Ever since the incentive licensing fiasco of the 1960s, amateur radio operators have been complaining about the licensing structure. I’m not sure why we seem to constantly debate the topic. I guess hams think that if we just keep tweaking it, we’ll finally get it calibrated just right and everyone will be motivated to upgrade to Extra and the bands will be jammed 24/7.
One of the latest proposals is on eHam. There, W2EV, asks us to consider giving Technicians some limited phone priveleges on the HF bands. He writes:
Technicians already have (vastly unused) CW privileges on 80 meters, 40 meters and 15 meters. Suppose they had HF voice privileges on those same bands, too! Something as simple as the same spectrum that General Class licensees enjoy, but restricted to 10 watts (I’m just spit-balling the power-level, for discussions’ sake).
Of course, this proposal was met with much opposition, many of whom said that the General Class test is not that much harder than the Tech test, and it’s really not that much to ask that people who want to operate HF upgrade to General. Another interesting comment was that Techs be given digital privileges in addition to CW privileges. I kind of like that idea.
Another, more radical approach was proposed by that iconoclast, Jeff, KE9V. He suggests doing away with testing altogether. I think a lot of what he has to say is true, but there are several problems with his approach.
First, article 25.6 of the ITU Radio Regulations states:
25.6 2) Administrations shall verify the operational and technical qualifications of any person wishing to operate an amateur station. Guidance for standards of competence may be found in the most recent version of Recommendation ITU-R M.1544. (WRC-03)
That is generally taken to mean administering tests, although Recommendation IRU-R M.1544 does seem to give some leeway. It recommends, “that administrations take such measures as they judge necessary to verify the operational and technical qualifications of any person wishing to operate an amateur station.” I suppose this verification could take place by a method other than by testing.
Therein lies the rub. Jeff doesn’t really propose a new method for issuing licenses, except to suggest that local clubs somehow facilitate the process. I’ve been to a lot of clubs over the past ten years or so, and I don’t think that many of them are really set up to do this. Nor do they have the desire or wherewithal to do it.
I don’t think we’re ever going to get it right. Besides, if we did, what would we complain about?
Michael N9XYP says
Incentive licensing really doesn’t work when the incentives aren’t all that great (14.313 for 35+years and some of the nets on 75/80?). How about breaking the licensing into 4 parts. Above/below 10 watts and above/below 30 megacycles. The high power would have stricter RF safety and electrical safety questions. There is a big following for QRP. Most hams I meet are running an HT anyway. And stop any ARRL plans, they don’t represent a majority of the hams and got us in this mess in the first place.
Joshua DC7IA and KK4RVI says
We’ll never be able to do it in a way nobody complains about. That also applies to any other topic.
73
Bob K0NR says
Dan,
I think the license structure is about right. The Tech license (Beginners Permit) is not that difficult. The General Class license is a nice step up in operating privileges without too demanding of an exam. Extra Class is a real challenge for most folks but provides full US privileges.
If anything needs “fixing”, I’d make it more difficult to memorize the exam questions. We could easily do it by expanding the existing question pool without introducing new material. For example, the Tech exam only has only one question on calculating the length of a 1/4 wave vertical (2m band, 19 inches). That could be expanded to 10 questions with minimal effort. The person that knows the actual principle will not see any additional burden but the person memorizing “19 inches” will be challenged.
My opinion. Worth every penny you paid for it.
Bob
Todd KD0TLS says
Here’s the current structure:
Based on passing a test that you term “not that difficult”, I can operate a 200W CW station on 40M. I don’t need to know anything about HF procedures or etiquette. I don’t even need to know a single character of code, because I can send and read using a computer.
Now, if I want to use that *same* rig and *same* computer to operate 5W PSK31 on 40M — Whoa! I need to prove that I have the knowledge commensurate with that privilege. This is something *completely different*, and we can’t let just anyone do it. I need to earn that. QRP PSK is a bridge too far, but QRO CW is completely reasonable.
This makes sense to you?
“Gateway to HF” only makes sense as a way to encourage learning the code, but technology has obviated that benefit. If the ostensible goal of GtF is to give a Technician a ‘taste’ of HF to encourage an upgrade, then it’s a dismal failure and QRP operating privileges would serve the same purpose.
Personally, I don’t find HF operation compelling. A whole lot of people on HF think it’s great, though, and that anyone experiencing it will be “hooked”. If so, then QRP operation would give Techs a chance to have that experience and to develop the skills and discipline that would make a transition to QRO HF easy. 200W CW operation with a keyboard doesn’t do that.
In the bigger picture, I think that the “senior” hams will need to resign themselves to the realisation that quite a lot of people are perfectly happy with VHF/UHF, 6, and 10M. The constant pressure to upgrade, and perpetual belittling of operators who make a conscious choice not to do so, is detrimental. Everyone that drives a car isn’t necessarily interested in upgrading to operating a tractor-trailer, for example. It doesn’t mean that they’re too stupid to pass the test; it means that operating a semi isn’t compelling to them. Making it easier to get that semi licence probably won’t change that.
Dan KB6NU says
There are some questions on the test about HF procedures, but your point about operating CW at 200 W vs. operating digital at 5-20 W is well taken. I was more interested in your comments about other hams pressuring you to upgrade and belittling you for not doing so. All I can say is that that does not happen here. If you have guys like that where you are, just blow them off.
Todd KD0TLS says
It’s not just me, Dan. It’s very common. And it’s not obnoxious people doing that, either. It’s “good guys” that think they are being ‘encouraging’. They aren’t even aware that they’re belittling anyone. I wish that I had time to respond in more depth.
Bob K0NR says
Todd KD0TLS:
I don’t recall saying you need to upgrade.
Nothing wrong with staying at the Tech level which provides everything you’d ever want above 50 MHz.
The CW privileges for the Tech are a carryover from the Novice license. Tech is designed to be a superset of Novice privileges. Should PSK31 and other digital modes be added to the Tech license? Maybe. We’d have to consider the impact on the Tech exam…it may result in more material being added in to the entry level exam.
73, Bob K0NR
Todd KD0TLS says
Bob,
I was speaking more in general terms, rather than singling you out in particular.
Digital modes was also just an example, rather than some end goal. I don’t recall any material regarding CW on the Technician exam, though.
Can we agree that GtHF isn’t encouraging upgrades? ISTM that any Tech excited by HF is not going to work CW under GtHF, but go for their General.
James says
KI4HTC
James
A $100.00 I could not aford that for each ten year I live on social security , I would love to see licecnse be done away with and let ham club to help other ham operator learnd the hoby of it. I have general license and the more code was very hard for me to pass it but I did get my license and still have lot to learn. I try for time to get my extra class and I going to try again in the next year to see what happen. If all the ham operator want to help other let do it , I willing do so.
Todd KD0TLS says
As a Technician, I never understood why I was allowed to operate 200W(!) CW on 15M, but not 5W PSK. Most rigs are 100W (like my FT-897), so 200W means that I’d need a linear.
So I’m trusted to operate a linear, with all of the potential for interference, *as long as I’m using CW*. But a 5W QRP PSK rig is somehow just crazy and dangerous?
I’m not really interested in HF operation, so it doesn’t matter to me personally. But it seems to make no sense. I think that the vast majority of Techs would gladly surrender their 200W CW privileges in exchange for 5W digital mode privileges on the same bands.
The real “barriers” in the hobby aren’t technical or regulatory, but those are the places hams always look for solutions. It’s the *social* aspects that are dreadful and turn new hams off. That requires introspection on the part of the “senior” hams, as the things that they think are ‘helpful’ are really just counter-productive.
Dan KB6NU says
I agree that the social aspects of the hobby could be improved, and I’d like to hear more about what you think is dreadful. What are some of the things that older hams think are helpful, but are counter-productive.
Todd KD0TLS says
Broad question. I’ve written about many of these things on my blog. It’s not “older” hams that have an issue particularly. It’s hams that have been in the game for decades. They’ve essentially lost their perspective and sense of introspection; they can do wrong.
It’s also not an issue of a few “bad guys”. It’s “nice guys” doing the wrong things in a misguided effort to be ‘helpful’ and ‘encouraging’. Virtually no experienced ham is even aware that they are doing these things, but they are corrosive. Perhaps I should summarise something in an email.
Larry Guthrie says
Millennials have a penchant for wanting something for nothing. If a person is not interested in doing a little study for an license upgrade, then they don’t deserve the upgrade. Tech class is good, many will stay there because that’s all they want. The only reason for the 200 watt 15 meter privilege was/is to encourage a person to learn to send and receive code, not because they are trusted with an amp.
If a person can’t study a few days and pass the general class test they really don’t need to be a general class ham. Ditto extra. Anyone with a high school diploma can pass either of those tests. The ham radio community really does not need nor could it survive many new hams if they are not intelligent enough to pass those tests. Ham radio is more than just a hobby. The FCC allows us to build, test and operate our own radios. Passing the test may not make a person qualified to do that, but it at least shows a willingness to do.
Todd KD0TLS says
Actually, I was proposing *giving up* something in exchange for *something else*.
People can send and receive code using a computer (or smartphone/tablet), so it doesn’t encourage acquisition of code skills.
I suggest that you read my comment again. Your response is a knee-jerk reaction to points that I never made. I’m sure that you have valuable insights.
Mike KM4WU says
I just got my tech and general a couple weeks ago, so please forgive me if I am speaking a little out of my league. The study was initially a little intense, but within a week or so, I was passing the online tests. I had a nagging pull towards trying the general as well, so I stopped reading in the tech level and started into the material for the general. Between watching videos and reading (and my mind going nearly numb) I took the tests. I passed (I was also offered the extra which I failed pretty horribly). My pull towards the general was 100% for the extra bits of frequency playground. I didn’t want at some later point to be held up because I wasn’t licensed. So, I hunkered down and set out to pass it.
So, I will say without having lived through any of the history the changes as a ham, I only have my own personal questions based upon what I learned for the these tests. As everyone knows, the tech is the opening of the door. Give em’ a taste, so to speak. But I don’t think the options to work CW in the 80, 40, and 15 meter areas are a very good idea. The frequency plan provides the ‘tech’ pocket to work CW (2 meters). If they catch on to CW (which I have not ) then great, they have an area to play. To offer the ability to fire frequency over long distances to a n00b or someone not so well versed in the deeper laws seems somewhat dangerous.
The thing is, the HF bands provides the ability to regularly hit other countries. in Part 97.1 “Continuation and extension of the amateur’s unique ability to enhance international goodwill.”
There’s something to the idea of getting a level under your belt and working it for a while before being let loose on the world. Learn locally and if you goof up something, which you will, you only piss off the neighbors, not another country, not exactly enhancing goodwill.
To take this further, I will throw this out there too. Being that I am a visual learner, I am quite fond of tracking down videos on YouTube to try to find someone who can expand on some topic which I might not fully understand. While doing so, I have found many videos of people modding their radios so they can float outside of the restricted ‘tech’ frequencies for “Emergency situations”. They then demonstrate that the mod works. How? By transmitting on frequencies not allowed to them. While understanding that, yes, hams are tweakers, these are the same people who are going to cause problems if you just freely open up the HF bands. This brings me back to my original point… providing little pockets of HF to work CW provides incentive to purchase a transceiver capable of hitting those frequencies, with much more ability than just CW. If they have already shown the lack of restraint to stay in their own neighborhood, do you think they will behave properly in the deeper end of the pool? I doubt it. So don’t offer it.
As I am just starting out here, I don’t know, or better stated, don’t have the working knowledge to provide a suggestion as to what a good solution might be. But, one of the ‘incentives’ I heard loud and clear, was that the air can get crowded. If I earn the higher license, I can work an area which is far less crowded. That sounded like a good thing. So I am working for it. I am currently reading through the extra class book because I want the full spectrum allowed to us. That said, I think the ‘incentive’ has worked.
As to the extra license areas… little slivers here an there, seem to be the perfect way to trip someone into a mistake. If you are scrolling around on and find something of interest, I could see it being very easy to jump in and talk without realizing that you have just jumped onto a frequency in which you don’t belong. It would seem to be a better idea to section the levels of license out to full bands.
I didn’t mean to go on that long, but this has been something I have been chewing on for a few days now, and this thread has been a very timely not to mention, an interesting read. So thanks all!!!
TJ says
What about a person that wants to be a Ham, however, has disabilities such as being dyslexic. I wish the test could be hands on. For instance, when I was in the Army it was simply. In Basic, you would show the DS what he had taught you. My DS taught me to shoot, throw Grenades, set up an LP/OP’s program a freq, react to ambushes further they taught me hand to hand combat, react to chem attacks, tuaght us to fight with bayonets etc. and we were tested not with pen and paper but with the skill nessacery to accomplish the mission. It was partical test. However, before joining the Army i failed physics 3 times barly graduated and passed the ASVAB by the skin of my test to get in.
TJ
OIF Veteran