FCC Relaxes Entrance To Ham Radio 135
Randy Rathbun writes "In a very bold (and IMHO, much needed) move, the FCC today released major changes to Part 97, which is the rules for the Amateur Radio Service. Among the changes are that there is only a 5 word per minute morse code exam from now on (getting rid of the 13 and 20 wpm exams), and reducing the number of license classes from six to three. The text of the changes can be read in this PDF document. You don't need to know morse code to get on the air on bands above 30 MHz, btw."
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
It was incredibly difficult to get the first no-code license created 10 years ago. Emotions ran very high, and many are still debating the issue.
This is one of the rare cases where a federal regulatory agency is far more enlightened than those they regulate. The FCC's report and order clearly shows that the only reason they didn't get rid of the code test entirely was because of an archaic international treaty that requires it for frequencies below 30 Mhz. Hopefully that will also change soon.
Phil Karn, KA9Q
Re:Any Linux software to practice code? (Score:1)
ftp://sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/apps/ham/morse/
Time to check some of this stuff out.
I think i can do 5 wpm (Score:1)
Ham radio has to go data to survive. Much like the ssb revolution of the 60s, many will opt out. That's okay. just don't begrudge us our fun.
The problem is fcc rules regarding encryption. I want to be able to do some internet work on this thing, but I don't want my laundry completely out in the public all the time. Yet, if we allow unrestricted crypto then the ham bands will be usurped by the telecom companies sending traffic they are paid for.
There has to be some middle ground, somewhere.
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:2)
Phil Karn, KA9Q
I Gave It Up (Score:5)
Right. Much needed for the manufacturers of Ham Radio appliances and for the continued existence of the ARRL, perhaps. But certainly just the opposite of what was needed for the "health" of Ham Radio, IMO.
I recently allowed my license to simply expire. I just somehow never got around to renewing. I once was very active. I had an Advanced Class license. Obtained when one really had to work to get one. (I took my General and Advanced Class tests at the Federal Building in down-town Detroit. Administered by FCC personnel.) In the past: I was active in both CW and phone (that's Morse code and voice, for the non-Hams out there) on the low bands (translation: HF - those bands below 30MHz). I was also active in VHF (FM, SSB and packet) and UHF. Built my own antennas. Maintained my own gear. Built some of my own gear. Was actively involved in the Amateur Radio Public Service Corps in my county. Was once actively involved with what was once a major repeater group in my area. Hardly ever went anywhere without a rig close-at-hand.
What happened? In a word: disgust.
There has been a serious decline in the "quality" of the hobby. I mean a really serious decline. These days one finds more appliance-using "lids, kids and space-cadets" on Ham Radio that one does seriously interested, knowledgeable and talented Operators. It has become, IMO, little more than high-end (and I use the term loosely) CB radio.
I think the final straw was hearing something like the third horribly-bungled Skywarn weather net in a row--and hearing the net control operator receive compliments for it--that I finally just gave Ham Radio up as a lost cause.
Ham Radio "operators" like to laugh at "CB radio types" as clueless, redneck yahoos. Well y'all ought to take a look in the mirror some time. Here's how: turn the radios off for a couple of months and then turn them on again and just listen. Be prepared for a shock. Prior to Ham Radio I had been involved with organized volunteer public service CB radio groups. Their professionalism far and away exceeded what Ham Radio has devolved into today.
For those who might accuse me of being a quitter--who might ask "Why didn't you stick around and help the hobby?": I tried. I really, really tried. I tired of tilting against windmills. Just try to correct somebody's bad operating habits these days. Just try to explain to to one of the average current crop of Hams that "QSL" does not mean 10-4. (Or "right". Or "correct".) Just try to tell some Ham that trimming ones coax does not really improve VSWR. Or that they're over-modulated/over-deviated. Or that their transmit power far-and-away exceeds their receiver's capability. Try to explain to a "modern" Ham on a 2m repeater why listening for "breaks" is important. (Much-less finding someone on 2m or elsewhere that has a clue how to handle emergency traffic!) Or, conversely, why one shouldn't "break" into a conversation unless they either: 1) intend to participate or 2) have urgent traffic. Arrrrgggg.
FCC and ARRL keep pushing the entry barrier down and the hobby just keeps declining--both in "quality" and participation. Somehow it never seems to occur to these two that the effects just might be related. Well, in my case they most definitely were.
Bitter? You bet I'm bitter. Having witnessed what was once an enjoyable hobby, populated mostly by Hams I could honestly regard as peers and superiors, degrade to the wasteland it is today.
You can keep it.
Canada did this years ago.. (Score:1)
ttyl
Farrell
tech plus (Score:1)
Re:Morse Code BAD - Wireless TCP/IP GOOOD (Score:1)
Check out TAPR [tapr.org]. Some people are even sending their email to their Palm Pilots this way.
KD5AMB
This is an excellent development. (Score:2)
Morse code is fun and people won't stop using it. But to have a test on copying Morse code by ear required to get any ham license that allows operation below 30 MHz in this day and age is rediculous. The average ham is older than 60, but ham radio should be a resource for young people to learn analog electronics, RF, wide-area networking, etc. I'm hoping that this change will start to address the age gap in ham radio, and I'll be working on a campaign to get young people into the hobby and on to our HF bands.
One of the best things about this decision is that it ends a very ugly acrimonious situation in ham radio that has persisted since 1990, when the no-code VHF license was introduced as the first foot in the door for modernization of ham radio. A lot of the older hams alienated the younger ones because they felt that no-coders weren't real hams. Now, those younger hams will have the same licenses as the older ones, and will be in their faces on the HF bands.
You can read more about this in my editorial The World's Most Silly Technology Law [technocrat.net].
Bruce Perens K6BP
Re:No Automatic Upgrades (Score:1)
That was a while ago
It looks like I'm getting grandfathered in, but I might as well restudy for the Extra class.
This is just bad. (Score:1)
I'm sorry. I'm all for bringing more people into the hobby, but this is a bad thing. As much fun as it is, and as much as you can do with it, the amateur radio service is still just that: a service. Emergency communications are always a priority, and, in many emergency situations, nothing but CW will work. I'd rather have someone who would not have learned CW but had to to get his license with me in a situation like that, than someone who wouldn't even have *been* a ham if it weren't for a reduced CW policy.
73 DE KE4JZN
Coincidence? I don't think so (Score:2)
--
Morse code rules! (Score:5)
--
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
"Your mother wears army boots!"
Seriously, someone makes reference later in the thread to the flame war that was fought in the usenet amateur radio groups beginning way over 10 years ago. Phil and I were two of the participants. The thing was that Phil won the arguement 10 years ago with the creation of the no-code Tech license. The folks on the amateur radio usenet groups just haven't figured that out yet? I stopped reading those probably around the time the internet got popular mostly for that reason!
Funny thing is that even one of the main reasons for getting rid of the code didn't account for the popularity of the net. Many folks believe(d) that getting rid of the code will save ham radio. I think it's probably too late! All of the "new blood" that would have come into the hobby traditionally are now yacking at each other on IRC over the net. The magic is gone.
As for some of the old, tired arguments that are being repeated here in defense of code. Guys - the war was over ALONG time ago. The latest step is just another nail in the coffin.
Perhaps the only way to recover ham radio is to create whole new technologies (or at least rapidly adopt them to our own uses...) that might capture the imagination of the younger set again. We need a new "killer ap" beyond DX and repeaters! Those are kind of warn out. Maybe we need the ability to do the internet over ham radio at high speeds? The problem with that is the content rules! (Did those get lightened up with the new order too??)
Whatever -
73 de Steve KA6S
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
Sheesh!
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
Re:This is no place for Zealous Ham Freaks (Score:1)
Packet radio was invented by the Aloha project
in Hawaii.
Now if you said - who made it practical and
inexpensive. That might be attributed to hams
in the form of the TNC-1/2.
steve
Re:HA (Score:1)
Wireless networking devices using HAM freq's become more popluar than CB's ever were. The Internet explodes and becomes really anarchistic. Advertising becomes the province of immensely powerful stations which hi-jack TCP connections to insert that awful little "dancing nude" anigif everywhere they can.
Spam radio...
Re:They're some very smart people. (Score:2)
I guess it would depend on your definitions, but one could make the argument that DNA got there first.
Steve M
Re:They're some very smart people. (Score:2)
However, you certainly do not need two intelligent beings. Animals communicate all the time. Ants have very sophisticated communications systems.
Steve M
Re:Slashdot Error: Still Need 5 WPM Code for HF (Score:1)
Brian
kb8rsc
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
Some hams think that a morse code requirement keeps out the riff-raff (CB'ers and the like).
The validity of the morse code requirement is one of usenet's longest running flame wars on the amateur radio newsgroups.
No Automatic Upgrades (Score:2)
When I took the test for a Technician license, I had to pass a 5 WPM code test and the General written test. That is the same as the new requirements for the General license.
I've never bothered upgrading since I got a Technician license. I could easily pass the written test but I hate morse code. Now I might try for an Extra license.
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:3)
Mostly two way, although there are some one way propagation beacons.
Is ham all private or is it also commercial?
Commercial traffic is prohibited.
Is ham radio sort of like a bbs type community?
There are bulletin boards that you can access via packet radio (radio modems).
Do you meet new people on ham radio or talk to ones you meat in real life?
You meet lots of new people, esp. on the HF (high frequency) bands.
What kind of transmit ranges are possible?
You can cover the Earth with an HF (3-30 MHz) radio. VHF and higher frequencies are generally limited to line-of-sight, just like broadcast FM radio. There are amateur satellites that can extend the range of VHF/UHF stations.
Re:It's a dying hobby. (Not flamebait. Really.) (Score:1)
Because it is fun, I imagine. Personally, I've just gotten into radio the last few months and find it very interesting. As long as there are geeks, there will be amateur radio. :)
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
I played with TCP/IP packet back when I was 12 or so and every NOS BBS program had code stolen/borrowed from the original by "Phil Karn KA9Q".. I never figured you actually existed.. Kind of like a legend to me..
Too bad the packet world dried up and died here. (Eastern Iowa). Therefore I became the only node around and that was back before the Internet was cheap enough for me to stay connected a do some packet tunneling. *sigh* I'd love to get back into it, but it seems like everyone around here sold all their TNCs and turned off their computers.
l8r
Sean (KB0LCJ, yeah, a lowly tech+)
dammit (Score:2)
Re:FM? (Score:2)
Re:FM? (offtopic) (Score:1)
OTOH, what for full deployment of HDTV. HDTV will be moving everyone to UHF (which used to have to be spaced 6 channels apart for really bad UHF tuners of the 1950's and 1960's, but can be packed much tighter today). That means many VHF TV allocations will be emptied, especially in big cities, as RS-170/NTSC gets phased out. Channels 5 and 6 would be ripe for adding to the FM band (though we would need new FM radios
ham radio != broadcast radio
OK, so how about an Internet DX Contest? (Score:1)
Re:This is an excellent development. (Score:1)
No-Code International has done nothing good for the Amateur service and you Bruce Perens should be ashamed of yourself for thinking that it has.
I for one will not slow down for a 5 wpm extra class operator in the extra class cw sub-bands.
More about these issues... (Score:2)
Also, make sure you chek out The World's Most Silly Technology Law [technocrat.net], an editorial by Bruce Perens over at technocrat.net [technocrat.net]
Cheers.
Nick
regulation-driven vs market-driven adoption (Score:1)
I guess the implication behind the arguments to keep the old rules is that people won't learn that stuff if they don't have to - which suggests that it isn't as valuable as the proponents of the arguments would have us believe. If those really are useful skills, people will learn them voluntarily. If they aren't useful (or more useful or entertaining than other activities available), people won't bother with them. That seems fine to me.
It would also be useful if everyone knew how cars work, and how computers work - but it would be silly to think that the government should require people to pass a test about internal combustion engines or the manufacturing processes behind radial tires before getting a drivers' license, or to to pass a test about webservers and operating systems before using a browser.
(In fact, in the US it's silly to talk about "licensing" forms of communication, as all of them should be covered by the First Amendment, but that's another argument for another day.)
like it ...... (Score:1)
many other things in the fcc must be changed
Test CW to talk voice (Score:1)
"Son, I know you want to fly that spacecraft to mars but first you gotta prove to me that you can shift gears on my grandpappy's Model T"
Who knows, maybe I won't let my license lapse after all.
N7JCT (Licenced since Jan 1987)
Bruce Perens is everywhere..... (Score:1)
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
If you're reading this, thanks in advance.
--
Re:Morse Code and Hardware Hacking (Score:2)
This reminds me of the time I sat next to an elderly, retired engineer at a banquet, and listened to him reminisce about the time they got THE BIG COMPUTER UPGRADE. You know, the "stored program jobbie".
Morse Code and Hardware Hacking (Score:4)
Of course it was an incredibly half assed way to build a radio, but it worked well enough that we could communicate using 5W probably five hundred miles apart! My nephew just got his codeless novice, and his first rig is an incredible little 2m handheld that can access just about any place on the world on a sophisticated network of repeaters using maybe 5W. However, he could no more build this for himself than you could assemble a functional web server out of a barrel of surplus electromechanical relays. He's having a lot of fun, but he's not really learning any electronics. The new licensing tests don't require that you know anything about circuits.
The cool thing about CW is that a kid can sit around and dream up a rig with no outside guidance and build it himself out of probably less than $100 of parts. It may not be done the "right" way, but he's going to learn a lot.
CW also enables people in third world countries to communicate without the kind of sophisticated repeater networks that exist in this country. And, no matter what you say, CW is the most reliable form of telecommunication there is. It takes only a few watts to go hundreds of miles, so it can work during a prolonged power outage. It doesn't require any kind of intermediate linkages like repeaters or sattelites.
That said, undoubtedly CW is going the way of the wire telegraph, very soon now. I'll be sorry to see it go.
If you want to learn Morse Code (Score:1)
Morse code is not doomed! (Score:2)
Even if the CW requirement were to completely dissapper, CW itself will not disapper anytime in the forseeable future. There are situtations where, right now, CW is the only viable communactions mode (one example is adverse conditions such as severe interferance, and weak signals). Also, many hams use it for contesting and DXing, and there are hams who use it as thier primary communcations mode because they enjoy using it.
Rest assured, despite what the pro-code lobby says, CW is not going away anytime soon.
Pros and cons? (Score:1)
The bit about the international treaty is true but there are a number of countries that do not require any CW test at all so it can't be that importaint to anyone (other than the old mens club)
I know a few of old hams that love CW (I used to know a lot). Those guys did a great deal for the whole radio and electronics business and I think that some of them deserve that special area to use as long as they can. Sure they have big egos and don't like newbies but I can respect that -- if they are good.
And on a typical
And now (20000101 00:33) it looks like Victoria Aus won't been needing CW to tell the rest of the world what went wrong...
It's a dying hobby. (Not flamebait. Really.) (Score:4)
The fact is that wireless communication has become a commodity item, and as a result some of the reason people take up amateur radio in the first place has disappeared. Why after all, would someone engage in something that requires expensive equipment and a special license when they can go out to the local electronics store and pick up a pair of FRS radios for under $150? Or suffer through static crashes and the ins and outs of HF propogation when they can grab a cell phone and dial any phone on the face of the planet?
As wireless services become more prevalent, fewer people will have an interest in rolling up their sleeves and getting their hands dirty. The state of the radio art is no longer being advanced in amateurs' workshops, it's happening in the labs at Motorola and Qualcomm. While it used to be true that many EEs were also hams, I think the current working conditions many of us suffer through make us less inclined to do things similar to what we do at work during our off time. Amateurs are, after all, by definition people who do something for the love of it. Why do something if it's neither necessary or fun?
I still do it because people don't tend to want to talk to you if you pick up your cell phone and dial a number at random. Having a yak with people I know on the way to work in the morning makes the commute go by faster. And even though I know this message will be read by people around the world, I'm still tickled to be able to talk to someone halfway around the world with no wires.
Fewer interested parties means fewer participants, and it's sad to have to predict that the hobby will probably have dwindled to almost nothing in 20 more years. Compounding the problem is the fact that in this country, amateur radio is the classic nerdy hobby, even more so now that computers are commonplace and using the internet has become the hip thing to do. Several years ago I was having a chat with someone in Europe about this topic. It seems that in his country (and I forget which it is), people who take up the hobby are regarded as people who are doing something useful with their spare time and not sitting down at the bar quaffing beer and watching soccer.
Set the wayback machine (was Re:It's a conspiracy! (Score:1)
Re:Coincidence? I don't think so (Score:1)
So, is this "day that many consider to be apocalyptic and/or provoking major crisis" supposed to be Y2K, or Tax Day?
(Note to non-US Slashdotters: In the US, April 15th is the deadline for filing US Federal Income Tax Returns -- as well as paying any unpayed income taxes.)
Re:Paraphrasing the FCC doc... (Score:1)
10 years ago, there were 5 license classes:
Novice (5wpm, test 2, very few HF priviledges)
Technician (5WPM, tests 2&3A, Novice+VHF)
General (13WPM, tests 2,3A/B, VHF+HF)
Advanced (13WPM, tests 2,3A/B&4A, VHF+more HF)
Amateur Extra (20WPM, tests 2,3A/B,&4A/B, all privs)
(Test 1, not mentioned, is the Morse Code portion, divided up into 1A (5wpm), 1B (13wpm) and 1C (20WPM))
The reason for the odd numbering of the tests is that technician was originally "General with a lower code requirement" and Advanced was "Extra with a lower code requirement". So the original element 3 was split, as well as the origional element 4.
Then the FCC decided to change the regulations, allowing Techs to get their licence w/o the Morse code test -- but without HF priviledges. After some settlement, we ended up with Tech split into "Technician" (no morse code, no HF privs) and "Technician Plus" (5wpm, Novice HF privs).
Since then, the number of people enterring ham radio through Technician class has skyrocketed, and the number of people enterring through Novice has plummetted.
One major problem with this system: Techs, because of history, were required to learn the rules associated with HF operation on the Novice bands, but did not have access to the Novice bands!
The new rules eliminate Tech Plus entirely (with the rule that -any- Tech who can prove they have passed a 5wpm code test get old-style Novice HF priviledges), and closed Novice and Advanced to new hams. Existing Novice and Advanced class hams can continue to renew as Novice or Advanced with no loss of priviledges. It also (as many people have already noted) eliminated the 13 adn 20wpm code tests.
This simplifies things -immensely-. Instead of having to deal with elements 1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 3A, 3B, 4A and 4B, the FCC and the amateurs that give the exams only have to deal with elements 1 (5WPM), 2(Tech Written), 3(General Written) and 4(Extra Written).
Tech now requires element 2, General requires 1,2,3, and Extra requires all four. Techs have all VHF priviledges, General has most of the HF privileges as well, and Extra has all ham privileges.
In addition, it is now streamlined in that Volunteer Examiners can prepare exams for any license class below their own (Extras can also prepare Extra exams).
The goal was streamlining and simplification. It succeeded in this goal.
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
I respectfully dissent (Score:2)
I'm one of those (and probably the only one who will post on slashdot for attribution) who thinks dumbing down the code requirement is a Bad Idea. I expect to get flamed for it, but this is one issue I've given a lot of thought to over the last 20 years or so, and don't expect to be convinced otherwise.
Ham radio is not only about technical innovation. Yes, that's one purpose, and one that I, too, believe is important. It's not the only purpose, however. The basis and purpose of the service, as expressed in 97.1, includes fostering international goodwill and providing emergency communications when needed. It takes more than a technogeek to accomplish these ends. One must be able to *communicate*. The dual nature of the ham tests serve, IMAO, to point that out: you can answer all the theory questions they can throw at you and still not be an effective operator. The code test provided some way to check that. To get the Extra ticket, you had to be a well-rounded ham, both a skilled operator and at least fairly knowledgeable technically.
The FCC has goofed here, aided by public pressure from well-meaning techies who can't see that building the technology isn't enough: you have to make use of it, too, to provide communications.
Jay Maynard, K5ZC (licensed as Amateur Extra in 1977)
--
No code == broken promises (Score:3)
Just like you hoped the no-code Tech would, too? Not to mention bringing in a flood of technically competent folks to revolutionize the state of radio communications, all on a shoestring budget in the ham bands, results published in QST and CQ. Right.
The simple truth of the matter is that the no-code license has failed in its stated objective. The average age of hams has risen at one year per year of elapsed time, and that rate is unchanged before and after the advent of the no-code license. As I've contended all along, the real problem is that ham radio is not attractive to kids today. Your campaign is 10 years too late, and ham radio will suffer for it.
One of the best things about this decision is that it ends a very ugly acrimonious situation in ham radio that has persisted since 1990, when the no-code VHF license was introduced as the first foot in the door for modernization of ham radio. A lot of the older hams alienated the younger ones because they felt that no-coders weren't real hams. Now, those younger hams will have the same licenses as the older ones, and will be in their faces on the HF bands.
Oh, so now the FCC can change human nature with a simple Report and Order? Those of us who had to work to earn our privileges are going to be as resentful of those who do not under the new scheme as was the case with the no-code Tech. This change will, if anything, perpetuate the alienation and division, and spread it to the HF bands as well. Many older hams have resented, and IMAO rightfully so, the dumbing down of the entrance requirements in the name of attracting the "right people" into the service, especially given the 10 years of failure to do anything of the sort that we've seen.
The real solution, as I have been arguing ever since the no-code argument started, is to convince people that ham radio is worth the entrance requirements. No matter how low you set the barrier, the real problem is not getting people past it - the widely diverse ham population before 1990 is all the proof anyone can ever need that desire will conquer all - but getting people to want to climb over it. We should have tried better marketing in 1990, instead of assuming that people were too dumb any more to pass the requirements. This change can only continue the slide toward chaos and lawlessness that we've seen - case in point, the 147.435 LA repeater, a blight on the face of the service if there ever was one - ever since the requirements were first lowered.
Jay Maynard, K5ZC
--
Re:regulation-driven vs market-driven adoption (Score:3)
The First Amendment covers content, not manner of speech. You can say anything you want, but the government has a right to regulate how and when and where in order to keep the peace.
--
Not exactly news. (Score:2)
Unfortunately, since amateur packet radio is among the most inefficient digital communication modes known to man, such a cluster would be frustratingly slow. All the really cool stuff, at least with wireless networking, is taking place in the license-free bands because license-free is cheaper and you don't have to answer questions about Ohm's law to get access to them.
For more information about wireless networking, you can start at The wireless field test at Old Colorado City communications/ [oldcolo.com] or you can go to the Wireless LAN/MAN Modem Product Directory [carleton.ca].
Wireless networks are the way of the future, it's just that Ham Radio isn't the way to get there.
Jonathan Guthrie, KA8KPN, Amateur Extra class (now grandfathered) since 1980.
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
-Craig
Re:Morse code rules! (Score:2)
Lets keep morse alive.
//-.-./--.-/-..//-.-./--.-/-..//--/---/.-./.../
Re:They're some very smart people. (Score:1)
Communications?
To communicate requires at least two intelligent beings with knowledge and skills of the system being used.
DNA is not interpretted via intelligence for it's intended purpose. If DNA is being interpretted by intelligent life to create life, and not just used by non intelligent mechanisms to define individuality, then please point me to the interesting URL!
They're some very smart people. (Score:2)
Many scientists, doctors, and engineers how work for companies like NASA and the
Whiney loosers? These are the types that gave you the internet and other technologies you probably take for granted.
I can't say for sure, but I would guess that morse code was the very first digital communications system. It punches through noise that analog voice comms could not.
The internet has not made ham radio obsolete, it has probably made the hams appreciate their medium even more! The internet has an unmeasurably low signal to noise ratio that even makes CB seem like it is populated with nuclear scientists.
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
2 way
is ham all private or is it also commercial?
Private
is ham radio sort of like a bbs type community?
yes - but often with an RF techy orientation (you get to build your own gear)
do you meet new people on ham radio or talk to ones you meat in real life?
both
what kind of transmit ranges are possible?
worldwide
I'm a HAM.... (Score:2)
Morse code is, and will always be extrememly important as a tool and in emergency situations. But Amateur Radio really is hurting right now for younger members. Going to a meeting, you only see ages 50 and above... which really is too bad, it is a fun hobby that I think kids would relly enjoy if their parents knew about it and gave some support.
I got my license when I was 12... and I also learned morse code at that age. It certainly is not that difficult, only a little intimidating at first.
Now those darn kids got "chat" over the internet
CW is anything BUT a waste (Score:1)
Nothing compares to the power of CW. It's power is its simplicity.
With no other means of communication can your voice travel so far using so little.
If the world's computers had crashed around us at Y2K, you can bet that those magical dots and dashes would still be singing.
While I hope that loosening the CW requirement will bring more people into this wonderful hobby, I hope that these newcomers will take the time to master CW anyway.
Reminiscing about "The Good Old Days" (Score:1)
I remember the good old days of the ARPANET, when you had to have a government research contract to be on the network at all, and everyone on the net was smart and polite and helpful, there were no advertisements, and no AOL, and no one much bothered with computer security because it was uncool not to share your computing resources.
Gosh, if we could only go back to those wonderful days of the elitist ARPANET...
Paraphrasing the FCC doc... (Score:1)
------
The FCC revisits rules every two years, and this year, they recognized the advances in communications by simplifying the license structure. Most of it is to ease their own bookkeeping headaches, though.
There were six classes of HAM license, each level of license including all entrance requirements and privileges of simpler level licenses.
* Technician (first test) (50MHz+)
* Technician Plus (5+ wpm morse) (additional privileges)
* Novice (second test) (3-30MHz)
* General (13+ wpm morse, third test) (additional privileges)
* Advanced (fourth test) (275KHz)
* Amateur Extra (20+ wpm morse, fifth test) (175KHz)
Now, there will be three classes of HAM license,
* Technician (first test)
* General (second test, 5+ wpm morse)
* Amateur Extra (third test)
Novice and Advanced holders are grandfathered, keeping their privileges, not upgraded to additional nor downgraded to lesser privileges. Technician Plus holders renew as Technician. Technicians who pass the 5wpm morse exam will be able to use the additional privileges, but it won't be a separate license class.
------
Questions: very briefly, what are the 'additional privileges' that are not new bands of frequencies? Where does someone get to use a fixed station vs a handheld station, for example?
I guess I'm too used to business docs that require an 'Executive Summary' or separate sections for history, what ideas were proposed but rejected, and what was adopted.
Re:I Gave It Up (Score:1)
Morse Code (Score:1)
Information in HTML (Score:3)
It's about time! (Score:1)
FM? (Score:1)
Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
is ham all private or is it also commercial?
is ham radio sort of like a bbs type community?
do you meet new people on ham radio or talk to ones you meat in real life?
what kind of transmit ranges are possible?
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
The ARRL.org had lots of good technical info, tho it didn't give me much of a feeling of how people actually use their radios.
Re:Clueless about ham radio (Score:1)
Re:I Gave It Up (Score:1)
I got a CB radio from my parents after I said it would be 'neat' to try radio. Ok, this was a while ago and the FCC required a CB license. I thought that was real cool and did the paperwork, got a call sign(KCB1476 IIRC) and had a lot of fun. The next step was to get a Ham license. Never happened for a few reasons, but I did store that CB in a closet. One day a few years later I setup the CB and said, "Break - KCB1476", well to my suprise everyone on the net (airwaves), on that channel, flamed (useful term) me for the call sign. So, I listened for a while, thought about what I was hearing, and threw the CB in the trash (after stripping it) and filed the call sign in a folder of death and forgot about radio.
What happens when something technical becomes mainstream? The least common denominator effect surfaces. This is not a pretty sight as most people who have been around when it occurs will testify.
Will these new rules cause me to "get into" Ham radio now? No. Did the old rules stop me? No. I just have less will to put up with stupid Sh*t. That is enought to keep me from Ham radio, even though I have plenty of time to tinker.
By the way I think antenna design is kewl. -d
Re:I respectfully dissent (Score:1)
Maybe, based on my lack of involment I missed the communication point. However, if I had a better experience when I tuned back in with a CB (KCB1476) I would not have checked out forever. The poor communication skills I heard on that day was just to much. Time I have, skills I may have, the will to put up with stupid people or bad manners, I don't have. -d
Re:I Gave It Up (Score:1)
Maybe visit a hamfest, need to check on the outside world anyway. -d
More info... (Score:1)
Re:It's a dying hobby. (Not flamebait. Really.) (Score:1)
Not sure if it's good or bad but... (Score:1)
However, I don't know if this is the greatest thing. I have the highest respect for someone who's been in the art for decades and can do CW at 30-40 WPM. When I do get my extra license, I'll sort of feel like a jerk compared to the people who know CW like a pro. However, IMHO, the real fun is in the lower frequencies (40M and below) and I'll be damn happy to be able to use those frequencies with more ease.
And no matter what anyone says, when you're trying to get that DX QSO at very low power levels, CW is the way to go.
Sam Etler - KB9VPB
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
(meaning, they think Morse code is neat, not the new law)
Ryan Kirk
Re:Morse Code (Score:3)
" There was a logical reason to pass this law in the 1920's. Military stations needed a way to order the hams off of the air if the country went to war, or if the hams were interfering with the military stations during peacetime. Since the military didn't have any voice radios, they required the hams to learn Morse Code so that they'd understand when they were given government orders. Another reason for having the hams know Morse was that the government wanted telegraphers for communication during wartime. It took a long time to train a telegrapher, so it was easier to just draft a ham who had already learned the code. "
Since the law is etched in international treaty, the requirement for Morse apparently can't be repealed by Congress, only slackened (as it just has been). Some see this as a way to let more people into the field of amateur radio, most hams I've spoke to though just think it's neat (kind of like programming, I guess), plus it turns their hobby into an exclusive club. One guy I know says he usually likes to just sit there and do morse code instead of talk because it's easier.
I recommend reading Mr. Perens' article at http://perens.com/Morse.html , it gives a good background on the topic.
(Sorry, Bruce, I got here first...)
Ryan Kirk
It's a conspiracy! (Score:1)
Re:This is no place for Zealous Ham Freaks (Score:1)
Proud to be KB9UTQ
building a high speed ham radio network in Boston (Score:1)
The L0pht folks tried to do something like this with gorilla.net but it hasn't gone very far. If you are in the Boston area, are interested in getting a ham license, and participating, please contact me at: esj@harvee.billerica.ma.us
--- eric (ka1eec)
It's all about bandwidth. (Score:1)
Re:Morse Code (Score:1)
Re:Morse Code and Hardware Hacking (Score:1)
Try a little garbage picking. You could build a clean CW transmitter for much less. Solder, Board supplies, a calculator, some wire, and a soldering iron.
They did away with circuits? Darned, now I know I have been inactive for way to long, hehe.
Eric A. Griff, <eric@cfpower.com [mailto]>
KE2NM
Re:tech plus (Score:1)
Re:Last Post! (Score:1)
and of course here for really neat Palm-APRS software >>> http://www.pocketaprs.com/ [pocketaprs.com]
I've always thought that if someone could port AX25 from Linux to PalmOS, that would be very neat AND useful. PPP to a gateway box is neat but somewhat limiting. The Palm Pilot is a cpu (albeit simple)... why not just connect directly to the TNC and do the link management right on the Pilot? Makes sense to me.