On Apr 15, 7:20�pm, John from Detroit wrote:

Normally I do not do full back quotes but
what you typed bears repeating.

Thanks but one repeat is enough...

I agree,, I kind of lumped a lot of that into
the "Willingness to study"
but in another field I have often
said that those truly blessed with the
ability have a need to "Pass it on" �(Willingness to help)

Agreed. But there's more to it than studying, A lot of things require
practice in order to do well.

The technicial ability is a result of the willingness to study

Partly - but it also is a result of doing. "Book learning" is great
but it must be matched by practical know-how to do a radio amateur any
good.

Respect.... Well.. We could discuss that
some but yes, that should be
part of it too.

Might as well discuss it.

As to being open to real progress.. For many decades
we have pushed the
progress forward.. to this day Hams still use better
hardware than the
military in many cases... Why.. Because hams designed it,
not military engineers.

I think that depends on how you define "better hardware".

Military stuff has to be as rugged and dependable as possible, in all
sorts of environments including hot, cold, humid, vibration, shock,
high altitude, EMP, etc. Most ham gear doesn't have to be able to
withstand anything like the environment the military demands.

Military stuff also has to be capable of things a lot of ham gear
doesn't, such as encryption, operation from 24-28 volts DC, remote
control, ALE, spread spectrum, interconnection with other military
systems, automatic operation, etc. Often the "radio" is simply part of
a much larger system.

There's also the military requirements of documentation, training,
domestic sourcing, etc.

The one place where ham gear is probably "better" is in price. But
that's to be expected because the requirements are so different.

---

Many hams know that the WW2 BC-610 transmitter was really a repackaged
Hallicrafters HT-4 amateur transmitter. Ham gear went to war!

But what's sometimes not emphasized is that they didn't just change
the label on the HT-4 and make it the BC-610. What really happened is
that the transmitter went through a considerable amount of testing and
rework before it could meet military specifications. For example,
things like vibration and shock were big issues; the original HT-4
final plate tuning capacitor simply fell apart in field tests.

And those were WW2-era requirements - modern military specifications
are even tougher!

73 de Jim, N2EY