If one thing has been a constant in amateur radio over its first 100 years, it’s been the constant changes in the licensing structure. I’m not qualified to write in detail about the history of license restructuring, but suffice it to say that no matter how the FCC has changed the amateur radio license structure, there’s always been a lot of complaining. These complaints have, of course, led to further restructuring.
I bring this up because I’ve recently fielded a couple of comments from readers on license restructuring. Also, an item on the ARRL’s website about the retirement of the FCC’s “ham guy,” Bill Cross, W3TN, mentions the possibility of restructuring. In the article, W3TN is quoted as saying:
Do we really need three license classes anymore? I can see in the future the number of license classes decreasing again — to two or maybe one — because the differences really are not that much.
Writing about how we might get kids more involved with ham radio again, one of my readers, Bruce, K1BG, says:
We need to go back to what worked. A simple Novice test, limited power (50 watts to avoid the RF exposure documentation), HF phone privileges, and a two year, non-renewable license. Move up or move out. Given today’s technology, you could take the test with a general class or higher licensee, have him/her go online, and have a callsign (NA1AAA – NZ0ZZZ, designating that you are a Novice) the same day. When you upgrade, your call does as well. Done. Get the kids in, get them hooked, and move on.
I kind of like the idea of going back to some kind of Novice test that expires in a year or two. For one thing, it would eventually clear the database of all the Techs that got licenses and then never did anything with them. This would give us a much better indication of the health of amateur radio.
Perhaps the two classes that W3TN talks about could be Novice and General. I’m not sure that the little bit of extra band space awarded to Extra Class licensees is really all that much of an incentive anymore, and some of us remember when the Extra Class license was really only an honorary thing, anyway. General Class licensees had exactly the same privileges as Amateur Extra licensees.
If we really wanted to keep an unofficial Extra Class, someone (the ARRL?) could come up with a program to recognize hams that have gone above and beyond. Part of it could be a test that really tests someone’s technical competence. Other considerations would include technical achievements, operating achievements, or community involvement. This would make being an Extra Class amateur more meaningful than it is today.
So, what do you think? Would you like to see the license structure simplified even more? Do you think such a proposal would have any chance of getting past the FCC?
John M says
Maybe we need to look into why all those Techs never did anything further with their licenses. Entry into the hobby is a lot easier but there are a lot of other hobbies and activities today that compete with Amateur Radio. A huge increase in HOA / CC&R controlled residences could play a part in dissuading people from entering the hobby due to the difficulty in having an effective antenna system. The availability of cellphones to the masses definitely factors into the equation in both the private and commercial communication space.
Jack says
One thing is an absolute…you are not going to get people worthy of the Ham standard by forever lowering standards to met THEIR requirements.
Bob K0NR says
Dan,
Before we start “fixing” something, we ought to know what problem we are trying to solve. It is not clear from your post what you think the problem is.
The ham radio community often has a nostalgia for the old Novice license…imagining young folks assembling Heathkits and getting on the air via CW. I don’t see that as viable in 2015. If the Novice license does not have 2m privileges, then you are just creating a Novice segregation problem. If a Novice has 2m privileges, then it would be better to just modify the existing Tech license, instead of creating a new license class.
I also don’t understand your comment “the little bit of extra band space awarded to Extra Class licensees.” That might be true from a CW perspective but on phone there are some very attractive privileges on 20m and 15m for Extra class licensees.
The only change I would make right now is to sunset both the Advanced and Novice licenses, just to get them out of the system. Probably upgrade the Advanced licensees to Extra and make the Novice class non-renewable. (I always wondered why anyone stays a Novice after all these years. What am I missing?)
But my main point is identifying what problem are you trying to solve (and is a change to licensing the best remedy?)
73, Bob K0NR
P.S. One more thing: we should bring back the Morse code requirement for all license classes. Just Kidding.
Dan KB6NU says
Lots of valid points, Bob, and I agree that Novices should have VHF and UHF privileges. I certainly wouldn’t want to segregate Novices, and I meant to put something in the original post about that. I think the point that K1BG was trying to make is that the Tech test is too high a bar for some kids, and he’s researched the difficulty of the old Novice tests.
I’m just thinking off the top of my head here, but how about the idea of some kind of “Maker” class? Something that would be extremely easy to get, but have only limited privileges? This would be just to suck people in, and it would be non-renewable.
Having said all that, you’re probably right about this idea being more nostalgic than realistic.
Jack says
Dan that “maker class’ could be having to build, under supervision say a QRP or build an quality antenna system…do something to prove you are worthy of licensing. As for using ICOM/Kenwood/Whatever ‘hand-helds’..well, somehow that’s about the low end of Ham Radio….it was worthy when one built one’s own or even mod’d a BC model but running about with a factory hand-held that’s ham radio??
Jack says
I agree about the cw and I’m NOT kidding….the slackness of Hams and the self righteous demands of people to ‘entitlement’ to a licence which no longer has the engineering qualifications it did has ruined the service. It was a ‘club’ with strict entry rules, now it’s like joining some every day social club….even the older hams using Japanese off the shelf, desk armchair lighting, antenna….sometimes the last costing towards $100,000 on massive towers. What’s “Ham” about that.? Some in the USA are really classy, finding early stations for example at estate sales or demolitions and rebuilding them to fabulous condition, some still renovating or restoring old gear, some building superb Home Brew, but this modern brain spasm that everyone has a right to everything, that if they can’t meet the requirements we must downgrade the requirements will see our glorified CB trashed. That isn’t helped by such nonsense as packet and star and etc….that’s not Ham Radio, it’s not engineering experimentation it’s no more than assemble and use. As for novices building gear…doing it very well and passed by qualified inspectors….yes I believe it should be an entry point. I was a foundation licence inspector until I just couldn’t take any more of the nonsense and when I tried to teach Ham tradition, I was ‘chipped’ “they don’t have to learn that!!…” I tried to teach some affection for the past including a pride in cw (today …”not unless I can use my computer key board…because whimper, sob, sniffle, boohoo”I can’t learn Morse code”…Oh humbug!! what nonsense, you just don’t have the Ham soul. Operating courtesy especially on 1 and 2 meters is about CB level….,’…Ham radio has become largely Farex fed to spoiled brats….fortunate we are to have some dedicated people…although CW courtesy is a bit sad I have found. In a nutshell toughen the admission…make Ham Radio a real achievement…I don’t care if we lose 500,000 or 10 million ‘members’ , make it a really proud and engineering geared ‘club’…not a home radio replacement for the telephone.
Tom AJ4UQ says
I think reciprocal privileges (CEPT, etc) are tied to the skills tested for each license. So giving “general” class licensees extra privileges won’t satisfy the requirements for operating overseas.
As for the current advanced licensees, it’s probably easiest to just leave them alone until they’re all gone through attrition. Novices have so few privileges now (can’t even get on most repeaters) that they should be given a grace period to upgrade or be retired. If you’re a novice operating CW on HF, a general test shouldn’t be too hard. The remaining novices certainly aren’t kids.
How do we get kids involved? There are many license-free RF and electronics opportunities to get them started. I think the trick is getting them to see how much more can be done once they take the next step and get a license. A technician license isn’t hard to get, and it opens up a huge amount of spectrum to play in.
Jack says
Tom, ok understand but would we not and they not gain so greatly from being forced to do something of a challenge to become a part of the great Ham brotherhood….the exams aren’t worth two bob…look at the 1950’s exams….and if you don’t want to learn CW and use it..stick with the CB’ers.
Jim Myers says
This is one of those situations where you have a solution in search of a problem.
As for “clear the database of all the Techs that got licenses and then never did anything with them” that’s just what we DO NOT need right now when spectrum is available to the highest bidder. When congress and the FCC looks to the amateur radio spectrum and whether it’s being utilized, they look at NUMBERS. They do not sit around and catalog how many people are actually actively using their license. If they DID do that, our spectrum would be auctioned off overnight.
Jack says
unfortunately you are correct…it’s like ‘yes we care, we put $10B into this and 100 into that …” oh yes….what did you actually DO??…I just told you…. we put $10B into this and 100 into that…down the drain in Mayer Amschel Bauer’s new world order military controlled globalisation where the dark world dominates. A friend, a once beautiful woman, wrote to me two nights ago…”God is evil”…well that’s certainly true….when religion spruikers want money “Jesus is Lord”….when they want to rape pillage and kill “God/Allah/whatever…” wants it. It’s not that God (the post-idol Hebrew fantasy) is evil, it’s that evil has become our God. We lost the chance after WW11 to demand amateur service in the war be appreciated by unalterable bands …(everyone else, the money grubbers) can go to blazes….we only have small spectra) so now we have to rely on numbers…perhaps 95% glorified CB’ers to keep some SECONDARY rights…I think it’s something, a tragedy, we should fight but….Jim….unfortunately you are right
Aaron KV9L says
Something needs to be done. The quality of operators or maybe I should say radio etiquette has declined horribly since the code requirement was dropped from the general exam.
I think the time to learn is very much needed for new ops. I recently had a conversation with a new ham, went straight to general, he thought the output of his radio was in amps. Though current was used for measuring output a long time ago, we now measure in wattage. Anyways, the point is too many ops coming to hf with no experience, no retention of theory.
As for getting younger hams interested, some of the things I hear on 75,40,and 20 meters… well if my parents heard that stuff I wouldn’t have been able to get my novice until I moved out of the house.
There needs to be some sort of change. The quality of the hobby will become 11m if there isn’t. I just don’t know what needs to happen. Heck, it seems the FCC won’t even enforce the hobby anymore.
Aaron
Andy Holman (N8AAX) says
I understand that new ops don’t have all the answers, nor should we expect them too. I do agree that they should know the basics. I too, went straight to General. I probably could have passed Extra but I wanted to take the time to learn more before doing so. To me, wanting to be an operator for many years, I felt that was my “Holy Grail”.
The problem I see with many of these conversations is that people want to get younger kids involved, then turn around and seem to want to bash them for not knowing what they are talking about on day 1. We cannot have it both ways. Maybe if we want to get more kids involved we (all operators) should get involved in showing kids. When I was young an extra (W8RS, now SK) showed me and that was what sparked my interest. It took 30 years for that to manifest into me getting my license. The impact we could have on the kids may not be immediate!
I do not think the code requirement being dropped from the exam, reduced “etiquette”. I don’t see how that could have any impact. To me it seems like maybe we need to write better test questions then to cover what people need to learn. Maybe its more basics and etiquette, then Extra is much more of the technical pieces?
Jack says
Andy “and seem to want to bash them for not knowing what they are talking about on day 1.”…I don’t know about bashing them BUT the idea of licensing was that you knew all the rules and how to apply them BEFORE day 1….I’m not sure how ‘etiquette comes into this….although CW has an etiquette ..”I do not think the code requirement being dropped from the exam, reduced “etiquette”. I don’t see how that could have any impact.” CW is a respect for tradition and a hurdle one ought to have to cleanly jump before getting a license to work with the greatest organisation ever devised. Should we go forward to the 1950’s??….yes indeed….
Jack says
Spot-on Aaron…
Bob, KG6AF says
I’m seeing a few claims being put forth as facts without much evidence, to wit:
1) “The Novice license worked.” There are certainly a lot of older hams who give credit to the Novice exam for getting them into the hobby, myself included, but those hams aren’t the whole story. The only people whose opinions are being expressed are those who stayed with the hobby, which seems like selection bias to me. As K1BG said, people were essentially told to move up or move out. How many dropped out? What was the Novice retention rate?
2) “The quality of operators is dropping.” There seem to be two complaints here: lack of on-air etiquette and widespread lack of basic technical competence. The former has little or nothing to do with current license structure or testing practices. The latter might or might not be true, but I’d submit that for many of us, the intervening years have dimmed the memory of just how incredibly ignorant we were when we got on the air. If we got better, it was because others were kind enough to help us, both on the air and off.
3) “We need to make it easier to take a test– have just a single General-class or above proctor the test, and enter the results via computer.” Is there any evidence at all that our current volunteer system is a significant impediment to recruiting new amateurs? In 2014, the ARRL VEC had over 7000 test sessions; add to that the sessions that the 13 other VECs held, and it’s hard to believe there’s a shortage. (Hey, former Novices, get out your old ARRL License Manual, look up the FCC test schedule, and try to remember how inconvenient it was to upgrade to General in the so-called good old days.) And if there is an area that’s under-served, all it takes is three General-class-or-higher licensees enrolling as VEs and you’ve got yourself a VE group that can give exams to Techs.
Let me add my own perspective, admittedly not fact: we’re attempting to remedy a social problem with a procedural fix. The problem isn’t so much the exams new licensees take, or the privileges new licensees are given, but what happens after they get their licenses. They go to a club and find that they’re shunned as no-coders, or because they’re just kids. Or they get on a repeater and–perish the thought–sound like a complete newcomer, and are ignored or, worse, lectured to. Or they can’t find anyone to help them put up an antenna, or look for equipment, or figure out why they can’t seem to raise anyone on the air. Or they stumble across any number of more “experienced” operators behaving badly on the air, and either follow their example or decide that amateur radio is not for them. None of this is fixed by a new license class, but by a wholesale change in thinking by us older hams. We need to help these new hams, just as others once helped us.
Jack says
Bob of course you are much right however”The former has little or nothing to do with current license structure or testing practices.”…it has everything to do with that.
This “They go to a club and find that they’re shunned as no-coders, or because they’re just kids. Or they get on a repeater and–perish the thought–sound like a complete newcomer, and are ignored or, worse, lectured to. Or they can’t find anyone to help them put up an antenna, or look for equipment, or figure out why they can’t seem to raise anyone on the air. Or they stumble across any number of more “experienced” operators behaving badly on the air, and either follow their example or decide that amateur radio is not for them. None of this is fixed by a new license class, but by a wholesale change in thinking by us older hams. We need to help these new hams, just as others once helped us.”
Well….they should know and use the etiquette. I’m quite anthropologically against people under teenage being licensed…they are unlikely to meet the engineering and depth to be a Ham,(sorry “a real” Ham….as most was pre 1970)…If they go on like’ pork chops’ on the air experienced hams should pull them up…and all Hams should give good example. I discussed this with one of the top dogs at the WIA and was told ‘ that’s not acceptable’…with such nitwits it’s no wonder we have what we have…when even the major influencers are no longer worthy of the tradition and without the tradition and the code….how are you a “Ham”.
Bob K0NR says
I am not seeing a problem with the difficultly of the Tech license exam. We’ve had quite a few 10-year-old kids pass the exam via our 2-day Tech license class.
The problem I do encounter is the “inactive Tech.” I got my Tech license, now what? Our club has been focusing on that issue via beginner topics at club meetings and other activities.
73, Bob K0NR
Dave says
I think it’s fine for the Tech license to be code free as it encourages beginners and manes for more operator availability for RACES EMCOMM, but for anything above at least 5wpm fot General and 10wpm for Extra should IMHO be a minimum. I have an old T-shirt that says ‘without CW it’s just CB’.
Jack says
Ok Dave…I understand but…why not get them to get it ‘right’ from the start?…this is one of the most incredible groups the earth ever produced, and CW should be respected forever and required forever in every class….until competent in it, you don’t make it.
David Tarsi says
Perhaps having part of the test be a “practical factors” test where the applicants are asked questions about typical operating practices and/or problems that exist in every day operation; and must respond with a written explanation. Back in the 60’s when I got my first ticket, a big part of amateur radio was knowledge; a lot of which was gained by actually working on equipment and/or building equipment.
An entry level license can allow the operator to experiment with antennas, and equipment and learn in the process. Help from an elmer about practical applications would be good.
As for Morse code, I would argue that it is more relevant today than ever. It is digital: on and off. Some of the on is longer in duration and some of the of is longer, and or shorter. That’s how computers work with on and off signals of different duration. Understanding computers is very important today. Also, when all else fails, Morse code gets through; that’s been known for years.
Morse code communication is actually a language, and if one learns to go fast enough, the sound of words can be heard instead of just individual letters. Today when every one is “texting” isn’t it odd that communicating in Morse code is actually faster than texting, even when the Morse message is sent in full words, and the texting uses abbreviations (read at the last link)?
http://www.wimp.com/neatexperiment/
http://legacy.utsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050627/news_mz1b27morse.html
http://c2.com/morse/wiki.cgi?MorseFasterThanTextMessaging
There are hundreds of Morse code apps, most of them free, that can be installed on most cell phones, and you don’t even need to look at the phone to send a message, or to receive it, if you can copy code.
Yes, code is difficult to learn, and some people get a mental block against it. Just keep the speed requirements down, and concentrate on sound to learn the code.
It doesn’t take as much power to communicate using Morse code, so its “eco friendly”.
Dave T
WA7AXT
Jack says
Largely I agree Dabe but completely disagree with this “There are hundreds of Morse code apps, most of them free, that can be installed on most cell phones, and you don’t even need to look at the phone to send a message, or to receive it, if you can copy code.
Yes, code is difficult to learn, and some people get a mental block against it. Just keep the speed requirements down, and concentrate on sound to learn the code.
If you are not pounding a key, you are NOT a code operator, you are just another evader..”it’s all too hard Boo Hoo!!…when you are just too lazy or too deliberately incompetent to put in the work…and there are techniques to simplify code competence which are not ‘apps’ (spare us from them!!) but human development. The drover’s dog could get a licence today (broadly speaking LOL!!), we have lost pride in what we were and capitulated to the fantasy that we are ‘free’ and democratic’ and ‘have inalienable rights’…try joining the military and refusing to salute or take arms training….even if born in USA but allowed to do National Service in “Israel”( created in 1934 not 1948) and which vets every president before elections..What’s going ON!!??…(chuckle) ….although when it comes to bad example every US President excels at it…I wonder…do we really have a chance to hold out for the good?
Jim Erickson says
I agree with finding out why Techs get their licenses & never do anything with them. In the past 3 years we have had real good luck pulling people out of “radio retirement.” Our secret is having a fun, active, non judgmental, inclusive group eager to help new people.
KB0DBJ
Amateur Extra Class
Mansfield-Johnson Amateur Radio Service
WA5JRS.com
Jack says
” In the past 3 years we have had real good luck pulling people out of “radio retirement.”
That’s a great idea Jim…with the proviso that Ham radio has a serious side, it’s not all about ‘having fun’ in today’s sense….but having fun being part of the world’s greatest contributor for over 100 years….How about getting those people to write their histories and have it all recorded for posterity, forever (however short that may be the way we are going!! LOL!)
Ken says
I think we have to decide do we want quality or quantity. In my opinion it seems
we worried to much about loosing the hobby if we didn’t get more Hams into it.
I worry we will loose the hobby if its not challanging to attract the right stuff.
We made it less technical and less restictive to enter the hobby. The easier something
is the less respect you have for it. The decline in quality seems to have started with
the VEC program and forward. Maybe we need to have endorsements to a license.
For example, we call the liecense a name and then each mode you want to operate requires an endorsement test. Might give hams a challange instead of giving it all away.
I have never agreed we should offer the original questions and answers to study. Regardless of the amount to study from and not knowing which you will get, I think
it should have been the studing of similar questions and the question you get on the exam will not be the exact question but similar. You either know you stuff or not.
It frustrates me to hear a Extra Class not know how to make a 40 meter dipole.
Ken,
N1KK
Jack says
Yep, Nick.