[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: ARRL License Restructuring Proposal



I, too, am in total agreement with this proposal. Having been licensed as a
tech since
1989, my test included the General theory element. The only thing that
stopped me there was the 13 wpm  code requirement (not fond of cw).

Now there are some who will suggest that already having been licensed as
General, they would feel they would be "taking a step back" or "being lumped
with" a lesser group, and that all their hard work was for naught.
POPPYCOCK!! You should be proud of your accomplishment.

And I might finally upgrade from Tech Plus and take the 12 wpm, yeah, maybe
go all the way to Class A!!

Jay Fox
K2FOX




-----Original Message-----
From: Red Johnson <redj@together.net>
To: Michael P. Olbrisch <kd9kc@whc.net>
Cc: Bernard F. Gaffney, Jr. <n8pvz@hotmail.com>; amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org
<amsat-bb@AMSAT.Org>
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 8:24 AM
Subject: Re: [amsat-bb] ARRL License Restructuring Proposal


>I guess I would be one of the sour pusses who wonders, why did I bother to
>upgrade to General?  An automatic upgrade to priviliges of General by
having
>passed the Novice test?  The Tech + test?  Is there nothing contained in
the
>General test that neither Techs or Novices need to know?  Why not at least
>require passing the written element?
>
>I guess the pride a lot of us felt in passing the General wasn't well
founded if
>it will become meaningless under the proposed rule changes.
>
>Why not move all current General Class licensees into Class B to recognize
their
>past accomplishments rather than send them back a step and lump them with
those
>who didn't upgrade?
>
>73 de Red
>K1RED
>
>Michael P. Olbrisch wrote:
>
>> Bernard F. Gaffney, Jr. wrote:
>>
>> > Has anyone else heard of the ARRL's proposed license restructuring, and
>> > if so, what do you think of it, in relationship to satelliting(to coin
a
>> > word)?
>> > Any other thoughts?
>>
>> I like it.  There is something in it for everybody.  The proponents of
MORSE
>>
>> CODE (like me) don't loose anything.  Those that want to eliminate code
>> get an easier shot at it.  There will be sour-pusses on the left and
right
>> of
>> this, but I see it as a win-win deal.  I believe it will not affect
>> satellite opns
>> as we are a sorta specialized group, unless the satellite bands are
somehow
>> opened to repeaters (heaven forbid!!!)  We all need to watch this very
>> closely to protect satellite and DX windows ON ALL BANDS, HF,
>> VHF, UHF, and beyond.  A mistake in this could result in AO-10 and P3D
>> uplink interference, or RS-12/15 downlink interference.  Any other
>> thoughts???
>>
>> --
>> Vy73,  Mike.  KD9KC
>> kd9kc@whc.net
>> The farthest West ham in West Texas.
>> (whereit is raining (huray) tonight)
>>
>> ----
>> Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>> To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>
>
>
>----
>Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
>To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org
>
>


----
Via the amsat-bb mailing list at AMSAT.ORG courtesy of AMSAT-NA.
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home