The RSGB has just released a draft of the new exam syllabus for Foundation, Intermediate and Full. The draft document states that this is for examinations held after 1 July 2018.
At 86 pages, this document contains a lot to review, and you have until the 21st of July 2017 to have your say on the proposed changes.
One of Essex Ham’s guiding missions is to help get new people into amateur radio, and so I’ve read the new syllabus to see how this will potentially affect new entrants to the hobby. In places, it’s quite a change, with a lot of material moving from Intermediate to Foundation.
To save you wading through 86 pages, I’ve condensed the changes into the following summary. My notes are added at the end of each section.
If you have any thoughts, feel free to add them to the comments section of this page, but to have your say, please complete the RSGB’s survey – Go to rsgb.org/syllabus_review
You have until 21st of July 2017 to tell the RSGB what you think.
Pete M0PSX
Foundation Online Course Coordinator
Section 0 – Prior Knowledge
A new section that explicitly states required knowledge of basics maths, fractions & decimals, units and basic algebra (e.g V=IxR). Two new requirements added:
- Addition of “micro” and “Giga” to the units
- Decimal and exponent notation and conversion of numbers from 10-6 to 109 to/from decimal.
Section 1 -Licensing Conditions
No significant changes here – just some tidying up. Additions to this section include:
- Adds the need to recall the optional /A, /P, /M and /MM suffixes {Was Intermediate}. Oddly, the new Foundation syllabus mentions the need to recall them, they don’t need to know what they mean until Intermediate (!)
- Adds “Vessel at Sea” and Aircraft conditions {Was Intermediate}
- Adds that station tests are required “from time to time” {Was Intermediate}
- Adds that foreign countries do not routinely recognise Foundation {Was Intermediate}
- Updates “Recall the requirements for ID” to include the need to ID on change of operator or supervisor (which isn’t in the licence). Interestingly, there’s no mention of “as frequently as practicable” (which is in the licence)
- Adds a definition of “broadcasting”
Section 2 – Technical Aspects
A significant increase here, notably:
- Introduces parallel and series circuits {Was Intermediate}. Requires candidates to:
- Understand that current in all parts of a series circuit has the same value and that the potential differences across items in parallel are the same.
- Recall that when resistors are connected in series, the total resistance is equal to the sum of the values of the individual resistors.
- Recall that when two resistors of equal value are connected in parallel, the total resistance is equal to 1/2 the value of each individual resistor
- Understand that the sum of the voltages across a number of resistors in series equals the supply voltage.
- Understand that where a supply feeds more than one component or device the total current is the sum of the currents in the individual items.
- Adds more on resistors, including that a current through a resistor results in conversion of electrical energy to heat energy. {Was Intermediate}
- Adds content on rechargeable vs non-rechargable batteries
- Adds more on sine waves, what they mean and that the start of a sine wave is at zero amplitude and the 90 degree point is the positive maximum
- Adds Analogue to Digital Convertor (ADC) and Digital to Analogue Convertor (DAC), plus definition of digital signals, and sampling rates
- Adds LEDs {Was Intermediate}
| An increase from 20 items, to 44 items, and I can’t see a reason why any of the new proposed material needs to be here. Intermediate introduces circuits (with practicals), and use of multimeters to test the theory. To me, that’s where much of this belongs. Construction and resistors is still very much an Intermediate thing, so how useful is loading Foundation with extra electronics theory? This is a lot of extra content to throw at a newcomer who has potentially no technical, electronics or construction experience at this level. |
Section 3 – Transmitters and Receivers
Some additions here:
- Introduces Sidebands (“amplitude modulated signals contain two sidebands and the carrier”), and concept of SSB {Was Intermediate}
- More on loads and matching
- Introduces Software Defined Radio receivers and transmitters
- Introduces Digital Voice and that different DV (incompatible) systems exist
- Adds two new block diagrams to remember:
| The lack of any mention of SSB at Foundation was always a puzzle, so it’s good that this is added. Block diagrams are a constant problem, and the addition of two new (unnecessary?) diagrams is not going to be popular with students. A-to-D, D-to-A and SDRs will increase complexity for volunteer trainers. |
Section 4 – Feeders and Antennas
Some significant additions here, on a section that some Foundation candidates already struggle with, especially those with no existing RF knowledge:
- Adds “Waveguide” as the third type of feeder.
- More on feeder, including loss, 50Ω impedance, RF energy being converted to heat, and greater loss at higher frequency
- Adds antenna radiation patterns. Candidates need to be able to identify the polar diagrams for the half wave dipole and Yagi, and identify the directions of maximum and minimum radiation. {Was Intermediate}
- More on antenna gain and ERP. Requires candidates to calculate ERP given antenna input power and antenna gain (a dB conversion table will apparently be provided, but is omitted from the draft) {Was Intermediate}
- Adds “feed point” impedance, mismatch and reflection {Was Intermediate}
- Adds N and SMA plugs (in addition to BNC and PL259), plus the SO239 socket. Mentions that these will appear in Table 2, but they’re not in the draft.
| Previously, there were 18 examinable items in this section. The proposed change takes this to 40 items! A lot of extra material moved en masse from Intermediate, making this a much more complex module. I wonder how much of this is truly helpful at Foundation… |
Section 5 – Propagation
Largely unchanged, but some material on the Ionosphere brought down from Intermediate:
- Adds more on Ionosphere: D, E, F1 and F2 layers and their order, and that refraction from the F2 layer is the main mode of long distance HF propagation. {Was Intermediate}
- Adds Sporadic E for VHF {Was Intermediate}
| The layers are only properly explained in the Intermediate syllabus, so not clear why the layers are introduced (but not explained) at this level |
Section 6 – Electro Magnetic Compatibility (EMC)
Largely unchanged, but lots of EMC material added for radios fitted to cars, including requirements for candidates to recall the following:
- Candidates should recall that they need to refer to the vehicle manufacturer’s handbook for advice on EMC (At Intermediate, they need to “understand” this, not “recall” it)
- Mobile radio equipment should have its own DC power fused positive lead wired back to the battery and the negative lead connected to the chassis
- 12V power sockets should not be used.
- RF can cause interference to vehicle electronic circuits, including audio systems, navigation systems, remote locking, alarms and engine fuel management systems
- Vehicle ignition and battery charging systems can cause RF interference
| The addition of in-car advisories makes sense. |
Section 7 – Operating Practices and Procedures
Largely unchanged and some tidying, but a few extra bits for candidates to remember, notably codes previously out-of-scope
- Adds: information on what data should be recorded in a log, and why UTC is used
- Candidates need to know meaning and the reason for using the following: QRZ, QSL, QSO, QSY, QTH, QRT, QSB. {Was Intermediate}
- Candidates need to know meaning and the reason for using the following: CQ, DE, DX, RST, KN, CW, K, SK. {Was Intermediate}
- Adds compatibility of digital voice (DV) and digital data (DD) modes
- Adds that users of Digital Voice (DV) should check that the channel is not in use by other modes.
- Adds requirement to know that Special Event Stations have callsigns starting with “GB”.
- Oddly, “no transmission on beacon frequencies” and “no terrestrial contacts on satellite frequencies” is in the Intermediate syllabus, so apparently doesn’t need to be taught at Foundation. This was not part of the current Foundation syllabus, so is not a change, but it’s an interesting oddity.
| Codes such as QTH and QSO really should have been introduced in Foundation, so the move makes sense, but it’s 15 codes that a newbie now has to memorise, which isn’t ideal. With band plans, repeater setup, data modes and satellite ops in the section already, adding 15 codes and DV will load this section with a lot of material that a newbie would self-learn on the job anyway. |
Section 8 – Safety
A considerable increase here, with material largely being moved from Intermediate:
- Voltages over 33V AC and 70V DC are hazardous but that an electric shock may be experienced at lower voltages.
- More on fuses (structure, purpose, requirement to work out why one has blown)
- Adds RCD protection {Was Intermediate}
- Adds risks associated with rechargeable batteries (high current, lithium batteries can cause fire and explode) and charging requirements
- Tool Safety: Lots here, including eye protection, swarf and hand tool care. {Was Intermediate}
- Soldering: Splashing, stands and ventilation {Was Intermediate}
- Ladders: Ratio (4:1 height-to-base ratio), overreach, toolbelt, hard hat {Was Intermediate}
- Exposure to radiation: body tissue and eyes, sources for safe levels of RF radiation and dangers of microwave frequency waveguide / high-gain antennas {Was Intermediate}
- Safety at temporary premises and on field events (damp ground, risk assessment, cable routing, protection, correct fusing, use of RCDs, etc)
| A lot of material has been moved from Intermediate. It’s hard to fault the addition of extra safety advice, but it increases the amount of teaching / learning. With no construction and only 10 watts at Foundation, some could argue that some of the new material is of limited use this early on. |
Section 10 – Practical Assessments
The main practicals are unchanged. The only change here is that there is an alternative to the Morse practical. Candidates must either do the existing “Morse appreciation or a data mode using an SDR. The exact wording of the data mode practical is:
“10B2: Demonstrate how to set up a Software Defined Radio (SDR) (such as the ICOM 7300 or any other SD radio) with additional software interfacing and make a QSO via a digital mode (PSK, JT65, JT9 or WSPR)”
| It’s good to have an alternative to Morse, and adding data modes is great – however, why mandate only an SDR for data? Do all clubs and trainers possess £1,200 SDR transceivers and software interfaces? With a class of 10 students, how practical is it to get all 10 students to set up an Icom 7300 from scratch, set up the interface and software, the various macros and have a QSO? With JT QSOs taking 9 minutes each, is this viable for classroom courses?
Also, why no SSTV? Can you have a QSO on WSPR? |
Summary
My understanding of the syllabus review, was that Intermediate would get slightly more difficult, to make the jump from Intermediate to Full a little easier. 93% of people passed Intermediate in 2015, compared to 68% passing Full, so I see the logic in adding more to Intermediate.
Given that we need to do all we can to get people into the hobby, I can’t see what’s to gain from significantly increasing the complexity of Foundation.
The last published numbers show that 15% of people taking Foundation… fail. To me, it seems that the proposed changes to the Foundation syllabus will increase that failure rate, involve a significant re-think of Foundation training material, increase the course length to accommodate the new material, and result in less newcomers entering the hobby.
At this time, it’s not clear whether it’s Ofcom asking for this significant toughening of Foundation, or the RSGB…
If you have any thoughts, feel free to add them to the comments section of this page, but to have your say, please complete the RSGB’s survey by the 21st of July – Go to rsgb.org/syllabus_review
Pete M0PSX
Em,
I can’t see the point of
* “Adds “Waveguide” as the third type of feeder.” for a foundation license.
That seems to be going a bit over the top to me.
Dave, G8WRB
I agree with all your comments.
I assume if the foundation have to learn about the dangers of microwave freqs then they will now be allowed access.
To be honest why are they making the foundation harder, for the 10 watts they get they already do more than enough.
They could do with being taught how to use an affordable SWR meter to tune an antenna instead of an mfj analyzer which most will never possess.
A bit more practise on how to talk on air including an explanation on why giving the callsign is important.
Foundation has had access to 10GHz for several years. See Schedule 1Table A in licence.
Is recognising waveguide difficult?
How many new foundation licensees operate on 10Ghz with commercially purchased equipment (since they cant build their own) ? That is the question to ask when considering if recognising wave guide is appropriate to the foundation licence. Asking “is it difficult to recognise wave guide” shows you are totally disconnected from the real situations faced by new foundation licensees.
That’s perhaps missing the point Alan – Recognising the symbol for a capacitor or a transformer is not difficult either, but they’ve been left out of scope as they’ve been deemed not relevant at Foundation.
The criteria for adding something to the Foundation syllabus should be that it’s relevant, something that the licence-holder needs to know or mandated by Ofcom, not because it’s easy. Have there been lots of documented issues with M6s not recognising waveguide, that I’m not aware of that’s resulted in the need for this to be added?
I see antenna’s propagation understanding of ssb & the use of Q codes in foundation as a good move
I also think some of the intermediate sylabus is of no use under an intermediate licence & only applies to a full licence my guess is it is not Ofcom but the RSGB who have come up with these ideas & raising the bar with foundation is a backward move because it will hinder & not help newcomers into Amateur radio
You can bet it’s not Ofcom pushing for this. It’s the old boys who pay their subs to fund RSGB. Does the Spectrum Regulator care whether a licence-holder knows how a DSP or diode works, or what current flows across two resistors in parallel? Of course not.
No the rebalancing between Full and Intermediate was instigated by Ofcom who felt the Intermediate exam standard did not justify the extra privileges from Foundation.
(Section 2 – Technical Aspects) Absolutely ridiculous, Are they trying to drive away newcomers to the hobby?
With the foundation license you have to use a shop brought radio, What is the need to learn about resistors? This will just confuse with the little bit that they would have to learn but drive most away from even doing the foundation license. It might be true about half the branch current for 2 resistors in parallel but it is not if you add more resistors, What is the point as they say a little bit of knowledge is dangerous and confusing.
I also agree with others comments.
I can’t add anything really that hasn’t been said already, it seems to be a lot of extra un needed information at foundation level . Enough so , that if I was thinking of getting into the hobby now, as a YL , to see if it’s a hobby I would want to be interested in, ” or to keep the other half happy ” , it would put me off.
For someone like me , who doesn’t have a technological background, electrical experience , and as an entry level to hobby , that I’m not fussed about , I probably wouldn’t bother, and it would result in the loss of someone like me , who got into it at a relatively doable level , Took it further and really got a buzz and enthusiasm for radio . Which would be a shame ..the hurdle would be too high for a beginner.
Aside from this , thank you Essex ham for this post , it must of taken a lot of time to create . And for alerting us all what is being considered for the new exam levels , it’s nice to be kept aware of a changing hobby xx
Even at full license level only the very few construct these days, It is a very different world out there today with many having to work more hours to bring home enough money to pay their mortgages and ever rising house bills which leave people a lot less time to enjoy hobbies in general. Even W & S felt this over the last few years hense the move to Portsmouth to join up with Nevada, We all rememer the days when the shop was always busy but the last few years the shop was always quiet and I don’t think was all down to internet trading.
I can remember many years ago there were always a fair few hams that used to be always in places like Maplins buying components when you would see Maplins employing skilled staff that knew a bit about electronics, These days very few are knowledgeable and to be honest the staff don’t need to be as you don’t see queues anymore down at the component counter.
For those that have been in the hobby for a long time will remember there used to be many qso’s years ago about construction on the local bands, This is a thing of the past now for most, Back then 90% of hams used to construct, These days it is probably only the 10%, Almost everybody buys everything out of the shop hense the less need for the technical knowledge, That’s why less and less foundation holders don’t progress up the ladder because there is no need for that in the hobby anymore as the only advantage for them to work up the ladder now is for the higher power privileges and to be honest we have all seen it on hf some of those use more then 10 watts as most of them have 100 watt radios, You don’t find many with FT817’s.
They all know that they are not going to have ofcom sitting outside for using a few more watts then they are allowed as they can see that there is a lot of long term keying on the bands and that ofcom don’t really care.
Back in the day many hams worked in the industry and in those days no one had mobile phones or computers like we have now so ham radio is not so essential for social chit chat and chats on technical stuff as friends will phone each other, You don’t see that many antenna’s up like you did years ago or cars with mobile set ups, Lets be honest a lot of new hams these days are buy a baofeng and a dmr handheld, You don’t need a huge technical knowledge for the new culture.
Changing the Syllabus too much will drive people away from the hobby, We don’t need more technical we need more people getting on the bands and talking.
This just proves to me how much the RSGB have their heads up their backsides and how detached they are with the hobby in it’s current from.
Very well put Sir .
Sadly, too true Paul. Ofcom’s happy for amateur radio to tick along as-is (as long as there are no customers willing to pay for AR’s spectrum). It’s the RSGB, lobbied by the fee-paying G army, who want to hold the hobby back.
exactly this is not Ofcom its the rsgb been put under pressure by the Gs and every one knows how they feel to wards m6s eg he is only a m6 no one answer him he will go away eg this repeater is for Gs only no m6s , this is a backwards step if the members is falling , think why this is not the way , the RSGB is better sorting out the G members that abuse the m6s and its on you tube and there just not helping. The hobby is dying and this is just another nail in the coffin, if I had to take the foundation again I would not as lots of questions are intermediate questions and that’s harder , Once again the Rsgb is bending to the needs and haters of the new m6 passes ,so again this will kill of the hobby and the Gs that have got this will be rubbing there hands with glee.
I quite agree Paul, you have stated all the item’s I have observed over the years including the lack of people at the components counter. Let’s keep it simple, we must encourage new people into the hobby and it is the responsibility of all of us to see that happens.
Jim. G8BJO.
The RSGB are out off touch , the only people’s they listen too are technophiles , the folks writing the syllabus are just trying to outdo each other, All this bull is turning people away from a hobby , the advanced exam for example is attempted for 400 watts NOT a application test for a engineers position with a multinational company , at 66 years of age this is ONE of my winter indoor hobbies , Amateur Radio RSGB especially needs to wake up or die off.
What Ronald said
Bri
Dare I say it hell yes this is me M1ECC HI Too many Murray types in this hobby that don’t live in the modern world and too much politics & judgemental wallies as well that think they know best less of this & more pulling together to support and help each other
To get on in amateur radio is needed after all we all share the same interest “radio” The area that needs the most focus is retaining people in the hobby
Do not push them away & make them feel judged with what they say or do when they go on air I see the new foundation sylabus doing exactly that pushing more away save the tech for intermediate & full isn’t the purpose of foundation to bring newcomers in who would have otherwise not even tried under the old rae system
We’ve added a quick survey to get your views: https://www.essexham.co.uk/limesurvey/index.php/417172
An interesting summary of changes – some of which are welcome additions but some, not so much.
“Foundation” should be exactly that; the broad strokes of a number of aspects to the hobby like the basics of how radio waves travel (ie: knowing when+why to use HF instead of VHF), Q-codes certainly although we seem to have too much of a good thing here with several un-necessary additions. There should be as much practical tuition as needed to get (a complete newbie) to assemble a station, operate a radio, find a frequency, call “CQ” and have a QSO – safely and happily.
Ohm’s Law, or the formula (working out fuse ratings etc), certainly – but the nuts and bolts of electrical/electronic theory perhaps best left to Intermediate. SDR probably deserves a slide, if only to explain how this modern tech differs from “conventional” radios . A digital-mode QSO? Given that with their 10-watts and let’s say a less-than-large garden, a mode like JT65 or PSK could be a benefit. Then again, so would Morse. The practical side should reflect the evolution of our bands: CW, Voice and Data explained and demonstrated to show that we have many methods of communication at our disposal and that the method of getting from A to B is (usually) more important than its contents.
As it stands, it seems like it could put some off from giving it a go – and in the short-term I guess the instructors will have to adjust, re-do their slides and know the revised content inside-out – and assuming that it’s being taught “well” (for want of a better word), those who put the effort in should get the result they deserve. It’s really only a memory test at the end of the day.
I think that the intended upgrade of the foundation licence is fine …… prefer quality to quantity, as many M6 wont advance further than this level then give them a better grounding in the hobby.
As PZT posts it is only a memory test of all three levels as was the RAE, read it… learn it… and recall it on the day ..
David G1GIL
Foundation should be kept simple, There is a big problem now getting people into the hobby.
The RSGB should influence manufacturer’s like Kenwood, Yaesu and Icom to sell a cheaper radio that covers vhf/uhf and hf like the FT817 but with a power level of 12 watts (2 watts for loss through coax and plugs). That can only operate on the bands and power levels the foundation license is licensed for.
Rules should be changed so that it is not allowed for foundation holders to go out and buy a 100/200 watt radio as why would someone at foundation license level want to progress to do an intermediate or full license exam if they have a 100/200 watt radio sitting on their side?
You would only have the more intrested people engage in intermediate training because they want to better themselves and their hobby and the ones that don’t want to take it any further and decide that the hobby is not for them will not have a 100/200 watt expensive radio to play around with when the boredom sets in, Not saying that all foundation licensee’s that have lost interest with the hobby are like that but what are they doing with 100/200 watt radios in the first place, Totally crazy that they have top end radio’s with power levels that they don’t have the right exam class to own and have not learnt in depth about EMC issues.
I also don’t think that foundation holders should have so many HF bands, Maybe just a few so there is some incentive to study for the intermediate license to gain extra bands along with a better radio and more privileges.
I agree on more practical time and better understanding of SSB and data modes, Q codes and antenna construction, propagation and how to use test equipment on a regular basis.
I still don’t agree on foundation holders learning about resistors and other components as that will push people away.
Just a basic level of understanding of ohms law would be sufficient, Really is no need for them to start studying Kirchoff’s.
Well said sir.. de GM4PPT.
If i am honest with this, it would push me away if i was looking to do the course. To much of the change makes it more studying, more harder to get a licence. i do not have time to start spending hours learning more. The foundation should be a start as it is to progression if someone picks to. The issue is all the bits they moving actually are not going to help newbies learn. Stuff like soldering a pl259 is actually more use at a foundation level so people can set their shacks up better for 10w. A badly solder pl259 can cause problems that then means people lose power and then do not value what 10w does.
The RSGB is really out of touch with the real world of amatuers. They do not understand any more and i think they not getting why the hobby is slowly dying still.
As many people know I got the foundation in Feb, however I wonder if I would’ve even bothered if these changes had’ve come into place, and to be quite honest, seeing that 11 out of the last 12 video’s added to youtube by the RSGB are all about YOTA I fail to see why they are intent on potentially driving people away. It’s hard enough being Foundation, I have heard G Callsigns on DMR 2M and 70Cm’s calling out, I have answered and nothing comes back, one G0 callsign actually asked for a signal check on DMR I came back (twice) and he called again, a 2E0 came back to him and said he was quite clearly answered by me, I am now thinking of not going any further in the hobby and if they change the syllabus that certainly would end it for me, 46 years interested, get licenced and leave the hobby in the same year, what jolly fun
Terence I am sorry that you have had to encounter some arrogance and ignorance from some of the higher license classes, Some of the foundation license classes have more enthusiasm for the hobby and better operating skills then some of the full license classes.
We are not all like that, I treat a foundation license holder the same as an intermediate or a full license class, Please don’t lose interest there are some great guys out there in the hobby, It is only the very few that are stuck up their own backsides, Enjoy the hobby and ignore them.
I do know what you are saying as I have heard a couple of full license holders myself criticising and ignoring foundation licensee’s, Disgusting behaviour that does not say much about their character.
Good point about YOTA.
Hope to work you soon on the bands.
Hi Terence exactly seen it happen and had it done to me I think before they start making it harder tp pass I would be asking, why is the hobby dying I am so bored with it, yes get there
house in good order get them big Gs with that kind of attitude sorted or removed as the way there acting there killing a great hobby but to try and get this passed as we all, know what some think of the m6s as I am a m6 there killing it I passed my test and not five minutes after passing, I was told we do not want to hear you on the cb and if we do we will never talk to you again. I felt deflated angry and wished I had failed I turned and said is ham that good, you have to listen to cb and it just got so boring after that give most of my radios and antennas away I was left with my 2m 70cm radio, never used 2m again but used 70cm then they took 70cm away then sent me my repeater fees , I can use neither so I will not pay most of my good contacts are mobile shame the hobby is going that way and the end is coming soon there killing it but does the Rsgb care , I think not
Thanks for that Paul, believe me I love the hobby and I love the way it’s encouraged at CARS Skills nights, they have helped me big time, anybody that knows me from there knows how interested in the hobby I am, but what with being ignored by (only a few) G Callsigns (They’re not anywhere near all like it) and now the RSGB trying to change the goalposts I just feel that it’s a case of here we go again, you find something that actually works then want to jazz it up even more and spoil what was a good thing. There’s nothing wrong with the foundation, Intermediate or the full, the RSGB ought to have faith in the competency of it’s trainers to teach correctly (which they do at CARS). Since passing the Foundation in February I have become interested in all modes, CW, Digital, Satellite, HF, VHF, UHF and more, no matter what it is, to me if it’s radio communications I love it, DMR (Not real radio to some) I have to use a handheld to get me to the repeater (Radio Retevis RT3), if a person wishes to progress they can, but if they take no further interest once they pass that is their choice, but to make their way into it harder I feel will just drive some away, and their new silly bus then becomes counter productive
Typical head-in-sand attitude from our lords and masters at the RSGB. Numbers are falling, so let’s make it harder for customers to get involved. The new plan has been put together by the RSGB ‘G’ team, who are more interested in appeasing their vocal purist old-timers than considering the future of the hobby.
“What can we throw in to scare off the non-academics?” “GHZ waveguides, DSP, outdated acronyms, F2 layer characteristics?” “Great – throw it in!”
Only academics with time on their hands will review the 86 page document and fill in the cumbersome review form, so these changes will go through on the nod with little-to-no opposition. Forgone conclusion.
I see that your poll was hijacked by M6-haters, pedants and the old boy network of grammar police. The same G8s who conspire to throw newcomers out of elitist forums and prefer playing keyboard politics to RF, perhaps?
When will people realise that amateur radio is a pastime. Back in the G’s heyday, it was a qualification and the only way to communicate around the world. The world’s changed and today’s M6s are the future, but the old guard are more concerned with shooting themselves in the feet to notice.
Taught more on over the air ettiquit and how to set there station up would be better than moving half the intermediate licence down to foundation…
We in Essex have gone all out to attract new blood to the hobby getting out there in the field taking the hobby to the public eye also successful skills nights at Danbury with lots of show & tell on display and guess what it works now the good old boys club the RSGB seems to want to undo all that & raise the bar on foundation only last year I thought the RSGB were at last waking up from there dream world with YOTA & the Tim Peak ISS Contacts to name but a few but sadly after reading through the new syllabus there still half asleep & will be wondering in the future why numbers are still falling same old same old with the RSGB 18 years licenced & still they have this elitist attitude come on RSGB start listening watch & learn
region 12 always have the most reported in Radcom
I must admit that when I went for the foundation licence it was so easy and the exam done in under 5 minutes .I had intended to progress but life has gotten in the way .I’ve been interested in radio since an early age and attempted morse years back but failed miserably hence not taking the RAE .If the foundation is made a little bit harder I would still have gone for it .
Above Paul (M0DVD) suggests
“Rules should be changed so that it is not allowed for foundation holders to go out and buy a 100/200 watt radio as why would someone at foundation license level want to progress to do an intermediate or full license exam if they have a 100/200 watt radio sitting on their side?”
I have several 100 watt radios here and like a linear amp ( don’t own one ) capable of 1KW and driven at 400 watts they tick over at 5 to 10 watts so no strain on the radio and also the benefit of the filtering , dual receive ect Do you really see the likes of our dealers over here losing £££ by not selling a 100 watt radio and of course the accessories that also go with it .Heck the dealers are even doing mars mods for around £25 .I presume that if the three tier licencing never came into affect in the first place that most of the dealers would be struggling or closed down .
I think we’re at a stage where no matter what is added or extracted from the licencing structure there never going to make everyone happy but as also been said they should be trying to encourage new blood into the hobby .
Thanks to those of Essex Ham for the precis of the proposed changes. I doubt I would have bothered to read all of the source document.
RSGB has a heavyweight and academically respectable team behind the setting of the syllabus, but I am not convinced that this is necessarily giving the right results for the hobby for 2017 and beyond.
Some interesting comments. I can’t help but agree with those that think the proposed changes will make recruitment of new entrants more difficult than at present. The examination at entry level is clearly still wrestling with the balance between engineering and operations. In many businesses that have faced this same issue, technology settled that years ago.
It’s interesting to compare the exams with the testing regime folk are put through before they are allowed to drive a car on public roads. To my mind amateur radio needs far more cars on the road if the hobby is to survive into the future.
Regards,
Mark, G4FPH.
It is a sad state of affairs when the only argument against increasing standards is to say that it will reduce numbers taking up the hobby.
I am old-school enough to have made all the class Bs take an exam before being let loose on HF as well as being for the idea of paying an annual fee to have the privilege of holding a transmitting licence.
We have a free licence and many then complain that Ofcom do not take interference to us seriously!
The increasing of standards is to be applauded and not denigrated.
73
Some of us see it as a sad state of affairs where 12 years of whining about the 3-tier licence by bitter G callsigns has made the RSGB’s bend to the pressure. What do you think is to be gained from making the training less relevant, the hobby less accessible and the barrier to entry more difficult?
People need to remember that a lot has changed since RAE. Amateur radio is now a hobby, not a qualification. Homebrew and electronics design is the exception, not the norm for today’s amateurs, and things have moved on. Today, there’s less electronics and more IT & coding, so trying to train radio enthusiasts and hobbyists to become old-school electronics engineers is only going to turn people away.
Ofcom is happy that the Fnd licence is sufficient to meet their requirements, so this change is just to satisfy the old guard purists… nothing more.
Each year, fewer people take those first steps, and the last report shows the lowest intake in 10 years. Making it less accessible and less relevant may satisfy the old guard who feel hard done by, but it will make the hobby less attractive and increase the decline.
It’s not the dusty old-guard sitting in their village halls taking about the good old days who are the future of the hobby, it’s tomorrow’s enthusiasts that many seem keen to belittle and exclude.
I floated a suggestion a couple of years back in which we would retain the three tier system (which seems to have broad acceptance in UK around the world) and automatically bump those with foundation and intermediate licences more than, say three years old up one tier.
The rationale for doing this would be that those being bumped-up have probably learned enough through ‘on the job’ (assuming, of course, they have been active in the hobby) to take the promotion responsibly. Along with these promotions, we redefine (modernise) the foundation level and intermediate level testing / licensing regimes based on the ‘new’ world that Stephen eludes to.
The game would be to ensure that those at the ‘new’ foundation level would emerge from testing / assessment / coaching / mentoring posing low risk of making a nuisance of themselves to other radio users (and OFCOM), enjoy the hobby in whatever way they choose and feel incentivised to continue, whether at the same licence level, or through the available progression. Priviledges of the new foundation and intermediate licences would also be adjusted. Those old chestnuts of bands, modes, powers being reviewed here.
I don’t look upon the above as ‘dumbing down’, more addressing fitness for purpose of amateur radio viz communications and social trends in 21st century. RSGB and the UK could be a leader here.
As to the point raised about UK-specific needs influencing what amateur radio products get produced by the major manufactures, our only hope is that enough similarities exist here with US and Japanese needs to be worthy of recognition and investment.
Regards,
Mark, G4FPH.
Interesting Read.
Personally, I’m didn’t read the foundation syllabus before I decided whether or not I would join the hobby.
I was interested in getting into radio and so I did it when I started my Physics degree at Southampton University. Part of my university choice was because it has an active radio society (SUWS.org.uk).
I started in Dec 2015 and by Dec 2016 I had my full licence, though I’ve only really started this week for lack of equipment and antennas.
So, these changes wouldn’t have put me off, they would have just been something I’d have seen as necessary.
If foundation doesn’t allow amateurs to build their own circuits, then I do think that any extra syllabus in the technical section is rather pointless.
Antenna diagrams and ERP, okay, some use to a foundation licencee.
Any increase to operating procedures is welcome, personally. More Q-codes can be helpful improving understanding when listening to more experienced amateurs. The earlier you learn how everything works the better.
Safety is a transferable skill, so any increase is good.
I do like the idea of adding digital modes as an alternative to the Morse appreciation practical. Digital modes is something of great interest to myself. However, the requirement to use an SDR transceiver basically sinks the idea as SDR transceivers like the suggested IC-7300 are relatively new it isn’t something you’d expect every club or training facility to have. Neither is it going to be something a foundation licencee is going to go out an buy immediately after they get into the hobby.
Cori,
Many people are using digital modes without an SDR transeiver. I don’t know where you got the idea from that it is necessary.
Also, AIUI, foundation licencees can build their own circuits, it is just transmitting equipment they cannot build.
73
DrTeeth,
The proposed RSGB syllabus mandates in Section 10B2 that an SDR must be used for the data QSO. The exact wording is printed under “Section 10” above, and in the RSGB draft document.
Data modes don’t need an SDR, most tutors don’t own one, and nor will most newbies – so why is RSGB mandating their use in the syllabus?
As for circuits, yes Foundation can build what they want. The only restriction is they can’t operate a non-commercially-available transmitter. The point is that the syllabus introduces construction and soldering at Intermediate level. The four circuit & soldering practicals, use of multimeter, resistor colour code, etc are all Intermediate, not Foundation.
I tend to agree with Cori on this one. We don’t show students how to make and test a circuit, or what a resistor is, until Intermediate – so examining students about resistors in series & parallel before they’re actually introduced to them, or learn about construction and testing, is surely only of limited value.
As a tutor, I personally feel that RSGB will be requiring me to teach in a non-logical way. Same with LEDs – The proposal is to explain to a student that an LED’s polarity matters at Foundation-level, and at Intermediate, let them make and test a basic circuit to turn on a lamp. Teaching an LED after a lamp would seem to me to be a far logical flow.
Anothert consideration is that people don’t move from Foundation to Intermediate immediately – it’s typically 6 to 12 months from my experience. Result – they’ll need to be taught it again, this time in the right order, halfway through Intermediate.
Hi Pete,
Interesting comments indeed.
The SDR requirement is indeed madness, especially as the IC-7300 is just like a regular rig from the outside apart from the screen, and that is really too small for the ID of signals unless set up a certain way. The requirement brings nothing to the table.
History is being made here. I seem to be changing my mind. I did it one in 1964 so it is time for it to happen soon.
I got an IC-7300 after getting rid of my Flex 6300.
73 de Guy G4DWV 4X1LT
Hi,
I agree with all the comments that say making the foundation exam harder. Will only turn people off from taking up the hobby. I also think the advanced exam is far to difficult and achieves nothing. As mentioned earlier 99% of amateurs buy equipment and do not construct. So what is the point of going into semiconductor theory or how a valve works. Perhaps the advanced exam should be made more relevant to today’s environment and concentrate on emc, safety, antenna theory, line transmission theory and the risk of causing problems to neibours TVs etc when using higher output power. For the 1% of amateurs that want to construct their own equipment. Provide another level that goes into electronic theory in greater depth to give them sufficient level of expertise to construct equipment. Which in my opinion the existing Advance exam does not do, a little knowledge is dangerous.
73
Derek M0WCS
It’s a pity the RSGB cannot devote the same amount of time to lobbying Ofcom to ensure that the SW remains free of QRM from distributing agencies such as BT as they seem to do alienating those whose interest is piqued. Looked between 8500 and 12000kHz lately and heard the mess there?
They should be encouraging SDR techniques but not using £mega equipment. I use a dongle and converter with some switching and home brewed filters. Cost around £25 whilst the flagship display at Bletchley Park features kit that makes the flight deck of the Starship Enterprise blush for complexity as does the antennae it feeds
It’s not just the RSGB that is at fault it’s the assumption that those who take an interest actually want to be an active amateur. It’s so wrong. I have a decent set up but rarely use it thanks to work, bad contest operating most weekends and the poor operating heard at times. The local 2m contacts I participate in are good with correct procedures and its something when another amateur breaks across to compliment the procedure.
All the RSGB seem to excel in now is publishing Radcom (not a touch on ‘The Bull!) full of articles of dissertation quality about using techniques open only to the extreme minority who like look clever and as a repetitive advertisement for ARRL publications and that never ending parade of vanity publications.
RSGB take a look at the ARRL, analyse their business acumen and the service their members receive from a professionally set up and supported organisation and then you may just understand the mish-mash of a group you really are. Members pay a decent size bung and for what? Get your act together and exist for members, not for the sake of the RSGB.
Hi.
I wonder if any of the people who object to the Foundation being changed to include a few more technical questions have ever read a US Novice test paper and checked out their licensing conditions when they pass.
Brian, I doubt any have read a US Novice test, it was abolished 18 years ago. The 200 watt US Novice exam was pitched at a level that enabled 4-year-olds to pass it.
ARRL are currently looking at establishing a new US Entry Level licence, be interesting to see where they pitch it. I suspect it’ll be below current UK Foundation.
Current entry level is Technician. Cheaper, no practicals, the questions and answers are all public domain, and you’re allowed 1.5kW on FM and 200W on HF.
As many have said above, making it more difficult to get a “Foot in the door” to our hobby is just daft! I like many have progressed through the three tier licensing process and I personally think there’s too bigger gap between intermediate and full. Having passed all 3 in 10 months, it was the jump from intermediate to full which really took some studying, about 6 solid months worth as I had very limited knowledge of electronics theory which was where I struggled, are the RSGB looking to address this at any point? If they insist of toughening up the foundation then maybe they need to look at intermediate and offer more privileges for successfully passing that like power to 100w etc as a 40w increase probably isn’t tempting many M3/6’s into going for it.
I’m all for extra saftey and a few of the other parts but saying that there is loads added the is of littel or no use untill you have the intermediate licance anyways. We won’t be gaining anything under licance conditions so it’s just added headake and will probably hold younger members off getting a foundation licance.
What are they trying to achieve by changing the syllabus of the foundation course. One thing comes to mind, complete discouragement for those interested in it as a hobby. Please remember by changing the goalposts it only causes more resentment and apathy among the current licence holders and those who are thinking of joining us in this great hobby
Well the RSGB has always wanted to be to technical, and have always thought they were the bees knees of amatuer radio, and yet of little or no use or help to its members, now they are of little of no help to novices hoping to come into the hobby, I would have thought radio procedure would be high on the list, going off some of the procedure on 2 metres, but confusion at the novice stage is going to be no help to them, just leave as it is, I took my test in 1985 and found it tough going as I had little knowledge of radio, but had a damn good tutor, so I made the grade, and eventually passed the morse as well which at the time was compulsory to get on the HF bands.
as an ex instructor and radio officer with the Air Training Corp , they introduced their own foundation course . this course was a nightmare and went far beyond what was necessary . this was only done to make the officer in charge good ? sadly it did not . i only taught the course once , but would never again ! i do not claim to be perfect , but i sat my three exams and passed all within 9 months . i did not get my full under grandad rights . the foundation was perfectly ok as it was ! do we wish to keep this hobby going or frighten new amateurs out of the hobby and onto 27Mhz SSB at 12 Watts ? do you repair a radio if it does not need repairing ?
I have been teaching the licences since 1992 and this in some ways is taking some of the topics back to what was the Novice Licence. For me the aim of the Foundation is to get the basics across to people who have no idea on radio plus also designed for youngsters as well and they are the ones that struggle with the maths as they haven’t even done it at school. My youngest who passed was 8 years old. As part of my training I introduce the SSB term just so they are aware of that. SDR I would mention it without them having to know a block diagram…think that should appear at Intermediate if they are bringing it in. I also have no SDR equipment so couldn’t even demonstrate it.
Bottom line leave as is……
I believe what is happening here, goes away from the intention of a Foundation License.
The purpose of which is to give anyone interested in Amateur Radio a “Taster” of the hobby.
However, I believe that at the inception of the 3 tier licence system, too many privileges Were given to the Foundation Licence Holders which I believe has had an effect on the lack of activity on the VHF/UHF Bands.
This has contributed to the have it all scenario of being able to Operate on a lot of the “Fun” Frequencies without the requirement to progress and abuse the power limitations enforced by the FL.
I really do think FL Holders should be restricted to 18. 28 & 145 MHz.
I am not saying this as a Grumpy G0. But as a level headed individual who thinks that the RSGB & OFCOM got it terribly wrong in the first place.
And before I get accused of being one of those moaning G Calls, I would like to say I welcome anyone to the hobby. I will talk to anyone irrespective of licence level. Class. Ethnic background or sexuality. If you are a decent person who abides by the rules, then I will do my upmost to treat you as my equal. Help where needed and be a Radio Friend to you without question.
Kindest Regards to ALL Radio Enthusiasts.
Nick
G0HFL
I thinks foundation licence does have alot of privileges as far as band usage goes the RSGB & OFCOM did get it terribly wrong in the first place abit late to change now the horse has bolted I would say keep the exam as it is for foundation licence
but bring in rules that you can only purchase new radio’s of the output power levels you are licenced to use ie something like (foundation licence approved radio) maybe done in a way like the wideband mod so when you move up to intermediate the radio can be opened up to full power output at an approved dealer only as i do think a foundation licence holder owning a 100/200w all singing radio is like a giving someone who has just passed there driving test a Ferrari f40 & saying you can only drive it at 10mph of course we all know that won’t happen
Do I recall the official history of the Foundation licence band / frequency privileges issue being that it was OFCOM that insisted that the allocation be as it is today and that RSGB were proposing a more restrictive one? I do recall being surprised when I heard that. Sadly, I can’t recall what the counterbalance to that part of the ‘negotiation’ was. Perhaps it was whether OFCOM would permit a Foundation licence of any kind to exist, so high stakes, if so.
My suggestion for promotion of existing Foundation and Intermediate licences was to make room for a redefinition of the Foundation tier. The rules for this new tier could be rewritten totally.
A relook at bands / modes / powers would be an integral part of the change / modernisation. Compliance with authorised bands and modes is far easier to enforce than compliance with power limits. I would be looking to trim band / frequency allocations for the new Foundation licence with respect to current, but not unreasonably so, i.e. mandating only allocation of bands / parts of the spectrum where contacts are likely to be few. I would want to understand why holders of this new foundation licence should not be allowed to run 100 W on some bands / modes to give them a fighting chance of being heard and having satisfactory contacts in the times of rising local noise levels and poor (HF) propagation.
I do not subscribe to the ‘all cars on the road should be limited to a top speed of 70 MPH’ school of thought.
Regards,
Mark, G4FPH.
The RSGB Working Group which devised the 3-tier structure were all RSGB members and only one of them, G8DPQ, worked for the Regulator which in those days was the Radiocommunications Agency.
It may be true there were one or two reactionary elements among RSGB Volunteers who did succeed in removing Foundation privileges which had appeared in the original Working Group Draft but it would be wrong to think the RSGB as an organisation didn’t support the proposal from their own Working Group.
The Regulator certainly did not have a problem with a Foundation licence – it was nothing new – both Japan and the USA had introduced Entry Level Licences almost half-a-century earlier in the 1950’s. The Regulator had been very keen to get the RSGB to set up the Working Group and get process underway. Wasn’t it the Regulator’s representative on the WG who pointed out a simple Morse assessment (the one Foundation now has) would fully meet the then ITU Requirement for a Morse test to operate below 30 MHz? (ITU regs have never stipulated what form a Morse test should take).
Roy ,
I agree with some comments, but making the foundation harder will push young people away
instead of helping them into the hobby, after all it is a HOBBY!!!!!!
More time should be spent on antennas, and high an low power, this seems to be were
people fail.
You can bye a radio and switch it on, but if the antenna is wrong its a waste of time.
73
Roy 2E0 RLL.
Right okay, my mind is made up, I am giving up my foundation licence, but that’s because I am going after the Intermediate at the next CARS course, then straight into the Full licence, I’ve met some great people in this hobby since I attended the Skills night in September 16 and love the hobby and I’m not going to let any stupid Silly Bus (okay Syllabus even) change stop me, I can get the Intermediate before that comes into play anyway, so with a little help from Pete M0PSX (Nudge Nudge) I can do this. Confidence booming.
I agree with most of your comments Pete, you have done an excellent job of summarising this for us all, thank you. In the past I have taught the City & Guilds Radio Amateurs Course at a Technical College.
I think that the Foundation Licence is pitched about right, except for a few tweaks . After all, it is part of a three tiered structured approach to the Full Licence. I feel that we need to encourage new people into the hobby and the Foundation Licence should contain only relevant information to allow the newly licenced operators to operate safely and have the knowledge to work within their licencing conditions (as all classes of Amateur Radio licence holders have to!). To ‘bloat out’ the syllabus with unnecessary items only makes it more time consuming to undertake the course and the examination. I feel that it should include practical for operating to give the candidates experience on air. However to over complicate it by adding setting up an SDR radio for data is totally unnecessary. The current Foundation can be done over a weekend and it is important to keep this in mind when making any changes.
The current Foundation is difficult if not impossible to do properly over a weekend if the candidates have no prior knowledge. Most so called Weekend courses tend to include a Friday evening as well.
Perhaps the question should be – Should the Foundation be the only entry point into the hobby? In some countries the Course and Exam for the Entry Level licence can be easily be completely in a single day. There is some merit in that, it would enable a complete course/exam to be run during JOTA or other youth based event. Young people could leave the event with a Pass Certificate instead of getting interested in amateur radio at the event but then having to wait as long as a year until their local club gets around to running a course.
Currently the ARRL are looking at adding a 4th tier to the US license structure with a new Entry Level license likely pitched well below the level of UK Foundation.
The suggestion have been made in the past that the UK should have an Entry Level licence giving access to all bands above 144 MHz with the idea of boosting VHF/UHF activity which has collapsed in the past 15 years. Perhaps it’s time to give this further consideration.
as for the foundation level, maybe the RSGB or OFCOM should come down hard on the safety aspects of amateur radio for all age groups, myself i do quite of portable work mainly on hf and always pay extra attention to the safety aspects as there is parents with young children around
As a Brit overseas (USA) I had an interest 8n Amateur Radio fem a detach3d standpoint, it was one of those things ‘ I’ll get around to it’ with some 20 odd years in the army with 12 of those as a vocational operator (Clansman then Bowman) I knew it was something I’d like to learn/ continue.
When I started looking around the courses were few and far between, and to be honest, the whole ‘scene’ seemed a little stuffy and antiquated, that and the concept of giving up a whole weekend while trying to juggle work, kids and other hobbies was a bit too much.
I then moved stateside. Casually browsing Facebook one day and noticed our local club was doing an open day/ technician class.
Went along, spent the day in the classroom, spent a couple of nights doing the practise tests online, week later, sat the test, paid my $14 test fee and bang, I’m licensed.
Simple, yes I’m limited to what bands I can use, mostly VHF/ UHF, a very small window on 10m for voice, 15M, 40M & 80M have small freq ranges that I can use CW up to 200w.
This gives me incentive to work up to General class, if I want to use HF voice, which I do.
So what does this mean to you guys? From my perspective the relative ease of getting tech (no practical at all, simple 35question multi guess) has made getting a licence easy for a lot of people in the U.S. this allows you to use repeaters and simplex. There are a LOT of repeaters over here, and a lot of hams.
I think if you make the process for the first step too hard, people will look into it and think, meh, too much work for too little return.
As a shortwave listener for many years and finally taking my exam in 2015, i do and have heard people with noise issues with their setup indoors and people quite say that the noise issue has been reported to the RSGB and Ofcom and also on many occasions over the years i have heard keyers music players and people on the air without call signs on a certain repeater and i do believe that a certain repeater was acuatly taking off the air some time ago and long behold till this day is still operating, so instead of making the foundation level much harder perhaps someone in authority should help people with their noise problems and get rid of the keyer’s music players people with no call signs, perhaps maybe the 3 levels of licence should be left as it is
A two level licence is required not this three level miss mash we have got at the moment. We need a basic licence that gives uhf and vhf all modes, and a full licence for hf and microwave opps with the ability to build equipment if one so wishes. The stigma of being a low level licence holder needs to be clamped down on by ofcom and the rsgb, by a small number of full callsigns, after all what ever the level of licence we are all radio enthusiasts and are learning at different rates. Gone are the days when the majority of people taking up the hobby were from an electronics or army signals background if the hobby is still around in 100 years the majority of amateurs need to accept change and move with the times, that unfortunatly a large number just cannot do as the RAE was the bible and any body taking that tick box easy exam for foundation or intermediate should not be let loose on the air waves and that is the reason amateur radio is on its last legs in the uk. MW6ZAN
I am in agreement with a lot of things that have been said, here, but, you people out there, who have been “Snubbed By G`s”, so what!, If you think about it, you probably should be “Glad NOT To Chat With Them”, I sat the “RAE” back in `85, my only “Downfall” was not filling my “Candidate Number” in, Ha Ha!, NOBODY CHECKED!, and the rest is HISTORY!, my point is, that if it had gone correctly, would I have done, what these people have done??, NO, I don`t think so!(easy for me to say, I hear you think!), but true anyway!, I have enjoyed Amateur Radio, since I can remember, all my friends are “Licensed”, some are no longer here, some I keep in-touch-with, some I don`t see from one-day-to-the-next!, since then it has ALL CHANGED!, and most of those people(not all), were given “Grandfather Rights”, me, I don`t think they should have!, but, who am I, you might ask?, No-One-In-Particular!, 31 or so years on!, I`m having “Another Crack” LoL!, I prefer the Old RAE, but have sat down, read The Foundation Book, and will be sitting down once again and “Putting Pencil & Pen To Paper”, and would I care if a `G` ignored me, NOT A JOT!, as regards to more changes, I think NOT!, if anything, go back to the RAE!, after my mishap & a few years on, I kept saying “I Am Gonna Do It This Year”, and never had the time, now I have All The Time In The World!, also at 61 yrs of age!so, its “Onwards & Upwards”, my fave saying, is, “If Its NOT BROKE, DON`T FIX-IT”, RSGB, either leave it as it is, or put it back to how it was!, without the Morse!, even though, I think Morse “Is Just As Important” as any other part!, I also hope ALL YOU NEW License Holders, whether its M6, 2e0, or M0, anything other than a `G`, Hold Your Head High!, You Have Worked Hard For It!, because it “Was`nt Handed To You On A Plate, Like Some People Out There”, and I “Mean No Disrespect To Any G`s or anyone who got Grandafather Rights!”, I`m just saying “Have A Little Respect For NEW LICENSEES”, We ALL Have to start somewhere!.
HI so as an instructor for the last 36 years having helped many go through the original exam to the latest methods of the three tier process. one thing does worry me though. some get the wrong idea that having passed the intermediate that they are technically qualified to mess about with such items as 400watt linear amplifiers. even with a full licence and many years with a ONC in telecommunications. this type of amateur and the way they think they just going messing with such items with reactive components such as power grid valves. is of some concern. having expressed myself on the RSGB forum about this was almost ignored and when i tried to justify my point was banned from ever making further comments.
so my point is the idea is to educate which is what the hobby is about and experiment yes with a full licence
Hi so i became even more curious about some comments from on elf the leading lights about expect degree type students into the Hobby. i went looking for some evidence that might support such ideas to find that the sylbus for a level physics now is such that reactive components is part of this in A level physics. so the education standards must have slipped way down since i left school secondary modern without any qualifications.