| |
G4EBT > RADIO 26.11.06 04:54l 138 Lines 5705 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : A93520G4EBT
Read: DK5RAS GUEST
Subj: Some thoughts on ZL licence
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<DK0WUE<GB7FCR
Sent: 061125/2344Z @:GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU #:6563 [Blackpool] FBB-7.03a $:A93520G4E
From: G4EBT@GB7FCR.#16.GBR.EU
To : RADIO@WW
Some ramblings on the ZL licence:
The ZL licence structure seems inflexible ("one size fits all") and the
exam syllabus looks stuffy and old fashioned, harking back to homebrew
days.
The rules - revised as recently as June 2004, demonstrably fail to meet
the RSM's stated aim of "innovative use of the radio spectrum". For that
to happen the regs would be flexible enough to met the aspirations of ALL
potential amateurs, while at the same time placing the minimum
restrictions upon the licence as are proportionate to the risks at all
levels.
The rules go well beyond what's necessary or can be justified from a
regulatory perspective to operate a commercial transceiver at low power
(as permitted by the UK Foundation and Intermediate licences, respectively
10 and 50 Watts).
The ZL regs can be read or downloaded from the link below and only run to
24 pages, including explanatory notes:
http://www.nzart.org.nz/nzart/exam/files/NewRules.pdf
The ZL rules are less verbose that the UK ones, but still have ambiguous
terms as do the VK regs, (as did the UK regs until recently), which don't
meet the requirement for regs to be written in clear and unambiguous
language. (The term "intercommunication" is meaningless).
Called the "New Rules" the RSM regs were only revised in June 2004. To
gain a licence it's necessary to correctly answer 40 out of 60 question in
two hours, from a public-domain question-bank of 600 questions.
The notes explaining the rules are well enough written and explain what
amateurs are permitted to do, what they're required to do, and what they
must not do.
Though a bit dated, the syllabus is fine for the few who still wish
to design, build and operate their own transmitters. But for those who
simply want to operate a low power commercial plug 'n play transceiver,
do they really need to know about the following aspects to minimise the
regulatory risks to an acceptable level. I don't think so:
*Atoms, sub-atomic particles, electrons, ions, semiconductor theory.
*Operation of a superhet, RF, mixer, IF, AF, product detector etc.
*Variation of capacitance with plate size, spacing, dielectrics.
*Causes and elimination of key clicks. (Huh?).
Lots of other stuff is highly relevant to an elementary licence, such as
propagation theory, (five questions) but on the setting up of a station -
LPF, dummy load, SWR bridge, ATU, antennas etc, all of which are relevant
to the proper operation of a transmitter so as to minimise interference,
there's only one question.
There's also only one question on safety.
Of course they're taken from a bank of 600 questions, with no prior
knowledge of which are going to be asked. And there's no doubt that the
syllabus would give newcomers a good grounding in amateur radio as a hobby
for the long term, but that isn't the issue.
The issue is:
Is there any regulatory justification for not permitting amateurs who so
wish, from having a lower entry criteria commensurate with the proper
operation of a low power commercial transceiver.
Answer - no there isn't.
Exams are conducted by local volunteer examiners - the result is notified
right away. A licence permits up to 500W PEP. For some odd reason, once
one has passed the exam, operation is limited to the bands below 5MHz and
above 25 MHz for the first three months, during which 50 contacts must be
made and a logbook kept. After that time, logbook keeping is voluntary,
though encouraged.
There's no defensible regulatory logic for restricting operation to below
5Mhz and above 25 Mhz in that way. If you've passed the exam and obtained
a licence, that should be an end to it.
If any restriction is placed on newcomers, I'd have thought it should be
on limiting the transmit power. I don't see the logic of allowing someone
use 500Watts from day one, but not until three months and 50 logged
contacts has elapsed may they do so between 5 & 25 Mhz.
It sound like something dreamt up by a daft radio amateur - not a lawyer.
It needs to be scrapped.
In terms of its approach to the RSM, if the NZRT favours a Foundation
Licence it could draw upon the experience of Ofcom in the UK.
The NZRT state's that there are some 6,000 ZL amateurs.
In the five or so years that the UK 3-stage licence structure including
the FL has been in place, almost 7,000 Foundation Licences have been
issued. This equates to a doubling of ZLs, or a 50% increase in the number
of VKs.
Ofcom reports no difficulties whatsoever with FLers, which has now been in
place for half a decade. NZRT and/or RSM could verify that by contacting
Ofcom.
NZ has a similar urban population density of 86% - the UK slightly higher
at 89%. Thus, most FLers live in urban areas where there is a risk of
interference to other spectrum users (emergency services, air traffic
control, TVI etc). It hasn't happened in the UK - it wouldn't happen in
ZL.
As a matter of interest and right off topic, despite the misleading
perception of Australia often portrayed in films, it's a nation of city
dwellers. It has one of the highest urban populations in the world - now
92.7%.
Higher than China, India, Japan, the Euro Area (76%) the USA (80.8%) -
indeed, just about any country in the world. The only country in the whole
of Europe with a higher urban population density in Belgium (97.3%).
(Source: Economist book of World Figures).
Why don't they use more land? (Deserts? Arrrrrrrrrrgh:-)
Spluttered G4EBT.
73 - David, G4EBT @ GB7FCR
British Vintage Wireless Society Member
G-QRP Club Member, No: 1339
QTH: Cottingham, East Yorkshire.
Message timed: 23:43 on 2006-Nov-25
Message sent using WinPack-Telnet V6.70
(Registered).
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
