-----Original Message-----
From: secc-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:secc-bounces@contesting.com]On
Behalf Of Bill Coleman
Sent: Friday, January 30, 2004 6:40 PM
To: Macie, Gordon; 'secc@contesting.com'
Subject: Re: [SECC] W5XX on the ARRL License Restructuring Plan
On 1/30/04 8:40 AM, Macie, Gordon at GMacie@innotrac.com wrote:
>> From: "Malcolm Keown" <w5xx@vicksburg.com>
>>
>> I have studied the proposed ARRL License Restructuring Plan.
>> There are two
>> points which I think need refinement:
>>
>> (a) two of the SSB HF band segments proposed for use by the
>> "New Novices"
>> are undoubtedly problem areas. Specifically, 3900 to 4000 and 7200 to
>> 7300. The 75 M segment is wall to wall nets and ragchewing
>> 24 hours a day.
>> To a lesser extent the 40 M segment is the same during the
>> daylight hours.
>> (the ARRL Net Directory lists 327 Nets operating between 3900
>> and 4000 and
>> 102 between 7200 and 7300).
>No doubt. However, the choices for phone segments is somewhat limited.
>Any segment given will must overlap the existing priviledges for General,
>and these are exactly the segments where the nets have concentrated.
establishment of a novice phone/image subband in the current novice segments
on 3.5 mhz would be an excellent solution.
>>When the "New Novices" begin to
>> descend on
>> these band segments with cursory knowledge of HF operating
>> procedures and
>> the operational protocol of established nets, conflict will
>> ensue. Heated
>> exchanges will probably occur when KG5XXX insists on
>> continuing his QSO on
>> frequency past the net start time for a given net or KG5XYZ with his
>> lingering CB slang tries to QSO with W5XYZ.
>This was a convincing argument right up until the CB slang part. The CB
>craze is long since dead, having died out almost two decades ago.
the craze might be dead, but CB isn't. tune around 27 mhz anytime. it's
all 'wall-to-wall and treetop tall'. not saying that the above would happen
on 3.9 mhz, but...
>> This is truly
>> going to be a
>> lose-lose situation.
>Is it? As I listen to the bands during the week, they seem awfully empty
>most nights.
yes and no. the 80m novice band earlier tonight was bristling with
activity. and -- as i recall -- some bands were dead a lot of the time 20
years ago.
>>In the early days of the Novice license, band
>> segments were reserved for Novice use from 3700 to 3750, 7150
>> to 7200, and
>> 21100 to 21250. This in effect allowed newcomers to learn
>> among themselves
>And, if you remember, it failed miserably. The ARRL started publishing an
>article entitled "Your Novice Accent" as a pamplet and mailing it to new
>Novices. I still have mine, almost 30 years later.
how did it fail miserably? if you're a new ham, you're a new ham. folks
are gonna forgive you for your honest faux paus, and help you along. i
think that might be what the article was all about. a 'novice accent' was
just that -- it was nothing to be ashamed of, or use to consider the entire
thing a failure.
>The problem was, the newcomers copied each other's bad habits,
>reinforcing them rather than learning proper operating procedures from
>more experienced operators. Making Novice ghettos was a huge mistake. The
>Novice license might have been more successful, had Novices intermingled
>with more experienced operators.
i disagree again. i have a logbook full of upperclass contacts from my
novice days on 40 and 15. in fact, i'd say the majority of my qso's were
with upperclass licensees. i would consider the novice program in the 70s a
huge success. guess folks just weren't as snobby back then. i would have
never referred to the activity from 7100-7150 and 21100-21200 a 'ghetto'.
it was nothing but exciting to me -- and many folks i talk with who got
their tickets at that time also consider something of a 'magical'
experience. in fact, i can still remember my first QSO (WA4CNY -- a
general -- 40m CW, 22 Aug 78) and my first JA (JJ1KHZ -- on 15 Jan 1979, 15m
CW). ghetto? it was dreamland.
>> The current proposal does exactly the reverse. The "New
>> Novices" will be free to descend on the "Old Timers" without
>> any restraint.
>Exactly. Who better to learn proper operating procedures from than the
>old timers?
i agree, but i think i'd leave it up to the old-timer to decide whether or
not he/she wants to be the teacher. some of those folks on 75 ssb rather
talk about their weedeaters and new concrete driveways with their usual
buddies.
>> Seeing that we have Novice segments still in place on 80,
>> 40, and 15, I
>> would propose that this spectrum space be allocated (or an equivalent
>> space) outside of the existing SSB Bands for "New Novice"
>> operation. If an
>> "Old Timer" chooses to Elmer in these band segments, then that is his
>> choice. This approach will preserve the dignity of the current ham
>> community and hopefully eliminate the clashes that are sure
>> to occur if
>> proposed ARRL Plan is implemented.
>So, you're going to move the Novices down below the Extra portion of the
>band, where they will have to contend with higher class licensees trying
>to work intercontinental DX, instead of up in the Net region? And when
>the Novice licensees move up to General, they won't be able to use any of
>the same frequencies, instead having to move to the General suburbs?
>I don't think this is wise spectrum management.
watching the cluster, it looks like most dx on 75 hangs out around 3790+.
and just because they upgrade doesn't mean they give up the space -- in
fact, that would answer your issue about novices being left to themselves.
and why not move them to the novice bands? the novice bands have been there
all along and no one has complained about it so far. keep the power limits
down for any license class using that portion and let it rip. by putting
'em up on 3950, it is just asking for a turf-war based on license class.
sorry bill -- absolutely nothing personal at all about this -- but i just
have a problem with this 'ham radio is dying so we have to bargain price it'
stuff.
73/Robin/K4VU
fighting the ARRL proposal with everything I have
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radioamateurfoundation/
|