Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The problem with todays version of ham radio is that it's really
boring. Nobody wants to talk to someone around the world, when they
can pickup a POTS or cell phone and do it with much less effort and
expense. With the demise of Heathkit, building radios is no longer a
draw. The magic of radio is gone. So, show them what they can do
with radio. Weather stations, APRS, satellite, construction, etc are
a good start.


The magic hasn't gone - it's just been refined. The numbers of
enthusiasts may drop, but those left will be more focussed and
dedicated. The quantity is being replaced by quality. For every ten new
hams who buy an off-the-shelf radio, play with it for a year or two,
then lose interest, there is one in whom the spark is truly lit.
Building is alive and well in the form of QRP. The satisfaction of
operating a TX which is the product of your own efforts and ideas beats
driving a commercial radio any day.

(There is a mirror to all this in the model aircraft hobby. Many now
begin by buying a top-dollar almost-ready-to-fly radio controlled plane.
All you need is money. Little achievement, little reward, other than
the transient buzz of flying the thing. Same effect - 90 percent drop
out, ten percent go on to greater things: building and designing their
own creations).

Don't believe the prophets of doom who tell us that ham radio is dead.
They're just pessimists and losers. Ignore them and move on.

Gaius wrote:
The magic hasn't gone - it's just been refined. The numbers of
enthusiasts may drop, but those left will be more focussed and
dedicated. The quantity is being replaced by quality. For every ten new
hams who buy an off-the-shelf radio, play with it for a year or two,
then lose interest, there is one in whom the spark is truly lit.
Building is alive and well in the form of QRP. The satisfaction of
operating a TX which is the product of your own efforts and ideas beats
driving a commercial radio any day.

(There is a mirror to all this in the model aircraft hobby. Many now
begin by buying a top-dollar almost-ready-to-fly radio controlled plane.
All you need is money. Little achievement, little reward, other than
the transient buzz of flying the thing. Same effect - 90 percent drop
out, ten percent go on to greater things: building and designing their
own creations).

Don't believe the prophets of doom who tell us that ham radio is dead.
They're just pessimists and losers. Ignore them and move on.



Correct - The magic hasn't gone. Take 10GHz. A 10 GHz SSB setup can do
well over 200 miles with only 2 watts with an old DSS dish. You can
call CQ in a 10G contest off of a local 30 story building, or even
better - a local rain cloud. The systems are normally built as
transverters from kits. And learning is involved in construction as you
figure out how to interface a 2m SSB rig to a transverter, and where you
find mini hardline, and SMA relays for cheap. Using them teaches the
user a lot about practical microwave propagation.

Interested persons from the Midwest or those from anywhere else check
out www.nlrs.org. We are one of the most active microwave groups in the US.

tom
K0TAR

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 21:55:07 +0000, Gaius wrote:

Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The problem with todays version of ham radio is that it's really
boring. Nobody wants to talk to someone around the world, when they
can pickup a POTS or cell phone and do it with much less effort and
expense. With the demise of Heathkit, building radios is no longer a
draw. The magic of radio is gone. So, show them what they can do
with radio. Weather stations, APRS, satellite, construction, etc are
a good start.

The magic hasn't gone - it's just been refined.

For someone that's been in the hobby from before I could (legally)
drive a car, the magic is gone. To someone new to the hobby,
communicating with peoples on the other side of the planet is
commonplace. Pickup a cell phone, dial, and talk. There's no magic
in that. In the past, showing potential new hams how it works got an
"amazing" reaction. These days, I get asked "what's all that noise"?
It's no longer a technical hobby, but more like a "radio sport". It's
no longer about building and refining a radio to the bleeding edge of
the state of the art. It's now what you can do with a radio.
Fortunately, there's plenty to do with a radio. I listed a few.
There's plenty more (contesting, CW, boat anchors, xmitter hunts,
microwave, field day, packet, meteor scatter, etc). Plenty to
interest a Jr High Skool brat, but you have to show them first. I
used to worry about overwhelming them. Not any more. I show them in
everything I can find and let them find their own inspiration. Oddly,
the local new hams seem to be coming from the 4-H Organization.

The numbers of
enthusiasts may drop, but those left will be more focussed and
dedicated. The quantity is being replaced by quality.

There was a surge of new hams wanting to use ham radio as a cheap cell
phone. That didn't last, but it sure fattened the various club
treasuries. I'm not sure those remaining are more dedicated. Most of
the radio club members are 50 or more years old. There are younger
members, that also tend to be very technical, but they're disappointed
at the general lack of technical expertise of the older hams. Comments
like "how do you expect to operate a software defined radio without
any programming skills?" are common. I give at least one technical
talk a year to the local clubs. I can tell by the audience's faces
that only a few have a clue what I'm talking about. I passed out about
30 CD's with 4NEC2, EZNEC demo, and a zillion models at one meeting.
I think perhaps 1 or 2 people tried it.

Don't believe the prophets of doom who tell us that ham radio is dead.
They're just pessimists and losers. Ignore them and move on.

I like to think of myself of being part of the solution, rather than
the prophet of doom and despair. Please ignore me and move on.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

Nobody was interested in Morse Code until I mentioned that it could be
used for "secret communications". *That means that the parents and
teachers couldn't understand what the kids were saying. *Lots of
interest (and potential problems) there.

The problem with todays version of ham radio is that it's really
boring. *Nobody wants to talk to someone around the world, when they
can pickup a POTS or cell phone and do it with much less effort and
expense. *With the demise of Heathkit, building radios is no longer a
draw. *The magic of radio is gone. *


I have a diverse collection of demonstrations for them, hoping to
catch each one of them with something they find interesting. I have a
handout with eight Morse Code characters on it, enough to spell out
some easy words, They're mostly 4th graders. I'm doing magnetism and
communications and showing how they relate. I taught school in the
Navy, but I have no experience with little kids, except my own. My
Navy students were almost always well-motivated but I have no idea
what the 4th graders are going to be like. They are all in the
Gifted And Talented Education program and I think it's either going
to be great or awful -- no in-between.

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:42:25 -0800 (PST), "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

I have a diverse collection of demonstrations for them, hoping to
catch each one of them with something they find interesting.

Perfect. That's the right idea. Lots of show and very little tell
(unless they ask).

I have a
handout with eight Morse Code characters on it, enough to spell out
some easy words,

Good idea. Mind if I steal it?

They're mostly 4th graders. I'm doing magnetism and
communications and showing how they relate.

9-10 years old is the right age to start. Between 8 and 15, I tried
literally everything I could find. Cooking, guns, sewing, carpentry,
elecronics (buzzer and magnets), chemistry, fizzix, etc. Getting my
attention for only a few minutes was easy. More than an hour was
impossible. Somewhat later, I took the ones that were of interest and
went deeper. I still recall round the clock repeater building
sessions in my fathers garage.

I taught school in the
Navy, but I have no experience with little kids, except my own.

When I took teacher prep, one of the first exercises was to reduce my
vocabulary to about 9,000 words which was about right for a 12 year
old. I later found out that the typical 12 year old knew far more
words than officially recognized. Just avoid any technobabble with 3
or more syllables and you'll do ok. Try to get them to ask questions
and answer the questions at the same level as was asked.

My
Navy students were almost always well-motivated but I have no idea
what the 4th graders are going to be like.

They will be out to see how far they can push or taunt you. Don't
fight it. Just be their friend and not their diciplinarian. If they
go over the top and riot, then maybe sacrifice the leaders for the
greater good. Smart kids are much easier to deal with than the
academic losers. My favorite line for getting them curious is "wanna
see what's inside" or "wanna know how this thing works"? Don't be
surprised if you get high level questions. Most of these kid so read
magazines and techy stuff online, mostly ammunition to make themselves
look good in class. Be prepared to answer tough basic questions like
"why does one radio talk around the world, while others just talk down
the street"? You might learn as much from their questions as they're
learning from your demo.

They are all in the
Gifted And Talented Education program and I think it's either going
to be great or awful -- no in-between.

In the accellerated classes, they'll all be trying to show off how
much (or little) they know.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:42:25 -0800 (PST), "Sal M. Onella"
wrote:

I taught school in the
Navy, but I have no experience with little kids, except my own. My
Navy students were almost always well-motivated but I have no idea
what the 4th graders are going to be like.

I know what you mean because our experience has converged there.
Outside of the Navy, and just yesterday, I was Mentoring 3 of my high
school students to varying degrees of success. When asked how it
went, I responded "up, down, and sideways." Luckily this response is
not the typical experience. These kids are from the lower end of the
socio-economic spectrum, but the school system here in Seattle has
made an investment, and community (I do this through the NW Assoc. for
Biological Researcher) does its part to. Computer literacy is tops
(without the golden hand of Chairman Bill Gates being felt). From
their interest and drive, their challenged background (or challenged
emotional/developmental life) doesn't disrupt their momentum.

One of the most profound lectures I have ever read, insofar as
teaching science goes, dates back roughly 150 years to one of our own.
"The Chemical History of the Candle" by Michael Faraday is a series of
lectures by the master of inductance given to young students. It is
the classic of its type and sets the standard even to this day.

One might ponder about the significance of a history of the candle. In
one sense, it is quite complete to that heading alone. But beyond it,
and he goes vastly beyond it, there is coverage that is topical to the
current energy debate, the current green debate, and current to the
state of biology that is understandable by the mid-schooler on.

One point that still astonishes me is when Faraday makes the point
(and I will extrapolate to current capacities) that for every barrel
of oil burned, a barrel of water is produced in the combustion
process. I have to wonder at the plight of science understanding (not
just training) when I see huge flame geysers burning in the desert
(waste gas) of an oil rich country that has to import water:
"What the ****? Over"

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

On Dec 14, 1:14*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 17:24:03 +0000 (UTC), "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"

wrote:
Jeff Liebermann wrote:
Yes. *You'll bore the kids to death with such minutae and trivia.
Show them the Jay leno morse code versus texting clip.
Geoff.

The most effective song and dance I did in front of a Jr High Skool
class was tearing apart various cell phones, walkie talkies,
computahs, and consumer electronics to demonstrate that they should
not be afraid of such things. *Unfortunately, the parents hated my
guts when the kids starting practicing what I showed them. *Learn by
Destroying(tm).

2nd best was dragging in my collection of old cell phones including an
IMTS control head, various bag phones, and an unbelievable brick like
handset that's VERY heavy. *I also brought an early Motorola tube type
Breaky-Backy with wet cells inside. *Some of the stuff still works.

Nobody was interested in Morse Code until I mentioned that it could be
used for "secret communications". *That means that the parents and
teachers couldn't understand what the kids were saying. *Lots of
interest (and potential problems) there.

The problem with todays version of ham radio is that it's really
boring. *Nobody wants to talk to someone around the world, when they
can pickup a POTS or cell phone and do it with much less effort and
expense. *With the demise of Heathkit, building radios is no longer a
draw. *The magic of radio is gone. *So, show them what they can do
with radio. *Weather stations, APRS, satellite, construction, etc are
a good start. *

--
Jeff Liebermann * *
150 Felker St #D * *http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann * * AE6KS * *831-336-2558

LOL I showed showed some kids how to disassembe and reassemble a
desktop computer. I understand a few did well on the disassembly part
but not so well on putting it back together their parents computers.

Jimmie

On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 11:15:41 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
wrote:

On Dec 14, 1:14*pm, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
The most effective song and dance I did in front of a Jr High Skool
class was tearing apart various cell phones, walkie talkies,
computahs, and consumer electronics to demonstrate that they should
not be afraid of such things. *Unfortunately, the parents hated my
guts when the kids starting practicing what I showed them. *Learn by
Destroying(tm).

LOL I showed showed some kids how to disassembe and reassemble a
desktop computer. I understand a few did well on the disassembly part
but not so well on putting it back together their parents computers.
Jimmie

That's the way we all learn. Next time, they'll do better. You've
hit on one of my many pet peeves. The skools are so afraid of
liability issues that any activity that involves potentially dangerous
tools or devices are proscribed by the administration. The result is
a generation (or two) that don't know which end of the soldering iron
to grab, don't know how to use hand tools, and have zero experience
with machinery beyond simple power tools.

They really have to learn to use such tools early in life or they'll
never learn. A friend of mine's father was an auto mechanic. He
didn't want his son to also become an auto mechanic. Every time his
son would pickup a tool, his father would take it away from him. It
worked. We met when he was about 40 years old. Despite practice and
some instruction, he was a total klutz with hand tool, and a hazard to
life and property with power tools. Try as he might, he couldn't
recover from the lack of childhood experience with tools. However, he
was far from useless. He taught me Unix and some programming in trade
for me maintaining his (Plexus and NCR) servers.

One of my standard birthday (and sometime Hanukah) gifts is a tool box
stuffed full of quality hand tools. I build the kit myself which
includes everything from jewelers screwdrivers to a claw hammer. When
I have time, I hot stamp the birthday brat's name into the plastic
handles, mostly to discourage anyone from borrowing tools. Years
later, the kit is invariably dispersed and half missing, but during
those years, the birthday brat gets some very useful experience with
hand tools.

I was encouraged to take things apart when I was fairly young. I had
my own tool collection by age 7 or so and was encouraged to use it. I
managed to break many things. My father and I would sit down, and he
would fix it. One day, I decided to take apart a brass mantle wind-up
clock. The main spring went boing. Instead of my father fixing it
while I watched, I got to fix it, while he watched. I fumbled,
blundered, and generally made a mess while my father offered advice,
but no direct help. At about an hour a day, we got it back together
and mostly working after about 12 days. I noticed that my father was
sitting on his hands. When I asked about it much later, he said it
wasn't to stop him from grabbing the clock and fixing it himself. It
was to keep him from grabbing my throat and strangling me because I
was doing such a lousy job. Years later, I was rebuilding his factory
sewing machines and later worked on rebuilding teletype machines.
Without that early experience, I wouldn't have had a chance.

Learn by Destroying(tm) which means if you haven't broken it, ripped
it apart, and fixed it, you don't understand how it works.


--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS

On Dec 14, 9:13*am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:


Are there other sticking points?

Yes. *You'll bore the kids to death with such minutae and trivia.


LOL TKS..

"Sal"

On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 22:23:44 -0800 (PST), "Sal M. Onella"
, in an obviously impaired state, wrote:

Please pardon the slightly off-topic subject. I'm giving a class at
my grandson's school next month and I'm going to include ham radio,
with some of the kids presumably getting on the air. Of course, an
unlicensed person can operate if a properly licensed control operator
is present. Is there a source of more detailed information? I
keyword searched Part 97 and found no surprises. I think good sense
prevails.

But:
If I set up two HTs to talk simplex across a room, how do I/we ID?
KD6VKW/Alfa and KD6VKW/Bravo, maybe?
Can the kids call CQ?
Do they ID with my callsign or must I provide the ID in my own
voice?

Seems to me that "KD6VKW Portable 1" and and "KD6VKW Portable 2"
would be appropriate. The addition of arbitrary letters and or
numbers after your call sign could be misconstrued as meaning
something other than what you intend. The use of Portable 1, Portable
2, etc., is more straightforward and accurately describes the type of
conversation in progress.
--

Raymond Sirois - KU2S
http://www.hamxam.org
10-10 #70270