Incentive Licensing thread on QRZ.com

[k4kyv]

The thread concerning whether or not Incentive Licensing was a failure, continues. This message, posted by K3UD, brings up some interesting points regarding AM.

The entire thread can be viewed at
Incentive Licensing a Failure?

Incentive Licensing has always been with us to one extent or another. When we had the Class A and Class B licensing system the incentive to move up to Class B was to gain additional phone privileges.

As far as the later Incentive Licensing proposals are concerned, here is some history and opinionated analysis as to why it was proposed based on my research into the subject.

I should point out that the initial request for Incentive Licensing proposals came from the FCC to the ARRL in 1958. The ARRL proposed back to the FCC that we should go back to the privileges as they existed prior to the time when Generals received all privileges in 1953. This went nowhere. 

Wayne Green of 73 magazine has always maintained that there were conversations between the FCC and the ARRL concerning various forms incentive licensing up through the early 60s and that the ARRL eventually told the FCC to go ahead and make a proposal, and they would back it. Say what you want about Wayne Green but he has been consistent with this from 1963 even up to the present.

Why did the FCC want to push any form of incentive licensing?
We need to remember that in the 50s there was a lot of talk about the so called technology gap between the US and the Soviet Union. When Sputnik was launched the talk became pretty strident and this was the time when educational emphasis in our high schools and colleges began to be placed on Math and Science. I think that Incentive Licensing was in part fostered by what we perceived as the technology gap.

It needs to be noted that one of the main purposes of the Amateur Service was to provide a trained pool of qualified operators in time of national emergency and it could certainly be argued that since the Soviets had one satellite in space the time was coming when they would have more with perhaps some being able to carry weapons of mass destruction. There was probably a real fear of an impending national emergency. Of course the term "trained operator" at that time meant CW ops.

One of the stated reasons for the ARRL making and supporting incentive licensing proposals was in fact the perceived decline in the number of amateurs who actually used CW on a regular basis. Other reasons included the increase in poor operating habits, declining courtesy on the bands, and lack of ongoing technical development among amateurs as a whole. This last reason
actually boiled down to the noticeable decline in amateurs who did not homebrew much gear. 

I have referenced the 50 Years Of ARRL publication
and found, according to the ARRL that the 50s was the era of the greatest technological advances by amateurs. Three years later they implied that the situation had reversed and painful medicine was needed to put things right.

I first became licensed as a novice in 1964 at age 13 and although I was an ARRL member this issue was completely over my head at the time. Any changes would not affect me for a long time. 1964-1968 is an eternity in the life of a 13 year old. As I got older and upgraded the license I started to see some of the implications of what might happen. In the end I ended up upgrading primarily to retain some VHF privileges I was going to lose if phase 2 of the incentive licensing proposal was implemented.

Yes there were two phases of this. The first one, which took away many privileges from the General, some from the Advanced and Novice went into effect in 1968.  Phase 2 was going to be more onerous for the General and Technician class operators. It is interesting to note that phase 2 was never implemented.

It is my opinion that the ARRL realized that they had created a
Frankenstein's monster and convinced the FCC not to go ahead with it. I guess you could say that losing some VHF privileges was incentive enough for me to upgrade but I never felt good about it.

Many never upgraded and were packed into band slices packed with QRM. Some nights it was almost impossible to operate. Many just gave up. Hamfests of the period 1969 through about 1973 were packed with gear as hams who had given up sold it off. Used equipment markets became flooded. As this happened, activity levels dropped, AM ops switched to SSB and QRM levels on
HF became manageable.

I have an extensive collection of QST from the mid 30s to the present, 73 from the first issue to about 1987 and CQ from 1951 to the early 90s. Incentive licensing has become a fascinating subject for me and I believe a lot of the directions amateur radio took or did not take came as a direct result of it. This library has enabled me to read every article, editorial, and letter to the editor that was published about incentive licensing from its first discussions to its post mortems in the mid 70s when almost all of
the American radio manufactures were either out of business or struggling.

As you may have guessed I have my own theory as to why this happened:

1. The ARRL in its history never really liked phone operation. (ARRL meaning the QST editor, technical writers, the Board and some staff) In the late 30s they had a short lived section in QST called  "With The Phonies" The implication being obvious. In the 40s they changed it to "Phone Band Phunies" The ARRL was mostly a CW mode oriented organization with a nod given to RTTY every now and then. This made some sense though when you remember the stated purpose of the Amateur Radio Service..... A pool of trained operators... which meant CW.

2.  In the late 40s the ARRL began to push SSB as a much more efficient means of communication than AM phone. They were right and the SSB articles and primers written for QST during the period were magnificent and  possibly the best technical writing ever produced for QST. The problem was that hams were not changing over at a fast enough rate, it was thought to be too complicated, too expensive, difficult to build and debug, and finally, difficult to receive correctly on the receivers of the day,

3.  In the early 50s a new system of licensing went into effect establishing the Novice and Technician licenses but more importantly in the scheme of things, granting full amateur privileges to General Class license holders. Overnight the Generals invaded the hollowed ground of the Advanced and Extra class. At the time, in terms of privileges the Advanced class (or class A)
was at the top of the heap.

The Extra did not have any additional privileges. Since I was not there at the time (only 2 years old) I can only relate to what I read about what was taking place during this time period. It seems that many in the Advanced and Extra classes were outraged at the FCC and the ARRL for allowing this to happen. Of course it could be argued that opening all the bands up to Generals, establishing the Novice and Technician license eventually led to the period of great amateur technological achievement that the ARRL was talking about in their 50 Years Of ARRL publication that chronicled progress up through 1964,

4. By the end of the 50s AM was still the major player on the phone bands. During this time period there were calls for the FCC to outlaw the use of AM below 30 megacycles. All of the pushing of SSB by the ARRL was having limited effect.

It is my opinion that incentive licensing was a means to right the perceived wrongs of 1953 when Generals received all privileges and to expedite the use of SSB. The latter being accomplished by forcing Generals into very crowded band segments where the only alternatives were to either give up AM and switch to SSB in order to have a fighting chance at a Friday night QSO or upgrade and use the relatively QRM free bands of the Advanced and Extra classes.

Some research that was done during the time period prior to the first incentive licensing proposals suggested that Advanced and Extra class operators who used phone (many were CW only) were migrating to SSB in much larger percentages than General Class operators.

It was perceived that this was because the higher classes were more technically oriented than the General class. The thinking seemed to be that all that was needed was an upgrade of the General's technical skills and he would suddenly see the value of SSB and convert to it. If he did not, then he would be confined to the QRM purgatory of very limited phone bands segments until he finally saw the light.

My opinion is that it was not a technical skill situation as much as it was an economic one. Older Advanced and Extra class operators most likely had more dollars to spend as individuals than the demographically younger General class hams.

The irony was that technical advances and manufacturing efficiencies collaborated to bring to the market very good and very affordable SSB gear. There was not much affordable and utilitarian gear available prior to about 1962 with Collins, and Johnson leading the way with rather high priced SSB equipment.

The advent of the SBE-33, The Swan and Heath single-band radios and later the Swan 350 and Heath 100 series all band units, and the National and Hallicrafters and others units eased the way in. There were also low priced two and three band radios from WRL and Galaxy And the high quality lower priced alternative to Collins, Drake.... brought the SSB mode into the realm of most amateurs by 1970 when there was a good amount of used SSB gear around.

The largest negative impact of incentive licensing was probably the caste system that was set up in the Amateur Radio service. In the end it seemed that the only things that incentive licensing accomplished were generating ill will among the amateur community, very crowded sub bands that served to limit traffic net operation, having a number of amateurs drop out of the service, a slow down in equipment purchases for a time period long enough to hurt the major American manufacturers, a sizable decline in the average page count of most major ham magazines, especially CQ from about 1971-1975. Generals were the most affected group as they lost more privileges than other classes.

On the other hand Incentive Licensing did succeed in motivating many hams to upgrade to their license to get back lost privileges. Whether or not this served to upgrade the overall competence level of the ARS is debatable considering where we are today and how far away we are from the testing standards of the 50s, 60s and 70s.

73
George
K3UD

[WA3VJB]

In the late 40s the ARRL began to push SSB as a much more efficient means of communication than AM phone.

Was it that early ?  Well anyway, I find it more telling that the administrators of the group in Newington never really updated their view toward "phone" even as they began to promote SSB, with their outdated attitude still evident the past couple years.

As an example, the FCC recently stepped around the ARRL and re-sized the phone bands on 75 and 40 meters, discarding an inadequate proposal that came from Newington.

The shift that took effect last year reflects popular voice activity and the decline in the number of people using CW.  Since this decision by the FCC has gone rather well, I predict it will provide a basis to downscale the CW reservations on other HF bands in the near future.

George's posting brings out another aspect of the League's political strategy when it came to insensitive licensing -- encouraging the FCC to do the actual dirty work of proposing a scheme like that, and thereby providing some insulation to the group in Newington.

These days the League cannot hope for such favour, what with the ARRL lawsuit against the FCC and the group's well-documented series of missteps it has openly made on a variety of issues.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

That fact the the the Extra class written test was easy, much easier than the the Advanced but the code was much harder, 20 WPM versus 13, at it's pretty clear to me it was all about CW, not techincal advancement. George is correct with his observation of the ARRL being CW snobs. I've long thought that and reached the conclusion in the same manner as he, reading the old QSTs.

[AF9J]

You got that right Steve.

I found the Advanced to be technically harder than the Extra.  After I took it cold (and flubbed up), I had to crack the books, and review theory I hadn't used since I was taking electronics courses in college, as a part of my engineering studies!  Impressionswise, I found the Extra to mainly be the 20 WPM, and some goofy eosteric stuff not covered in the Advanced.

73,
Ellen - AF9J

[WA3VJB]

"CW Snobs" indeed.

They probably find themselves off-topic today then, when the popular sentiment is quite firmly toward voice modes.

It's interesting to see Newington trying to quickly backpedal and tout all the incoming licensees now that the FCC has dropped the code licensing element.

For their next trick ...

[k4kyv]

The League hasn't shown quite so much anti-AM bias for the past few years, but we all remember their attitude back in the 60's, 70's, 80's and into the 90's.

They had always been anti-AM.  Before WW2, when AM was about the only voice mode in use by amateurs, they were decidedly anti-phone, and derisive remarks about phone could regularly be found in QST, even though there were many technical articles about phone during the 1930's.

When SSB was first introduced, they quickly jumped on the bandwagon, but continued the same derisive attitude towards AM.  I recall during the mid-70's at an ARRL convention in Boston (it was held at the Statler Hilton, anyone remember?), the speaker at one of the forums was an attractive young lady (don't remember her callsign or name).  A question was posed regarding AM, and she replied that the League was not seeking to have the mode outlawed, but that their policy was, in her words, more like "benign neglect", and to "let it die a natural death".

To their credit, they did support AM during the power limit proceeding, for whatever that was worth.

[Carl WA1KPD]

they quickly jumped on the bandwagon, but continued the same derisive attitude towards AM.  I recall during the mid-70's at an ARRL convention in Boston (it was held at the Statler Hilton, anyone remember?),

Wow Don ,

I remember going up to one there in the late 60s. I had only had my Advanced for about a year so I am guessing maybe 69? There may have been one in the 70s, but I was up at Northeastern then so I think I could remember it. But I was chasing something other then DX in those days.

Anyway I remember the one in the late 60s, meeting one of my on the air friends (W3FBF  SK) of Brommall PA at the Midtown Motor Inn on Huntington Ave and then gong on to the fest where he treated me to a beer. I was  16 or so at the time

Thanks for bringing back the memories

[K1MVP]

 If "incentive licensing was a failure", then I fail to see where "dumbing down" the requirements
 was/is a "success".

 I well remember the incentive era of 1968, and I as recall there were many of us who did
 lose full phone privileges as a general back then, and while many of us did not "like it",
 we just went back and "brushed up" by reviewing the manual and went down to the FCC
 field office to upgrade to advanced, I don`t remember that many guys "b--ching about it
 back then.

 As far as "cw snobs",--there were also many other "snobs" on the air other than just cw,
 and still are today IMO.
                                           73`s, K1MVP

 P.S., I and many others still think the biggest mistake ever made effecting HR in the past
        20 years was when the FCC the turned  testing over to the VEC program.  

[k4kyv]

If "incentive licensing was a failure", then I fail to see where "dumbing down" the requirements was/is a "success".

The failure of incentive licensing was that its stated purpose was to upgrade the overall competence of the amateur radio community, but if anything, the decline in the competence of the amateur community accelerated after it went into effect in 1968.

As George pointed out, it had a negative impact on AM because the Generals were crammed into such a small space that the congestion almost precluded AM operation, so that motivated most generals to change over to SSB.  Within a year or so after IL had gone into effect, AM had almost completely disappeared off the band.  Many were openly declaring it dead.  Along with AM went homebrewing, and  amateur radio took a great leap towards appliance operating.

But within 4-5 years, AM began its "comback" in the early 70's.  It has now been "coming back" for over 30 years, many more years than it had ever been "dead".  Nevertheless, the "norm" for mainstream ham radio has been appliance operating ever since.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

The failure of incentive licensing was that its stated purpose was to upgrade the overall competence of the amateur radio community, but if anything, the decline in the competence of the amateur community accelerated after it went into effect in 1968.

That's because the tests to upgrade were more about Morris Code skills than technical knowledge and skills, thanks to the snobs at the ARRL. It was doomed to failure.

[K1MVP]

The failure of incentive licensing was that its stated purpose was to upgrade the overall competence of the amateur radio community, but if anything, the decline in the competence of the amateur community accelerated after it went into effect in 1968.

That's because the tests to upgrade were more about Morris Code skills than technical knowledge and skills, thanks to the snobs at the ARRL. It was doomed to failure.
 

 The only requirement to upgrade from General to Advanced back then in "68" was an additional 50
 question written test, (no additional CW) as the cw requirement of 13 wpm was given credit to
 the general who had already passed it before an FCC examiner.
 So I fail to see where it was a "push for cw" as you imply
.
 By the way,--the exact answers to the written test were not published (like) now,--the license manuals
 back then contained "sample questions" only of what the material MIGHT be on the exams, so
 one had to understand the material in order to answer the questions.

 I still find it interesting that those who were not even around, back then can say the way it was
 back then.

                                                       73, K1MVP

 P.S, Morse code WAS a big player back then in HR and the ARRL DID support this tradition AND
       had good technical articles in QST back in that era,--it`s the past 20 years that they have
       "caved" and sold out ham radio,(again IMO), and others to whom I have spoken with.
 
 

[k4kyv]

That's because the tests to upgrade were more about Morris Code skills than technical knowledge and skills, thanks to the snobs at the ARRL. It was doomed to failure.

Maybe they should have included some questions about Morris automobiles.  I once drove a 1939 Morris 10.  It took more than a little bit of technical expertise to keep that thing rolling.   

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

So I fail to see where it was a "push for cw" as you imply

No implication. I state it as a matter of fact. The Extra requirement was an easier written test than the Advanced and 20 WPM code was required. Those are facts. That's the push for code at the expense of technical capability. The ARRL could help itself waht with the momentum of 70 years of institutional bigotry involved.

Further, the proof is in the pudding. There are plenty of Extras that are technical morons and the technical abilities within ham radio only declined after insensitive licensing.

One does not have to be around at the time to understand history. It is all well documented in the pages of ham radio magazines of the era (unless you claim QST, 73, CQ and FCC documents are all wrong).

[K1MVP]

So I fail to see where it was a "push for cw" as you imply

No implication. I state it as a matter of fact. The Extra requirement was an easier written test than the Advanced and 20 WPM code was required. Those are facts. That's the push for code at the expense of technical capability. The ARRL could help itself waht with the momentum of 70 years of institutional bigotry involved.

Further, the proof is in the pudding. There are plenty of Extras that are technical morons and the technical abilities within ham radio only declined after insensitive licensing.

One does not have to be around at the time to understand history. It is all well documented in the pages of ham radio magazines of the era (unless you claim QST, 73, CQ and FCC documents are all wrong).

Well there IS a "big difference" between reading about war and the military, and actually BEING IN
and experiencing it firsthand.(although many college professors think otherwise)
I find it also interesting,(along other lines) that many who are most "anti war" or "anti military" never
even served.

The same holds true in HR,--IMO you can learn(about the way it was) a lot more from the old-timers who
who actually "lived through" that era than what one reads from books,IMO again.

The FACT remains that the "Extra" DID require more back in the 50`s and 60`s still does remain a fact,
and it was not just the 20wpm requirement,--the written exam WAS in fact harder than the others.

Of course we now know all that has changed in the past 20 years,--the so called "extra" has become
the "new novice" or "entry level" license, which can be had with absolutely NO cw, and just having
the "ability" to "recognize" the answer from published answers(the exam pool system) thus we now have
"extras" who cannot even calculate the length of a half wave dipole.

                                                        73`s Rene, K1MVP

P.S,--Did you EVER get the chance to talk to Fran(W3SCC) as to his opinion of HR today versus years ago?
 
P.P.S,--the "extras" who are "technical morons" are a result IMO of the "dumbed down" exam system,
           of the past 20 to 25 years, which just "proves" my point.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

So you're saying that QST, 73, CQ and the FCC all got it wrong.  10-4 on that.

Out.

[K1MVP]

So you're saying that QST, 73, CQ and the FCC all got it wrong.  10-4 on that.

Out.

What I am saying is YES,--"the powers that be", ARRL, FCC etc, etc, "HAVE CAVED" into
making the priority, quantity or "numbers", at the expense of "quality" for the past 20 to 25 years, for obvious reasons, like attempting to get more $$$.

That was "important" years ago also,($$$) but not like it has been over the past 20 years.
I am convinced that the FCC views HR as a "thorn" in their side, and basically just "tolerate" us.
The ARRL and others care about the #`s, which has led the "watered down" license, IMO.

                                             73`s K1MVP

P.S, you still have not answered my question,--have you asked W3SCC about what he thinks
of how HR is today versus years ago when he was first licensed.
 

[W3SLK]

Rene said:

Well there IS a "big difference" between reading about war and the military, and actually BEING IN
and experiencing it firsthand.(although many college professors think otherwise)
I find it also interesting,(along other lines) that many who are most "anti war" or "anti military" never even served.

Boy, aint that the truth! As a veteran, that pisses me off more than anything!

Rene also said:

That was "important" years ago also,($$$) but not like it has been over the past 20 years.
I am convinced that the FCC views HR as a "thorn" in their side, and basically just "tolerate" us.
The ARRL and others care about the #`s, which has led the "watered down" license, IMO.

Another astitute observation. But I also feel that the support the FCC gave back in the 50'/60's was dropped when we as a group were no longer a resevoir of technical advancement. What I mean by that is where the group developed and inovated for the better of everyone else. Not like today where everyone drives the internet.

[K1MVP]

But I also feel that the support the FCC gave back in the 50'/60's was dropped when we as a group were no longer a resevoir of technical advancement. What I mean by that is where the group developed and inovated for the better of everyone else. Not like today where everyone drives the internet.

Mike,

I agree,--but that occurred IMO, NOT because of incentive licensing, but because of the "watering
down" of standards that occurred during the "Dick Bash" era when the answers to the exams were
being published verbatim (that coupled with streamling the exam system with the VEC) and doing away
with cw has led to this mess, IMO

I can also attest to the fact, (having served over 20 years) that the military no longer "values"
a ham ticket as an "asset".

Such WAS NOT the case in the 50`s and 60`s, My commanding Officer(who was also a ham)
and an electronics instructor  during WW2, recognized the value of a ham ticket back then.

I have found(in the past 20 years) that the military gives little or no credance to a ham ticket, as such
it is no surprise that the FCC does not "value" the amateur service as a source of "trained people"
in electronics.   
                                               73, K1MVP

[W4EWH]

I can also attest to the fact, (having served over 20 years) that the military no longer "values"
a ham ticket as an "asset".

I've been saying for a long time that there used to be a de facto agreement between hams and the armed forces.

The military championed our cause at frequency allocation conferences - no small task, in the era before Telstar when shortwave was the only viable method of international broadcasting, and HF the only usable multi-point communications system, for both corporations and the military, which would work without a phone system or in unimproved area or at sea.

Hams, for our part, became a trained corps of operators which could be called into service quickly during war. That's why the NTS is an exact copy of the military net model, that's why cw was required, and that's why ham's adoption of SSB was encouraged as soon as SAC had proved it was viable for military use.

Times have changed: a truism, since technology, by its nature, always changes. Military electronics are now so secret that field technicians have been reduced to making binary decisions while swapping boards in and out of testbeds that are themselves secret. No expertise required; all repairs done by civilians at repair depots or factories - ergo, no need for hams in the equation.

It's ironic that the very technology which condemned this cozy arrangement has obviated the need for it: geostationary satellites have made possible international broadcasting without shortwave, have made possible international phone calls at price points below that of Telex or telegram, and have made possible military communications to the squad level from command and control centers thousands of miles away.

HF, in other words, is a commodity without buyers, and we've been homesteading on electronic real estate that only the government owns, simply because nobody wants it but us. This metaphor is not as strained as you might think: the current squabble between the Pave-Paws radar managers and 440 MHz repeater operators in Massachusetts is just the tip of an iceberg that will gouge pieces off of "our" bands again and again, simply because there's no one in charge of preventing it and no interest in doing so.

Digital technology will allow high-fidelity, over-the-horizon broadcasting to prosper - and if you think it won't happen, go into your attic and dig a 300 baud modem out of the corner and ask yourself how long that change took - and that means that bible-thumpers, tin-horn dictators, and (of course) ClearChannel will be looking for more bandwidth on HF. Don't tell yourselves that satellites are cheaper - they're not - because even if it were true, the broadcasting networks will demand alternatives to use for bargaining chips when talking to Hughes or NASA or whomever. It's going to happen.

UPS took 220-222. Seemed like a small matter at the time. What's next?

Bill, W1AC

[AF9J]

Good points Bill,

But, you want to hear something weird?  UPS has made virtually no use of 220-222 MHz.  Also, if I remember right, Northern California 440 repeaters are also getting pulled into the Pave Paws issue by bases like Beale, AFB, etc.  Sad but true, many of the the bands on  70cm & above, are used by us on a secondary basis.  I remember working a guy in upstate New York (from Wisconsin) in the late 90s on 1296 MHz, and he told me later on, that he had to deal with radar from a nearby Air Force Base, blanking my signal periodically, while we were trying to complete the QSO!

73,
Ellen- AF9J

[KB2WIG]

 "  But, you want to hear something weird?  UPS has made virtually no use of 220-222 MHz.  "

They must have broken it when they first got it ..........  klc

[W4EWH]

Good points Bill,

But, you want to hear something weird?  UPS has made virtually no use of 220-222 MHz.   [snip]

Ellen, it doesn't surprise me. My guess is that they just bought the allocation so as to scare the vendors who make the stuff they really want into cutting their prices, and they're leaving it unused as a bargaining chip for future changes.

Anyone have any personal knowledge of what UPS is planning?

Bill

[AF9J]

I read that that the FCC wouldn't allow then to do certain things on 220-222 MHz they wanted to to do.  Also,when the trunking systems started coming into use on 800 or 900 MHz, they concentrated their radio systems on trunking channels in those freq. ranges.

Ellen - AF9J

[W4EWH]

I read that that the FCC wouldn't allow then to do certain things on 220-222 MHz they wanted to to do. 

The Congress proposes, the FCC disposes: sounds like the bureaucrats on 12th St. SW weren't amused at being told what to do by mere politicians, but my cynicism is showing.

Of course, that's adding insult to injury: having it taken away from hams on a lobbyist's whim is bad enough, but it's used less now than when the "220 - Use It or Lose It!"  buttons were floating around hamfests. Look for more of this kind of land-grab: the only important part of the result is that hams are pushed aside.

"When elephants fight, it is the grass that gets trampled".

Bill, who is feeling depressed today.

[w5omr]

I read that that the FCC wouldn't allow then to do certain things on 220-222 MHz they wanted to to do. 

So... did UPS actually -buy- any 220Mc gear, and if so, has anyone seen it on the surplus market?