John -
the only point of a retreat should be on concessional grounds ie we have a valuable resource we will negotiate certain things for...for example the majority of amateurs world wide DO NOT PAY FEES.. if we assume 16000 amateurs at $60 per head then "free" fees could easily be bought for spectrum sales - as could ongoing FREE examinations...there is lots to be thought of but done properly it could be a major way forward for sensible use of the spectrum.
Under no circumstances should the F call be reduced in capacity and quite frankly I see no reason it is not allocated 50 or 100 w PEP...- I am getting really keen on the KIWI full call format of 500W PEP regardless of mode...we can beat them in most sports so why not a 750 W PEP entitlement for Full calls and a 200 W PEP for Standards and 100 W PEP for foundations ?
Are the exams too easy?
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Hi John,VK5AJL wrote:
I don't quite know about the diplomatic retreat though. In parts of the world amateurs have a 4m band (around 70MHz) and a 1.25 metre band (around 220MHz) both I would like to play with. I think we should retreat kicking and screaming (not that it would do much good) unless the ACMA are prepared to let us have concessions in other parts of the spectrum. If we just keel over, the govt will get the idea that whenever they want to sell spectrum, they can get it from us.
But they can anyway... don't think the amateur radio lobby is exactly strong when faced with defence, broadcast, or land mobile interests. The WIA, and I grit my teeth writing this, does well for its size mainly due to the strong historic links with staff in ACMA. I work in emergency services and we are crying out for greater access to UHF spectrum, no one wants to take anything off the amateurs but we do need to. It comes down to amateurs making far better use of the spectrum they have instead of sitting on 30MHz of mostly white noise. Now if that 10MHz (420-430) pretty much already given away was traded off against, say primary status guaranteed between 50-52MHz then it could be seen to be a "win win". But remember Defence are thinking that way too as they are the ones that really conceded 420-430 and they may have their eyes on other spectrum.
Sorry for the diversion.
Cheers,
Richard
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Dream on... as if ACMA is going to give away such income, no matter how triffling it is.
-
VK4TS
Re: Are the exams too easy?
It then comes down to the skill of the negotiators and the presentation...as simple as that....
But hang on ..I am relying on the national body to represent us..... OK Richard .........dream over....its become a nightmare,,,any organisation who thinks almost $200 to sit a F call is OK and wonders at drop offs in new applications is in fairy land....
But hang on ..I am relying on the national body to represent us..... OK Richard .........dream over....its become a nightmare,,,any organisation who thinks almost $200 to sit a F call is OK and wonders at drop offs in new applications is in fairy land....
-
VK4QB
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Hi All,
The exams are possibly structured incorrectly but hey, they can be tweaked. Remember, we are dumbing down from what it used to be. This is the trend every where now.
Also re loss of income by ACMA , they lost millions by making the CB bands free, and to say nothing of deleting the TV licences, then, they seem to be well heeled, or have they dumbed down already?
Brian 4QB
The exams are possibly structured incorrectly but hey, they can be tweaked. Remember, we are dumbing down from what it used to be. This is the trend every where now.
Also re loss of income by ACMA , they lost millions by making the CB bands free, and to say nothing of deleting the TV licences, then, they seem to be well heeled, or have they dumbed down already?
Brian 4QB
-
VK2VEL
Re: Are the exams too easy?
I agree. Being "customers" of the spectrum may provide some mediocum of security. Maybe just a little more than non-paying customers.VK2DAG wrote:Rob a Fee is a good thing.
It means we are paying customers and so we get a certain level of service. We may not be paying much (I reccon we should be paying more) but are still customers.
You would be paying far far more for your internet connection.
Trent F-calls can use ssb on 2 and 70. The band-plan says "All Licence Classes"
Matt.
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Ah Brian, I thought I was old but even I wasn't around to remember TV licences! I believe that was the PMG- and it was either DOC or DOTAC that abolished CB licences. ACMA have not given away any income stream and they aren't likely to start now. Well heeled? You try finding a radio inspector these days- they need more resources and not less. Reporting an interference fault on the South Coast of NSW to an on call RI in Cairns, to be monitored by listening stations in Melbourne & Tasmania... they have serious problems with staffing (of their own making).VK4QB wrote:Hi All,
The exams are possibly structured incorrectly but hey, they can be tweaked. Remember, we are dumbing down from what it used to be. This is the trend every where now.
Also re loss of income by ACMA , they lost millions by making the CB bands free, and to say nothing of deleting the TV licences, then, they seem to be well heeled, or have they dumbed down already?
Brian 4QB
Cheers,
Richard
-
VK4TS
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Our Governments have long been swayed by international agreements and trying to be seen as doing the best thing.....while not trying to get to far off task take the shameful example of former VK2VW Hew Griffiths (refer WIKI) who was arrested in Australia for an internet crime overseen by an American court who was then extradited and spent time in US Prison - a direct result of the free trade agreement we (Australia) signed with the US. At no time had Hew ever been to the USA and in fact after he was released from US prison he was told not to return...
In the main the government wants to be seen as punching above its weight a common phrase used in the media...how much above its weight would it be if it deleted our access to ITU standard ham bands ?
70Mhz and 220 Mhz could be seen as almost an impossibility in VK due to current use...those of us who remember how long it took to move the two users of the 80M dx window can attest to that...
In the main the government wants to be seen as punching above its weight a common phrase used in the media...how much above its weight would it be if it deleted our access to ITU standard ham bands ?
70Mhz and 220 Mhz could be seen as almost an impossibility in VK due to current use...those of us who remember how long it took to move the two users of the 80M dx window can attest to that...
-
VK7DR
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Well - just how far off topic can you get...?
Are the exams too easy? Hmm, that depends what they are set for, and that, at least, is clear.
They are examinations for the Amateur Operators Certificate of Proficiency.
They are, essentially, not examinations for technical ability or knowledge with respect to the workings and circuitry of communication equipment.
This requirement only comes into consideration where such knowledge is required to be able to operate the equipment effectively.
For instance, knowledge of vacuum tube RF power amplifiers was once essential, as all broadcast and amateur transmitters used them, and without knowledge of how they work, their correct operation is impossible.
And there is no doubt that such knowledge remains necessary, but to what level? Well, in this example, sufficient to be able to operate a vacuum tube transmitter - and that ain't a lot, my friends.
However, where home brewing is part of the amateur's stock in trade, then we have a different problem. Here and here alone can we see there is a requirement for serious knowledge to be demonstrated.
Once, the examinations for the AOCP were correctly set, IMO. They took into account the fact that many hams built their own equipment and antennas - and the need to do so within the requirements of the regs means a suitable exam set to test this knowledge.
I do not believe we have this level of testing now - but at the same time, I do not believe it is essential for the standard or foundation licence.
Yes, amateur advanced should be a proper test of skill and knowledge. But tying such levels of skill to the notion of how much power an advanced station can run is, however - as I said before - a confusion of notions only wankers make.
On the subject of licences themselves - the F call should not be a permanent licence, but an entry point for the privilege of gaining a standard amateur licence (at least.) It should be reviewed at twelve months to two years.
As for what frequencies they can use, it makes no sense to me to limit them to less than 80, 40, 20, 10 and 2 metres and above. You either have foundation calls or you don't. And allowing them 30 watts would have been more valid.
And, finally, considering what I hear on 80 metres every night, it seems obvious that there should be a more serious and stronger focus in the exams on an operating procedure, level of courtesy and language suitable to the privilege of holding an amateur radio licence.
Are the exams too easy? Hmm, that depends what they are set for, and that, at least, is clear.
They are examinations for the Amateur Operators Certificate of Proficiency.
They are, essentially, not examinations for technical ability or knowledge with respect to the workings and circuitry of communication equipment.
This requirement only comes into consideration where such knowledge is required to be able to operate the equipment effectively.
For instance, knowledge of vacuum tube RF power amplifiers was once essential, as all broadcast and amateur transmitters used them, and without knowledge of how they work, their correct operation is impossible.
And there is no doubt that such knowledge remains necessary, but to what level? Well, in this example, sufficient to be able to operate a vacuum tube transmitter - and that ain't a lot, my friends.
However, where home brewing is part of the amateur's stock in trade, then we have a different problem. Here and here alone can we see there is a requirement for serious knowledge to be demonstrated.
Once, the examinations for the AOCP were correctly set, IMO. They took into account the fact that many hams built their own equipment and antennas - and the need to do so within the requirements of the regs means a suitable exam set to test this knowledge.
I do not believe we have this level of testing now - but at the same time, I do not believe it is essential for the standard or foundation licence.
Yes, amateur advanced should be a proper test of skill and knowledge. But tying such levels of skill to the notion of how much power an advanced station can run is, however - as I said before - a confusion of notions only wankers make.
On the subject of licences themselves - the F call should not be a permanent licence, but an entry point for the privilege of gaining a standard amateur licence (at least.) It should be reviewed at twelve months to two years.
As for what frequencies they can use, it makes no sense to me to limit them to less than 80, 40, 20, 10 and 2 metres and above. You either have foundation calls or you don't. And allowing them 30 watts would have been more valid.
And, finally, considering what I hear on 80 metres every night, it seems obvious that there should be a more serious and stronger focus in the exams on an operating procedure, level of courtesy and language suitable to the privilege of holding an amateur radio licence.
-
VK2VEL
Re: Are the exams too easy?
I think this is the most astute analysis and commentary that I have ever read here.VK7DR wrote: Are the exams too easy? Hmm, that depends what they are set for, and that, at least, is clear.
They are examinations for the Amateur Operators Certificate of Proficiency.
They are, essentially, not examinations for technical ability or knowledge with respect to the workings and circuitry of communication equipment.
This requirement only comes into consideration where such knowledge is required to be able to operate the equipment effectively.
For instance, knowledge of vacuum tube RF power amplifiers was once essential, as all broadcast and amateur transmitters used them, and without knowledge of how they work, their correct operation is impossible.
And there is no doubt that such knowledge remains necessary, but to what level? Well, in this example, sufficient to be able to operate a vacuum tube transmitter - and that ain't a lot, my friends.
However, where home brewing is part of the amateur's stock in trade, then we have a different problem. Here and here alone can we see there is a requirement for serious knowledge to be demonstrated.
Once, the examinations for the AOCP were correctly set, IMO. They took into account the fact that many hams built their own equipment and antennas - and the need to do so within the requirements of the regs means a suitable exam set to test this knowledge.
I do not believe we have this level of testing now - but at the same time, I do not believe it is essential for the standard or foundation licence.
Yes, amateur advanced should be a proper test of skill and knowledge. But tying such levels of skill to the notion of how much power an advanced station can run is, however - as I said before - a confusion of notions only wankers make.
I think operating procedure is covered quite well in the current syllabus for the practical test common for all new license candidates. I rather suspect that most freshly ticketed license holders are reasonably good with operating procedure, once they gain a level of confidence on air, given the current emphasis on procedure in training and assessment.And, finally, considering what I hear on 80 metres every night, it seems obvious that there should be a more serious and stronger focus in the exams on an operating procedure, level of courtesy and language suitable to the privilege of holding an amateur radio licence.
Courtesy and language. Unfortunately, this is probably more representative of society in general, rather than a lack of training or awareness of correct behaviour on the air. An emphasis on this in exams would probably do little to curb uncivilised behaviour once the ticket is in hand. It's the same as driving licenses, any hoon can do the right thing to pass the test.
I think that this is where tutelage and mentoring by experienced ops post-exams and very early on is most invaluable.
-
VK5AJL
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Correct me if I'm wrong but it seems VK2DR agrees with me that the Foundation and Standard calls are about right and that the advanced exam should be a true test of skill and knowledge. I read into that, "a lot harder".
As to what level of power is allowed is another matter. I have never used any more than 100w and don't really want to although I am capable of more on some bands. I do not simply want to pump out 400w or 1kw on 40m. That just isn't in my game plan. The only reason I did the advanced exam was so I could put out 10w on 10MHz. At the same time, I have nothing against someone else who wants to use more power. We each have own interests.
Having said that, what would you tie power levels to? You might argue, power levels were/are tied to license class as a matter of convenience but what else is there? Even you have done it yourself by limiting F calls to 30w.
But the main reason for this response is something I couldn't agree with more.
Another thing I agree strongly with:-
THANKS FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS AND OPINIONS. There is quite a diverse range.
As to what level of power is allowed is another matter. I have never used any more than 100w and don't really want to although I am capable of more on some bands. I do not simply want to pump out 400w or 1kw on 40m. That just isn't in my game plan. The only reason I did the advanced exam was so I could put out 10w on 10MHz. At the same time, I have nothing against someone else who wants to use more power. We each have own interests.
Having said that, what would you tie power levels to? You might argue, power levels were/are tied to license class as a matter of convenience but what else is there? Even you have done it yourself by limiting F calls to 30w.
But the main reason for this response is something I couldn't agree with more.
Why limit this to F calls though. One thing I have said along the way is perhaps we should all have to sit for an assessment of some kind every few years. Everybody seems to have shied away from this question. I have heard an advanced call openly admit on air he knows nothing at all about radio and only gets on air to chatter. He said he simply kept doing the exam until he passed.The F call should not be a permanent licence, but an entry point for the privilege of gaining a standard amateur licence (at least.) It should be reviewed at twelve months to two years.
Another thing I agree strongly with:-
I am a serious homebrewer. (I don't mean beer either although I do make a nice drop of stout.) I always very carefully test stuff I make on the bench first and have a number of friends (regular sched) who give me VERY CRITICAL appraisals of my work and signal.However, where home brewing is part of the amateur's stock in trade, then we have a different problem. Here and here alone can we see there is a requirement for serious knowledge to be demonstrated.
THANKS FOR ALL YOUR COMMENTS AND OPINIONS. There is quite a diverse range.
-
VK4WDM
Re: Are the exams too easy?
This is a bit tough in my view. I have an old friend who was licensed way back in 1949. He passed his exams, including CW at 15 wpm, operated ever since without any complaints from anybody, has impeccable on the air manners and knows how to tune his elderly FT101B to put out a nice clean signal. Would it be fair to re-test him and expect him to pass an exam geared to modern radio? Would it be fair to put him off the air if he failed rather than let him enjoy AR in his twilight years?"Why limit this to F calls though. One thing I have said along the way is perhaps we should all have to sit for an assessment of some kind every few years. Everybody seems to have shied away from this question."
IMHO most of the members of the AR family try to do the right thing. We do have a few idiots (In AR-speak "lids") who do the wrong thing and we need a system to pull them into line. In my early ZL days we had a number of "band monitors" - senior hams appointed by the P&T department, who could send you a friendly note (known as a "pink slip" or give you a phone call about bad language, key clicks, out of band sigs etc. If you did not fix the problem or amend your behaviour they could report you to the radio inspector for official action.
At one point, I only had a license to operate on 80m but I used to pirate on the 10m band thinking I would get away with it because very few ZLs at that time used 10m. One day I received a letter from another ham. It contained a list of my illegal 10m contacts for the last week and a copy of a letter he had written to the RI complaining about my pirating. Across the top of the latter was written "this will not be posted if your pirating ceases immediately." He also included an offer to give me more CW training so I could up grade my license and operate on 10m legally.
I know it is much harder to mentor new comers and teach values and standards in today's world, but perhaps we should try rather than apply a regulatory approach such as more examinations.
I will finish with a question. If you heard a "F call" using unacceptable language during a QSO would you make an attempt to contact him or her by phone and suggest that a modification of behaviour is required?
73
Wayne VK4WDM
-
VK5AJL
Re: Are the exams too easy?
I agree with you about your old friend. It is why I carefully worded my comment with "assessment of some kind" rather than using the word "examination". This might simply involve a visit from a WIA assessor to see what the operator is up to or any of many other possibilities.
I have heard an F call using abusive language (although not profane) and did mention it by email. I was shouted down. I don't bother anymore.
I have heard an F call using abusive language (although not profane) and did mention it by email. I was shouted down. I don't bother anymore.
-
VK2VEL
Re: Are the exams too easy?
You did the right thing in trying to mentor. Don't stop trying. But next time, make a recording and send it to ACMA with a complaint, if your input is thrown back at you.VK5AJL wrote: I have heard an F call using abusive language (although not profane) and did mention it by email. I was shouted down. I don't bother anymore.
Re: Are the exams too easy?
This topic has drawn a lot of interest and comments. I have had both my amateur license and my driving license for over 35 years. I think the amateur licencse exam was much harder to pass 35 years ago, but the driving license test seemed very easy to pass and only 12 months on P plates and I had my full (Class C) license, which I can drive a vehicle with a GVM of 4.5 Tonnes.
Think what mayhem and carnage I could do with a 4.5 tonne truck, but I am not required to have my driving skills or knowledge retested until I reach old age, where my driving ability may be impaired. How many people are killed on our roads each year compared to how many operators are killed using their transceiver? Why should we impose retesting on amateurs when we do not impose the same regime on drivers in charge of lethal weapons?
I believe that most amateurs learn more about the hobby and improve their knowledge and skills as time permits. Those who don't probably loose interest and may give the hobby away.
One thing I would like to raise for consideration was the original plan that the foundation license was only issued for a limited time, with the expectation that the holder would progress to the next level. I believe this plan was dropped, but it may have had some merit.
In NSW, P1 drivers are expected to pass additional testing before proceeding to a P2 license (with increased speed limit and more points). After 2 years or more, how many F calls have progressed to the next level? Maybe the amateur fraternity should set a goal or target to encourage and assist all F calls to progress. In addition to the obvious higher knowledge level, assistance with improved operating procedure and techniques. Why complain that an F call does not operate to the same standard as an old hand, when we don't assist F calls to improve?
I would be interested in your comments.
Think what mayhem and carnage I could do with a 4.5 tonne truck, but I am not required to have my driving skills or knowledge retested until I reach old age, where my driving ability may be impaired. How many people are killed on our roads each year compared to how many operators are killed using their transceiver? Why should we impose retesting on amateurs when we do not impose the same regime on drivers in charge of lethal weapons?
I believe that most amateurs learn more about the hobby and improve their knowledge and skills as time permits. Those who don't probably loose interest and may give the hobby away.
One thing I would like to raise for consideration was the original plan that the foundation license was only issued for a limited time, with the expectation that the holder would progress to the next level. I believe this plan was dropped, but it may have had some merit.
In NSW, P1 drivers are expected to pass additional testing before proceeding to a P2 license (with increased speed limit and more points). After 2 years or more, how many F calls have progressed to the next level? Maybe the amateur fraternity should set a goal or target to encourage and assist all F calls to progress. In addition to the obvious higher knowledge level, assistance with improved operating procedure and techniques. Why complain that an F call does not operate to the same standard as an old hand, when we don't assist F calls to improve?
I would be interested in your comments.
-
VK4TS
Re: Are the exams too easy?
See how good you are on another countries standard...take the US Extra class exam at http://www.qrz.com/testing.html the first couple there were a lot of US regulations I didn't know and I couldn't pass it...now I have learnt them ....but its an interesting question bank...only a fixed group of 741 questions for the exam...
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Thanks for that Trent, very interesting!
Some of the questions did not seem to be particularly "ham radio technical" oriented ...
... WTF is a "vidicon"? (now a rhetorical question, I checked with Google
)
... more to the point, why would I use one in ham radio when 'solid state' cameras are the go these days?
BTW, I "sat" a USA Extra sample exam and passed ... but I think the CW requirement would be another story
For interest/comparison, sample test papers for the ZL qualification are at:
http://www.nzart.org.nz/exam/index.html
Some of the questions did not seem to be particularly "ham radio technical" oriented ...
... WTF is a "vidicon"? (now a rhetorical question, I checked with Google
) ... more to the point, why would I use one in ham radio when 'solid state' cameras are the go these days?
BTW, I "sat" a USA Extra sample exam and passed ... but I think the CW requirement would be another story
For interest/comparison, sample test papers for the ZL qualification are at:
http://www.nzart.org.nz/exam/index.html
Bob, ZL1RS in the Bay of Islands at RF64vs
-
VK4TS
Re: Are the exams too easy?
End of Morse code requirement
In 2003, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) ratified changes to the Radio Regulations to allow each country to determine whether it would require a person seeking an amateur radio operator license to demonstrate the ability to send and receive Morse code. The effect of this revision was to eliminate the international requirement that a person demonstrate Morse code proficiency in order to qualify for an amateur radio operator license with transmitting privileges on frequencies below 30 MHz.[14]
With this change of international rules, the FCC announced on December 15, 2006 that it intended to adopt rule changes which would eliminate the Morse code requirement for amateur operator licenses.[14][15] Shortly thereafter, the effective date of the new rules was announced as February 23, 2007. After that date, the FCC immediately granted the former Technician Plus privileges to all Technician Class operators, consolidating the class into a single set of rules.
Following the change in requirements, the ARRL reported a significant increase in the number of applications for licensing.[16]
OK its from Wiki but you get the drift
In 2003, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) ratified changes to the Radio Regulations to allow each country to determine whether it would require a person seeking an amateur radio operator license to demonstrate the ability to send and receive Morse code. The effect of this revision was to eliminate the international requirement that a person demonstrate Morse code proficiency in order to qualify for an amateur radio operator license with transmitting privileges on frequencies below 30 MHz.[14]
With this change of international rules, the FCC announced on December 15, 2006 that it intended to adopt rule changes which would eliminate the Morse code requirement for amateur operator licenses.[14][15] Shortly thereafter, the effective date of the new rules was announced as February 23, 2007. After that date, the FCC immediately granted the former Technician Plus privileges to all Technician Class operators, consolidating the class into a single set of rules.
Following the change in requirements, the ARRL reported a significant increase in the number of applications for licensing.[16]
OK its from Wiki but you get the drift
Re: Are the exams too easy?
I agree that we all *should* assist all F and Std operators to progress, if they wish to. I sat my F exams less than 12 months ago and was lucky enough to find a club that did just that, so in the last 9 months or so I have progressed from F to Adv.vk2gx wrote:<snip>...Maybe the amateur fraternity should set a goal or target to encourage and assist all F calls to progress...</snip>
I would be interested in your comments.
There are a couple of issues that I see :-
1) There seems to be a real prejudice against F, and to some extent Std operators by a significant number of "experienced" Adv operators. It seems to run along the lines of I had to do it harder so I am better than them, therefore they should also do the hard yards. This and some of the argumentative replies to newbie questions I have heard and read has made me wonder if it is worth continuing in the hobby or even bothering to talk to these "experts".
2) If an operator is content to be an F call or Std call, then how is it anyone else's business? I mean to each to their own. I started in the hobby because I *thought* it would be fun and interesting. If an F call has fun and isn't hurting anyone what is the big deal?
Remember it is a hobby, it is supposed to be educational and fun. It seems as one trawls some of the nets and forums there are some who take it all far too seriously and believe that theirs is the one true way and that F calls and new operators such as myself are to be held in contempt.
To wrap this all up, time and technology has moved on. The exams are what they are. If you don't like the way new operators are appearing and having fun, then you have a couple of choices:-
a) get over it
b) give it away
c) lobby the powers that be to change the system - but be careful what you wish for, if you cut off the supply of new operators you may well strangle the hobby out of existence.
Keep in mind what RL Stevenson wisely said "If your morals make you dreary, depend on it , they are wrong."
Regards
Colin Warren
VK2CSW
VK2VIS
VK2FRBZ
______________________________________________________________
Colin
VK2CSW
Where are we going? And exactly why am I in a hand-basket?
Colin
VK2CSW
Where are we going? And exactly why am I in a hand-basket?
Re: Are the exams too easy?
Hi Colin,
You made some very good points. The hobby did need a fresh injection of new blood and I think the foundation concept has a lot of merit. But like most new schemes I'm sure it could do with some fine tuning.
I think that the term foundation should flow to the privileges that these new operators are given. I also think that there does need to be some supervised progression from foundation to the other classes much like gaining a driver's licence. I don't agree with the blanket 12 month and your out approach but I don't think it is necessarily a good thing to have veteran F calls in a decades time either.
I work in radio and for years many of us have lamented over the lack of RF "savvy" young talent coming through TAFE and few appreciate the value of amateur radio. They nearly all think in terms of IT and sadly when confronted with RF challenges take to it with a modern IT approach that isn't necessarily the way RF design & networks need. Much like me doing electrical wiring or cabling an MDF. We need to transfer our RF experience to these people before literally many fall of our perches.
Could I suggest that the privileges should be tailored to (a) expose them to as broad a picture of amateur radio as possible- a bit of HF (not almost all as is the case now) a bit of VHF & UHF... (b) place them on bands where population density is lightest, not heaviest (ie 80, 10, 70cm... I seriously question whether 2m is a good idea... population plus inexperience is creating a UHF CB type culture that is NOT in the interest of getting new operators started). I think that the no home construction rule may be well intended but may be too stiff- I think we need to reintroduce to the world the Dick Smith kits, maybe Woollies aren't interested but we need to get commercial support for these somehow.
And I think we all need to cherish the image of amateur radio a whole lot more than is the case now. The culture has definitely changed in the past 30 years I've been around- and not for the better. But then that is a society issue and not restricted to AR. Respect for the hobby and those who have taken the effort to get a licence needs to be drummed in to our new blood- and some old timers need a little bit of a reminder that they were young once & they hopefully were treated better than they are now treating those trying to learn.
Regards,
Richard
VK2AAH
You made some very good points. The hobby did need a fresh injection of new blood and I think the foundation concept has a lot of merit. But like most new schemes I'm sure it could do with some fine tuning.
I think that the term foundation should flow to the privileges that these new operators are given. I also think that there does need to be some supervised progression from foundation to the other classes much like gaining a driver's licence. I don't agree with the blanket 12 month and your out approach but I don't think it is necessarily a good thing to have veteran F calls in a decades time either.
I work in radio and for years many of us have lamented over the lack of RF "savvy" young talent coming through TAFE and few appreciate the value of amateur radio. They nearly all think in terms of IT and sadly when confronted with RF challenges take to it with a modern IT approach that isn't necessarily the way RF design & networks need. Much like me doing electrical wiring or cabling an MDF. We need to transfer our RF experience to these people before literally many fall of our perches.
Could I suggest that the privileges should be tailored to (a) expose them to as broad a picture of amateur radio as possible- a bit of HF (not almost all as is the case now) a bit of VHF & UHF... (b) place them on bands where population density is lightest, not heaviest (ie 80, 10, 70cm... I seriously question whether 2m is a good idea... population plus inexperience is creating a UHF CB type culture that is NOT in the interest of getting new operators started). I think that the no home construction rule may be well intended but may be too stiff- I think we need to reintroduce to the world the Dick Smith kits, maybe Woollies aren't interested but we need to get commercial support for these somehow.
And I think we all need to cherish the image of amateur radio a whole lot more than is the case now. The culture has definitely changed in the past 30 years I've been around- and not for the better. But then that is a society issue and not restricted to AR. Respect for the hobby and those who have taken the effort to get a licence needs to be drummed in to our new blood- and some old timers need a little bit of a reminder that they were young once & they hopefully were treated better than they are now treating those trying to learn.
Regards,
Richard
VK2AAH