After reading through your thoughts Tony I was reminded of the testing procedure for past Technicians. I believe, until the last restructuring the Technician exam was the same one Generals took. Prior to 2000 the only difference was that the General applicant took a 13 wpm code test and the Tech Class only took the 5 wpm until they created the no-code Tech but both took the General technical exam.
Now if I am not mistaken, the no-code Technician still took the same written as the old General. In short, these guys took a test that was designed around a "Voice" license. So it appears to me their technical competency might be as good as a licensee who by passing only an additional CW test might be competent to operate HF voice. Well since the code is going the way of the spark, why not let the guys with these licenses operate HF voice? By their written test, they should have the technical competence. Understand I haven't formed a definite opinion on this yet, but these are thoughts that have crossed my mind. I also wonder if they were discussed at the ARRL board meeting. Another thing is the quotation "dumbing down amateur radio". The main reason for going to multiple choice tests for all applicants was the fact that grading time was requiring so much time and personnel. I don't remember for sure, but it seems to me that in the 1950-60 time frame there was only about 250,000 amateurs. Today there are over 800,000 as I recall (all are not active, but took tests). I know from experience of operating a test center for commercial licenses and grading papers on electronic technical material in a Community College that I would not want to hand grade tests with hand drawn circuit diagrams and questions concerning the operation of that circuit. Grading a single 50 question test of that nature could easily take over an hour. With the multiple choice answer sheet, all one needs is an answer key with all the right holes punched out for someone which will take about 2 minutes to grade. One can also administer the tests by computer which grades the test automatically. Either method cannot review hand drawn diagrams. Multiply that by the number of tests given and time consumption goes off the scale. Understand all, I am not advocating the position of the ARRL but can see why they might adopt it. Testing is now in the hands of VOLUNTEERS, so we might contact some of them to see if they would take on the chore. If they have an opinion and they will share it, it would be good to hear their feelings as they are not paid for their work. Considering all sides, I can see from tests previously taken by current licensees, they could be considered capable of anything we are except the code. I can also see that the code was a filter that prevented some undesirables from applying. I hate the fact that I had to work harder than some new person that does not have to know the code to gain the privileges. Maybe the way to go would be the sub-band method you have mentioned. Expand the Extra sub-band much more than it is proposed in the ARRL document. Maybe include the current Novice sub-band in phone privileges for Extra and increase the General by only 25 Kcs. Having a lot of extra (pardon the pun) space would be incentive to learn the code. If the code idea does not work, then have a 25 or so question test additional, to cover other technical material that is not currently covered (this would require some thought). In other words, if they eliminate the code altogether a person would have to take the current 50 question technical test for the Extra then take an additional 25 or so question test on a higher plane rather than administering a 5 wpm code test, maybe over different communications modes and how they operate. By passing both tests, a person would have a real incentive to gain the 50 Kcs the Extra would allow, if passed. Another factor is the other narrow band modes such as RTTY, PSK, Amtor and such including CW. Since they are narrow band, they might be squeezed (I hate to use that word) into smaller amount of space, then allow the Extra more than just the old Novice portion. Ideas to play with. I do know that FCC has bigger fish to fry than the Amateur Service and only review rule proposals for us as absolutely necessary, so we had better get with it. If we can change the ARRL proposal to increase the Extra sub-bands through individuals, and maybe the QCWA group, we will have a better chance. What do you guys think? 73 Jim de W5JO ----- Original Message ----- From: "RoadKing" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 10:37 AM Subject: [AMRadio] The PROPOSED ARRL Suggestions to FCC > Man, Jim, > > You posted this on Several BBSs and It has certainly stirred the Fires! > Even I posted some thoughts on the "FORUM". > > I would humbly suggest that Although Jim has merely posted what the ARRL > has "PROPOSED" to the FCC, this is NOT LAW. These CHANGES are NOT a part of > Part 97. > > I would humbly Suggest that you watch the FCC sight and if you see them > Post some proposed CHANGES and YOU don't agree with those Changes then > Please Please exercise your fingers and WRITE them expressing that this > does nothing to enhance the hobby, it is going to merely create more > congestion on already crowded bands. (Shortened message from Tony to save bandwidth)
