In a message dated 10/20/05 11:17:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> On Oct 20, 2005, at 7:28 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > In a message dated 10/19/05 11:37:44 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > >> Well, the big problem is -- there are no more Novices! > > > > Yes, there are! Also Tech Pluses and "Techs-with-HF", who have the > > same privileges as Novices. > > But those Techs aren't restricted to operating CW like we were 30 > years ago. Extremely few of them are active on HF CW. All true - but it's been like that for decades now. I think what we're really seeing is that a lot of hams are minimally active or completely inactive. This isn't just a ham radio thing - lots of activities have experienced serious downturns in activity. I think there was a book called "Bowling Alone" about the decline of bowling leagues. > > > > se are the numbers of current, unexpired > > amateur radio licenses held by individuals > > on the stated dates, and the percentage of > > the total number of active licenses that > > class contains: > > > > As of October 15, 2005: > > > > Novice - 27,606 (4.2%) [decrease of 21,723] > > Technician Plus - 45,994 (6.9%) [decrease of 82,866] > > QED. What has been demonstrated? Since April of 2000, the FCC has issued no more new Novice, Tech Plus and Advanced licenses, so those license classes are bound to decline by simple attrition. They've also been renewing all Tech Pluses as Technician, and left it up to the licensee to maintain documents showing they are code-tested. If the rules are simply left alone for the next 55 months, we'll see the number of Tech Pluses go to zero as the last ones are renewed as Techs. And of the licensees that exist -- how many of them are actually > > active on the HF novices bands? > A few, but very few. > Trust me, I remember when the novice bands were full of activity > every evening. Me too! And yet in those days there were only about 10,000 to 20,000 Novices, and Techs had no HF at all. That's just not the case any more. The nature of the > > hobby has changed -- the path of activity that people take is now > different. If they are operating CW, it isn't in the Novice bands, by > and large. > That change started in the 1970s and accelerated in the 1980s - because of VHF/UHF FM. Instead of starting out on HF CW as most hams had done for decades, a lot of newcomers began to start out on VHF/UHF FM, to work the local repeaters and such. Many bypassed the Novice completely and went straight for Tech so they could use 2 meters and 440. That change significantly affected how new hams viewed ham radio. Their introduction was voice, not Morse, and their focus became local/regional rather than national/international. Etc. If they ever did get on HF, it was long afterwards. The old (pre-mid-1970s) Novice was only good for a short time (one year until 1967, two years afterwards, nonrenewable and "nonretakeable"). This put serious pressure on a new ham to get active and upgrade before the license ran out. Most of the Novices I knew back then (at least the ones who had any sense) had a station all set up and ready to go before the license arrived, because they'd not want to split their time between setting up a station and operating it. The change to all license classes being 5 years renewable (mid 1970s) and later 10 years renewable (early 1980s) changed all that. Many if not most new hams got the license first, then set about putting a station together. But there was no hurry because there was no license deadline like in the old days. > > Except there's no separation between Morse Code and data modes on > > those subbands, at least in the USA. Data modes aren't allowed in > > the HF 'phone image subbands, but outside them, all the data modes > > share the same space as Morse Code. Only good operating practice > > keeps them apart. > > And there's nothing wrong with good operating practice. We use it to > great effect on 160m. > There have already been problems with folks not following the bandplan on 160. On the HF bands the problems are worse because of more use and greater coverage with a typical setup. For example, until a few years ago 3579 was a prime "glowbug" frequency, because you could get colorburst xtals from old TV sets and build simple 80 meter rigs around them. Then a PSK31 rig called the Warbler came out. It caused a sensation, and put a lot of hams on PSK31. That made the area around 3579 "the PSK part of the band", even by those not using Warblers. End result was that the glowbug folks were driven away by the QRM. The Warbler designers weren't anti-glowbug; they simply didn't know about the problem when they were designing the rig. > > I don't think that petition has been filed yet. It proposes > > regulation by signal bandwidth, not mode. It has some good ideas > > and some flaws. > > I wasn't talking about the bandwidth petition, but the Novice band > refarming petition. > My mistake, I misunderstood. > > There were 18 petitions to FCC from mid-2003 to mid-2005 about > > changing license classes, Morse Code and written testing, new entry- > > level license classes, subbands, and a whole bunch more. They all > > got RM numbers and comments. FCC replied to all 18 petitions by > > 05-235, which proposes to simply drop Element 1 (the 5 wpm code > > test) and make no other changes at all. > > > > The ARRL regulation by bandwidth petition is a separate deal. > > I thought the Novice band refarming was still active. Seems there was > an NPRM for that, too. > I don't think FCC wants that change. The impression I get from the NPRM is that FCC doesn't want to change *anything* other than dropping the code test. What they seem to be saying is that, over time, the Novice and Advanced licenses will simply disappear through attrition as licenses expire and hams upgrade. They repeatedly mention that upgrading requires only written test(s) for all hams except Technicians who have not passed a code test, and that if the code test is dumped, all hams will be just written tests from whatever license they want. The NPRM also seems to me to be saying that FCC's vision of the future is that Techs will be all VHF/UHF, Generals will have most privileges, and Extras will have it all. Simple progression, fewer license classes, etc. And no extra work for FCC - just let the closed-off license classes fade away. This happened once before, too. The FCC stopped issuing new Advanceds at the end of 1952, and for almost 15 years there were no new ones issued. Then in 1967, as part of the incentive licensing changes, the Advanced was reopened to new issues. 73 de Jim, N2EY _______________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net You must be a subscriber to post to the list. Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.): http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com
