F-Call thoughts

[VK1ZZ]

Over the years there has been fiercly divisive comments on should an F-Call have a 10W restriction or should it be eliminated.

Yes I know this is contentious BUT, when I think about it I cannot help but wonder "Is this a reasonable restriction?" and I have come to a conclusion that it is NOT reasonable and here is why.

Many modern transceivers are not capable of complying with this restriction for a myriad of reasons. Operator "Error"aside, to me it seems like the operator is subjected in many instances to abuse, criticism or just simply ignored. An F-Call may indeed get his transmitter to run at 10W and then buys/builds a very effective antenna with considerable gain and produces a strong clean signal that often times brings comments from "other" operators that question his output power. Is this fair?....I think not. We all need to take a breath and consider the consequences of our actions both on and off air.

I am often exasperated when trying to work an F-Call "down in the noise" when I know there is a very good chance that if this operator was able to run 100W I would be able to have an easier time working that station. We all know (or at least should know) the amount of db gain from 10w to 100w and many times this is all it will take to enable a good QSO over one that is tiresome.

The F-Call IS a good idea and I am glad it was introduced, all of us have a variety of opinions as to whether it was a good idea or not, whether that licence was/is too easy to obtain, has too much access to the HF spectrum and the list surely does go on, however, if we as a community continue to ridicule those of us perceived to be not equal, what does it say about us as a community?

I have been listening for a while now and the number of times I hear an F-Call being subjected to dropping carriers, snide remarks/comments, or deliberate interference I worry about where we as a community are headed. We should all take another look at our "perceptions" of amateur radio and try to be a little more accommodating in our on air operating and show respect to others on air. There is so much more we can all learn, both on the technical side as well as the humanity side, why not give it a try?

So, what do I believe?..Hmmm, here goes my flamethrower, eliminate the 10w restriction and revise power out to 100w, no increase of additional privileges or bands, eliminate mode restrictions to equal that of the Standard Call, and drop the requirement surrounding home brewing of transceivers. My view is that if we all learn to get along the community will come together and be more supportive of each other and therefore become united as a group, slash, community.

I am reminded of an old saying: TEAM meaning Together Everyone Achieves More

Well for those who don't know me, I began my journey as one of those 1960's CB fruitcakes (tongue in cheek guys) and grew my interest to the point I got roped into sitting for an exam in 1995 and I went from a (this was while I was living and working in the USA) Technician Class (no CW), to TECH Plus, then to General Class and finally Extra Class with CW at 15wpm. Obviously I returned to VK and some may think that was not a good choice but there you go, I did.

My hope is that if we as a community can have an open minded discussion then common sense just might prevail and we can sweep away any and all distractions and get to a point we all agree on and move our wonderful hobby forward and become stronger as a community united and not leave anyone behind or on the fringes.

I sincerely hope I have not offended anyone with my post here, if I have, you have my unqualified apology.

73 and good DX to all

Gary

[VK5TM]

I agree with what you say.

One thing that is perplexing to me, is that according to the regs, this is a technical hobby and yet F calls are not allowed to do anything "technical".

The one thing that everybody (apart from newcomers) forgets, is that they were once in exactly the same position - they were new to the hobby.

Forget the differences in what was needed to get a license 20, 30 or 50 years ago as opposed to today, times have changed and some need to catch up with modern times.

[VK1ZZ]

I agree with what you say.

One thing that is perplexing to me, is that according to the regs, this is a technical hobby and yet F calls are not allowed to do anything "technical".

The one thing that everybody (apart from newcomers) forgets, is that they were once in exactly the same position - they were new to the hobby.

Forget the differences in what was needed to get a license 20, 30 or 50 years ago as opposed to today, times have changed and some need to catch up with modern times.

Terry,

I concur with all your comments. In my original post, I had thoughts of saying more but in the interest of brevity and not wanting to sound too much of a windbag, I deliberately left out more along the line of my thinking.

My hope is to stimulate inward thinking by the individual in the hope that thought positions may change for the better with respect to the whole amateur community. This has for me been a wonderful hobby, I have learnt a lot, with more, much more, to learn, and in my case, sometimes a medical scare can stimulate a persons thoughts on how to enjoy the hobby even more than I currently do.

regards,
Gary

[VK2AAH]

On what basis do you believe that a person who has a Foundation class demonstrated the knowledge to safely operate a 100W transmitter?

What I think is irrelevant. What ACMA thinks IS. EMR is a serious issue to the ACMA and given society's sensitivity to the hazards of relatively high levels of EMR generated by 100W into a poorly installed antenna system by someone lacking the knowledge to understand the issue, it would seem to kill the idea. Either increase the focus and depth of required understanding of the issue, or expect the ACMA to reject the idea.

As for requiring 100W to be heard... I've heard plenty of 10W F calls do very well during the 80m contests... power is a minor factor- antennas do most of the work. Check the 2014 TT 80m contest results- some F calls did VERY well.


Richard
VK2AAH

[VK1ZZ]

Richard,

Thankyou for taking time out to comment.

With regard to EMR, it would be fair to say that many amateurs regardless of their level of technical expertise do make errors in their station building. If there was to be a more in-depth study requirement to avert excessive EMR issues in the foundation carriculum, we should all welcome this as I am sure the majority of first time licencees would welcome the knowledge they would gain so that their operations would be best quality practices and safe.

I too have worked many foundation calls during contests and I have noticed both strong and week signals. When just casually running on for example 40M recently, I did work two stations from VK5, both working into dipoles and both assuring me they were running only 10w and I am not about passing any comment other than to say while I was able to work both stations easily enough, another station joined the frequency and that station also spoke of using 100w and a dipole. Given their close proximity to one another and the significant difference in signal strength, you could say (not technical of course) that the stated power out was a factor. Again this is simply anecdotal of course.

I just feel that the foundation licence could benefit from further thought and perhaps some restrictions could be lifted and as you implied, perhaps a more technical approach to the entry level licence should be considered.

I often feel there are some of us who may be making life difficult for those who are perceived as being the beneficiary of a somewhat minimal knowledge base and are given more privileges than they should. Clubs can play a huge part of the overall success of any new licencee becoming a long term member of our hobby. Mentoring is done at Universities, perhaps we should encourage more of this in our hobby also?

There are a myriad of thoughts and variations and my post was to hopefully draw out a variety of ideas and maybe suggestions all to the ideal of helping to make our hobby more successful or perhaps I could go as far as to suggest harmonious? (I am smiling as I write)

ACMA are essential, they hold the big stick or if you like they are the elephant in the room, but, we as a community should be able to come up with improvements for our hobby and with careful consideration we should be able to present to ACMA a total proposal which addresses all there concerns. This is what we hope the WIA does for us and if this forum can display a wide range of options then perhaps someone way above my pay-grade can offer a more complete submission.

I did think about voicing the idea of the foundation licence be first issued for 10w with the opportunity to upgrade to 100w upon completion of a study course and exam to ensure the technical knowledge be held prior to them being given 100w permission. There are other ideas I had (yeah I know, not all would have been good) but I chose to leave them out for fear of boring folks to sleep before they finished the post.

If I only provoke thought and even discussion on improvements then I will feel I have at least contributed to the hobby which has given me many years of enjoyment and has facilitated in my meeting some really cool people....

Regards,
Gary

[VK2AOH]

I run 10W from my KX3 cw mostly 40M for local chats and rarely have trouble getting contacts. On occasions run QRP 5W cw with a homemade KD1JV kit radio and still get plenty of contacts both local vk and when band conditions are favorable can work dx.

There are ample manuals and websites giving information on how to set up simple but efficient aerials.

Really the Foundation call is for many the begining in ham radio and there is the opportunity to upgrade.

Nick
VK2AOH

[VK1ZZ]

Hi Nick,

Aha...yes QRP is fun and it can make you work hard at times.

All that you said is 100% correct and an upgrade path is available to all. My thinking about the current foundation licence restrictions is that when a new licencee is ready to setup his forst station shall we say, he is most likely going to look at either used transceivers or new low end models. The vast majority are 100w capable and are the most likely to be purchased.

The issue they then face is to comply with their 10w limitation and as you know many of the transceivers around cannot be restricted to an actual 10w output on SSB. With digital modes and cw they have every chance of compliance but still they have an issue with restricting their SSB output to 10w. So, why not find a pathway for them to gain the knowledge to safely operate at 100w without stretching their technical ability to upgrade to standard which is considerably harder than perhaps that required to study and pass an in between exam for access to 100w. It is only a thought on my part and indeed I may be over simplifying this.

Getting back to QRP, what a blast I had when I made contact on 4 bands with a Dxpedition on Lord Howe Island with 1mw out of my KX3, that had me grinning and crowing for days....

Again, Nick, thanks for taking time out to post, it's always good to read differing opinions as it is to find new things to do with our great hobby.

Regards,
Gary

[VK2AOH]

Hi Gary,
The only 100W radio I have is a TS-480SAT and although have set to 5 or 10W cw on occasions can't remember running ssb at those levels.

While 10W ssb is may be hard to determine with some transcievers myself have had no problems with the good signals coming from some F call stations.

There are low power radios like the FT817 although this is only a 5 watt rig. Think KX3's would be well out of reach of many younger F calls.

Good location, an efficient aerial system, all help a low power station.

Really can't see lifting the power restriction would serve any purpose.

Rather lifting the restriction on building and operating low power 10W transmitters and accompanying receivers would be of more benefit to F call operators.

Regards, Nick

[VK1ZZ]

Hi again Nick,

I guess in a round about way my reasoning on lifting the 100w limit would hopefully bring to an end the arguments around what power levels are being used. I agree that the really nice recent transceivers are most likely beyond many new licencees and they would find it difficult to decide on what they need versus what they want or like. Many would not be able to understand what they find on sites such as Sherwood Engineering transceiver test results. In many cases few amateurs fully appreciate what is written on these sites. The pick a column number and take a stab at understanding what has been measured and perhaps fail to see the interconnect between all of these test results. So I appreciate what they must go through by trying to decide what to buy and most make a decision on what they hear on air or from what they might be told by somebody they know. This is always fraught with danger and by that I mean making a decision based on opinion and not necessarily made on facts that would be relevant to the type of operating they start out with.

It is a perplexing issue for all of us at times and for those of us who are fortunate enough to have been able to learn what we need to know to make an informed decision it still is sometimes a nervous wait for our selected purchase to arrive.

I really think that the foundation licence needs to be revisited. The study guide needs to be updated to allow for a little more technical study required but not to be made so difficult that we discourage new entrants to our pretty good hobby. I think the 10w limit is not enforceable and I think it creates more issues. At least it needs to be looked at again by folks far better at this than me but I just wanted to voice my thoughts and see if I was alone.

Yes there are QRP rigs around but they do command a decent price. How many foundation licencees own a TS-520/530, FT101, TS440S etc. None of these will provide a 10w ssb signal without either a modification or careful tuning and there is no requirement for this to be done so the licencee is responsible and it seems to me we may as well give up on this idea and instead give them an easier way to get to 100w legally as a step towards the more difficult upgrade to a standard licence.

I think we need more entrants to our ranks but I also feel we need to come together as a group and help new licencees grow their technical knowledge and for them to advance our hobby.

I think the foundation licence is a good thing for our hobby but I just feel we should take a long look at the limits in place and change some things. A "100w output" additional step would at least take some angst out of the convesation. I know, I know, some folks say they run 1--w anyway so why bother, but I reckon there might be a few Advanced licencees that just might break the 400w limit also...

Still good times ahead mate.

73

[VK2AAH]

Questioning whether some F calls are breaking the 10W limit does nothing to assist your argument. It does the opposite. And going a step further by bringing Advanced calls into it only makes it worse. There will always be people who break rules- changing the rules to suit them is daft. Rather than argue changes to the Foundation class based on specific entitlements, more time needs to be spent on how to broaden (or deepen) the skills development and testing within the current system. Until those who want the change demonstrate that to ACMA nothing is going to change. Given ACMA's response to the 1kW trial I wish negotiators all the best selling this...


Richard
VK2AAH

[VK1ZZ]

Picking out a sentence written tongue in cheek and turning it into something it was not meant to be is a tad unfair.

I still think there are changes that could be made to give a better outcome and the WIA would be an obvious leader in any discussion into making our hobby even better. I am not trying to sell any particular "position"but rather trying to stimulate a converstaion.

Anyway, I have put forward some thoughts it's up to others to think what better suggestions could be put out for discussion by the wider community.

The ACMA would look at any proposal from the WIA and I am sure they would present any proposal thoroughly well thought out and well constructed.

I will refrain from further comments and leave it up to the majority.

Gary

[VK2MUS]

easy way over Richards concerns is to add the regulation exam to the requirements of the Foundation license - this then would give F call the same backing on radio operating that Standards and Advanced Licenses have. This is the exam that tests a person ability to operate a radio under the law.

The current situation of only allowing such a low output power to over come possible problems of snowing the neighbors TV is a bit like giving a license to drive only a 1 cylinder car on the basis that it will cause less damage.

John

[VK2AVR]

There is no technical reason why an F-Call can't lower his power to 10 watts. On SSB, using an external meter, it's often difficult or impossible to verify you're actually sending 10 watts instead of not 5 or 20W. But it should be obvious (looking at your power meter) that you are running considerably less than 100W and that is the important part.

As you've said, many hams make errors in their stations regardless of licence level. That's one of the reasons why the high power trial failed (yes there were flaws in the trial, let's not rehash that again - a lack of knowledge of EMR was clearly identified). There are definite EMR concerns at 100W so we should not let somebody who has done a very simplified entry to the hobby to run enough power to get themselves into danger. Upgrading licence levels is easy and empowers the ham with more knowledge to hopefully know what they are doing. The hobby as a whole needs to lift its game with regards to EMR. It's not hard to operate safely it just needs a little bit of knowledge.

So you have an F-Call who's in the noise and you wish they could run 100W. Why not wish they had built a better antenna? And ignoring the antenna issue, how many times have you heard someone running 100W that was too low and you wished they could run 1kW? It doesn't make any difference, people will always want more power.

Seasoned hams often do need an attitude check. Dropping carriers on F-calls, ignoring them etc is childish. Ham radio *will* die unless newcomers are welcomed to the hobby, and it's a shame that many just don't seem to care.

I think the power restriction should remain, but allow home-brewing (maybe limit it to QRP kits - these are hard to get wrong and quite safe.. just thinking aloud). Also, scrap the no-digital rule. Many young people ARE interested in digital and we should be progressive and give them reasons to enjoy the basic licence instead of forcing it to be CW/SSB/FM only.

The good news is the current WIA Pres is very progressive and knows what needs to happen for this hobby to survive and flourish. ACMA do listen, so we will make progress. As a community we just need to work on calling out those who vilify F-calls.

[VK2MUS]

Also, scrap the no-digital rule. Many young people ARE interested in digital and we should be progressive and give them reasons to enjoy the basic licence instead of forcing it to be CW/SSB/FM only.

Allowing F calls to use Digital teaches the operator firstly that low power can be more functional then high power and this in today's environment is a worthy goal. It also will satisfy the concerns of the old guard who want the power levels of entry operators restricted on the argument ( right or wrong) of EME. Secondly it binds the technology that the entry operator may already be proficient at ,to the new hobby - ( a technology that the old guard may not be as proficient with) which of course is Computers and this is an important selling point for the young members of the community, thirdly, the digital community is a fairly active and stable community it self polices and generally its members will go out of the way to help new operators - some of the modes work to strict procedures - in other words its a community that does not 'dump' on operators simply because they are new, its an excellent learning environment.

However it would need some changes to the Foundation license requirements and these changes would not impinge on the old guard in any way. There is no need for increased power or increased freq range. There is no need for special qrp gear. All that needs changing is to allow access to all digital modes. To facilitate that you also have to drop the 4 character callsign if we are running short of VK callsigns then use the VI or AX we use the AX on only three days a year and I doubt many actually use it on those days .

john

[VK3AUU]

Good idea. One only has to look at the results on WSPR to see how effective very low power digital signals are propagated. Just have a look at the Database link at http://wsprnet.org/drupal/ Almost all are running less than 10 watts and some down to 0.05 watts.

David

[VK3RX]

All that needs changing is to allow access to all digital modes.

Access to digital modes, higher power and other things are all part of: motivation to upgrade folks, as many FLs have already done and continue to do so.

In any case at least with some of the digital modes I've used, the software won't take 7 character callsigns (max of 6).

[VK5ZLR]

I agree with VK1ZZ, issues around setting Tx power, PEP vs carrier, and accurately measuring same, have bogged down experienced people, and ultimately 10w or 100w is not going to make a lot of difference in terms of interference & safety.

For not much money anyone can subscribe to the VKS network, and run 100wPEP voice & data with zero tech understanding, hard to see why F-class can't do similar.

I'd also like to see the 7 letter call dropped, it can be a bit of a mouthful.

-Richard

[VK4TI]

Personally raising the power to more than 20>30 watts would be a mistake , as for other modes if the training does not reflect the use then sorry no not suitable , and it's a good inducement for taking the upgade which to an N class is kinda simple ?
I would consider doing some study if it meant adding a genuine gallon under the right circumstances meaning we never stop learning .

[VK2MUS]

Access to digital modes, higher power and other things are all part of: motivation to upgrade folks, as many FLs have already done and continue to do so.

In any case at least with some of the digital modes I've used, the software won't take 7 character callsigns (max of 6).

we are not talking about existing Foundation operators we are talking about getting more people into the hobby - thus making the entry more enticing to younger people the debate on upgrading is irrelevant what is relevant is to entice more people especially the young who may never be interested in building a radio but are interested in using the technology - the old guard may see building radios as being the hobby however things have changed some what over the years and we need to meet those changes - one of my radios is a little green plastic thing about an inch square and several thousand kilobytes of computer code and my bookshelf has titles such as Software Receiver design, Internet linking for Radio Amateurs etc and my soldering iron is MathLab, Visual Studio, etc This is the Amateur radio of the present and the future - you may not like it but have a good look at your present transceiver I will bet my last dollar that it has some computerization built in. Thinking based on what the hobby was 50 years ago is a way to destroy the hobby we need people that can think outside the box to keep the hobby current with technology and we certainly do not need to create Foundation operators with old guard thinking
John

[VK3RX]

For not much money anyone can subscribe to the VKS network, and run 100wPEP voice & data with zero tech understanding, hard to see why F-class can't do similar.

Subscribers to that and the other HF networks can only operate mobile, so the likelihood of causing TVI etc. is vastly different from operating a fixed (home) station.

we are not talking about existing Foundation operators

This thread is indeed about the FL and primarily the power limit.

Are you suggesting another licence class or changing the FL syllabus??