wrote:
On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:

Changes in requirements don't have any effect
when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists.


I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the
general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio.

I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow
ham radio.

I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are
millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on
any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles.


I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant.

In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look
beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are
comparing look as they do.

Looking at the numbers in one way, we may wonder at an apparent
drop-off. A lot of technicians went way. We need to speculate on why. It
would be a basic assumption that they decided that Ham radio was not for
them.

Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off was a
change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for
purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the
like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are
served by Cell phones now.

Others have speculated that the dropoff was due to poor treatment of
new Hams.

I don't doubt that there may be examples of the second group, I would
surmise that there could be a little bit of both reasons, but am
inclined to think it might be a 90/10 in favor of the former.

I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've been
having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing change,
and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new generals and a
Technician will be added to the ranks this evening. Those new guys don't
know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were doing ten years ago, and
don't particularly care either. They have become interested in Ham
radio, and we've encouraged them every step of the way. We've been
selling the sizzle.

One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some
kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal
with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby
interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to
ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context,
I think.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:

Changes in requirements don't have any effect
when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists.


I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the
general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio.

I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow
ham radio.

I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are
millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on
any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles.


I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant.


However, they need to be looked at in context. Just looking solely at the
new licenses and upgrades does not give a complete picture.

In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look
beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are
comparing look as they do.

Which was precisely the point I attempted to make.

[snip]


One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some kind
of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal with. We
need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby interesting, and to
replace the fact that everyone is terminated to ground eventually. 1
percent growth would be desirable in that context, I think.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

I would like to see it stay at about the same percentage of the general
population as it is now. As the population grows or shrinks, I would expect
our numbers to do the same. However, as you said, we do need the new
recruits as none of us are immortal.

Dee, N8UZE

On Apr 10, 2:00�pm, Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:
On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:

Changes in requirements don't have any effect
when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists.

I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the
general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio.

In my experience, non-hams' knowledge of the
existence of amateur radio is all over the map, from
"never heard of it" to "what do you want to know?"

Most people may have heard of it, but that doesn't mean
they really understand it. For example, I have met people
who thought amateur radio disappeared years ago. Others
think that it requires an elaborate station and the knowledge
of an EE just to get started. Etc.

With significantly less than 1% of US residents holding
amateur radio licenses, it's not unreasonable that lots
of people today would not have heard of amateur radio.

I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow
ham radio.

"Growth" has consistently been one of the main reasons
given for changing the license requirements, by those
who wanted them changed.

I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. *There are
millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on
any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles.

I think growth is a good thing, as long as it does not come
at the price of quality.

I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant.

In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look
beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are
comparing look as they do.

Agreed.

* * * * Looking at the numbers in one way, we may wonder at an apparent
drop-off. A lot of technicians went way. We need to speculate on why. It
would be a basic assumption that they decided that Ham radio was not for
them.

That assumption is incomplete, however.

Some may have decided ham radio was not for them.
Others may have had to put aside ham radio for a time,
because of other responsibilities.

A considerable number may have either died or become
incapacitated enough that amateur radio is no longer an
option for them.

Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off was a
change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for
purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the
like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are
served by Cell phones now.

I know many hams who got licenses in the late 1970s, 1980s and 1990s
for just that reason. Some of them
became interested in other facets of amateur radio, some
did not. Some replaced amateur radio with a cell phone,
some did not.

I don't know if those who replaced amateur radio with a
cell phone make up a majority of those who left, or not.

But I do know this: We're not getting very many new
"honeydew" hams anymore. Not anywhere near what
we were getting before 1995 or so.

Others have speculated that the dropoff was due to
poor treatment of new Hams.

*I don't doubt that there may be examples of the second group, *I would
surmise that there could be a little bit of both reasons, but am
inclined to think it might be a 90/10 in favor of *the former.

If not even more so.

* * * * I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've been
having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing change,
and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new generals and a
Technician will be added to the ranks this evening. Those new guys don't
know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were doing ten years ago, and
don't particularly care either. They have become interested in Ham
radio, and we've encouraged them every step of the way. We've been
selling the sizzle.

Exactly! But by the same token, to get those 3 hams, you probably had
to sell the sizzle to quite a large number of
people.


*One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some
kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal
with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby
interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to
ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context,
I think.

I think that if Amateur Radio is presented in a clear and positive
manner, the growth will take care of itself.

73 de Jim, N2EY

Michael Coslo wrote on Tue, 10 Apr 2007 14:00:46 EDT:

Subject: Before and After Cessation of Code Testing

wrote:
On Apr 9, 8:22 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:

Changes in requirements don't have any effect
when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists.

I don't believe that there is any significant percentage of the
general population of the USA who has never heard of ham radio.

I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow
ham radio.

I don't even care if ham radio grows or doesn't grow. There are
millions of hams on planet Earth, more than enough to fill my logs on
any mode I choose through at least the next four sunspot cycles.

I believe that Hans' percentage numbers are indeed relevant.

In a dynamic area such as ARS license numbers, there is a need to look
beyond raw numbers and to determine exactly why the numbers that you are
comparing look as they do.

In general I agree with you Mike. I've had some trouble getting
to the website where Hans got his numbers; www.ncvec.org doesn't
have any page with that information.

Other than that, amateur radio licensee numbers MUST remain "up"
in order to indicate to the government there is a "presence" of
citizens in a sizeable number that deserves attention. There
are many different radio services regulated by the FCC and
amateur radio is a minority among those.

The "why" of license changes can be determined by different raw
database searching than what most "statistics" websites show.
The information exists as to changes in class. Obviously there
has been a large number of recent "upgrades" of Technician to
General. None of us can find any reasons for licensees letting
their licenses lapse, at least from the raw database.

The FCC database may be publicly-downloadable but it is LARGE
at, what, 80 to 90 Megabytes? One needs high-speed Internet
service for reasonable downloading. File size of the database
is not a problem in modern PCs, nor is it difficult to write a
specific sorting routine to extract various categories' data.
Many publicly-accessible websites already do some sorting.

Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off was a
change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for
purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the
like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are
served by Cell phones now.

Based on my experience in southern California, I took the
"honey-do" license reason as pure speculation on others' part.
What I have seen here in the last decade is: (1). A rapid
growth of cellular in its present compact HT form; (2). a
growth of "technician" type VHF and UHF activity which had
already begun well back before the year 2000 Restructuring.

Caveat: I live in a large urban population area, not unlike
the NYC-LI, Chicago, San Francisco ('Bay Area'), Seattle, etc.
areas. VHF-UHF at LOS paths works well in such areas. But,
there is another part of VHF-UHF radio activity that doesn't
quite have the parallel of HF DX hunting, in-person get-
togethers, spontaneous or planned.

The BBS or Bulletin Board System had a tremendous growth
from the early 1980s to the "ripening" of the Internet in
the later 1990s. Quite a number of those BBSs featured
in-person "gatherings" of a social nature where all could
get to know one another better, not through the scarcity of
few clues presented through a computer screen. That's not
unlike the VHF-UHF large urban amateur situation where the
participants can travel a short distance to some gathering.
There's not the "DX Isolation" of hundreds or thousands of
miles to another continent as is often the case on HF.

There's more activity of radio amateurs above 30 MHz than
what the "HF" amateurs think, especially in larger urban
areas. Those who operate above 30 MHz should never be
thought of or even considered as "second-class" amateurs
of the "shack on a belt" category.

I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've been
having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing change,
and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new generals and a
Technician will be added to the ranks this evening. Those new guys don't
know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were doing ten years ago, and
don't particularly care either. They have become interested in Ham
radio, and we've encouraged them every step of the way. We've been
selling the sizzle.

There's a problem with using anecdotal evidence: It is too
limited to apply to the national scene. Changes in licensing
patterns FOR the national area can only be derived from national
licensing information. I can say my 91352 ZIP area has 78 hams
with over 2/3 of those at Tech or Tech-Plus category but it
means little for a national amateur radio condition. Yes, at
my test session on 25 Feb 07 over half were there to get or to
upgrade from Technician licenses. Doesn't mean much to looking
at the overall national scene.

One minor disagreement with Hans, though. I don't care if we get some
kind of huge growth, in fact, that would be lots of problems to deal
with. We need a steady influx of new people to keep the hobby
interesting, and to replace the fact that everyone is terminated to
ground eventually. 1 percent growth would be desirable in that context,
I think.

The national population keeps on growing. Amateur radio licensee
numbers have not over the last four years. To keep a "presence"
of the hobby requires that licensee numbers at least keep pace with
the population increases. The FCC is aware of numbers and serves
the national interest, not just amateurs. The FCC must try to
accomodate all the radio services as best it can. In general, I
see them as doing that.

If the amateur radio licensee numbers are up or at least
maintained,
there will be a MARKET of suppliers of amateur radio goods. That's
important, not just for ready-made super-deluxe do-everything rigs
but also for supplies, of components, of accessories. If the
market sees a decline in percentage of the population, then some
will drop out or the prices of goods will increase.

The amateur radio market has already dropped some. Advertising
sales are down slightly. That was enough to force HR and 73 to
quit their independent publications, for CQ to reduce its VHF
specialty periodical. QST hangs in there on the basis of enormous
support from the ARRL but it is folly to depend on it as the sole
source of all US amateur radio information. Radio Shack is mainly
a purveyor of consumer electronics goods. There are fewer and
fewer "radio parts" stores across the country; most of the old
"radio parts" aren't even made now, their makers into other,
more profitable electronics goods areas. Without a "presence"
in the marketplace, a decline in license numbers could continue
a slow market drought.

BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros"
in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination
since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry
trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership
magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There
were brief mentions of it in various Pentron industry trade
news, even the occasional newspaper "filler" story around the
country. It wasn't known just to already-licensed radio amateurs
but to a larger segment of the electronics-oriented public.

73, Len AF6AY

"AF6AY" wrote in message
oups.com...

[snip]

BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros"
in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination
since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry
trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership
magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There
were brief mentions of it in various Pentron industry trade
news, even the occasional newspaper "filler" story around the
country. It wasn't known just to already-licensed radio amateurs
but to a larger segment of the electronics-oriented public.

73, Len AF6AY


What percentage of the general populace read EDN, Electronic Design, and
Spectrum? We can't rely on just one group of people (pros in electronics)
to provide stability or even growth. Just because a person is an
electronics pro doesn't necessarily mean that amateur radio will tickle
their fancy.

What percentage of the newspapers carried those fillers? Not many. Of
those, what percentage of people actually read the fillers tucked in here
and there in the newspaper?

We need to get the word out among the general populace not just specialty
groups.

Dee, N8UZE

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:

What percentage of the general populace read EDN, Electronic Design,
and Spectrum? We can't rely on just one group of people (pros in
electronics) to provide stability or even growth. Just because a
person is an electronics pro doesn't necessarily mean that amateur
radio will tickle their fancy.

What percentage of the newspapers carried those fillers? Not many.
Of those, what percentage of people actually read the fillers tucked
in here and there in the newspaper?

We need to get the word out among the general populace not just
specialty groups.

Yes, pretty much! We also need to have our hobby in some position
to attract the general populous also. Some of the same type items that I
was writing about with Len.

I take my own situation as an example. I got into Ham radio as a
person who was interested in possible communications support and control
in matters relating to Amateur Astronomy. From there, it blossomed into
HF and to my surprise, some of the old (read hollow state) radios as well
as digital modes.

While we can say "You can communnicate with the world on HF, that
point might be lost on people who can pick up a cell phone and call most
anywhere in the world.

It might take a little while for the fact that we can do that
without any infrastructure to sink in. Once that happens, we got 'em hook
line and sinker.

The important thing is that we have to find something relevant to
the newbie to start with.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

"Dee Flint" wrote on Tue, 10 Apr 2007
22:31:17 EDT
"AF6AY" wrote in message


BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros"
in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination
since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry
trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership
magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There

What percentage of the general populace read EDN, Electronic Design, and
Spectrum? We can't rely on just one group of people (pros in electronics)
to provide stability or even growth.

The worldwide membership of the IEEE exceeds the number of licensed
active US radio amateurs. The electronics industry employs
millions in the USA alone. It is BIG.

Just because a person is an
electronics pro doesn't necessarily mean that amateur radio will tickle
their fancy.

That's true and observable in any corporate electronics engineering
environment. But, don't forget that the majority of those IN the
electronics engineering part of the industry got INTO it for the
fascination of the technology. It doesn't take a great deal of
persuasion to get them interested in the hobby aspects of radio
beyond scanners, beyond SWL, beyond WiFi, beyond WLANs. Indeed,
some of them get into robotics, a fun hobby for many...or they get
into audio. My MD General Practitioner is fascinated by speakers
and various ways to couple them for the highest-fi of sound, but
not INTO circuitry itself...despite being able to USE a number
of very high-tech electronic devices in his medical practice.

Those in wholesale and retail merchandising of electronics pay
attention to many phases of the electronics market, trying to
anticipate demand. They will also delete items that do not sell
well or where the local interest groups are too small for them
to make a profit in their business. My wife and I were out today
looking for a particular item of consumer electronics. One place,
a relatively new Best Buy store (built four years ago), was huge.
A mile and a half away is a Fry's Electronics, even bigger. In
observing the entire electronics retail industry for the last half
century, I've never seen any amateur radio outlet that approaches
their size.

What percentage of the newspapers carried those fillers? Not many.

Perhaps. I can only state that the Los Angeles TIMES has a
circulation of 1.4 million each day. Since more than one
person will read one issue, the number of readers here may
exceed 3 million.

Of
those, what percentage of people actually read the fillers tucked in here
and there in the newspaper?

I have no idea, not being in the journalism field. You might
try asking your own newspaper about that.

We need to get the word out among the general populace not just specialty
groups.

I will suggest you observe the Public Relations techniques of
the entertainment industry. They manage to get enormous PR
about entertainers, TV series, motion pictures, etc. Or any
advertising agency willing to talk about it (not that easy).
They KNOW about such things.

The first thing amateur radio MUST do is to LOSE the old, trite
cliche's of a half century ago used to "promote" amateur radio.
Almost all of that just doesn't work in this first decade of the
new millennium. We have one in three Americans with a cell phone.
CB users outnumber licensed radio amateurs by anywhere from 4:1
to 7:1, certainly so and larger on the nation's highways. We
get worldwide video feed from anywhere on the globe for TV news,
the only thing stopping some on late-breaking news is the crowding
of communications satellite transponders. We all were able to see
"videophone" pictures from inside Iraq during the first Gulf War
(a decade and a half ago). We can have VoIP anywhere that the
Internet is, which is sizeable on every continent. We have
wireless auto "keyless entry" locks by the millions in use every
day. We have Wireless LANs available in homes, not just
businesses. We have wireless door bells and the cell phone
"Bluetooth" short-range couplers to a teeny cell phone typified
by the strange growth some ardent users have in one ear. :-)

The general public - to me - doesn't seem to know exactly what
"shortwave" is, even less informed on what "HF" is. They know
about CB because such has been featured as an integral part of
one popular TV series ("Dukes of Hazard"), used in several major
motion pictures ("Convoy" and "Smokey and the Bandit" among the
bigger grossers). The best that can be said for showing amateur
radio is the film "Frequency," a fantasy tale of some kind of
time travel. Note, "Contact" starring Jodie Foster, was much
more science-fiction about first meeting with aliens even
though it had brief showing of amateur radio as part of the
story.

The general public can recognize cell site antennas and towers,
can understand that police and fire and other public safety
agencies USE radio as part of their work. They KNOW they can
choose a satellite relay service for their home TV instead of
going to cable; the little dishes are unmistakable. They
just don't have an appreciation for a "QRP ham rig that can
talk anywhere in the world," especially when that ham rig
requires just the right kind of ionospheric conditions to be
able to do that. In general, the public seems unaware of
shortwave broadcasts since they have plenty of standard AM
and FM broadcasting available in every US urban center.

The general public is much more aware of the skylines of many
urban neighborhoods interrupted by towers with beam antennas,
ungainly wire antennas strung as best a residence plot allows.
In general they think them ugly and unsuitable for a residential
neighborhood. In general they aren't going to be sold on some
tall tale of "those are 'necessary' for homeland defense!"
Besides the occasional RFI problem, the general public has a
negative opinion of amateur radio in their neighborhood...it
is their HOME territory, not a radio center.

Trying to talk up amateur radio to the general public
requires being AWARE of what the general public knows, NOT
what amateurs or membership organizations want. It isn't
publicity to promote ham radio to the general public if all
that is done is amateurs high-fiving one another on a "job
well done." It isn't "well done" to the public if they
reamin insular. Despite being an ARRL member, I cannot
(in truth) say that the ARRL has gotten out to the public.
If anything, NASA has done that much more on requesting
astronauts to get Technician class licenses to talk to
various public school groups from space. That's a NASA
PR ploy to keep the public aware of NASA activities...
and future NASA budgeting to keep the space biz going.

Walter Cronkhite as a narrator of an amateur radio video
about amateur radio is fine. But, it can't just be
shown to amateur radio clubs. It has to get OUT to the
public. At least sell the idea of showing the video as
a public service, something the stations are required to
do. So what if the showing is in the wee small hours of
the morning? SOME showing is better than NONE.

73, Len AF6AY

AF6AY wrote:

Trying to talk up amateur radio to the general public
requires being AWARE of what the general public knows, NOT
what amateurs or membership organizations want. It isn't
publicity to promote ham radio to the general public if all
that is done is amateurs high-fiving one another on a "job
well done." It isn't "well done" to the public if they
reamin insular. Despite being an ARRL member, I cannot
(in truth) say that the ARRL has gotten out to the public.
If anything, NASA has done that much more on requesting
astronauts to get Technician class licenses to talk to
various public school groups from space. That's a NASA
PR ploy to keep the public aware of NASA activities...
and future NASA budgeting to keep the space biz going.

Yup, NASA has gotten a lot more mileage out of the project than the ARS
has.




Walter Cronkhite as a narrator of an amateur radio video
about amateur radio is fine. But, it can't just be
shown to amateur radio clubs. It has to get OUT to the
public. At least sell the idea of showing the video as
a public service, something the stations are required to
do. So what if the showing is in the wee small hours of
the morning? SOME showing is better than NONE.

Another suggestion. most Cable systems have public service channels.
Amateur radio advocates should be able to tap into that.

There is one caveat, and I go into this with a bit of sensitivity here.
In my non-Ham life, I often put together productions that serve as
advertisements. The old adage of putting your best foot forward is
mandatory if you are going to get a message across. We often do not do that.

You don't need - or even want - the smartest Ham on the block. What you
need is an adept communicator. This erudite communicator needs to be
"prettied up" for the prospective audience. Wearing a "Hooters" T-shirt
ain't gonna cut it. I would probably wear a suit and tie (note not a
white shirt and skinny black tie). Maybe lose the jacket after a few
minutes. In similar form, we're trying to attract teenagers, we probably
don't want a kid with a tattoo on his forehead and a safety pin in his lip.

Why don't we want that local uberHam? In many (most?) cases they are
not very good communicators.(note the difference between communicating
and communicator) They are too close to the subject. If we're trying to
demonstrate HF comms for the unfamiliar, they don't need a lecture on
the third intercept point of whatever transceiver. Sometimes they want
to show how smart they are more than try to attract people.. Wanna scare
a prospective Ham away? Make them feel like they can do anything if they
aren't an engineer.

Focus the message, use a good communicator, and look approachable.

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

"AF6AY" wrote in
oups.com:



In general I agree with you Mike. I've had some trouble getting
to the website where Hans got his numbers; www.ncvec.org doesn't
have any page with that information.

Other than that, amateur radio licensee numbers MUST remain "up"
in order to indicate to the government there is a "presence" of
citizens in a sizeable number that deserves attention. There
are many different radio services regulated by the FCC and
amateur radio is a minority among those.

Agreed. I'm glad someone got that into this conversation. That we
have these allocations at all is a minor miracle. Numerical preservation
is one of the ways that we will keep them, IMO.

Why? Some have speculated that the majority of that drop-off
was a
change in communication habits, ie. Hams who got their licenses for
purposes of "calling home" to check in, or get a grocery list, or the
like. Some call that flavor of Ham a "honeydo" Ham. These people are
served by Cell phones now.

Based on my experience in southern California, I took the
"honey-do" license reason as pure speculation on others' part.
What I have seen here in the last decade is: (1). A rapid
growth of cellular in its present compact HT form; (2). a
growth of "technician" type VHF and UHF activity which had
already begun well back before the year 2000 Restructuring.

Yes, most of the reasons given are spectulation, and when that
happens we tend to inject our own personal views into that speculation. I
don't really know the cause of the drop-off, am just making a (hopefully)
intelligent guess. 8^)


Caveat: I live in a large urban population area, not unlike
the NYC-LI, Chicago, San Francisco ('Bay Area'), Seattle, etc.
areas. VHF-UHF at LOS paths works well in such areas. But,
there is another part of VHF-UHF radio activity that doesn't
quite have the parallel of HF DX hunting, in-person get-
togethers, spontaneous or planned.

From th etimes that I was out there, that would be VHF nirvana,
tall mountains and fairly flat valleys. I suspect the canyons might be a
little challenging tho'. Back here in PA we have nice mountains, but so
many foothills and corduroy valleys that make repeater work a little more
challenging. But even that can be overcome with effort and fairly deep
pockets. We have a very good local repeater system, with several polling
stations on the local mountains that vote on which signal gets to the
main repeater. A 300 mw HT cam be used over almost the entire county.


There's more activity of radio amateurs above 30 MHz than
what the "HF" amateurs think, especially in larger urban
areas.

We're certainly busy on VHF here. State College is considered the
"smallest metropolitan area in the country...8^)


Those who operate above 30 MHz should never be
thought of or even considered as "second-class" amateurs
of the "shack on a belt" category.

Absolutely. I've often thought that there was a natural divide
between HF and VHF+. Disregarding 6 meters, which is kind of a mishmash,
it can almost be two different hobbies. I gravitate toward HF myself, but
there is cool stuff happening at VHF and above. And so what if a Hams
hobby is confined to "the repeater" anyhow?


I have personally seen a surge of new Hams in our area. We've
been
having a 2 percent growth in our area since *before* the testing
change, and assuming that tonights testing is successful, 2 new
generals and a Technician will be added to the ranks this evening.
Those new guys don't know a thing about what the Honeydo hams were
doing ten years ago, and don't particularly care either. They have
become interested in Ham radio, and we've encouraged them every step
of the way. We've been selling the sizzle.

There's a problem with using anecdotal evidence: It is too
limited to apply to the national scene. Changes in licensing
patterns FOR the national area can only be derived from national
licensing information. I can say my 91352 ZIP area has 78 hams
with over 2/3 of those at Tech or Tech-Plus category but it
means little for a national amateur radio condition. Yes, at
my test session on 25 Feb 07 over half were there to get or to
upgrade from Technician licenses. Doesn't mean much to looking
at the overall national scene.

Our situation is truly a "single data point". My thoughts on that are
that we are working hard to prove that with an inclusive atmosphere
(critical) and selling that sizzle, we seem to be making it work.

There are so many facets to Ham radio - Experimentation, Olde tyme
radio, voice, digital, simple OOK Morse comms. Public service,
contesting, DX'ing, homebrewing, SWD radio, Offroading comms, and on and
on. the ARS should almost be selling itself. And the serendipitious finds
it's way into the picture too. I never would have thought that I would
get into hollow state technology, as I am heavily into the latest
technology too. Go figure!

My main point is that with good representatives, Ham radio
shouldn't be a hard sell.



BTW, as to Dee Flint's other comment in this thread, the "pros"
in electronics HAVE been informed of the code test elimination
since December, 2006. EDN and Electronic Design, both industry
trades of wide distribution, and SPECTRUM, the membership
magazine of the IEEE had news of that prior to 23 Feb 07. There
were brief mentions of it in various Pentron industry trade
news, even the occasional newspaper "filler" story around the
country. It wasn't known just to already-licensed radio amateurs
but to a larger segment of the electronics-oriented public.

Knowledge that Ham radio "exists" is nice, I suppose. Even better
would be that people understand that they might want to get involved.

Just one example might be APRS. Although I find it a little creepy,
helicoptering parents might find it interesting to know where their
offspring are. I'm pretty convinced that a PSK31 enabled 2 meter
"texter" radio would be popular among high schoolers and even older hams.
Something like that should have been available some years ago. You could
even combine it all into one unit.

This isn't rocket science, just pipe dreaming something that might
be an interesting element of the hobby. Who says that we all have to be
doing the same thing?


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo wrote on Wed, 11 Apr 2007
04:22:00 EDT

"AF6AY" wrote in

Other than that, amateur radio licensee numbers MUST remain "up"
in order to indicate to the government there is a "presence" of
citizens in a sizeable number that deserves attention. There
are many different radio services regulated by the FCC and
amateur radio is a minority among those.

Agreed. I'm glad someone got that into this conversation. That we
have these allocations at all is a minor miracle. Numerical preservation
is one of the ways that we will keep them, IMO.

Yes, and proper politicking, too. Example: The model radio-
control channels on 72, 74 MHz. Model hobby organizations and
the model hobby industry fought for that and got them. No way
that model airplanes, boats, cars are "advancing the state of
the art" of vehicles nor is it even a scientific activity. It
is FUN to do. The Academy of Model Aeronautics in Ohio has
a quarter million members and that is only part of total
involved in model hobbies. It CAN be done without all the
high-sounding rhetoric. It is a PEOPLE-involved activity and
the numbers do make a difference.

Caveat: I live in a large urban population area, not unlike
the NYC-LI, Chicago, San Francisco ('Bay Area'), Seattle, etc.
areas. VHF-UHF at LOS paths works well in such areas. But,
there is another part of VHF-UHF radio activity that doesn't
quite have the parallel of HF DX hunting, in-person get-
togethers, spontaneous or planned.

From th etimes that I was out there, that would be VHF nirvana,
tall mountains and fairly flat valleys. I suspect the canyons might be a
little challenging tho'. Back here in PA we have nice mountains, but so
many foothills and corduroy valleys that make repeater work a little more
challenging. But even that can be overcome with effort and fairly deep
pockets. We have a very good local repeater system, with several polling
stations on the local mountains that vote on which signal gets to the
main repeater. A 300 mw HT cam be used over almost the entire county.

I don't know when you were in southern California area, but the
Condor Net began about 1977...back before microprocessors were
available to the hobbyist. On the "220" band, it uses subaudible
signalling to access any repeater path from just north of the Bay
Area (San Francisco) down south to L.A. and San Diego, over to
Arizona and one link to Nevada. All privately funded, all public
access, over 600 miles of all types of terrain, flat to mountains.


Those who operate above 30 MHz should never be
thought of or even considered as "second-class" amateurs
of the "shack on a belt" category.

Absolutely. I've often thought that there was a natural divide
between HF and VHF+. Disregarding 6 meters, which is kind of a mishmash,
it can almost be two different hobbies. I gravitate toward HF myself, but
there is cool stuff happening at VHF and above. And so what if a Hams
hobby is confined to "the repeater" anyhow?

There's an unfortunate stereotypical attitude, enforced by
years of publicity since before WW2 that ONLY HF is
"important" since that is where DX happens. HF is easier
to work with than VHF because "lumped" constants are used
to make identification and understanding easier. By the
UHF region it begins to be "distributed" constants, much
harder for the average ham to understand. But, VHF and
above can do some tricks that are physically impossible
for the average ham home owner...even if "DX" is a rarity.


Our situation is truly a "single data point". My thoughts on that are
that we are working hard to prove that with an inclusive atmosphere
(critical) and selling that sizzle, we seem to be making it work.

Whatever works on the local scenes is good. If it works, it works.


My main point is that with good representatives, Ham radio
shouldn't be a hard sell.

That is the HARD part! The OLD paradigms, the phrases, the
"new" phrases such as "vital to homeland defense" just don't
work with the general public. It hasn't worked enough so far.

As I remarked to Dee, NASA is doing more for ham radio PR than
the ARRL. Those astronauts who got Tech licenses didn't do so
"for the good of amateur radio." They got them because it was
a job requirement. NASA is doing its own PR since it is
publicly funded through the taxpayer.


Knowledge that Ham radio "exists" is nice, I suppose. Even better
would be that people understand that they might want to get involved.

Selling "sizzle" is a first step. Adding the "bacon" aroma
helps a lot. But the sizzle and aroma can NOT remain locked
inside ham club houses. That is NOT proper PR, despite it
making hams in those club houses feeling all good and
emotional.

This isn't rocket science, just pipe dreaming something that might
be an interesting element of the hobby. Who says that we all have to be
doing the same thing?

Ahem...several of the more vocal are dead set on continuing
all the old paradigms, confident that such is the "best" way.
It isn't. The number of NEW licensees arriving on the ham
scene is NOT keeping up with those expirations. It's been in
the statistics for at least three years now and is NOT just a
minor blip in the numbers.

73, Len AF6AY