From: vbreault@rinhp750.gmr.com (Val Breault)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.misc
Subject: Re: W5YI report..
Date: 15 Oct 92 14:42:13 GMT
Organization: General Motors Research Labs
In-reply-to: sorgatz@avatar.tti.com's message of 14 Oct 92 19:54:45 GMT

In article <1992Oct14.195445.5829@ttinews.tti.com> sorgatz@avatar.tti.com (sorgatz) writes:

    ..sez that there is a move afoot to petition the FCC for a change in
   Amateur license structure such that:

    There would be only Novice, No-code Tech, and General!  The request has
   not yet been given a docket number, but it seeks to eliminate the 13 & 20
   WPM CW requirements, giving current General and Advanced license holders
   the same privileges as Extras! Current Tech Plus (old Elem 3 Tech) would
   be grandfathered to General, and persons seeking a distinctive skills test
   could take the 13 or 20 WPM CW exams and earn an endorsement of 'CW Expert'
   or 'CW Master' which would NOT give them any additional frequency space.

<... okay, you remember the original post... I won't repeat all of it...>

My two cents worth:

I'm an Extra class operator and I got it the old fashioned way.  I studied
the subject matter and learned the laws/formulas/principles/code.  I enjoyed
the experience, looking at it as a challenge.  After doing the work to learn
CW up to the 20wpm mark, I've found that I prefer it over phone and use it
almost exclusively when I'm on HF.  The technical information I had to learn
has stimulated me to learn even more.  However... now that it's behind me 
I have reflected on the whole exercise and come to an opinion or two.

CW is irrelevant.  It's one mode among many.  Sadly, no other mode is 
stressed.  I would much rather see a lot greater emphasis put upon digital
communications techniques and much less emphasis put upon CW.

The depth of technical knowledge required to pass the tests is quite shallow.
I understand the reasoning for the multiple choice exams with the published
answer set (I'm also a VE).  I wish there was a better method of assuring
that the applicants actually UNDERSTOOD the subject matter and could apply
that knowledge.

I think that we could get by with ONE license and a series of endorsements.
(HF endorsement would require 5wpm cw skills for ITU compliance, digital
auto-forwarding endorsement would require proof of technical knowledge of
various networking philosophies,  repeater endorsement would require 
demonstrated knowledge of the applicable laws etc.)  With this kind of
a pick-and-choose structure, people would not be required to study things
that they are not interested in knowing or are not prepared to exploit.
It could, by virtue of it's narrowness, be a much more exhaustive test
of one's abilities (in that one specific area) than is currently possible. 
It would reduce some people's prejudicial view of "lower class" licensees
by making the comparisons comparisons of apples and oranges.  (If one has
HF and ATV endorsements is he better or worse than one that has digital
and microwave endorsements?)

I would like the VE teams, under the authority of the VEC to be able to 
issue a 60 day temporary license that would enable the successful applicant
to get on the air immediately.

There's more... perhaps I'll post more later...  Give it some thought eh?

-val-

--

Val Breault - vbreault@gmr.com - N8OEF
General Motors Research and Environmental Staff.
The opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect 
those of the GMRES or the General Motors Corporation.