May 2003 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[ARRL-ODV:8741] Foundation License
by Coy Day 12 May '03

12 May '03

Tom, I guess if you really want to know more about the new license, you have to pay the 3 quid 99! Coy ........... Coy Day, N5OK, ARRL West Gulf Division Director RR 1 Box 254, Union City, OK 73090-9726 Home: (405) 483-5632, Cell: (405) 740-8990 n5ok(a)arrl.org Web: http://home.att.net/~n5ok.ok/

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8740] Re: Time for a New License
by Tom Frenaye 12 May '03

12 May '03

At 11:09 AM 5/12/2003 -0500, Coy/N5OK wrote: >I understand the UK has a new class license. Do we have the details of the requirements for it? See http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/05/07/3/?nc=1 More information on the Foundation License is available on the RSGB Web site (click on "Foundation Licence Courses"). http://www.rsgb.org/ -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8738] Directors Workbook
by Tom Frenaye 12 May '03

12 May '03

In case no one else noticed, the folks in Newington have put the Directors Workbook in the ODV portion of the ARRL web site (plus an order form for the new QSL cards). Not sure how long it has been available but I don't recall anyone mentioning it was there. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/ODV/ -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8739] Re: Directors Workbook
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 12 May '03

12 May '03

Apparently my March 13 message didn't reach eberyone. Here it is again. 73, Dave K1ZZ -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 10:03 AM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8533] Director's Workbook now on the Web In the private ODV section of the members-only Web site you will now find an online version of the Director's Workbook. The URL is http://www.arrl.org/members-only/ODV/workbook/. There is also a link from the "miscellaneous ARRL documents" list. I hope you will this format to be useful and convenient. Certainly it will be much easier to keep it current. There is still some work to do in that regard, which will be among the topics for discussion at this weekend's EC meeting. Other than updates, about the only substantive change I have made is to the narrative about communication with division membership, Section 11.1. Very few division newsletters are being printed these days since nearly all Directors are using electronic communication instead. I have updated the discussion to reflect the fact that printed newsletters are now the exception rather than the rule and to highlight the availability of the email facility. If you spot any of the errors or omissions, please let me know. 73, David Sumner, K1ZZ Secretary -----Original Message----- From: Frenaye, Tom (Dir, NE) Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 12:19 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8738] Directors Workbook In case no one else noticed, the folks in Newington have put the Directors Workbook in the ODV portion of the ARRL web site (plus an order form for the new QSL cards). Not sure how long it has been available but I don't recall anyone mentioning it was there. http://www.arrl.org/members-only/ODV/ -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8737] Re: Time for a New License
by Coy Day 12 May '03

12 May '03

Jay, I like it. Would it make sense to require a sponsor (Elmer if you wish) for those issued the Amateur Class license? Much like having a driving permit that requires you to drive with a licensed driver. The sponsor could be general or extra class. I understand the UK has a new class license. Do we have the details of the requirements for it? Coy ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Bellows" <jbellows(a)skypoint.com> To: "arrl-odv" <arrl-odv(a)reflector.arrl.org> Sent: Monday, May 12, 2003 10:00 AM Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8735] Time for a New License Jim H. has suggested the current Technician exam is too difficult as an entry class license. Kay has suggested in light of the likely elimination of Morse as an HF license requirement by WRC 03, we consider an entry level license with a less demanding exam and limited but appropriate operating privileges. Their comments invited discussion and suggestions. Here goes. I suggest a three class license structure, Amateur Class, Amateur General Class and Amateur Extra Class. Each license would have HF and VHF/UHF privileges and we would all be Amateurs. The Amateur General and Amateur Extra Class would have the same privileges as their current counterparts. The Amateur Class would be an entry level license limited to and enticing and useful, but not satisfying, mix of HF and VHF/UHF frequencies and a maximum power level of 100 watts. If this sounds like a Novice license with VHF and HF phone privileges or a Tech license with HF phone privileges, that is fine. Restructuring has increased the interest of existing Amateurs in improving their skills and upgrading to expanded privileges, but it hasn't succeeded in providing a gateway to the broad scope of Amateur Radio for interested prospects. For prospective Amateurs Restructuring simply closed HF as the door to Amateur Radio and opened VHF as the entrance to the Amateur Service. Rather than focusing on either HF or VHF as the entry to the Amateur Service, the entry level license should focus on our common interests as Radio Amateurs and should afford both HF and VHF/UHF privileges. There is some difference of opinion as to the difficulty of current license exams. My understanding is a license examination is intended to establish the minimum level of understanding of pertinent rules and concepts an applicant should have before being authorized the privileges granted by the license. The license should be the beginning not an end in our quest to understand and increase our enjoyment of Amateur Radio. One of the local curmudgeons has suggested an exam should test whether the applicant knows enough not to seriously injure himself/herself or others. Though I would prefer a slightly more rigorous test, he may not be too far from the mark. I have been helping out in presenting entry level and occasional upgrade license classes for 15 years or so. With the exception of the very detailed information on RF Exposure I don't think there is much in the current Tech Exam that is beyond the capabilities of a typical Middle School student. That being said, in some sense the entry level test doesn't always focus on the things a "newbie" needs to know to get on the air. There are a few test topics that deserve some thought. Most students, youngsters in particular, wonder why they are expected to devote so much time to memorize frequency allocations. After all one of the most popular handouts from ARRL and equipment manufacturers are frequency allocation charts. Why, because hams don't always remember the band edges. If we don't remember the allocations, perhaps the test should focus on understanding more than rote memory. Frequency allocations are just one example. Ideally, every new license should come with an Elmer. Perhaps one way to take some of the "fear" out of getting the license and getting on the air would be to identify local clubs who would be willing to provide assistance to "newbies". We might be able to provide a list of those ARRL Affiliated Clubs and contact persons willing to assist new hams to new hams when we send out our promotional materials to new licensees, if we aren't doing it already. WRC03 will present new opportunities in structuring Amateur licenses to meet the international requirements of 2003 and beyond. One of those opportunities is the chance to create a license structure that is relevant, inclusive, meaningful and inviting to prospective Amateurs. Can we afford to let this opportunity pass? 73, Jay KØQB

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8736] Re: Time for a New License
by Tom Frenaye 12 May '03

12 May '03

At 10:00 AM 5/12/2003 -0500, Jay/K0QB wrote: >Jim H. has suggested the current Technician exam is too difficult as an entry class license. Kay has suggested in light of the likely elimination of Morse as an HF license requirement by WRC 03, we consider an entry level license with a less demanding exam and limited but appropriate operating privileges. Their comments invited discussion and suggestions. Here goes. > >I suggest a three class license structure, Amateur Class, Amateur General Class and Amateur Extra Class. Each license would have HF and VHF/UHF privileges and we would all be Amateurs. > >The Amateur General and Amateur Extra Class would have the same privileges as their current counterparts. The Amateur Class would be an entry level license limited to and enticing and useful, but not satisfying, mix of HF and VHF/UHF frequencies and a maximum power level of 100 watts. If this sounds like a Novice license with VHF and HF phone privileges or a Tech license with HF phone privileges, that is fine. [stuff cut] >With the exception of the very detailed information on RF Exposure I dont think there is much in the current Tech Exam that is beyond the capabilities of a typical Middle School student. [more stuff cut] The requirement for RF safety questions in the entry-level license appears to go away if the license is limited to 100w on 15m and below, and 50w on 12m and above. http://www.arrl.org/news/rfsafety/eval/index.html I think that would be a good thing to aim for. -- Tom ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8735] Time for a New License
by John Bellows 12 May '03

12 May '03

Jim H. has suggested the current Technician exam is too difficult as an entry class license. Kay has suggested in light of the likely elimination of Morse as an HF license requirement by WRC 03, we consider an entry level license with a less demanding exam and limited but appropriate operating privileges. Their comments invited discussion and suggestions. Here goes. I suggest a three class license structure, Amateur Class, Amateur General Class and Amateur Extra Class. Each license would have HF and VHF/UHF privileges and we would all be Amateurs. The Amateur General and Amateur Extra Class would have the same privileges as their current counterparts. The Amateur Class would be an entry level license limited to and enticing and useful, but not satisfying, mix of HF and VHF/UHF frequencies and a maximum power level of 100 watts. If this sounds like a Novice license with VHF and HF phone privileges or a Tech license with HF phone privileges, that is fine. Restructuring has increased the interest of existing Amateurs in improving their skills and upgrading to expanded privileges, but it hasnt succeeded in providing a gateway to the broad scope of Amateur Radio for interested prospects. For prospective Amateurs Restructuring simply closed HF as the door to Amateur Radio and opened VHF as the entrance to the Amateur Service. Rather than focusing on either HF or VHF as the entry to the Amateur Service, the entry level license should focus on our common interests as Radio Amateurs and should afford both HF and VHF/UHF privileges. There is some difference of opinion as to the difficulty of current license exams. My understanding is a license examination is intended to establish the minimum level of understanding of pertinent rules and concepts an applicant should have before being authorized the privileges granted by the license. The license should be the beginning not an end in our quest to understand and increase our enjoyment of Amateur Radio. One of the local curmudgeons has suggested an exam should test whether the applicant knows enough not to seriously injure himself/herself or others. Though I would prefer a slightly more rigorous test, he may not be too far from the mark. I have been helping out in presenting entry level and occasional upgrade license classes for 15 years or so. With the exception of the very detailed information on RF Exposure I dont think there is much in the current Tech Exam that is beyond the capabilities of a typical Middle School student. That being said, in some sense the entry level test doesnt always focus on the things a newbie needs to know to get on the air. There are a few test topics that deserve some thought. Most students, youngsters in particular, wonder why they are expected to devote so much time to memorize frequency allocations. After all one of the most popular handouts from ARRL and equipment manufacturers are frequency allocation charts. Why, because hams dont always remember the band edges. If we dont remember the allocations, perhaps the test should focus on understanding more than rote memory. Frequency allocations are just one example. Ideally, every new license should come with an Elmer. Perhaps one way to take some of the fear out of getting the license and getting on the air would be to identify local clubs who would be willing to provide assistance to newbies. We might be able to provide a list of those ARRL Affiliated Clubs and contact persons willing to assist new hams to new hams when we send out our promotional materials to new licensees, if we arent doing it already. WRC03 will present new opportunities in structuring Amateur licenses to meet the international requirements of 2003 and beyond. One of those opportunities is the chance to create a license structure that is relevant, inclusive, meaningful and inviting to prospective Amateurs. Can we afford to let this opportunity pass? 73, Jay KØQB

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8734] Re: Convention-hamfest date conflicts
by Joel Harrison 12 May '03

12 May '03

Greg, What is the "specialty" convention that conflicts?? The Microwave Update Conference is in Seattle this year in late September and has more of a national following than a local one. Joel

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8733] Re: ARRL Banner
by Jim Weaver 12 May '03

12 May '03

Tuck and all, Yep, I meant inches for the height dimension. Guess my finger did too much walking. The dimensions would be 6' W x 29" H. Sorry for any confusion. As Jim H. and David W. know, we in the "real" Midwest like to do things rather large, but a 29' tall banner would be a little bit too large! 73, Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director, Great Lakes Division k8je(a)arrl.org - Tel. 513-459-0142 ARRL -- The reason Amateur Radio is! GREAT LAKES DIVISION CONVENTION, September 6, 2003: See http://greatlakes.arrl.org

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8732] Re: ARRL Banner
by Tuck Miller NZ6T 12 May '03

12 May '03

Jim, I sure hope you mean inches and not feet. That would be the biggest ARRL poster I have ever seen. Jim Weaver wrote: >To: All > >Some time back I said I was having an ARRL banner made locally. I was >asked to take a photo of it and send it for the information of ODV. We >in this Division have had the banner for a while and I finally got >around to photographing it today. The banner is 6' w x 29' and cost >$85.00. The dimensions were selected to fit the front of a typical 6' >table. It has 3 grommets on each the top and the bottom to permit >hanging with small rope. Gaffer's tape also works very well (I learned >about this tape from SM NB4K). The basic banner is from vinyl >impregnated fabric (a typical banner fabric) so it can be rolled >lengthwise into a neat package of about 3" diameter. > >FYI. > >73, > >Jim > >Jim Weaver, K8JE, Director, Great Lakes Division >k8je(a)arrl.org - Tel. 513-459-0142 > >ARRL -- The reason Amateur Radio is! > >GREAT LAKES DIVISION CONVENTION, September 6, 2003: See >http://greatlakes.arrl.org > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > -- ************************************************ ARRL The national association for Amateur Radio Remember, Helping Others....Always Worthwhile!! Southwestern Division Vice Director Are you a member yet? If not, please join! Check out the Convention web site at: http://www.hamcon.org/ Personal Web Page: http://www.qsl.net/nz6t

1 0