[Lowfer] 2m

[Lyle Koehler]

Let's see if I follow the logic. No-code Techs are allowed to operate on 2
meters. Bad operators can be found on 2 meters. Therefore, no-code Techs are
bad operators.

During the last round of license restructuring, a friend of mine compiled
some interesting statistics based on FCC enforcement actions. Unfortunately
I've lost them, but it's time for an update anyway. I looked up the FCC
enforcement letters for the first half of 2003, which can be found at
http://www.arrl.org/news/enforcement_logs/

Excluding actions relating to "paperwork" offenses such as multiple club
callsigns and those actions which the FCC declared had been satisfactorily
resolved, I made a list of all the amateur stations who had received FCC
warning or advisory notices during that 6-month time period. There were a
total of 49 actions. Here are the statistics, separated by license class:

Extra -- 10 (20%)

Advanced -- 5 (10%)

General -- 12 (24%)

Technician -- 22 (45%)

Because of roundoff error, the numbers only add up to 99 per cent, in case
anyone is counting. Some of the Technicians were "Tech Plus" who had passed
a code test, but the database no longer makes that distinction.

Of the 729,000 licensed hams in the US in mid-2003, 15% were Extra, 12% were
Advanced, 20% were General, 48% were Tech or Tech Plus, and 6% Novice. It
looks like the Extras were the only ones who really excelled in the bad
operator department, although Generals also make pretty good lids, and Techs
are trying hard to catch up. One might conclude that Novices are the best
operators, but it may be because none of them ever get on the air any more.

This discussion could go on forever, and I'm obviously not helping the
situation. How about if we move it to 40m CW?

Lyle, K0LR