[QCWA] FCC NPRM:

[Jim Wilhite]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Paul L Schmidt" <k9ps at arrl.net>
To: "Discussion of QCWA" <qcwa at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 6:08 AM
Subject: Re: [QCWA] FCC NPRM:


> Gene A. Nailon wrote:
>>  FROM: K5DLE  Gene Nailon  k5dle at juno.com
>> 20 July 2005
>>
>> Hello QCWA;
>>
>> You must be very proud!  You are going to get just what you
>> want and deserve.
>>
>
> I'm not exactly sure what that means.  It seems to me that the
> FCC's process of a rulemaking proposal is supposed to accomplish
> just that - determine what we want, need, and deserve.
>

Many times what people want is good for them, and in this case, is 
elimination of code a good thing?  Maybe so, maybe not as explained below.



>> Congradulations,
>
> Have we somehow graduated to/from something?  (That popular
> mis-spelling of the word is generally reserved greeting cards
> at graduation time - was that the intent?)
>
> The worldwide regs no longer require a morse examination.
>
> My state doesn't require someone wanting a driving license to
> demonstrate ability with a standard transmission.
>

Holding an amateur radio license is hardly akin to a state driver's license, 
unless you wish to compare the difference between an automobile license and 
commercial truck license.  Some years back states toughened the Commercial 
truckers license because they realized the level of understanding about how 
to load the trailer, systems on the truck and how to operate them is 
critical to, not only safety but to common courtesy.

Since the reduction of the code standard, the theory knowledge level has 
been questionable.  I, personally, know many Extra hams that have no clue 
about the theory of electronics.   This is not bad when the people held a 
lower level license and was considered to be learning the advanced 
operational and theory practices.  At least the code did prevent some people 
from entering the hobby without consulting with existing amateurs who 
explained how we work before the new comers were let loose on the bands. 
Good or Bad?  I think it has been marginal.



> Both morse and standard transmissions are still legal to use
> if one wants to.  In fact, one of my cars has a standard
> transmission -- as do some of those 250+ horsepower 6-speed
> sports cars I've seen advertised on TV.
>
> The NPRM shouldn't be seen as a loss of a mode - it should be
> seen as an opportunity to evaluate how far we have come with
> communications technology, where we are going, and to what
> extent tradition and history need to be included in the
> requirements for new licensees. The FCC doesn't make those
> decisions in a vacuum -- they solicit comments from citizens
> before making the decison, and often adjust the proposal to
> reflect comments received.
>
> This isn't time to gripe about the proposal.  It's time to
> assemble thoughts in a well laid-out format and get them ready
> to present to the FCC.


You are very correct here and I urge we review all bands not just, the 
VHF/UHF/SHF bands .  Most of the complaints center around the activity on 
75/80 and 20 meters.  Maybe we should petition the FCC for yet stricter 
enforcement of the interference rules or a special license to operate on 
those bands.  Additionally, any amateur that operates on the CB band be 
fined and have their license revoked.  I suspicion the reason we in the U.S. 
cannot operate on the lower portion of the MF/HF bands is the overwhelming 
number of U.S. hams that would move to that portion and interfer with 
CW/Digital modes in other parts of the world.

Sometimes rules are streached into areas where the intent of the rule did 
not allow (think of the current K1MAN conterversy).  But certain people will 
hide behind the strict literal translation to mask questionalble operations. 
Do we want that?  I leave that up to you, but the one thing I detest is 
amateurs holding the highest class of license who have very little or any 
knowledge of the rules, the equipment they operate (even basic knowledge of 
antennas) and their general demeanor toward others.  Be careful of what you 
request, you might get it.

>
> -ps


73  Jim
W5JO