The AM Forum
March 28, 2024, 06:37:52 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Links Staff List Gallery Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Isn't it time to rename the amateur licence classes?  (Read 14389 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« on: March 30, 2007, 02:35:32 PM »

The outdated names of our licence classes need to be changed to more closely reflect present-day reality.

Change "Extra" to "Full Amateur".

Change "General" to "Restricted Amateur".

Change "Technician" to "Communicator".

Since Novice and Advanced classes are relics of a previous licensing structure and no longer being issued, keep the existing names, since those do closely reflect the privileges granted while they were still being issued by the FCC.

WATSA?
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #1 on: March 30, 2007, 02:52:43 PM »

I see oxymorons Grin
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
W1RKW
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4410



« Reply #2 on: March 30, 2007, 03:38:17 PM »

I dunno, I think JN is good for the Technician
Logged

Bob
W1RKW
Home of GORT. A buddy of mine named the 813 rig GORT.
His fear was when I turned it on for the first time life on earth would come to a stand still.
W1GFH
Guest
« Reply #3 on: March 30, 2007, 06:32:39 PM »

I dunno, I think JN is good for the Technician

Tech = JN
General = OP
Extra = OM
Logged
The Slab Bacon
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3934



« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2007, 08:59:41 AM »

Don,
        you and some of the others have been pissing and moaning about this for a long time . Incentive lisencing has been somewhat a pain in the ass since the getgo. It is what it is and that is what it is. Nothing can be done to change it now. Itz over and done, and that is that. Please get past it and move on. You and some of the others have been bellyaching about this for a long time. It is starting to sound like a bunch of sour grapes.

There is nothing that we can do to change things now, Its over and done. I do agree with you on some of the points, But dont get fixated on them. You have got to be positive!
The restructuring has allready brought quite a few newcomers to am!! I feel good about that.

Be more positive, and turn this whole thing into something good! It is up to us to make it happen. A little careful molding and shaping could turn it into something good for all of us.

The negativity just makes it look like a bunch of "sour grapes"!!

                                                                                   The Slab Bacon
Logged

"No is not an answer and failure is not an option!"
Ed KB1HVS
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 962


« Reply #5 on: March 31, 2007, 01:41:14 PM »

"Full Amateur" is like being called "Semi Pro".  Wink
Logged

KB1HVS. Your Hi Value Station
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #6 on: March 31, 2007, 03:58:34 PM »

       you and some of the others have been pissing and moaning about this for a long time . Incentive lisencing has been somewhat a pain in the ass since the getgo. It is what it is and that is what it is. Nothing can be done to change it now. Itz over and done, and that is that. Please get past it and move on. You and some of the others have been bellyaching about this for a long time. It is starting to sound like a bunch of sour grapes.

Sounds like you have totally misinterpreted my suggestion.  Nothing was intended to be negative or "sour grapes".  This was not a rant about recent changes to the licensing structure, or the dumbing down of ham radio, or any of the other stuff you hear so much these days on this forum and elsewhere.  The one and only point I am attempting to make is that the names of the licence classes are no longer descriptive of the privileges granted. 

The original concept of "Extra" was just that - something extra.  No additional operating privileges were granted.  Just a certificate to hang on the wall, to stroke one's ego, maybe.  Basically a recognition of being above and beyond the minimum required for full privileges.  Not only a more difficult exam, but a tenure requirement. It actually dates back to the 30's when there was a similar ticket for a few years called the "Extra First" which also conveyed no additional privileges.

Actually the concept of "Extra" was compromised with the initial advent of incentive licensing.  It was no longer something "extra", but became a requirement for full operating privileges.  In my opinion, the whole incentive licensing program was/is a mistake and a dismal failure, but that's another topic for another discussion.  With the recent band expansion, Extra class is now mandatory for a full 50% of the 75m phone band (or 25% if you already have the Advanced, which is no longer issued); upgrading to Extra is the only way a General can gain access to 3700-3800 in addition to 3600-3700.  Extra is required for 25% of the 80m cw band.  It's required for full privileges on 40, 20 and 15m.  Maybe I am a stickler for words, but "extra" does not accurately describe a minimum requirement for full access to privileges.  It should be called something like "full licence" or "full amateur", indicating that the holder has full privileges.  This has nothing to do with the code test or newcomers, other than the fact that a newcomer needs to achieve "Extra" class to avoid substantial restrictions on his/her amateur operation.

General should be changed to "restricted" because the General class operator now has severely restricted operating privileges.  When the name was first changed from "Class B" to "General" in the early 50's, it accurately described the privileges granted by the change - full access to all amateur frequencies, but nothing beyond.  Just a general operator's permit.  But now so many privileges are withheld from the General, that "restricted" better describes it than "general".

The name "Technician" was conceived with the original intent of that licence, also in the early 50's.  In those days, UHF was largely unexplored territory, and the FCC wanted to encourage amateurs to experiment in that undeveloped region of the spectrum.  Originally the Technician was limited to 300 mc/s and above.  The idea was to attract the technically minded who wished to experiment with UHF, but who had  little interest in traditional ham radio activities such a rag-chewing, chasing DX, working for certificates, etc.  A bare minimal code test was required, but the written test was identical to General.  As time went on, more and more operating privileges were granted to the Technician, and it increasingly became a "communicator's" ticket, for those who were satisfied with restricted operation that allowed them to talk around town, but without that bothersome 13 wpm code test.  Commercially built equipment appeared on the market, so one no longer had to convert old 2-way FM radios to the amateur bands.  In recent years, with the advent of no-code, only a minority of newly licensed Technicians have actually been interested in cutting-edge technical investigation.  It has become an easy-to-get entry level licence that allows local chit-chat, particularly via the repeater.  Therefore, "communicator class" would be more descriptive.

Like it or not, the Incentive Licensing concept has just about been phased out, IMO an event that is long overdue, and to-day's Extra is now the "general", and, without the code test, within the grasp of practically anyone who is genuinely interested in getting on the air.

Perhaps it's a minor issue, but the present-day names of the licence classes are misleading to potential newcomers who might be curious about ham radio, but not familiar with the evolution and the history behind the various classes of privileges.

It would be very easy to change the names of the licence classes without any further alteration to the licensing structure.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
K4QE
Contributing
Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 73



« Reply #7 on: March 31, 2007, 05:53:44 PM »

Don,

I have to admit that I, too, was somewhat put off by your initial post.  Your intention was unclear.  However, your detailed explanation shows insightful reasoning why the new names you suggested are appropriate.  I've been licensed for only 28 years, so I wasn't aware of some of the nuances to classes and privileges as they developed over the years.  I'm too young to remember what it was like before incentive licensing.

I agree that the names should be changed as you described.
Logged

73, Tony K4QE
Herb K2VH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 556


Pennsylvanian shaking hands with Yankee


« Reply #8 on: March 31, 2007, 06:00:47 PM »

Don, (and everybody else)

I basically agree with you, and see completely what you're trying to do.  Your post is not in any way "sour grapes," but rather a constructive attempt to improve on an outdated nomenclature.

In pondering this whole thing, I find myself thinking that the Advanced label should be the name for the top grade of license.  In fact, I see no reason not to grandfather the Advanced holders into so-called Extra class privileges, calling them all Advanced.  I held that class of license for 34 years--from 1968, when so-called incentive licensing first appeared and the Advanced Class license again became available--till 2002, just before the code requirement for Extra was reduced from 20 wpm to 5 wpm.  Today's remaining Advanced license holders are, in many cases, more advanced than the so-called Extras.  Why not call the top level Advanced?

As you point out, General is no longer general.  It is indeed restricted.  It's probably a good idea to call it just that, or possibly Limited.  And finally, the present Technician is, as you point out, not really technical, but is more of a novice class license.  Why not collapse those two together, and call the left-over Novices and the present Technicians all Novice Class, or perhaps, Entry Class?  I think that would make the most sense.

Highest class: Advanced

Intermediate class:  Restricted or Limited, or maybe just plain Intermediate

Entry class:  Novice or Entry.

I was originally going propose that we go back to Class A, Class B, and Class C., but I actually like this scheme better.  What do you think?

Thanks for giving us something to think about.

vH

Logged

K2VHerb
First licensed in 1954 as KN2JVM  
On AM since 1955;on SSB since 1963

"Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar."
--Edward R. Murrow
WA1GFZ
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11152



« Reply #9 on: March 31, 2007, 09:50:24 PM »

how "moron" with no class as one. We seem to have plenty of that. I can't even work the gray hair net way up on 1945 without two layers of idiots on 1943 and 1950 jamming us every week.
Logged
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #10 on: March 31, 2007, 09:53:59 PM »

Hi Herb,

Much of what you're saying is true.  I got my Advanced in 1993, and my Extra in 1994. In many ways I found the old Element 4A Advanced written, to be harder than the Extra Element 4B written.  Element 4A had a lot more theory, requiring me to crack the books (after I took the test cold and failed it), and study some Electronic Theory I hadn't used, since I took 6 credits worth of required electronics classes for my Nuclear Engineering degree back in 1984.  I found Element 4B to be more esoteric stuff, than theory.  The Extra was more about the 20 WPM code test.

BTW - your proposal about grandfathering the Advanced Class to Extra Class might not fly.  In December, there was a thread on e-ham proposing grandfathering the Advanced Class licensees to Extra Class.  Most Advanced Class licensees who posted were against the idea.  They felt like it was a charity handout.  In some cases they felt that by keeping their Advanced, they were showing proof that they got their license before the no-code, or "Lite" licensing era.  Here's the link to the topic.  Some of the postings got kind of nasty:

http://www.eham.net/articles/15310

73,
Ellen - AF9J

Don, (and everybody else)

In pondering this whole thing, I find myself thinking that the Advanced label should be the name for the top grade of license.  In fact, I see no reason not to grandfather the Advanced holders into so-called Extra class privileges, calling them all Advanced.  I held that class of license for 34 years--from 1968, when so-called incentive licensing first appeared and the Advanced Class license again became available--till 2002, just before the code requirement for Extra was reduced from 20 wpm to 5 wpm.  Today's remaining Advanced license holders are, in many cases, more advanced than the so-called Extras.  Why not call the top level Advanced?

As you point out, General is no longer general.  It is indeed restricted.  It's probably a good idea to call it just that, or possibly Limited.  And finally, the present Technician is, as you point out, not really technical, but is more of a novice class license.  Why not collapse those two together, and call the left-over Novices and the present Technicians all Novice Class, or perhaps, Entry Class?  I think that would make the most sense.

Highest class: Advanced

Intermediate class:  Restricted or Limited, or maybe just plain Intermediate

Entry class:  Novice or Entry.

I was originally going propose that we go back to Class A, Class B, and Class C., but I actually like this scheme better.  What do you think?

Thanks for giving us something to think about.

vH


Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #11 on: March 31, 2007, 11:14:55 PM »

Hi Herb,


BTW - your proposal about grandfathering the Advaced Class to Extra Class might not fly.  In December, there was a thread on e-ham proposing grandfathering the Advanced Class licensees to Extra Class.  Most Advanced Class licensees who posted were against the idea.  They felt like it was a charity handout.  In some cases they felt that by keeping their Advanced, they were showing proof that they got their license before the no-code, or "Lite" licensing era.  Here's the link to the topic.  Some of the postings got kind of nasty:

http://www.eham.net/articles/15310

73,
Ellen - AF9J

This is "water over the dam". As part of the license restructuring proposal several years ago (WT 98-143 (I think)) , the pitch was made to roll all the Advanced into the Extra Class bucket. The FCC formally turned it down. The FCC said "don't be a wus, take the test".

I personally like the Class 1, 2, 3, etc. or Class A, B, C, etc. Then there's no name distinctions or monikers attached to the licensee.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #12 on: April 01, 2007, 01:27:04 AM »

Yuppers Pete,

Quite true. And, the "don't be a wus, take the test" FCC comment you paraphrased  was echoed in many of the postings.  Some of the posters made a similar comment, along the lines of "hey if you're saying that the tests are so dumbed down, why not just take the Extra test.  You should have no problems passing it."  Most of the Advanced posters felt the same way.  Many of them felt that they had no real need/desire for the addtional freqs. that being an Extra would give them.  Some of them felt that having and Advanced in this day age made them unique, since it's no longer issued.  BTW, I like the comment about maybe changing the license names to Class 1; 2; or 3, or A, B, or C.  Sounds good to me.

73,
Ellen - AF9J
Logged
n3lrx
Guest
« Reply #13 on: April 01, 2007, 02:44:03 AM »

I never could understand the license classes anyway. The only ones that made sense were Novice, Technician and Advanced. For obvious reasons are are self explanatory. General, QTF does that mean? If anything it makes more sense to put General before Technician as the very meaning of the word Technician holds more clout. General means, well, you're just there i.e. General Population.. Advanced, well, If you say you're an Advanced Class people automatically think WOW! Advanced.. As with anything 'Advanced' means you be da man! Extra?? Extra what Extra Testicle? Extra as in something left over and unnecessary? It just makes no sense to me and never has.

Since they've reduced it to 3 classes it should be Novice (Entry Level, as the word applies), Technician (Experienced Operator.) and Advanced (Advanced Experience.) if it were to make sense.
Logged
N3DRB The Derb
Guest
« Reply #14 on: April 01, 2007, 06:52:01 AM »

I like my advanced, and I'm gonna keep it.
Logged
Herb K2VH
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 556


Pennsylvanian shaking hands with Yankee


« Reply #15 on: April 01, 2007, 08:04:03 AM »

General means, well, you're just there i.e. General Population..

Randie,
That's true about General, unless you're in the Army Grin .

 Most Advanced Class licensees who posted were against the idea.  They felt like it was a charity handout.  
 

Ellen,
True, but my proposal is just the opposite -- grandfathering the Extras to Advanced.  Given current circumstances, that actually makes sense, if you think about.

Everybody Else,
Maybe you're right, as I had originally thought -- Make it Class A, Class B, and Class C.  Then we'd be back to where we were in the 1930s, and maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing. Undecided

Or, we could forget the whole thing.  I was just sharing some thoughts, and thinking out loud.

Don't be fooled today! Cheesy

K2VHerb
4/1/07
Logged

K2VHerb
First licensed in 1954 as KN2JVM  
On AM since 1955;on SSB since 1963

"Just because your voice reaches halfway around the world doesn't mean you are wiser than when it reached only to the end of the bar."
--Edward R. Murrow
W3SLK
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2651

Just another member member.


« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2007, 09:28:05 AM »

I'm telling you, its all a government conspiracy!! Wink
Logged

Mike(y)/W3SLK
Invisible airwaves crackle with life, bright antenna bristle with the energy. Emotional feedback, on timeless wavelength, bearing a gift beyond lights, almost free.... Spirit of Radio/Rush
K1MVP
Guest
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2007, 10:25:44 AM »

Don --KYV,
I think your comments are good,--sounds to me like you are proposing "truth in advertising" in the
licensing stucture,--something in short supply these days.(in many other areas of life also).

                                               73, K1MVP
Logged
n3lrx
Guest
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2007, 11:50:02 AM »

I like my advanced, and I'm gonna keep it.

I'll agree with you there. We're a select breed now that they no longer issue them. I'll probably keep mine until I'm forced to upgrade or they grandfather the Advanced Class into the Extra. By then the American Retail Radio League will have abolished AM and made all radios channelized like glorified Good Buddy radios.  Let's hope the FCC slaps them in the face on that one too..
Logged
AF9J
Guest
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2007, 12:22:22 PM »

I know what you mean about the channelization issue.  Strangely enough, there are a lot of hams out there already acting like we're operating on channels (and I don't mean the AM Ghetto).  I read a discussion thread about this topic a few months back called "Are You On Frequency?"  The originator of the thread mentioned how he's already had people answer his CQs with the complaint that he was off frequency because he was calling on say 7288.4 kHz instead of right on 7288.0 or 7289.0 kHz.  If that doesn't sound like a channel mentality, then what does?  Go figure!  As long as you're not being heard out of band, being heard out the subband for your license class, or being heard down in say the CW subband when you're operating phone, who cares!  Besides you tune to the station calling CQ anyway.  But I guess a lot of people get all bent out of shape if you're not right on say 3832 kHz, in spite of the fact that freq. readout is very much dependant upon receiver calibration.

73,
Ellen - AF9J

I like my advanced, and I'm gonna keep it.

I'll agree with you there. We're a select breed now that they no longer issue them. I'll probably keep mine until I'm forced to upgrade or they grandfather the Advanced Class into the Extra. By then the American Retail Radio League will have abolished AM and made all radios channelized like glorified Good Buddy radios.  Let's hope the FCC slaps them in the face on that one too..
Logged
k4kyv
Contributing Member
Don
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 10057



« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2007, 01:24:28 PM »

I have heard the same thing - monitored slopbuckets griping about AM'ers transmitting on random frequencies instead of even kHz.  Then they go on to deride our "outmoded equipment" that doesn't have digital readout.

I'd bet those guys have no concept of what "zero-beating" means.
Logged

Don, K4KYV                                       AMI#5
Licensed since 1959 and not happy to be back on AM...    Never got off AM in the first place.

- - -
This message was typed using the DVORAK keyboard layout.
http://www.mwbrooks.com/dvorak
n3lrx
Guest
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2007, 01:52:58 PM »

That's one of the reasons I like AM. Don't get me wrong, I know how to zero-beat but one of the things I do like is that most AM transmitters are wide enough to hear everyone even if you are a few K off. With slopbuckets if you're not zeroed then you're chasing duck flutes all over the place. At least with AM it does allow you the option to still hear nearly full fidelity from every member of the group even if they are slightly off from each other.

With Channelizing it's wasted spectrum. If you are east and there is a weak QSO west on 3885 that is just above the noise yet you don't want to get on frequency and risk interference with each other you can still slide down a few K's and probably never bother them even though your sidebands may cross the weak signals may never interfere with eachother unless band conditions change.

With channelization at say 5KHz you'd be forced to use 5KHz above or below. What about all the wasted space between? The ARRL has done nothing but idiotize the Ham bands over the years. But of course their band plans are not carved in stone anyway. The only band plan that matters is what the FCC has set forth. If they say a band of frequencies are for phone it means they are for ALL modes of phone unless stated otherwise, if they say a band of frequencies are for CW it means just that. Who cares what the ARRL says It's Charlie's rules I follow. If Charlie allows VFO's who cares about the ARRL's good buddy plans. If they do get away with changing the rules, well.. Thanks God there's eBay! I'll find another hobby.
Logged
Pete, WA2CWA
Moderator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 8154


CQ CQ CONTEST


WWW
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2007, 02:50:16 PM »

With channelization at say 5KHz you'd be forced to use 5KHz above or below. What about all the wasted space between? The ARRL has done nothing but idiotize the Ham bands over the years. But of course their band plans are not carved in stone anyway. The only band plan that matters is what the FCC has set forth. If they say a band of frequencies are for phone it means they are for ALL modes of phone unless stated otherwise, if they say a band of frequencies are for CW it means just that. Who cares what the ARRL says It's Charlie's rules I follow. If Charlie allows VFO's who cares about the ARRL's good buddy plans. If they do get away with changing the rules, well.. Thanks God there's eBay! I'll find another hobby.

I’m not sure what ARRL Band Plan you’re referring to, but their HF band plan is about as simple and unrestricted as you can get.
ARRL published band plan:
http://www.arrl.org/FandES/field/regulations/bandplan.html

Now, there are other published band plans from individuals and groups that have taken the time to compile general areas and frequencies where common operating interests gather.
Here's an example:
http://mostgraveconcern.com/ke7hlr/hfbands/HFBandPlan.pdf

And, other than for 60 meters, I don’t see the ARRL supporting HF channelization. It would put the screws to their support of HF contesting and DX’ing.
Logged

Pete, WA2CWA - "A Cluttered Desk is a Sign of Genius"
The Slab Bacon
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3934



« Reply #23 on: April 02, 2007, 11:24:23 AM »

Don,
        Sorry that I am just now getting the chance to respond to this.
You are prolly right, the classes are terribly misnamed, but WTF does it really matter? Everyone within the amateur community knows what they mean. So itz kinda a moot point. Those outside our community dont know, but they dont matter anyway.

Extra should prolly really be called "techincian" as that does imply that they might actually be able to build or fix something.

General doesnt imply much other than maybe "general purpose".

Extra, well what is extra about you?? Do you have 3 ba's or what?

Keep in mind my warped sence of humor and try this on:

Technician: Highest class, you might be able to build or fix something.
                Kinda like most of the AM operators.

Limited: Next step down, Limited ability, limited priveleges, might be   
            able to buy "plug and play" stuff and attemp to make it
            work. Kinda like the inbred ssb groups.

Dunno: The lowest class. Dunno squat!! Can barely operate a ricebox
           if someone else hooks it up for them. Kinda like the average
           ssb / ricebox guys.

Please keep in mind my warped sense of humor, but i kinda think it sez it all. However the class system is still not a lid / sphincter filter!!
there are just as many extra class jammers and qwermers as there are boots!

I worked with a friend a few years back, helping with a youth oriented amateur radio club. We had young kids with exra tickets, just because they could copy code and MEMORIZE test question answers. They didnt even have a clue which was the business end of a slobbering iron! Most of them have since dissapeared and let their lisences lapse. It shows how much they were really interested in the hobby.

Sometimes I feel that the "class" thing created a finger pointing
"I'm better than you" mindset. That usually has a tendency to crank me off.

When I was a lowly "technician" years ago, I used to fix radios and make up antennas and cables for many of the "extra" operators (both young and old) in these parts. Go figger!!

So the bottom line is: "Whats in a name!!" why make more out of it than it really is.

                                                    the Slab Bacon
Logged

"No is not an answer and failure is not an option!"
Todd, KA1KAQ
Administrator
Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4310


AMbassador


« Reply #24 on: April 02, 2007, 11:34:20 AM »

I like the simple A, B, C structure.

Advanced Class ops could be referred to as A-    Wink
Logged

known as The Voice of Vermont in a previous life
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

AMfone - Dedicated to Amplitude Modulation on the Amateur Radio Bands
 AMfone © 2001-2015
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.082 seconds with 18 queries.