"N2EY" wrote in message
...
[triming down stuff that's been repeated in the thread]
To a certain extent. But the change had its downside, too. Ham radio used
to
get a lot of free publicity and recruitment in the form of SWLs hearing
hams on
AM. That pretty much ended with the switch to SSB. The number of new hams
slowed down (in part) because of that change.
So we need a new publicity mechanism ... I'd agree with that ...
From plain RTTY to things like AMTOR, PACTOR, PSK31, etc.
Plain RTTY is still very much in use, thank you.
Yes, I know ... but that's a CHOICE, just as using CW or any other mode
is a choice.
AMTOR is pretty much dead, I am told.
Certainly not as popular as it once was, but I don't think it's entirely
"dead."
Of course what really drove all that was PC/soundcard setups becoming
affordable.
Agreed ... multimode with a std SSB radio and PC ... cool stuff. However,
still limited in some respects and we can do better with purpose-made
RF modems capable of more speed and other improvements.
It wasn't lectures or laws that got hams to change, it was demonstrations
by
other hams.
The point I'm trying to make is that there is a BIG difference between
wholesale abandonment of a mode (Spark - CW, AM - SSB)
or the outlawing of a mode (Spark) than there is in simply removing
the Morse test requirement.
Removing the Morse test requirement does not take away any operating
privs from anyone ... it does not disallow the choice to use Morse. It
simply removes a requirement that is extremely dissinteresting (and in some
cases difficult) for many people.
There's a BIG difference in the comparisons.
Nobody is proposing a regulatory change that will prohibit or in any way
restrict the USE of Morse ...
OH YES THEY ARE!!!!
Check this out from ARRL's coverage of the VEC gathering:
"Maia's proposal suggested upgrading all current Tech and Tech Plus
licensees
to General and allowing their use of all bands. Beginner licensees should
be
granted call signs from the NA-NZ#xxx call sign block, he said. Both Maia
and
Neustadter suggest ways to streamline the number of license classes. Maia
offered up the possibility of asking the FCC to eliminate the Morse
testing
requirement immediately, easing code exam format restrictions"
here it comes:
"and giving serious thought to dropping CW-only subbands as well."
The only CW-only subbands are on 6 and 2 meters. I don't think those are
the
subbands Freddy wants to drop. I think he means "CW/data subbands" - on
HF.
I think that Fred knows quite well that the only CW-only subbands are at
6m/2m.
Besides, that is ONE petition of a number that have been/will be filed.
While I will not divulge the detailed contents of the draft NCI petition
that
is under Board review right now, I *will* guarantee you that it will NOT
propose any changes in band segmentation.
all that's being asked for is to eliminate the
test requirement that even the FCC and the IARU admit are not in the
best interest of the future of ham radio.
That's what YOU propose. W5YI & Co. are already on the next page.
It's not fair to single out W5YI ... its the NCVECs ... including reps from
ARRL and all the other VECs ... one of whom used to be "top dog" in
amateur regulation at the FCC.
Nobody is being forced to do anything ... in fact, the
proposed/anticipated
change will STOP forcing folks to do something that many don't want to
do ...
So, the "None of these were forced on hams by regulatory change."
argument
doesn't hold water Jim.
Sure it does. The point being that none of the historic changes you cite
involved rules changes.
The elimination of spark did ... and my "None ... by regulatory change" was
meant to indicate that eliminating Morse testing will not force ANYTHING
on anyone by regulatory change.
Heck, you can buy a decent 2m transciever for $150 today
... something with performance, quality, reliability, and ergonomics
that the average ham couldn't duplicate for 3x that price when
buying parts in small quantities.
And it's a throwaway.
I would respectfully disagree ... the idea that "hams can't work
with SMT" is bogus ... the ARRL website has a lot of good info
on working with SMT ... and I've built a LOT of prototypes in
the lab by hand using SMT without special, expensive tools.
It just takes a different technique.
Does that mean I think homebrewing should roll over and die?
CERTAINLY NOT ...
But how will homebrewing survive? How many amateur radio HF or VHF
transceivers
have you designed and built, Carl? If it's not worth your time and effort,
how
can the rest of us be expected to do it?
Now that the WRC is over, my business travel schedule will be less
demanding (hard to work on home projects when you're away from
home for 5 weeks).
My first priority for the rest of the summer/early fall is to get up
at least one, preferably two, tower(s) and some better antennas
than what I have now for HF, plus a good set of VHF/UHF
antennas ...
Once that is done, or work stopped due to weather, I plan to
get down to brass tacks on designing/building some gear. It
will NOT be "conventional," but it will be designed to be amenable
to reduction to kit form for those who'd like to build their own.
the introduction of the no-code Tech license;
Which has not resulted in greatly increased longterm growth nor a
techno revolution.
If it weren't for the thousands of hams who have entered via the
no-code tech license, the ham population would be something
like 1/2 what it was in 1990 ...
That presumes none of them would have gotten licensed if the rules hadn't
changed. That's not reasonable. You're saying that we'd be down to
~257,000
hams by now if not for the changes to the Tech.
I had intended to say 1/2 to 2/3 ... the 1/2 would be worst case ...
Carl - wk3c
|