The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Maybe you never
will use it again. There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated.

Guess that explains Creationism. They either forgot or just
never did get biology class. And get upset when science
contradicts a trivial off topic section of the Bible.
But there is hope that some people will "get it" and
be able to do something with it. Of course the school
or FCC has to pick and choose what the kids should try
to learn. Spending less time on European medieval kings and
more on Vietnam would make sense, as modern governments are
no longer kings sitting around in castles getting bored
and deciding to have wars for the fun of it. Well, today kings
are called "dictators" anyway. Now to bring this back to
ham radio, is requiring code worth the time prospective
hams would have to spend on it, or maybe more theory should
be asked for today?

I seriously doubt that the FCC would increase code speed for
extras. The medical wavier issue would crop up again, and
the FCC found that to be a PITA. Besides it would be hard
for the FCC to tell old extras from newer extras as IIRC they
didn't keep track of who was who as old extras came up for
renewal.

"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...

The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Maybe you never will use it
again. There are many things you learn in life and may never use again,
unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated.

Guess that explains Creationism. They either forgot or just
never did get biology class. And get upset when science
contradicts a trivial off topic section of the Bible.
But there is hope that some people will "get it" and
be able to do something with it. Of course the school
or FCC has to pick and choose what the kids should try
to learn. Spending less time on European medieval kings and
more on Vietnam would make sense, as modern governments are
no longer kings sitting around in castles getting bored
and deciding to have wars for the fun of it. Well, today kings
are called "dictators" anyway. Now to bring this back to
ham radio, is requiring code worth the time prospective
hams would have to spend on it, or maybe more theory should
be asked for today?

I seriously doubt that the FCC would increase code speed for
extras. The medical wavier issue would crop up again, and
the FCC found that to be a PITA. Besides it would be hard
for the FCC to tell old extras from newer extras as IIRC they
didn't keep track of who was who as old extras came up for
renewal.

I'm not so sure "more" theory is the answer either. Used to be, you HAD to
know electronics when you went for the exams. NO ONE told you what was on
the exams. Then some lazy ******* got some political pull and they started
to dumb down the theory and put "ALL" possible questions and answers in a
book - for someone to read and recall. That isn't teaching anyone -
anything. Any idiot can learn that way, to the extent needed. It doesn't do
anything to reinforce it in their heads as to what to do with it after. IF
they make it more theory, then they'll just make the "idiot" books cover it,
and again, you'll have a bunch of people who learned A, B, C or D, not the
real meat and potatoes of Electronics. I've seen them come away and not know
what a fuse does or some of simplest of schematic symbols they "should"
know. Give me a break. Those books today teach them NOTHING. They're nothing
more than the sugar coating of it all. Just enough to get by and HOPE they
plan to pursue it further on their own, which MOST - DO NOT. Again, due to
LAZINESS.

You're right about the History though, not to lay so much on the past, but
work on current affairs. Past is good, but often TOO much time is spent on
it. That stuff is building blocks to some extent, history does have a
propensity to repeat itself, so you can't "ignore" it as a whole, but
spending say a week learning about King Arthur just doesn't get it. I recall
our teacher trying to drill **** in our heads about Genghis Khan (sp?). I
could give a **** less what he did. What I DID come to ignore and have a
need for later in life, was that stuff covered in Health class. I ended up
using it a few years out of school.
I wished then I had paid more attention to it. So, I had to "relearn" most
of it. Some things DO have their uses.

As to code, actually, it isn't so bad to know - really. Think about it. You
have sign language for deaf. IF you plan to talk to a person who is deaf,
you better learn it real fast. If you plan to travel - you may need to learn
some foreign language, even though most can speak English now. Code "can"
have benefits. We had 9 miners trapped about a year ago. They communicated
that there were nine, by 9 raps on the pole stuck in the ground. Had someone
in the ground and above ground knew code, a more detailed description could
have been issued. It could have helped. Before they got the elevator in to
get them, they had no idea what "physical" shape the guys were in or any
pending dangers under the ground. Maybe you won't use code again once
learned, but at some point, it may save a life with the user's intervention.
If you're in an auto accident, down in a gully, you have a radio. The mic is
broken, so you can't talk. You could key the radio with a key or something
and send a message. Hopefully someone knowing code would hear it and be able
to let others know. There are many reasons people can give to "not" learn
code, but there are just as many as to it's benefits. If it saves only one
life, it is worth it.

cl

cl wrote:
"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...

The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Maybe you never will use it
again. There are many things you learn in life and may never use again,
unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the skeletal
system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It doesn't mean
they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they graduated.

Guess that explains Creationism. They either forgot or just
never did get biology class. And get upset when science
contradicts a trivial off topic section of the Bible.
But there is hope that some people will "get it" and
be able to do something with it. Of course the school
or FCC has to pick and choose what the kids should try
to learn. Spending less time on European medieval kings and
more on Vietnam would make sense, as modern governments are
no longer kings sitting around in castles getting bored
and deciding to have wars for the fun of it. Well, today kings
are called "dictators" anyway. Now to bring this back to
ham radio, is requiring code worth the time prospective
hams would have to spend on it, or maybe more theory should
be asked for today?

I seriously doubt that the FCC would increase code speed for
extras. The medical wavier issue would crop up again, and
the FCC found that to be a PITA. Besides it would be hard
for the FCC to tell old extras from newer extras as IIRC they
didn't keep track of who was who as old extras came up for
renewal.


I'm not so sure "more" theory is the answer either. Used to be, you HAD to
know electronics when you went for the exams. NO ONE told you what was on
the exams. Then some lazy ******* got some political pull and they started
to dumb down the theory and put "ALL" possible questions and answers in a
book - for someone to read and recall.

Almost all standardized testing is done that way these days. Actually I
don't know of any that isn't


That isn't teaching anyone -
anything. Any idiot can learn that way, to the extent needed. It doesn't do
anything to reinforce it in their heads as to what to do with it after. IF
they make it more theory, then they'll just make the "idiot" books cover it,
and again, you'll have a bunch of people who learned A, B, C or D, not the
real meat and potatoes of Electronics.

I have never been able to see the difference between reading a book
that contains the answers to questions, and reading a question pool.
Both are entered into my memory the same way. Did you know the answers
are often scrambled, that is that the letter answer on the test is not
the letter answer in the pool?



I've seen them come away and not know
what a fuse does or some of simplest of schematic symbols they "should"
know.

I've been in the field for a long time, and there are some things that
slip me once in a while. Do you help these folks when they make a newbie
mistake?

Give me a break. Those books today teach them NOTHING. They're nothing
more than the sugar coating of it all. Just enough to get by and HOPE they
plan to pursue it further on their own, which MOST - DO NOT. Again, due to
LAZINESS.

Wow! I've got a copy of the "Now You're Talking" book. A person would
have to work pretty hard do learn nothing from that.

You're right about the History though, not to lay so much on the past, but
work on current affairs. Past is good, but often TOO much time is spent on
it. That stuff is building blocks to some extent, history does have a
propensity to repeat itself, so you can't "ignore" it as a whole, but
spending say a week learning about King Arthur just doesn't get it. I recall
our teacher trying to drill **** in our heads about Genghis Khan (sp?). I
could give a **** less what he did. What I DID come to ignore and have a
need for later in life, was that stuff covered in Health class. I ended up
using it a few years out of school.
I wished then I had paid more attention to it. So, I had to "relearn" most
of it. Some things DO have their uses.

As to code, actually, it isn't so bad to know - really.

Morse code is VERY good to know. Good enough that it should continue to
be a part of the test.


Think about it. You
have sign language for deaf. IF you plan to talk to a person who is deaf,
you better learn it real fast. If you plan to travel - you may need to learn
some foreign language, even though most can speak English now. Code "can"
have benefits. We had 9 miners trapped about a year ago. They communicated
that there were nine, by 9 raps on the pole stuck in the ground. Had someone
in the ground and above ground knew code, a more detailed description could
have been issued. It could have helped. Before they got the elevator in to
get them, they had no idea what "physical" shape the guys were in or any
pending dangers under the ground. Maybe you won't use code again once
learned, but at some point, it may save a life with the user's intervention.
If you're in an auto accident, down in a gully, you have a radio. The mic is
broken, so you can't talk. You could key the radio with a key or something
and send a message. Hopefully someone knowing code would hear it and be able
to let others know. There are many reasons people can give to "not" learn
code, but there are just as many as to it's benefits. If it saves only one
life, it is worth it.

Yup, one of so many reasons that Morse code is a good thing. Hams are
all about communication, and communications in all manner of situations.
I love the latest technology, but that technology is sometimes fragile.
Sometimes life and death, health and welfare might just come down to two
skilled operators who can make an old communications method on primitive
equipment sing its simple yet powerful song.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
cl wrote:
"robert casey" wrote in message
ink.net...

The biggest problem with most is "laziness". Maybe you never will use
it again. There are many things you learn in life and may never use
again, unless you plan to play on Jeopardy. Many people learned the
skeletal system in health class, microorganisms in Biology class. It
doesn't mean they use it now. Probably forgot it as soon as they
graduated.

Guess that explains Creationism. They either forgot or just
never did get biology class. And get upset when science
contradicts a trivial off topic section of the Bible.
But there is hope that some people will "get it" and
be able to do something with it. Of course the school
or FCC has to pick and choose what the kids should try
to learn. Spending less time on European medieval kings and
more on Vietnam would make sense, as modern governments are
no longer kings sitting around in castles getting bored
and deciding to have wars for the fun of it. Well, today kings
are called "dictators" anyway. Now to bring this back to
ham radio, is requiring code worth the time prospective
hams would have to spend on it, or maybe more theory should
be asked for today?

I seriously doubt that the FCC would increase code speed for
extras. The medical wavier issue would crop up again, and
the FCC found that to be a PITA. Besides it would be hard
for the FCC to tell old extras from newer extras as IIRC they
didn't keep track of who was who as old extras came up for
renewal.


I'm not so sure "more" theory is the answer either. Used to be, you HAD
to know electronics when you went for the exams. NO ONE told you what
was on the exams. Then some lazy ******* got some political pull and they
started to dumb down the theory and put "ALL" possible questions and
answers in a book - for someone to read and recall.

Almost all standardized testing is done that way these days. Actually I
don't know of any that isn't


Testing is one thing, "studying"' is another. Most "tests" don't give you
the answers in a book. Rather it is a conglomeration of books which a person
has had to read to ascertain the knowledge. IF it is coming to that, then it
is no wonder this country is dumbing down.

That isn't teaching anyone - anything. Any idiot can learn that way, to
the extent needed. It doesn't do anything to reinforce it in their heads
as to what to do with it after. IF they make it more theory, then they'll
just make the "idiot" books cover it, and again, you'll have a bunch of
people who learned A, B, C or D, not the real meat and potatoes of
Electronics.

I have never been able to see the difference between reading a book that
contains the answers to questions, and reading a question pool. Both are
entered into my memory the same way. Did you know the answers are often
scrambled, that is that the letter answer on the test is not the letter
answer in the pool?



Those books do not cover electronics in great detail. They gloss over
subjects. There was a time you had to "build" a working circuit - to pass.
Yes, I'm well aware that the answers are mixed up in the test pools as
opposed to the books. Back when Heathkit was in business, they had books for
each class of license. Those books had a similar pattern, but they drilled
stuff into your head. They seemed to explain things a lot better and in more
detail. Maybe I'm just too used to the "learning" methods of yesteryear.

I've seen them come away and not know what a fuse does or some of
simplest of schematic symbols they "should" know.

I've been in the field for a long time, and there are some things that
slip me once in a while. Do you help these folks when they make a newbie
mistake?


I try to help! And yes, as we age, we do forget things. I used to have
several dozen frequencies memorized and as to service. I'm lucky if I can
recall 10 of them - now. I'm sure there are symbols people can forget. But
my example of the fuse, it is sad when you don't know what a fuse is for!
That is like the most basic principle.

Give me a break. Those books today teach them NOTHING. They're nothing
more than the sugar coating of it all. Just enough to get by and HOPE
they plan to pursue it further on their own, which MOST - DO NOT. Again,
due to LAZINESS.

Wow! I've got a copy of the "Now You're Talking" book. A person would have
to work pretty hard do learn nothing from that.


The Now Your Talking - Book, is probably one of if not "thee" only in depth
books out there at this time. I was referring - and should have been a bit
more specific, to the question and answer guides with something like a 2
sentence explanation of a procedure, theory, etc. In my opinion, they don't
teach a thing. They just provide the questions and answers. Study it long
enough, you'll get enough memorized to pass, yes... but then you're stuck
because you know little "background". I believe it used to be, if a person
had the minimum of an Advanced license, he/she could use that as somewhat of
a credential for a job in electronics. Now, "I" wouldn't dare think of
hiring anyone with just having used the Q/A books. That is my opinion - for
what it is worth.

You're right about the History though, not to lay so much on the past,
but work on current affairs. Past is good, but often TOO much time is
spent on it. That stuff is building blocks to some extent, history does
have a propensity to repeat itself, so you can't "ignore" it as a whole,
but spending say a week learning about King Arthur just doesn't get it. I
recall our teacher trying to drill **** in our heads about Genghis Khan
(sp?). I could give a **** less what he did. What I DID come to ignore
and have a need for later in life, was that stuff covered in Health
class. I ended up using it a few years out of school.
I wished then I had paid more attention to it. So, I had to "relearn"
most of it. Some things DO have their uses.

As to code, actually, it isn't so bad to know - really.

Morse code is VERY good to know. Good enough that it should continue to be
a part of the test.


Think about it. You have sign language for deaf. IF you plan to talk to a
person who is deaf, you better learn it real fast. If you plan to
travel - you may need to learn some foreign language, even though most
can speak English now. Code "can" have benefits. We had 9 miners trapped
about a year ago. They communicated that there were nine, by 9 raps on
the pole stuck in the ground. Had someone in the ground and above ground
knew code, a more detailed description could have been issued. It could
have helped. Before they got the elevator in to get them, they had no
idea what "physical" shape the guys were in or any pending dangers under
the ground. Maybe you won't use code again once learned, but at some
point, it may save a life with the user's intervention. If you're in an
auto accident, down in a gully, you have a radio. The mic is broken, so
you can't talk. You could key the radio with a key or something and send
a message. Hopefully someone knowing code would hear it and be able to
let others know. There are many reasons people can give to "not" learn
code, but there are just as many as to it's benefits. If it saves only
one life, it is worth it.

Yup, one of so many reasons that Morse code is a good thing. Hams are all
about communication, and communications in all manner of situations. I
love the latest technology, but that technology is sometimes fragile.
Sometimes life and death, health and welfare might just come down to two
skilled operators who can make an old communications method on primitive
equipment sing its simple yet powerful song.

- Mike KB3EIA -

cl wrote:

Those books do not cover electronics in great detail. They gloss over
subjects. There was a time you had to "build" a working circuit - to pass.
Yes, I'm well aware that the answers are mixed up in the test pools as
opposed to the books. Back when Heathkit was in business, they had books for
each class of license. Those books had a similar pattern, but they drilled
stuff into your head. They seemed to explain things a lot better and in more
detail. Maybe I'm just too used to the "learning" methods of yesteryear.


http://www.heathkit.com/index.html is still in business, but its changed
from their old kit lineup.


The Now Your Talking - Book, is probably one of if not "thee" only in depth
books out there at this time. I was referring - and should have been a bit
more specific, to the question and answer guides with something like a 2
sentence explanation of a procedure, theory, etc. In my opinion, they don't
teach a thing. They just provide the questions and answers. Study it long
enough, you'll get enough memorized to pass, yes... but then you're stuck
because you know little "background". I believe it used to be, if a person
had the minimum of an Advanced license, he/she could use that as somewhat of
a credential for a job in electronics. Now, "I" wouldn't dare think of
hiring anyone with just having used the Q/A books. That is my opinion - for
what it is worth.


The local ham club is looking for people to take classes with "Now
Your Talking" rather than try to find people with any electronics
background. I offered to help maintain their club equipment but they
brushed me off because I don't have a ham ticket. I still have a half
way decent RF bench, but nothing compared to the $1,000,000 plus benches
of test equipment I had at Microdyne.


I never had any formal electronics training, yet I ws a broadcast
engineer, and a engineering tech for some products at Microdyne. I
learned it because I wanted to. I went to work part time in a TV shop at
13 after school and on Saturdays. When I was drafted I was tested to
prove I didn't know electronics but it backfired. I not only passed the
MOS test for Broadcast Engineer at Ft Knox, I was told I had received
the highest score on record for the test. These are some of the reasons
for my sig file. :-)


--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Mon,Apr 18 2005 6:00 am

cl wrote:



The local ham club is looking for people to take classes with "Now
Your Talking" rather than try to find people with any electronics
background. I offered to help maintain their club equipment but they
brushed me off because I don't have a ham ticket. I still have a
half
way decent RF bench, but nothing compared to the $1,000,000 plus
benches
of test equipment I had at Microdyne.

I never had any formal electronics training, yet I ws a broadcast
engineer, and a engineering tech for some products at Microdyne. I
learned it because I wanted to. I went to work part time in a TV shop
at
13 after school and on Saturdays. When I was drafted I was tested to
prove I didn't know electronics but it backfired. I not only passed
the
MOS test for Broadcast Engineer at Ft Knox, I was told I had received
the highest score on record for the test. These are some of the
reasons
for my sig file. :-)

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Michael, be warned that you can now expect all sorts of
"hate mail" in public in response to what you've written.
:-)

Trust me on that if you haven't seen others' received
flak. :-)



Still a professional electron pusher (and long-time
electronics hobbyist) but one doesn't do it during
regular office hours. :-)

wrote:
From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Mon,Apr 18 2005 6:00 am

cl wrote:
The local ham club is looking for people to take classes with
"Now
Your Talking" rather than try to find people with any electronics
background.

"Now You're Talking" is for folks with no prior background. The
idea being to introduce those who DON'T have that prior background.

I offered to help maintain their club equipment but they
brushed me off because I don't have a ham ticket. I still have a
half
way decent RF bench, but nothing compared to the $1,000,000 plus
benches
of test equipment I had at Microdyne.

I am sure the offer was appreicated, Mike, it it IS an "Amateur
Radio" club. Do you have an aversion to getting licensed?

I never had any formal electronics training, yet I ws a broadcast
engineer, and a engineering tech for some products at Microdyne. I
learned it because I wanted to. I went to work part time in a TV
shop
at
13 after school and on Saturdays. When I was drafted I was tested
to
prove I didn't know electronics but it backfired. I not only passed
the
MOS test for Broadcast Engineer at Ft Knox, I was told I had
received
the highest score on record for the test. These are some of the
reasons
for my sig file. :-)

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Michael, be warned that you can now expect all sorts of
"hate mail" in public in response to what you've written.

Actually, not really Mike.

Welcome to RRAP, wherein our resident
"used-to-be-an-engineer-and-know-everything-better-than-you"
representitive, Len "Lennie" Anderson endears himself and makes friends
by calling them Nazis, thugs, elitists, etc, then crying foul when
"called" on it.

Trust me on that if you haven't seen others' received
flak.

Trusting Lennie Anderson on ANYthing is like letting Jack
Kevorkian make your health care decisions for you.

Do a Google on ", ",
(before winter 2001, I believe...)

Lennie's "reputation" for honesty, trustworthiness and
dependability are less than adequate.

Still a professional electron pusher (and long-time
electronics hobbyist) but one doesn't do it during
regular office hours.

You don't do it during OFF hours either, judging by your complete
lack of evidence on ANY "hobbyist" project other than listening to the
ATIS at LAX on your scanner.

Hope you'll get a ticket at one level or another, Mike...there's
a lot of fun to be had...If some club was rude to you, don't think it's
the whole tamale.

73

Steve, K4YZ

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
cl wrote:

The local ham club is looking for people to take classes with "Now
Your Talking" rather than try to find people with any electronics
background. I offered to help maintain their club equipment but they
brushed me off because I don't have a ham ticket. I still have a
half
way decent RF bench, but nothing compared to the $1,000,000 plus
benches
of test equipment I had at Microdyne.

That's all well and good Mike and no doubt you're a quite competent RF
tech, not even a discussion. But I think you're missing some critical
points here. Rumors to the contrary ham radio is overwhelmingly a
communications hobby, it is NOT an electronics hobby as such. Sure
there are any number of high-end electronics gurus who also have ham
tickets and exercise their skills on the bands, in the clubs and even
in this funny-farm of a USENET group. But they're not the heart & soul
of ham radio today for certain and I'm not particularly convinced they
ever were. In general the average ham learns as much about electronics
as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on
average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment.
Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is.

In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane
details of electronics amongst the average members of the average
neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer
to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios,
they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios
off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking"
fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham
radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and
prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a
bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in
an offer to "help".

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

w3rv

wrote:

That's all well and good Mike and no doubt you're a quite competent RF
tech, not even a discussion. But I think you're missing some critical
points here. Rumors to the contrary ham radio is overwhelmingly a
communications hobby, it is NOT an electronics hobby as such. Sure
there are any number of high-end electronics gurus who also have ham
tickets and exercise their skills on the bands, in the clubs and even
in this funny-farm of a USENET group. But they're not the heart & soul
of ham radio today for certain and I'm not particularly convinced they
ever were.


Most of the hams I knew as a kid were home brewers. They were not
designers but they could build a piece of equipment form a magazine
article or the handbook. I lived about an hour from Mendelson's in
dayton Ohio, and I ran into a lot of hams there, digging through the
unmarked bins of parts to build their latest project or repair one of
their projects.


In general the average ham learns as much about electronics
as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on
average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment.
Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is.


The whole idea of a rig that isn't intended to be serviced is what
kills my interest in the hobby. Too many custom parts made of
"Unobtaium" and refusing to release schematics and manuals really don't
inspire any confidence in imported whiz bang rigs. Not that I prefer
tube only rigs, but they were built to do their job for years. Maybe
the rest of the ham's life if he took decent care of his equipment. A
lot of newer rigs end up as parts units because some cheap component is
NLA. Do you think many of these all plastic LCD display radios will
still work when they are 20 years old?


I was told that a couple retired EEs in the local club did all their
repairs and I didn't know enough to be of any help. Then they told me
to "stuff" my offer of free electronic components to help them with
repairs.


In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane
details of electronics amongst the average members of the average
neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer
to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios,
they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios
off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking"
fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham
radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and
prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a
bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in
an offer to "help".

w3rv

Sorry, but that analogy just doesn't work. Several members told me
they wanted to do minor repairs on their equipment but they didn't have
access to the tools or equipment anymore. I offered them free use of my
shop and to give them most of the components from my old repair business
if I had what they needed and was laughed at. As far as weapons, I have
used a bow but I prefer an M-72. ;-)



A lot of hams in Ohio were glad that I was willing to help out
including an old ham in his late 70s that brought me a home brew
receiver that a SK friend of his had built 20 years before. He had lost
the hand drawn schematics and had a tear rolling down his cheek as he
asked if there was any way I could possibly help him. He told me that
he had been to every two way shop and ham equipment dealer to try to
find someone to work on it and that one of them told him I was the only
one in the county crazy enough to even attempt a repair. I tore it down
and found a couple burnt resistors and shorted caps. I did a little
math, dug around and found the parts. He was crying when the receiver
came to life and kept thanking me. I charged him $10 and he hurried
home to get back on the air. Helping someone like that is better than
spending hours on the air to me. Different strokes?

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

Michael A. Terrell wrote:

wrote:

That's all well and good Mike and no doubt you're a quite competent RF
tech, not even a discussion. But I think you're missing some critical
points here. Rumors to the contrary ham radio is overwhelmingly a
communications hobby, it is NOT an electronics hobby as such. Sure
there are any number of high-end electronics gurus who also have ham
tickets and exercise their skills on the bands, in the clubs and even
in this funny-farm of a USENET group. But they're not the heart & soul
of ham radio today for certain and I'm not particularly convinced they
ever were.



Most of the hams I knew as a kid were home brewers. They were not
designers but they could build a piece of equipment form a magazine
article or the handbook. I lived about an hour from Mendelson's in
dayton Ohio, and I ran into a lot of hams there, digging through the
unmarked bins of parts to build their latest project or repair one of
their projects.



In general the average ham learns as much about electronics
as he/she needs to satisfy their enjoyment of the hobby. Which on
average ain't much in this day of cheap whizzy plug 'n play equipment.
Beast on reality as you might but that's the way it is.



The whole idea of a rig that isn't intended to be serviced is what
kills my interest in the hobby. Too many custom parts made of
"Unobtaium" and refusing to release schematics and manuals really don't
inspire any confidence in imported whiz bang rigs. Not that I prefer
tube only rigs, but they were built to do their job for years.

I like the modern equipment, but hollow state equipment is simply cool.
Now that I have my main station set up, I'm going to start putting
together some old tube rigs. Oh yeah!


Maybe
the rest of the ham's life if he took decent care of his equipment. A
lot of newer rigs end up as parts units because some cheap component is
NLA. Do you think many of these all plastic LCD display radios will
still work when they are 20 years old?


I was told that a couple retired EEs in the local club did all their
repairs and I didn't know enough to be of any help. Then they told me
to "stuff" my offer of free electronic components to help them with
repairs.

Mike, if I may be blunt, that is a pretty ****ty club. Pardon my French!



In this sense and given the obvious lack of interest in the arcane
details of electronics amongst the average members of the average
neighborhood ham radio club you should not have known that your offer
to participate was a no-counter. They don't "maintain" their radios,
they don't need your expertise, they simply ship their broken radios
off to the repair shops to get fixed. In short "Now You're Talking"
fits their agenda and your's simply does not. In another sense ham
radio clubs are private entities conventionally for hams and
prospective hams only. As an analogy what you did was show up at a
bow-hunters club with a .45-70 powder-burner and expect any interest in
an offer to "help".

w3rv


Sorry, but that analogy just doesn't work. Several members told me
they wanted to do minor repairs on their equipment but they didn't have
access to the tools or equipment anymore. I offered them free use of my
shop and to give them most of the components from my old repair business
if I had what they needed and was laughed at.

AS I said, a poor excuse for a club.....

As far as weapons, I have
used a bow but I prefer an M-72. ;-)



A lot of hams in Ohio were glad that I was willing to help out
including an old ham in his late 70s that brought me a home brew
receiver that a SK friend of his had built 20 years before. He had lost
the hand drawn schematics and had a tear rolling down his cheek as he
asked if there was any way I could possibly help him. He told me that
he had been to every two way shop and ham equipment dealer to try to
find someone to work on it and that one of them told him I was the only
one in the county crazy enough to even attempt a repair. I tore it down
and found a couple burnt resistors and shorted caps. I did a little
math, dug around and found the parts. He was crying when the receiver
came to life and kept thanking me. I charged him $10 and he hurried
home to get back on the air. Helping someone like that is better than
spending hours on the air to me. Different strokes?

Different strokes indeed. The ARS has room for many different types. It
sounds as if we would get along just fine.

I'll bet you felt just darn good when you got to help that fellow.

Sounds to me as if you *have* found your place in the hobby. Seems like
a good one to me.

- Mike KB3EIA -