> I finally looked at this. I would support this if it did not include
> digital privileges for Technicians (and the 27 remaining Novices).
It seems rather petty and counterproductive to deny any license class
access to any mode authorized to other license classes in the same
spectrum.
That said, I would certainly limit Novices and Technicians to modes
less than 500 Hz wide and prohibit them automatic or semi-automatic
control based on the same thought process that prevents Novice and
Technician licensees from being Trustee of a Repeater. There is
certainly the expectation that anyone engaging in automatic control
have a higher level of knowledge and experience than that required
of an "entry level" licensee.
73,
... Joe, W4TV
On 2/29/2016 11:58 AM, Peter Laws wrote:
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 6:38 PM, Bill Turner <dezrat@outlook.com> wrote:
The FCC has put the ARRL's January Petition for Rule Making (RM
11759 - found on the web at,
http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/comment/view?id=60001374190 ) on public
notice and invited interested parties to comment on what the League
has called "minimal but necessary changes" to 80 and 75 meters. The
ARRL petitioned the FCC to fix a "shortfall in available RTTY/data
spectrum" that the Commission created when it reapportioned 80 and
75 meters 10 years ago.
I finally looked at this. I would support this if it did not include
digital privileges for Technicians (and the 27 remaining Novices). If
that single portion -- absent from ARRL's bulletin -- were removed I
would be wholeheartedly in favor of it given that the 2006 boundary
change was almost certainly a typographical error.
Technicians will *not* be encouraged to upgrade by giving them more
privileges as Technicians. Have you looked at the Element 3 question
pool? There is, basically, no barrier to upgrading. Anyone who
claims there is hasn't read the pool. If they've read through the
pool, they are probably going to pass the test. You want more
privileges? Upgrade. It has, literally, never been easier.
Unfortunately, the FCC isn't into nuance and can't be counted on to
implement only the good part of this petition, so I am against it in
its entirety.
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|