" with weak DTV signals.

    PSK-31 can subsist 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 dabbler radiotelegrapher. <shrug>

    I could relate some more systems which permit as much (in a few cases greater, but those are not allowed in USA dabbler radio) an advancement. And, I don't occupy the personal sustain with them as with those just listed...but that spoils your glory worship of the FIRST mode in everysingle 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 dabbler 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 commandeer 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 speak to their government.

    Apparently the only "qualified" persons regarded by so many olde-tymers is THEM. Reflect on the FACT that the FCC (which regulates everysingle civil radio in the USA) does NOT require any Commissioners or staff to hold any radio licenses! [gasp, disorderly but true...]

    You will reject to believe it, but my "campaign" (exaggerated description) was solely to attempt modernization of existing USA dabbler radio regulations. Having worked IN radio communications since 1953 and NEVER having had to know or exercise it as piece 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 mature 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 dabbler 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 identical way. For the relaxation of the 2006-2007 holiday time I made NO attempt nor worked up any interest in achieving my "own" license nor in "having my very own radio station." I enjoyed the Holiday time with friends who were not concerned with preserving the past forever, much less glorying in the alleged marvel 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 industry corps radio with a tripartite partnership), had my filligree-edged blue background First Class Radiotelephone Operator License certificate granted in March 1956, had been a hobbyist tinkering/dabbling/ building/learning by myself since 1947. Oh, and I'd already been a contributor, then Assciate Editor with Ham Radio magazine...all without any dabbler 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 everysingle the "campaigning" I'd done, they suggested I travel for it. So I decided to consequence just that. Not a problem. Once decided I set about to consequence IT, disregarding everysingle 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 consequence IT. As the stale Hawaiian colloquial phrase has it, "Go for broke!" :-)

    I was in a personal financial situation of being able to afford an entire HF-VHF station then and acquired good, but not necessarily "top-of-the-line" radio equipment. That is resented, sometimes bitterly, by those who are unable to consequence so, and many of them utter their frustrations on me. I cannot nor will not back such resentful individuals, certainly not everysingle those who insist and insist that "I should occupy done what they did" from teen years through their middle age. dabbler radio would NOT subsist 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 subsist interested in: http://eham.net/reviews/detail/6136"

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

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

    Thanks but no thanks. I occupy my very own, rather plain, austere "license certificate" from the ONLY legal issuer in the USA, the FCC. I silent occupy everysingle my stale 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 collect as much or more sustenance from a meal at Home Town Buffet or satisfaction for cadaver comfort from a three-pack of cotton socks from Target (upscale Hanes brand), and occupy money left over from either one. I don't occupy 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 companionable Work), using them everysingle when she was silent working. Those three certificates are in storage up north. THEY don't need 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 redress 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 join and collect a freebie from them if I did. Six weeks LATER? Departments in Newington appeared to NOT being on communication terms. After a genteel letter by surface mail asking if I could silent avail myself of their freebie offer, I got a terse e-mail epigram "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 acknowledge me immediately on the judgement that "demographics of membership are given only to potential advertisers." After a year and a half of growing frustration I decided to let membership lapse. The ARRL is primarily a PUBLISHING HOUSE and less a membership organization by their own attitudes, wordings, and phrases behind their PR propaganda. They hadn't done anything for me in two years.

    I just don't believe highly over such pretty paper from a NON-legal "official source." Years ago at the availability of better photo programs for PCs, a friend of mine made up everysingle kinds of "certificates" which looked very, very "authentic" and would occupy WOWED a casual observer. It was everysingle in sarcasm and humor at others' need for wallpaper bling. Some were devastatingly laughable but in a sneaky subtle way. :-)

    I carry ONE non-standard detail in my wallet, a miniaturized photocopy of my DD-214 figure I got in 1956. If you are a veteran of the US armed forces you will know what a "DD-214" is (still used today but changed slightly to reflect different military regulations), non-veterans probably don't and don't much care. It is there because it can subsist there. I don't exercise it for "certificate bling," just as a casual and different conversation starter in companionable gatherings. Gatherings of HUMANS who can communicate without radio. [gasp!]

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

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

    If there were a prize for an individual's ratio of words uttered on eHam to number of QSO's on the air, you would definitely subsist a contender.

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

    Please accept my sympathies on USA dabbler radio not subsist 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 subsist a contender."

    Please account CHANGING your personal antipathic commentary to the e-ham Forum conviction section. There you may utter everysingle you want without touching any of the article subjects that you look to despise.

    Meanwhile some of us care to leer to the FUTURE and attempt to note where USA dabbler 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 dabbler License History...   by K6LHA on December 23, 2009 Mail this to a friend! N2EY wrote on December 22, 2009, desperately trying to retain 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 piece of the story. A spark signal can actually subsist made relatively narrow (tens of kHz at HF) with proper techniques."

    It could subsist made to occupy an infinitely narrow bandwidth (as with an ideal, but impossible to achieve, Dirac filter). Such would moreover occupy an infinitely diminutive power output.

    An arc discharge has extremely mercurial conduction/non-conduction transients...in terms of picoseconds or less, conditional on the quicken 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 piece 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 subsist analyzed once everysingle the characteristics of the entire network are known/measured. There will subsist variables of everything in the total analysis which can bewitch weeks to compute. But WHY bother? Measurement instruments to accurately measure/characterize everything just weren't available to the average dabbler experimenter prior to the 1930s and very few CARED to consequence so. A Spark transmitter was SIMPLE. In addition it gave the ILLUSION of power with the visible and audible arc, generated ozone and arc content ash. Anyone who could wield hand tools could build one out of available wood and metal parts and wire. It was technically CRUDE. Cruder than a kluge.Spark transmitters, even with the most complicated of tuned networks were basically hubbub Generators.

    Very early radio used a brutal coerce system of elevated power RF sources with essentially-passive detectors as receivers, everysingle 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 simple RF sources or the first privilege Continuous Wave generators in the power category. Yes, alternators had harmonics, relatively low-power, nothing at everysingle relish the hubbub GENERATORS of Spark.

    Now, James, you should occupy KNOWN this from your early travail with Spark transmitters and your scholarly lessons in advanced radio theory obtained at the university later. Instead, you portrayed the very stale ways in radio AS IF they could subsist done today or even a half century ago. It was simply not so comparable. Yet you had to glorify the early achievements in terms of others in print AS IF they were wonderous achievements of genius...and thus basking in their reflected glory..................As far as I know, the only surviving, useful arc-discharge RF generator is that used in testing electronic apparatus designed to withstand EMP (Electro-Magnetic Pules) effects. Controlled power and PSD (Power Spectral Density) characteristics, carefully measured and calibrated. Such is not used for testing dabbler radio equipment; there is no need to consequence so.===========================

    This article was not remotely considered to subsist a treatise on stale radio nor stale regulations. It started off simply as a study of the number of license classes in USA dabbler radio over a period of time following a milestone change in USA dabbler radio regulations. As usual, it was hijacked by some certain others who, having an antipathy/personality-conflicts with myself or some need to highlight themselves above others, took it far off the original intent.

    It is my interest - NOT shared by most others here - to leer towards the FUTURE, not to live in the relected glory of past radio pioneers...or to fake to subsist pioneers of radio (just of HF) by developed skill in manual radiotelegraphy or reading stale copies of dabbler 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 everysingle users of the EM spectrum. Laws of physics consequence NOT recognize human desires, imaginations, nor the "history" aspect of early primitive radio.

    AF6AY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 occupy apparatus 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 smooth of technical know-how of the piece of dabbler radio that interests them is high.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 note from QRZ that you live in KS, which means it's not just a big-coastal-city problem either.

    And it's not just about upgrading but about getting a license in the first place.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler 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 dabbler 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 consequence occupy some "experience," they occupy a few intermittent college students and had some ladies recently become Techs. Their nightly ARES net turns into a rag chew after any official industry is taken care of, and they always occupy at least 20 members checking in. They moreover collect some Echolinks fairly frequently. They pulled a list of licensed hams in their county and the list was huge! Activity in their club was dwarfed by the number of licensees. I believe promoting ham radio should subsist a piece of any public school science or communications/technology course. I moreover believe there should subsist more ham clubs in colleges.   RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Ov   by KJ4KKI on December 30, 2009 Mail this to a friend! One has to subsist resilient with the times and needs of a population. I was apprehensive that I couldn't learn code and Place 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 moreover bought a second ham engage and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%. I design to learn code...when I occupy a time in my life to study it and practice it. privilege now, I'm studying for my General. I consequence 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 leer at the overall mission of something. While I admit that the Tech manual isn't minute when compared to the general or Extra manuals/tests, it certainly gets one started with an HT or mobile FM rig...to collect their feet damp and chew on...so to speak. It showed me how much more I wanted to collect involved and learn. In my profession and smooth of schooling, I've been guilty of complaining about "the pass it used to be." Sometimes, in the end, change is good. Sometimes, they just don't realize it until they collect 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 dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Years   by K5ZTY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! Regarding the big numbers of non renewals, dabbler Radio, relish 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 everysingle 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 occupy to learn or array any information of the hobby at everysingle to obtain any class of license. Hence, no investment, no pride of accomplishment, obtained a license and doesn't know how or why to exercise it, no interest in renewing.We need to travel back to an entry smooth license that is much for one year. Upgrade or you're out. Publish the question pool but no answers. They wouldn't collect as many applicants but they would collect more Hams.   Don't failing ARRL For What FCC Did   by N2EY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! K5ZTY writes: "However, the ARRL has made it their project to license every person in the world by dumbing down the license requirements nascence with the Volunteer Examiner program in the early '80s."

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

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

    Again, failing the FCC. They refused to travel after Dick Bash, and when they created the VE system, publishing the entire actual questions 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 need to travel back to an entry smooth license that is much 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 prevent somebody from publishing the answers, identical as Bash did 30 years ago? (Except it would subsist easier this time.)

    --

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

    The trick is to find those changes that will ameliorate the system *without* requiring FCC to consequence more.

    73 de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Ov   by N2EY on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! KJ4KKI writes: "I was apprehensive that I couldn't learn code and Place 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 moreover bought a second ham engage and read probably over a thousand pages of internet material. I made 100%."

    GREAT!

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

    KJ4KKI: "I design to learn code...when I occupy a time in my life to study it and practice it."

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

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

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

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

    And sometimes, in the end, change isn't good. Sometimes the folks who said "That's NOT a much 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 occupy tremendous gaping holes in the stuff tested and silent collect the license.

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

    Some may scoff at the concept that a person could memorize their pass to a passing grade, given the size of the question pools. But "memorization" doesn't denote somebody has to memorize everysingle the questions and answers verbatim. In the actual world, everysingle it means is that a person has to recognize the privilege acknowledge out of the given ones - 74% of the time.

    There's moreover a tremendous contrast between being able to acknowledge the questions on the exam, and actually knowing how to consequence 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 everysingle vintages don't occupy that self-realization.

    73 es GL de Jim, N2EY

      RE: Trends in USA dabbler Radio License Classes Over Three Y   by K6LHA on January 2, 2010 Mail this to a friend! K5ZTY complained on January 2, 2010:

    "Regarding the big numbers of non renewals, dabbler Radio, relish 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 dabbler radio operator licenses...for BUDGET reasons. moreover done was to establish frequency coordination groups for industry corps radio users plus a much overhaul of radio licenses for diminutive boats and general aviation aircraft, public safety agencies. The ARRL has NO POWER to compose regulations. The ARRL was moreover among three to govern the NCVEC nascence in 1984. Note: PL 97-239 enacted on 13 Sep 82 made it viable for the FCC to enact privatization. [That's Public Law 97-239 and does not refer to piece 97, Title 47 C.F.R.].................K5ZTY: "The publishing of the exam questions and answers has given birth to everysingle 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 occupy to learn or array any information of the hobby at everysingle to obtain any class of license."

    That's your opinion, of course. When did you consequence your final formal dabbler radio license exam? I took mine on 25 Feb 07. For everysingle three test elements then, the Question Pool had an average of 13 times the minimum required pool questions of 10. So, for 120 questions total, there would occupy to subsist 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 care to memorize for any hobby test.

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

    Ahem...the second-lowest "renewal" rate in USA dabbler radio is Technician class. general is third. dabbler Extra is first (they are the hard CORE amateurs). The number of licensees in Novice class, Technician Plus class, and Advanced class occupy everysingle been dropping since 2000.

    Someone who got their first USA dabbler radio license in the year 2007 will occupy 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 factor testing or just for an administrative change not needing testing. I would estimate at least 35 were there on the day of my test, so the team leader locked up (probably) $490 at the 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 recall that]

    "No pride of accomplishment?" That's overly-cynical. I bewitch PERSONAL pride in everything I've set out to consequence and then complete satisfactorily. I don't travail up a tremendous head of steam and travel parading it around forums for decades. :-)

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

    If someone just doesn't know "WHY" to exercise it, then I doubt they will ever pass a test for it. Just bewitch a leer at the current NCVEC QP contents. You should require WHY they are AT a VEC test site if they "don't know why." That piece is a nonsense question. <shrug>.................K5ZTY: "We need to travel back to an entry smooth license that is much for one year. Upgrade or you're out."

    By golly, then I "failed" this draconian pecification! I got my dabbler license almost three years ago...and I've NEVER upgraded it!

    I must subsist one of those "worthless, beginner, know-nothings, ignorant, stupid, etc." beings who didn't consequence dabbler radio for years before being licensed in dabbler radio!!! :-) Ah, no matter, I've been called everysingle of those names by already-licensed amateurs because I've been a professional in radio-electronics since 1952 and just didn't TRY to collect an dabbler license until age 74. Oh, oh, OH, such a terrible, terrible attitude! :-)

    Oh, and how did you consequence 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:


    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams





    References :


    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11502669
    Wordpress : http://wp.me/p7SJ6L-pJ
    Scribd : https://www.scribd.com/document/357481055/Pass4sure-310-152-Sun-Certified-Backup-and-Recovery-Engineer-emphasis-on-Solstice-Backup-exam-braindumps-with-real-questions-and-practice-software
    weSRCH : https://www.wesrch.com/business/prpdfBU1HWO000QVBZ
    Issu : https://issuu.com/trutrainers/docs/310-152
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12064573
    Youtube : https://youtu.be/WmtgO6KoC2E
    Blogspot : http://killexams-braindumps.blogspot.com/2017/10/sun-310-152-dumps-and-practice-tests.html
    RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/DontMissTheseSun310-152Dumps
    Vimeo : https://vimeo.com/243488916
    Google+ : https://plus.google.com/112153555852933435691/posts/3TPkJ7RKHqW?hl=en
    publitas.com : https://view.publitas.com/trutrainers-inc/look-at-these-310-152-real-question-and-answers
    Calameo : http://en.calameo.com/account/book#
    Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/0bi6alxlbg7ac39msf04a5awcdo7lraz
    zoho.com : https://docs.zoho.com/file/5isglc15539515b944cb69a675c5006318273






    Back to Main Page

    www.pass4surez.com | www.killcerts.com | www.search4exams.com