Date: Wed, 4 May 94 04:30:01 PDT From: Ham-Policy Mailing List and Newsgroup Errors-To: Ham-Policy-Errors@UCSD.Edu Reply-To: Ham-Policy@UCSD.Edu Precedence: Bulk Subject: Ham-Policy Digest V94 #192 To: Ham-Policy Ham-Policy Digest Wed, 4 May 94 Volume 94 : Issue 192 Today's Topics: "NOCODE" Tech to "TechPLUS" upgrading (4 msgs) Idea, 10-10 members.... New FCC amateur radio licenses (5 msgs) Oh, no, Mr. Bob! (was Re: "NOCODE: . . .) Ooops. Send Replies or notes for publication to: Send subscription requests to: Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu. Archives of past issues of the Ham-Policy Digest are available (by FTP only) from UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-policy". We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: 3 May 94 19:26:35 GMT From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu!levine@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Subject: "NOCODE" Tech to "TechPLUS" upgrading To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article 77b9@amcomp.com, dan@amcomp.com (Dan Pickersgill) writes: -->kevin jessup writes: --> -->>When a "codeless" tech "upgrades" to TECH plus 5WPM code, he simply -->>gets a CSCE for the 5WPM. No forms get sent to the FCC. At least -->>not when I upgraded. I was told to just save the form in case -->>someone asked to see it. Well, this has changed. Now there is a distinction between No-Code Techs and Technicians w/HF on the 610 Form. The FCC now apparently recognizes the two distinct licence classes. No one can argue that they are not different. Different requirements to pass and different privs. Similar to the difference between any other 2 classes. You pass more elements, you gets more privs. --- ------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247 kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1994 19:31:19 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu!levine@network.ucsd.edu Subject: "NOCODE" Tech to "TechPLUS" upgrading To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article GM5@wang.com, dbushong@wang.com (Dave Bushong) writes: --> -->What happens if you: --> -->Upgraded from Codeless Tech to Code Tech, then moved, and sent in a -->610 for a change of address? Do you include your CSCE so that the -->FCCs information is correct? Or just keep the CSCE forever in case -->you never upgrade? --> If I were a Tech w/HF who upgraded from No-Code, I would send the CSCE photocopy so my new license could indicate Technician w/HF. Also, the FCC database could be updated in my favor. The station licenses are now different, as I understand. --- ------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247 kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1994 19:37:46 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu!levine@network.ucsd.edu Subject: "NOCODE" Tech to "TechPLUS" upgrading To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article nvd@vortex.eng.sc.rolm.com, montp@vortex.eng.sc.rolm.com (Mont Pierce) writes: -->>kevin jessup writes: -->> -->>>When a "codeless" tech "upgrades" to TECH plus 5WPM code, he simply -->>>gets a CSCE for the 5WPM. No forms get sent to the FCC. At least -->>>not when I upgraded. I was told to just save the form in case -->>>someone asked to see it. -->>> --> -->In all the databases I've seen I've never seen any indication of any -->kind that you could use to distinguish between a Tech and Tech+ unless -->they upgraded from Novice to Tech+. --> -->So, unless your going to confront each Tech and ask for their CSCE you -->would never know if they upgraded from Tech to Tech+ or not... --> -->If the FCC can tell, then they must be looking at some field other then -->class of license. --> -->73, --> -->km6wt --> The new licenses to be issued shortly (when the new FCC Computer is online, and it isnt today) will differentiate between Technician and Technician w/HF ON THE LICENSE. Also, I learned today that the FCC is backlogged 12-14 weeks and still processing the OLD 610s. (they havent reached the first of the new ones yet due to the backlog) --- ------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247 kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1994 15:08 CDT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!dog.ee.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!news.uh.edu!elroy.uh.edu!st3qi@network.ucsd.edu Subject: "NOCODE" Tech to "TechPLUS" upgrading To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article <2q68hb$ao8@jericho.mc.com>, levine@mc.com writes... >In article 77b9@amcomp.com, dan@amcomp.com (Dan Pickersgill) writes: >-->kevin jessup writes: >--> >-->>When a "codeless" tech "upgrades" to TECH plus 5WPM code, he simply >-->>gets a CSCE for the 5WPM. No forms get sent to the FCC. At least >-->>not when I upgraded. I was told to just save the form in case >-->>someone asked to see it. > >Well, this has changed. Now there is a distinction between >No-Code Techs and Technicians w/HF on the 610 Form. The >FCC now apparently recognizes the two distinct licence classes. > >No one can argue that they are not different. Different >requirements to pass and different privs. Similar to the >difference between any other 2 classes. > >You pass more elements, you gets more privs. > > >--- >------------------------------------------------------------ >Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP >levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247 >kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599 >------------------------------------------------------------ > When the FCC gets their new computer system online, the will begin issueing licenses that state "Technician Plus HF". This is from W5YI. -Brad Killebrew N5LJV -st3qi@jetson.uh.edu -President, Univ of Houston ARC ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 19:10:20 GMT From: darwin.sura.net!rsg1.er.usgs.gov!news.cs.indiana.edu!noose.ecn.purdue.edu!constellation.ecn.purdue.edu!wb9omc@seismo.css.gov Subject: Idea, 10-10 members.... To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu I'd like to gauge the interest among members of 10-10 International who are on the Internet for a group, possibly called: rec.radio.amateur.1010 The purpose of the group would be multiple: 1) to help disseminate information of general interest to 10-10 members who have access to Internet. 2) to help 10-10 members set up skeds, nets and other communications events. 3) to help develop interest in not only 10-10 International but to maintain interest in 10 meters in *spite* of the current lull in the band. 4) to help develop computer operating aids for 10-10 contests and paperchasing. 5) to serve as one focal point for 10-10 members to discuss the organization, contest rules, awards rules, etc. 6) other future purposes realted to Amateur Radio and 10-10. *********** I think that emailing me would probably be preferred to clogging up a number of newsgroups with "me too!" kinds of mail. If you are interested or have a *brief* thought on the subject, please email: wb9omc@harbor.ecn.purdue.edu flames and/or mail bombs will be ignored, deleted, /dev/null'ed, etc. :-) If interest seems positive enough, I will make some contacts with the officers of 10-10 to find out in what ways, if at all, they would like to make contact and maintain contact with such a newsgroup. 73 Duane, WB9OMC ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 94 17:25:43 GMT From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!rwiley@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Subject: New FCC amateur radio licenses To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article , David Drumheller wrote: > I've noticed that the recent amateur radio licenses come in two parts: >the traditional wallet document, and one that can be framed to be hung in >the shack. I was last issued a license in 1990 that was printed with an >impact printer, and it's a little hard to read. It appears that the new >licenses are laser printed. > > Question: Can I ask the FCC for the new license? I'd like to get the >part you can frame. (Somehow I feel the answer is going to be `no.') > >-Dave They are nice, aren't they? The answer is, it can be done. All you need to do, is submit a form 610, and request a duplicate. My wife lost her's, and it came in the mail in about 4 weeks. 73 de Bob, N8MMR -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= =-= Bob Wiley, N8MMR Internet: rwiley@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu =-= =-= P.O. Box 3164 Amateur Radio Packet: N8MMR@W8CQK.OH.USA.NA =-= =-= Columbus, Ohio 43210 =-= ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 94 18:42:54 GMT From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!eff!news.kei.com!yeshua.marcam.com!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!nntp.cs.ubc.ca!unixg.ubc.ca!news.mic.@ Subject: New FCC amateur radio licenses To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu If I'm not mistaken, if you simply send in the form 610 to renew your license (which is free) they will send you the new format, even if 10 years isn't up. Or a change of address, for that matter. 73 -- rogjd@netcom.com Glendale, CA AB6WR ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1994 19:39:20 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!cat.cis.Brown.EDU!noc.near.net!jericho.mc.com!fugu!levine@network.ucsd.edu Subject: New FCC amateur radio licenses To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article 2Ju@ra.nrl.navy.mil, drumhell@claudette.nrl.navy.mil (David Drumheller) writes: --> I've noticed that the recent amateur radio licenses come in two parts: -->the traditional wallet document, and one that can be framed to be hung in -->the shack. I was last issued a license in 1990 that was printed with an -->impact printer, and it's a little hard to read. It appears that the new -->licenses are laser printed. --> --> Question: Can I ask the FCC for the new license? I'd like to get the -->part you can frame. (Somehow I feel the answer is going to be `no.') --> No Problem. Get one of the new 610s and send in for a license renewal. Maybe you lost your original....... --- ------------------------------------------------------------ Bob Levine KD1GG 7J1AIS VK2GYN formerly KA1JFP levine@mc.com <--Internet email Phone(508) 256-1300 x247 kd1gg@wa1phy.ma <--Packet Mail FAX(508) 256-3599 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 18:36:29 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!news.acns.nwu.edu!news.eecs.nwu.edu!ahab.eecs.nwu.edu!hpa@network.ucsd.edu Subject: New FCC amateur radio licenses To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu Followup to: By author: drumhell@claudette.nrl.navy.mil (David Drumheller) In newsgroup: rec.radio.amateur.policy > > I've noticed that the recent amateur radio licenses come in two parts: > the traditional wallet document, and one that can be framed to be hung in > the shack. I was last issued a license in 1990 that was printed with an > impact printer, and it's a little hard to read. It appears that the new > licenses are laser printed. > > Question: Can I ask the FCC for the new license? I'd like to get the > part you can frame. (Somehow I feel the answer is going to be `no.') > You can get a new license issued if your old one got mutilated or destroyed. Mine pretty darn well qualifies (I left it in the trouser pocket in the wash), but the current FCC 3-month delay makes me leary... I figure also it will be a good incentive to finally get that 13 WPM so I can get an Advanced... /hpa -- INTERNET: hpa@nwu.edu FINGER/TALK: hpa@ahab.eecs.nwu.edu IBM MAIL: I0050052 at IBMMAIL HAM RADIO: N9ITP or SM4TKN FIDONET: 1:115/511 or 1:115/512 STORMNET: 181:294/101 .... .- -- ... -.. --- .. - --- -. - .... . .- .. .-. .-.-.- ------------------------------ Date: 3 May 1994 15:00 CDT From: ncar!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!zip.eecs.umich.edu!panix!ddsw1!news.kei.com!eff!news.duke.edu!news-feed-1.peachnet.edu!emory!swrinde!news.uh.edu!elroy.uh.edu!st3qi@ames.arpa Subject: New FCC amateur radio licenses To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article , drumhell@claudette.nrl.navy.mil (David Drumheller) writes... > I've noticed that the recent amateur radio licenses come in two parts: >the traditional wallet document, and one that can be framed to be hung in >the shack. I was last issued a license in 1990 that was printed with an >impact printer, and it's a little hard to read. It appears that the new >licenses are laser printed. > > Question: Can I ask the FCC for the new license? I'd like to get the >part you can frame. (Somehow I feel the answer is going to be `no.') > >-Dave >-- >David Drumheller, KA3QBQ phone: (202) 767-3524 >Acoustics Division, Code 7140 fax: (202) 404-7732 >Naval Research Laboratory >Washington, DC 20375-5350 e-mail: drumhell@claudette.nrl.navy.mil Yes, you can. My old impact license was set to expire in 1998, but I wanted a good looking laser-printed license, so I sent in for a renewal. This was two years ago when I did thig. I recieved back a great looking license with a new expiration date set for Feb. 14, 2002. Just send in a 610, a copy of your current license, and check the box that says "renew" license. ------------------------------ Date: 4 May 94 01:40:55 GMT From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!noc.near.net!news.tufts.edu!news.hnrc.tufts.edu!jerry@ucbvax.berkeley.edu Subject: Oh, no, Mr. Bob! (was Re: "NOCODE: . . .) To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In article <2q696a$ao8@jericho.mc.com>, levine@mc.com (Bob Levine) writes: > > Also, I learned today that the FCC is backlogged 12-14 weeks > and still processing the OLD 610s. (they havent reached the first > of the new ones yet due to the backlog) > Sometimes it's more of a kindness not to tell! :-) ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 3 May 1994 00:17:44 GMT From: ihnp4.ucsd.edu!usc!math.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!mixcom.com!kevin.jessup@network.ucsd.edu Subject: Ooops. To: ham-policy@ucsd.edu In <29APR199413294960@elroy.uh.edu> st3qi@elroy.uh.edu (Brad Killebrew N5LJV) writes: >Oops. Disregard the last message, I posted it in the wrong area. Just great! Now we have TWO useless messages in this area!! :-[ Oops...make that three! ;-) -- /`-_ kevin.jessup@mixcom.com { }/ Marquette Electronics, Inc \ / N9SQB, ARRL, Amateur Radio |__*| N9SQB @ WD9ANY.#MKE.WI.USA.NA ------------------------------ End of Ham-Policy Digest V94 #192 ******************************