Larry wrote in
:

"Dee Flint" wrote in
:

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


I bumped into this post after a couple of hours on Skype with a ham
buddy of mine in New Zealand. I was 5-9 for the whole QSO and I don't
have an antenna.

Who do we call "potential recruits" under these conditions? What's
the point, any more? (Please don't point me to that old BS about
emergency comms.

Respectfully, your perspective on Amateur Radio is a bit narrow. It
isn't just about talking with other people. If all a person wanted to do
was talk, they are much better off picking up the phone. And they were
much better off a long time and on many other comm modes before Skype
came around.


I went right through the eye of Hurricane Hugo in
Charleston in 1989, talking on Cellular One's AMPS bagphone to worried
friends in Ohio as I stood in the street, in the eye, looking up at
the stars in a completely destroyed neighborhood.

1 data point. We had a snowstorm that took down most of the power
lines in our area a few years back. Everyone tried to call their worried
friends and took the cellular network down almost immediately. If cell
phones were reliable, they wouldn't spend all that money on emergency
comm systems.
If they stay up, that is great. Use 'em if you got 'em. (however
even if there is power, during emergencies they tend to get overloaded)

- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

I don't think that we are ever going to see Amateur Radio appeal to
the public at large. Fifty years ago it was difficult to phone
outside of your state, today I regularly call relatives in India, Iran
and Australia for free on Skype. Kids today who regularly chat with
other kids from around the globe on myspace will not be impressed with
a hard to hear ham contact with North Dakota.

I flew to India on business, turned on my standard US issued mobile/
cell phone in Mumbai airport and received a call from the US long
before I cleared customs. The customs agent just shrugged when he saw
my phone. Have you ever tried to take ham equipment into India or get
an Indian callsign? Just forget it unless you want to pay some
serious "facilitation fees."

The appeal of ham radio is almost historical, like being a classic car
buff, but it appeals only to certain segments of the population. I
doubt that the july 2003 record of hams will ever be broken, what
eliminating the code requirement does is hold the line on decline and
make it easier for those who want to try the hobby to try it.

wrote:

I don't think that we are ever going to see Amateur Radio appeal to
the public at large.

It never did. Never will.

Fifty years ago it was difficult to phone outside of your state,

Even ten years ago, the cost of long distance telephone calls made them
"exotic" or "rare". Today, they're not. OK, fine . . . ham radio has
never been limited to just the ability to "talk" to people far away.

today I regularly call relatives in India, Iran
and Australia for free on Skype. Kids today who regularly chat with
other kids from around the globe on myspace will not be impressed with
a hard to hear ham contact with North Dakota.

Yep. So what can we find that *will* impress them? The technical
challenge of hooking up a computer to a radio? The challenge of being
able to use a digital mode using only a wetware modem? [I'm pitching CW
here, for those who might miss it.] Satellites? Helping develop new
modes of radio communication? The thrill of tossing a CQ out and not
knowing who will respond?

I honestly do not know. We need to somehow communicate the fact that
"ham radio" is not synonymous with "talking to someone far away" because
this generation knows that the way to "talk to someone far away" is to
simply open their cell phone.

The appeal of ham radio is almost historical, like being a classic car
buff, but it appeals only to certain segments of the population.

I think that the analogy with collecting is flawed, but I can support
the "classic" concept. A better analogy for me is sailing. Obviously
the best way to get from point A to point B is *not* by using a
sailboat, but I think that interest in recreational sailing is doing
pretty well.

Ham radio will never appeal to a broad segment of the population. It
never has. But the more facets of the hobby we can get in front of the
general population, the better chance we have of attracting a few of
them into the hobby.

I doubt that the july 2003 record of hams will ever be broken, what
eliminating the code requirement does is hold the line on decline and
make it easier for those who want to try the hobby to try it.

Oddly enough, leisure-time pursuits are cyclical. It's not beyond the
realm of possibility that ham radio might "catch on" at some point, at
least for a while, especially now that the code requirement is gone.

If it doesn't . . . well, then it doesn't. I'd love to see an influx of
younger people into the hobby, but if that doesn't happen, I'll be long
dead before it dies completely.

Kind of like Usenet grin

Steve Bonine wrote on Wed, 18 Apr 2007 00:16:53 EDT

wrote:

I don't think that we are ever going to see Amateur Radio appeal to
the public at large.

It never did. Never will.

I agree. However, I would like to see it publicized a bit
more before the public so that the public gets an all-
around image of amateur radio rather than the stereotypical
one that has been around for half a century.

Fifty years ago it was difficult to phone outside of your state,

Even ten years ago, the cost of long distance telephone calls made them
"exotic" or "rare". Today, they're not. OK, fine . . . ham radio has
never been limited to just the ability to "talk" to people far away.

I disagree a bit. Having seen advertisements and amateur
radio magazine article contents for a half century, one
of the most prominent features could be summed up in the
phrase "work DX on HF with CW." :-)

Antennas, transceivers seem to have always mentioned "DX,"
"ability to work the 'rare' ones," "a DX-ers dream" and
other assorted wish-fulfillment phrases designed to sell
goods.


... Kids today who regularly chat with
other kids from around the globe on myspace will not be impressed with
a hard to hear ham contact with North Dakota.

Yep. So what can we find that *will* impress them?

One way might be the amazed surprise that accompanies
actually BUILDING a radio "from scratch" and making it
work. Anyone can, and many do, just buy a radio or
consumer electronics and the vast majority of those work
right out of the box. Building, with one's own hands,
everything, even from a kit, can be a creative
satisfaction to the majority. The Michael's chain of
arts and crafts store became a success at selling
that kind of creativity.

A few activites such as fox-hunting might be appealing
from the fun of transferring a kid's game ("tag, you're
it", etc.) to more useful pursuits of adulthood (besides
chasing the opposite sex that is, a whole different
endeavor). There's an element of competitiveness in that,
albeit mild. Younger people tend towards competitive
events and "joining teams." It's essentially an outdoors
activity, not "nerdish" sitting still in front of computers.

The technical challenge of hooking up a computer to a radio?

Not quite that simplistic. Writing (developing, really)
a program FOR a radio-computer interface has direct
application which can be very personalized to user
requirements. That can be VERY creative...especially
if the program result can be used by many others.

Satellites?

No. To a twentysomething of today they have "always had"
communications satellites.

Helping develop new modes of radio communication?

Not quite. To do the "new" one needs to understand what
is here and available now. We have so much of the "now"
that a beginner would not know all of it.

The thrill of tossing a CQ out and not knowing who will respond?

Perhaps. A form of that happens on many personal websites
of today...except that users there do not have license call-
signs. With most users being anonymous, others don't really
know who they are. With amateur licensees one will know
after looking such up on a callsign CD or a website such as
QRZ. A following QSL card, even if a week or two late,
will provide confirmation of that contact.

I honestly do not know. We need to somehow communicate the fact that
"ham radio" is not synonymous with "talking to someone far away" because
this generation knows that the way to "talk to someone far away" is to
simply open their cell phone.

Steve, "your" generation (and even later) are already using
cell phones besides the teen-agers. :-) And they are talking
short-range, medium-range, and long-range on those phones,
even with those strange ear-growths based on Bluetooth.

I think that the analogy with collecting is flawed, but I can support
the "classic" concept. A better analogy for me is sailing. Obviously
the best way to get from point A to point B is *not* by using a
sailboat, but I think that interest in recreational sailing is doing
pretty well.

Allow me to draw a communications parallel in analogies.
The BBS (Bulletin Board System) began in earnest shortly
after the first "hefty" (memory larger than 48K bytes)
personal computers appeared, roughly in the decade from
1982 to 1992 (give or take). I was a part of that then
and really got "into" it. BBS-ing attracted tens of
thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, not just in the
USA but worldwide...doing what USENET wanted to be before
the Internet became public and carried it. It was a huge
success with many different BBS intersts...social, technical,
work-oriented (especially with writers), special-interest
groups, you name it. Yes, there were the sexual aspects
but those were actually a minority of all the different
BBS groups.

About the same time, also in larger urban centers, "repeater
clubs" started up, perhaps a bit more chummy than the older
ham clubs since the 'VHFers' were less interested in reaching
out to foreign lands as were the older "DXers." They were
primarily social get-together clubs, much the same as the
social BBSs.

The Internet going public in 1991 halted the BBS expansion
as subscribers shifted from BBSs to the 'web. There was
much more to offer on the Internet...BBSs couldn't keep up
much less try to match it. But, the repeater clubs still
exist, at least here in southern California. Some illustrate
their gatherings and picnics on their websites.

Ham radio will never appeal to a broad segment of the population.

Then I would say that the old, out-dated stereotypical
"we are the heroes of disasters and emergencies" bragging
ought to be put away. The public that has been IN such
events is aware of who helped them and who didn't.

But the more facets of the hobby we can get in front of the
general population, the better chance we have of attracting a few of
them into the hobby.

True enough to me. But, PR smarts are needed for promotion,
those who can "feel the pulse of the public, the market" and
have been successful in doing PR. Marketeers are always in
front of the public, in competition with existing activities
that don't "reach out" enough.

Oddly enough, leisure-time pursuits are cyclical. It's not beyond the
realm of possibility that ham radio might "catch on" at some point, at
least for a while, especially now that the code requirement is gone.

I really doubt that it will catch on now. So far, the trend
shown in stats is for upgrading, not newcomers. I see the
dropping of the code requirement as 12 to 20 years late.
The interest in ham radio is primarily among those who are
already involved in some form of radio or who are well
acquainted with those who are in radio.

If it doesn't . . . well, then it doesn't.

That's how it can be... :-)

I'd love to see an influx of
younger people into the hobby, but if that doesn't happen, I'll be long
dead before it dies completely.

Well, this whole PUSH to "get the younger people in" might
be more of wishful thinking by old-timers, themselves thinking
that "all young people" were like they of a long time ago.
I hear/see no real push to sustain youngsters once they got a
taste of the activity. SUSTAINING the interest is important
for that adult group to weather all their other responsibilities
(job, family, etc.) to reach old-timer stage and retirement,
along with some cash to spend on expensive radio toys (that
sustains the market for radio goods producers for everyone).

These "younger people" already have a wealth of competitive
ways to communicate at their disposal. Stuff that neither you
nor I nor any old-timer had when we were young. Old-timers
will decry and denigrate "youngsters" current interests (it
happens with every generation) but that is absolutely *NOT*
the way to approach these younger people. They have to be
touched on their level, not the nostalgia of old-timers
exaggerating their own personal experiences of a bygone era.

To get that influx of younger people, they have to be SOLD
on it. Selling is NOT helped by showing off their middle-
aged selves as "role models of excellence." Younger people
will simply reject that. They could care less if a ham has
personally contacted half the world's hams or been IN amateur
radio since the year dot...if they look "old" they've lost
points before they start.

SELLING requires controlled enthusiasm, "controlled" insofar
as touching younger people on their terms, not the salesman's.
Good salespeople are a bit like actors. They have to assume
a ROLE and do it as natural as possible in that role. Those
"actors" won't win awards to take home, but they can win
awards to carry with them inside for a long time.

73, Len AF6AY

AF6AY wrote:

You'll pardon me for only picking one part of your article to discuss.

Then I would say that the old, out-dated stereotypical
"we are the heroes of disasters and emergencies" bragging
ought to be put away.

While I do agree that some of the material that comes out of disasters
is overblown, sometimes people do *earn* the right to brag. When folks
put a lot of hours into helping out in disasters they deserve recognition.

Why is it so bad to highlight a positive aspect of the hobby? It's not
the *only* aspect of the hobby, but hams still do help in disasters.
It's one of the few things that we do that the general public can
actually relate to. How do you get the general public excited about the
thrill of snagging a rare DX station or working your 100th country or
even building a radio? But people relate to cell phones that don't work
and hams' ability to communicate in those conditions. The fact that
cell phones are more reliable these days and hams' capabilities are not
needed as often doesn't diminish the message.


The public that has been IN such
events is aware of who helped them and who didn't.

They might have an idea what *agency* helped them. But the public has
no particular awareness of the infrastructure that facilitated that
help. They might understand that a Red Cross feeding vehicle provided
them a meal; they don't understand or care how that crew communicated
with their headquarters.

With Katrina, the Red Cross found itself with 200+ shelters and no
communications with them. Hams helped. Did the people in the shelters
know that? In most cases they did not, as there was no reason for them
to care how the communications were accomplished.

Don't get me wrong . . . I'm not saying that every ham needs to
participate in emergency communications, or that hams are the major
players in every disaster. But in spite of the great strides that have
been made in making the communications infrastructure more robust,
Mother Nature can still throw a sufficiently hard punch to cause severe
disruption, and ham radio operators do still play a role in such
situations. If the hobby can benefit from accurate, well-written
accounts of those activities, what's wrong with that? It's something
good that real people do with their real time and resources, and they
should get real recognition for it.

On Apr 18, 7:48�pm, Steve Bonine wrote:
AF6AY wrote:

You'll pardon me for only picking one part of your article to discuss.

* *Then I would say that the old, out-dated stereotypical
* *"we are the heroes of disasters and emergencies" bragging
* *ought to be put away.

While I do agree that some of the material that comes out of disasters
is overblown, sometimes people do *earn* the right to brag. *When folks
put a lot of hours into helping out in disasters they deserve recognition.

Oh, I agree with that, no sweat. What I didn't make clear were
all the others who haven't worked an "emergency" at all and
attach themselves to one.


Why is it so bad to highlight a positive aspect of the hobby? *It's not
the *only* aspect of the hobby, but hams still do help in disasters.

Yes, some hams do help. I'm not saying none do. But, the
average citizen has been seen helping out in emergencies
and disasters, voluntarily, and get little attention for that.
Why should there be more attention paid to someone who
once took a radio test and has some radio gear available?


*The public that has been IN such
* *events is aware of who helped them and who didn't.

They might have an idea what *agency* helped them. *But the public has
no particular awareness of the infrastructure that facilitated that
help. *They might understand that a Red Cross feeding vehicle provided
them a meal; they don't understand or care how that crew communicated
with their headquarters.

During the 17 January 1994 Northridge Earthquake aftermath,
FEMA set up a "true" bulletin board at one center for victims.
Several TV screens showing slow pan-circle shots moving
across handwritten messages from family and friends. Watchers
could get a very strong ID from the handwriting in the message.
That was a lot more ID than some "radiogram" form or a
stranger relaying a message over the phone.


Don't get me wrong . . . I'm not saying that every ham needs to
participate in emergency communications, or that hams are the major
players in every disaster. *But in spite of the great strides that have
been made in making the communications infrastructure more robust,
Mother Nature can still throw a sufficiently hard punch to cause severe
disruption, and ham radio operators do still play a role in such
situations.

IF and only IF the radio amateur's equipment ALSO survives.

Familiarity with only ham equipment doesn't automatically
mean certain items of "robust" ham equipment will survive
anything. I've been there and seen the REAL robust stuff
pass environmental tests. Consumer electronics grade,
such as most ham gear, isn't going to sail through without
damage.


*If the hobby can benefit from accurate, well-written
accounts of those activities, what's wrong with that?

Of course it can. But, one can also write a news thing
many different ways, arranging words to imply lots of
different things. As a student of wordsmithing, as one
who has gotten pay for writing, and after having read
way too much advertising literature, I can spot most of
those right off. :-(

Look to the ARRL for being masters of the above on
their "Letter" of every week. The ARRL does good as a
membership organization but sometimes they DO "sin
by omission" on news.

News stories have got to get OUT of the insular "news
world" of amateur radio in order to reach the PUBLIC.

73, Len AF6AY

On Apr 18, 12:16�am, Steve Bonine wrote:
wrote:
I don't think that we are ever going to see Amateur Radio appeal to
the public at large.

It never did. *Never will.

That's true.

*Fifty years ago it was difficult to phone outside of your state,

Even ten years ago, the cost of long distance telephone calls made
them "exotic" or "rare".
*Today, they're not. *OK, fine . . . ham radio has
never been limited to just the ability to "talk" to people far away.

The big attraction is, and always has been, "radio for its own sake",
IMHO. The journey more than the destination.

For most people, how a communication gets somewhere doesn't
matter - they're interested in the content only. For most radio
amateurs,
the method matters greatly.

It's like the difference between riding in an airliner and flying your
own
small aircraft. Both will get you from Point A to Point B, and in fact
the
airliner is almost always less expensive, faster, and easier. But it's
not
the same thing.

today I regularly call relatives in India, Iran
and Australia for free on Skype. *Kids today who regularly chat with
other kids from around the globe on myspace will not be impressed
with a hard to hear ham contact with North Dakota.

That depends on the kids and how amateur radio is presented.

On Monday, thousands of runners finished the Boston Marathon.
26.22 miles in rainy windy weather. The winner finished in 2 hours
14 minutes and some seconds.

If you just want to get from Hopkinton to Boston, there are lots of
ways
that are easier and faster than running. So why do so many thousands
run the Boston Marathon, and many others?

Yep. *So what can we find that *will* impress them? *

It's not about impressing people. It's about finding those who
will be *interested* in "radio for its own sake".

The technical
challenge of hooking up a computer to a radio?

Some will be interested in that.

*The challenge of being
able to use a digital mode using only a wetware modem? *[I'm pitching CW
here, for those who might miss it.]

Some will be interested in that.

*Satellites? *Helping develop new
modes of radio communication? *The thrill of tossing a CQ out and not
knowing who will respond?

Some will be interested in all of those, too.

I honestly do not know. *We need to somehow communicate the fact that
"ham radio" is not synonymous with "talking to someone far away"
because
this generation knows that the way to "talk to someone far away" is to
simply open their cell phone.

The main factor is "radio for its own sake". An end in itself, not a
means
to an end. That's the selling point.

Most won't get it. A few will. It is those few we are after.

The appeal of ham radio is almost historical, like being a classic car
buff, but it appeals only to certain segments of the population.

I think that the analogy with collecting is flawed, but I can support
the "classic" concept. *A better analogy for me is sailing. *Obviously
the best way to get from point A to point B is *not* by using a
sailboat, but I think that interest in recreational sailing is doing
pretty well.

Excellent example! Now think about *why* someone would bother
with a sailboat nowadays. It's certainly not about speed, nor ease
of sailing, nor saving money. Sailing requires different skills than
power boating, and arguably more skill and knowledge overall. Yet
the attraction remains. Why?

Ham radio will never appeal to a broad segment of the population. *It
never has. *But the more facets of the hobby we can get in front of the
general population, the better chance we have of attracting a few of
them into the hobby.

That's 100% correct. It's also the challenge, because amateur radio
has so many facets and activities that it isn't always easy to quickly
describe.

I doubt that the july 2003 record of hams will ever be broken, what
eliminating the code requirement does is hold the line on decline and
make it easier for those who want to try the hobby to try it.

Oddly enough, leisure-time pursuits are cyclical. *It's not beyond the
realm of possibility that ham radio might "catch on" at some point, at
least for a while, especially now that the code requirement is gone.

Perhaps. But for that to happen, people have to know amateur radio
exists, and all the things it does. That's hard to put into a 30
second
spot or a sound bite.

As it looks right now, the removal of the last remnants of Morse Code
testing in the USA have not caused any great amount of new growth.
But it's been less than two months - probably too early to tell.

If it doesn't . . . well, then it doesn't. *I'd love to see an influx of
younger people into the hobby, but if that doesn't happen, I'll be long
dead before it dies completely.

There *are* younger people coming into amateur radio all the time.
The reason you may not see so many of them, IMHO, is that they
don't have the same situations as in previous generations.

One thing I hear from time to time is that if you look around at a ham
radio club meeting or hamfest, you don't see a lot of young people.
And that's generally true, but not because there aren't a lot of
younger
amateurs.

Most of the "younger people" I know (under the age of, say, 50 or 60)
simply don't get as many large blocks of predictable free time as
their
counterparts of 20, 30, 40, or 50 years ago got. Those in school have
a lot of competing activities, like sports, jobs, homework, etc.
Others
are often dealing with two-career relationships, aging parents,
spouses, ex-spoused, blended families, etc.

The result is that a lot of people have plenty of free time - in small
pieces that happen at odd and uncontrollable intervals. That's one of
the big selling points of computers, email and the internet - it's
ready
when you are, for a minute or an hour.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article ,
Steve Bonine wrote:

Yep. So what can we find that *will* impress them? The technical
challenge of hooking up a computer to a radio? The challenge of being
able to use a digital mode using only a wetware modem? [I'm pitching CW
here, for those who might miss it.] Satellites? Helping develop new
modes of radio communication? The thrill of tossing a CQ out and not
knowing who will respond?

I honestly do not know. We need to somehow communicate the fact that
"ham radio" is not synonymous with "talking to someone far away" because
this generation knows that the way to "talk to someone far away" is to
simply open their cell phone.
[...]


Once upon a time, ham radio was a great source of innovation. I
remember hearing about how this or that essential device that we now
take for granted was invented / improved upon / perfected / etc. by hams
who did that sort of thing as part of their hobby. It has been a very
long time since I last heard that said. Ham radio ceased to be forward
looking and innovative and has devolved into something more akin to
stamp collecting - interesting to practitioners, useless to the world at
large.

Ham radio will not grow until and unless it is seen to provide value
to the larger community. Once, it was considered to be a source of
competitive advantage to the economy by contributing to the
technological base (a post-Sputnik point of view). My guess is that the
FCC was willing to ignore the complaints of the ARRL and the old Morse
code cultists because they (the FCC) see it that way, as well.

xxx wrote on Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:41:27 EDT:

Subject: Before and After Cessation of Code Testing

Steve Bonine wrote:

... knowing who will respond?

I honestly do not know. We need to somehow communicate the fact that
"ham radio" is not synonymous with "talking to someone far away" because
this generation knows that the way to "talk to someone far away" is to
simply open their cell phone.

[...]

Once upon a time, ham radio was a great source of innovation. I
remember hearing about how this or that essential device that we now
take for granted was invented / improved upon / perfected / etc. by hams
who did that sort of thing as part of their hobby. It has been a very
long time since I last heard that said.

"Once upon a time" is approximately the time period prior to
World War II...the first 44 years of "radio" as a communications
medium. Trying to judge progress in a technology area involving
hobbyists solely by the information contained in hobbyist
publications is inaccurate, if not outright braggadocio by
hobbyists. "Radio" as a communications medium is now 111 years
old. The innovation, invention, and quantum-jumps in increases
of the communications (and radio) arts of the last 67 years have
totally eclipsed those early pioneering days done by everyone
involved with any RF emission activity. Some of the highlights:

1. "Discovery of 'shortwaves' enabling worldwide communications:
Already known by non-hobbyist technologists. Radio amateurs
were forced upwards in frequency use by politics, not
pioneering. It was fortuitous for amateurs, yes, but not
necessarily of their own and objected-to at the time by
amateurs.

2. SSB: Already used in wireline communications by long-distance
telephony providers in the 1920s; use on HF as "carrier" (multi-
channel) service by commercial and government groups in the
1930s.
Single-channel SSB given boost by USAF contracts for such in the
immediate-post-WWII time.

3. Quartz crystal control of frequency: Already known by
academics
and other physical standards workers; WWII needs resulted in
mass-
production of crystal units reaching a million units per month;
synthetic (man-made) quartz crystal growth perfected by industry
in the 1950s. Growth techniques helped the semiconductor
industry with similar growth of germanium and silicon ingots.

4. VHF FM voice: Pioneering already begun about 1938 by industry
to improve Public Safety mobile communications and adopted by
military for universal manpack and vehicular radio in WWII;
broadcasting use pioneered by Edwin Armstrong in 1930s for
broadcasting industry applications, including music.

5. Superheterodyne receivers: Invention of Edwin Armstrong in
1918, led to almost universal use of superheterodyne
architecture
in receivers to the present day in all radio services.

6. Quartz and mechanical-torsion-resonator narrow bandpass
filters:
Originally developed by telephony industry for "carrier" long-
distance wireline and multi-channel RF communications providers;
development of "modern filter theory" spurred by this same
application plus long-distance frequency-multiplexed microwave
radio relay (transcontinental service). Adoption to most radio
architectures possible by man-grown quartz crystal blanks (3).

7. "Channelized" (step-increment) frequency control of Rx, Tx:
First wide use in DoD/USAF contracts for post-WWII single-
channel SSB, followed shortly thereafter by air carrier and
general aviation radionavigation and radio communications.

8. Use of internal ("embedded") microprocessors for general
purpose control of function and frequency: Almost simultaneous
in both test equipment and various radio communications services
beginning about the mid-1970s. Such enabled reduced interior
space, number of total components by eliminating mechanical
couplings of controls. Adjunct advantage of providing displays
of controls settings and mathematical results of some functions
heretofore unavailable with older methods.

9. Digital Signal Processing (DSP): Probable first widespread use
for submarine and anti-submarine military use, typically SONAR
variations. Followed closely by applications to "music
synthesizers" and similar (PC sound cards) and consumer
electronics and instrumentation displays. This and item (8)
made possible by Large Scale Integration of solid-state
devices beginning their explosive growth in the mid-1970s.

The preceding items are just a short list of major innovations as
they apply to common amateur radio use of today. It does not begin
to cover major innovations in all electronics, including
applications
to medicine and architectural engineering nor the physical
standards
organizations worldwide.

Ham radio ceased to be forward
looking and innovative and has devolved into something more akin to
stamp collecting - interesting to practitioners, useless to the world at
large.

"Xxx," to paraphrase Hans Brakob, I would "throw that out with
great force."

The activity of amateur radio is basically a hobby, an activity
done primarily for personal enjoyment...worldwide, I might add.
It is a fascinating one, a technically-challenging one, one of
use in communicating with like-minded enthusiasts, local to
worldwide. Hobbies are FUN for their participants. There is
nothing at all "wrong" with having FUN doing anything, whether
stamp collecting, rebuilding classic cars, flying model aircraft
by radio control, or being advisors for Scouts.

Radio amateurs, by and large, are not into amateur radio for the
sake of being inventors, scientific researchers, manufacturers
of radio-electronics devices, or being emergency and disaster
volunteers. They CAN, of course, as can any citizen without an
amateur radio license.

I could cite an equally-long list of "post-Sputnik" innovations
that have appeared in amateur radio use and technology, done by
radio amateurs themselves. Some, if not most, are citizens of
other countries. However, the more widely-used innovations and
inventions has, from the beginning, come from academicians,
engineers and producers in the electronics industry, and
communications providers. The history of all that explosive
growth has been continually documented in hundreds of trade
journals, professional associations, and scientific journals.
It isn't exclusive to appearing in amateur radio interest
publications.

Ham radio will not grow until and unless it is seen to provide value
to the larger community. Once, it was considered to be a source of
competitive advantage to the economy by contributing to the
technological base (a post-Sputnik point of view).

Please feel free to document all those "advantages to the
economy." I see very few such cases of the last 111 years of
"radio." What I have seen are a number of claims for same
that very conveniently "sin by omission" [of incorrect
attribution to the overall world of radio and electronics]...
something that marketeers know by the simple acronym of "PR."

My guess is that the
FCC was willing to ignore the complaints of the ARRL and the old Morse
code cultists because they (the FCC) see it that way, as well.

I must disagree with that as well. Since the FCC must regulate
ALL United States civil radio RF emissions, they are chartered
to be aware and informed of almost everything in regards to
"radio." They DO that on a technical level, including having an
Office of Engineering and Technology for their own advisement.
The FCC is aware of nearly ALL radio use, not only in the USA
but worldwide (we are globally interconnected in many
communications ways). The FCC also asks for advice on use and
technology and, as chartered by law, input from ALL citizens.
Such "input" is made available to the public at large, freely.

Anyone can fault the FCC for some alleged political bias. That
is frequent and also many-sided. Such is normal in politics,
but it is not per se some "truth." The ARRL ("my" club) is
no more a paragon of truth than any membership organization
and the FCC is not bound to 'obey' the ARRL 'advice' than any
other special-interest group.

The FCC made a decision on a contentious subject in amateur
radio license examinations. The FCC has the final say on who
is licensed and who is not. The public comment period was long
and over 3,700 citizens commented. The FCC took about a year
to reach a decision on the matter, then made it law by legal
means. Let us accept that and go forward.

Len AF6AY

On Apr 19, 11:47�pm, AF6AY wrote:
xxx wrote on Thu, 19 Apr 2007 07:41:27 EDT:

Due to time limitations, this post will comment on just one of Len's
claims:

* *1. *"Discovery of 'shortwaves' enabling worldwide communications:
* * * Already known by non-hobbyist technologists.

Which ones? And why weren't they *using* those shortwaves before
amateurs led the way?

*Radio amateurs
* * * were forced upwards in frequency use by politics, not
* * * pioneering. *It was fortuitous for amateurs, yes, but not
* * * necessarily of their own and objected-to at the time by
* * * amateurs.

The conventional wisdom of the early professionals in radio was that
the longer the wave, the farther it would go along the earth's
surface.
The shorter waves were considered useless, or at least unreliable, for
long-distance communication, because ionospheric propagation was not
known at the time. Long-distance non-amateur radio used waves
thousands or tens of thousands of meters long for communications
across oceans and beyond. This required enormous antennas and
high power levels, all of which were developed for the purpose. The
Alexanderson-alternator station SAQ, now a museum that operates a few
times per year, is a prime example of the professional state of the
art at the time. SAQ operates at 17.2 kHz

After 1912, amateurs were required to use waves no longer than 200
meters. They were further restricted to 1000 watts input, which was
very low power by professional long-distance-radio standards.

Most anateurs stayed right at that wavelength, following the
professionals' statements that shorter waves were less effective. Some
amateurs and non-amateurs conducted experiments at shorter wavelengths
but the results were not promising. The radio developments of World
War 1 did not materially change the situation.

In those days the "gold standard" of communication was whether the
Atlantic Ocean could be crossed. Marconi's claim of transatlantic
reception of the single letter "S" was considered a major
accomplishment at the time.

In December of 1921, the ARRL sent Paul Godley to the UK to listen for
American amateurs on 200 meters. He heard several, and not just
coastal stations. But two-way transatlantic communication eluded
amateurs on 200 meters.

In November of 1923, documented two-way transatlantic radio
communication was achieved on approximately 110 meters by
two American and one French amateur, using less than 1000 watts input.
This success led to others, with transpacific and antipodal shortwave
amateur communications following in short order.

If the effectiveness of shortwave radio was known by nonamateurs,
why didn't they use it until after amateurs pointed the way and proved
it by their pioneering success?

73 de Jim, N2EY