[CW] New RadioTelegraph Operator License

Wed May 22 03:36:37 EDT 2013

HI HI he could probably tell if you were making errors by your sweating or
swearing!

73 Kate K6HTN

On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:42 PM, D.J.J. Ring, Jr. <n1ea at arrl.net> wrote:

> They also test English at 20 wpm and code groups at 16 wpm, one full
> minute without error out of five minutes sent.
>
> I had FCC Engineer-in-Charge make me send 25 wpm on the hand key as
> required but he kept me sending for nearly the full five minutes.  Years
> later I found out he did not know Morse.  Boy did he make me sweat.
>
> 73
>
> David N1EA
>  On May 22, 2013 2:15 AM, "Kate Hutton" <katehutton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have been considering doing this ... for what reason?  Because it's
>> there, I guess. I have even talked about it with the guy who administers
>> the exams in my area.  He's waiting for me to tell him that I'm ready.
>>
>> However, I'm a new enough ham that I will have to take the code test.  I
>> move NTS traffic routinely at 20 - 22 WPM, but I make mistakes under
>> pressure, so the test could be interesting.  My understanding is that,
>> unlike the amateur code exams, they test both sending & receiving.
>>
>> I'm not sure if I have all the relevant written material.  I have the
>> booklet from W5YI that covers Radiotelegraph elements 5 & 6.  I also have
>> Gordon West's GROL + Radar book, which has its own element on radio law.
>>  Does that cover it all?
>>
>> My main impediment is that I am on too many traffic nets & don't have
>> much time to study.
>>
>> 73 Kate K6HTN
>>
>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 11:31 AM, <sbjohnston at aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>>   I'm proud to announce that the FCC granted my new RadioTelegraph
>>> Operator License yesterday.  It is number T000000001, so I am the very
>>> first to receive the new type of radiotelegraph ticket.  There doesn't
>>> seem to be a T000000002 yet, so apparently I am the *only* holder as
>>> well.  -grin-   That and $5 will buy me lunch at McDonalds.
>>>
>>> When the FCC announced the new radiotelegraph license structure in Ja
>>> nuary (see below), I asked the FCC's helpdesk what elements would be
>>> needed for me to get the new ticket.  They confirmed that applicants
>>> for the new Radiotelegraph Operator License would be required to pass
>>> written elements 1 and 6, and telegraphy elements 1 and 2.  I hold an
>>> Amateur Extra class license issued before April 15, 2000, so my passing
>>> of that 20 wpm code test would substitute for Telegraphy Elements 1 and 2.
>>> I also hold a General Radiotelephone Operator License (was originally a
>>> First-Phone), so that would cover written element 1.  That left me only
>>> needing to take the exam for written element 6.
>>>
>>> ETA was the only COLEM (the commercial equivalent of volunteer examiners) that
>>> responded to my email inquiries - none of the others even bothered to
>>> reply.  It took me three months to work out with ETA how to take the
>>> exam. Their examiners based at a nearby college apparently vanished
>>> without notice, and thus there was a lot of dead-end emailing and
>>> back-n-forth discussion. ETA finally offered the option to have a local
>>> library proctor the exam.  I made all the library arrangements and took
>>> the exam a couple weeks ago.  In just a few days ETA let me know I'd
>>> passed.  Then last week they told me they needed two signed passport photos
>>> for the application.  Fortunately I got their message when I was having lunch
>>> next door to a Walgreens that takes such photos, near a post office where
>>> I could mail them to ETA, all done in a half-hour or so.  ETAapparently received the pictures in time to submit my
>>> application on the first day the Commission was able to accept them, May
>>> 20.
>>>
>>> With the demise of commercial maritime CW, there is little practical
>>> use for a radiotelegraph ticket.  Except for museum-ships and
>>> historical club shore stations, there is little commercial Morse to be
>>> heard on the "ship-to-shore" bands.  Why bother with a new version of
>>> an antique license?  I appreciated the challenge of studying for aserious exam
>>> covering technology from a very wide time range - 1920s to 2000s, and
>>> I'd like to be able to operate one of the restored maritime stations some
>>> day.
>>>
>>> "Why do you want to climb Mount Everest?" George Mallory is famously
>>> quoted as having replied, "Because it's there".   It is unlikely I will climb
>>> Mount Everest, but I can always learn more about radio and electronics.
>>>
>>> 73   Steve WD8DAS
>>>
>>> sbjohnston at aol.com
>>> http://www.wd8das.net/
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Radio is your best entertainment value.
>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>>
>>> - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>> Changes to FCC Radiotelegraph Operator Licenses Coming May 20
>>>
>>> *Effective May 20, 2013*<http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2013/db0419/DA-13-798A1.pdf>,
>>> the FCC will no longer accept applications for First (T1), Second (T2)
>>> or Third Class (T3) Radiotelegraph Operator Certificates. In addition, the
>>> FCC has consolidated the T1 and T2 Radiotelegraph Operator Certificates
>>> into a new license class called the Radiotelegraph Operator License (T).
>>> According to the FCC, this change takes effect upon renewal: T1s and
>>> T2s that are renewed on or after May 20, 2013 will be renewed as Ts, but
>>> existing T1s and T2s will retain their current license class for the
>>> duration of the current license term. The Commission also consolidated the
>>> T3 with Marine Radio Operator Permits (MP); T3s renewed on or after May 20,
>>> 2013 will be renewed as MPs, but existing T3s will retain their current
>>> license class for the duration of the current license term. These new rules
>>> were first announced in a *Report and Order* (*WT Docket No. 10-177*<http://apps.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/view?id=7022100656>),
>>> issued January 8, 2013.
>>>  - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> CW mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
>>> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>>
>>> =30=
>>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> CW mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
>> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>> =30=
>>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> CW mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/cw
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:CW at mailman.qth.net
> CW List ARCHIVES: http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> =30=
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/cw/attachments/20130522/6373ba01/attachment.html>