| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
Prior to the cessation of code testing for US amateur radio
license testing, there were a number of speculations on what would happen in the amateur radio ranks. To see what really happened I looked at www.handata.com information and selected the 30-day period prior to 24 January 2007 (or 30 to 60 days prior to end of code testing) and the 30-day period just after 23 February 2007: FCC Action Ending 24 January 2007 Ending 24 March 2007 ------------------- ---------------------- -------------------- New Licensees 1,342 2,941 No Longer Licensed 2,101 2,975 Class Changes 985 7,234 Callsign Changes 214 897 All Updates * 16,536 17,418 * Includes Renewals, Address Changes, etc. 30-day Period ending 24 March begins approximately 23 February 2007. 30-day Period ending 24 January begins approximately 24 December 2006. The number of Updates, primarily Renewals, is about the same for the two periods. Expirations are about the same, allowing for the perterbation of the year-end Holiday of Christmas and New Years when no or little testing is done. It should be noted that Expirations are generally higher than the number of New amateurs entering. One reason for the lower number of New Licensees in January may (or may not) have been a "waiting period" between the announcement of the FCC 06-178 R&O on code test elimination and it taking effect near the end of February. Most significant are the Class Changes indicating that major activity was Upgrades, a 7.3:1.0 ratio. Callsign Changes were less at about a 4.2:1.0 ratio. License Class totals show the distribution of Upgrades a bit better: License Class As of 24 January 2007 As of 24 March 2007 ---------------- --------------------- ------------------- Technician 310,195 (+870) 307,730 (-3,998) Technician Plus 41,343 (-840) 39,242 (-1,208) Novice 29,429 (-243) 28,892 (-291) General 142,428 (-323) 147,186 (+5,129) Advanced 76,889 (-335) 76,084 (-475) Extra 111,423 (+6) 112,231 (+775) Club 10,313 (+53) 10,402 (+56) TOTAL 722,020 (-812) 721,767 (-12) Total less Club 711,707 711,365 Numbers in parentheses indicate the change in class totals from the start of that particular 30-day period. There is a significant increase in the number of General Class licensees through March and a near similar decline in numbers of Technician Class indicating that many of those new Generals probably came from the Technician Class. All those in their 2-year Grace Period are included. Since we don't know if those are just letting their license lay until it expires or are too busy right now or otherwise occupied, I am including them since the FCC allows them to pick up where they left off if they decide to renew before that Grace Period is up. 73, Len AF6AY |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"AF6AY" wrote:
Prior to the cessation of code testing for US amateur radio license testing, there were a number of speculations on what would happen in the amateur radio ranks. To see what really happened [...] Are you sure that you've given it enough time? How many non-hams know anything about any of this? It will probably be years before the results are in. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Mar 31, 12:48 am, "AF6AY" wrote:
happened I looked atwww.handata.cominformation and selected http://www.hamdata.com/ 73 Lloyd Colston, KC5FM http://kc5fm.ld.net |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Mar 31, 8:02�am, xxx wrote:
*"AF6AY" wrote: * *Prior to the cessation of code testing for US amateur radio * *license testing, there were a number of speculations on what * *would happen in the amateur radio ranks. *To see what really * *happened [...] * * Are you sure that you've given it enough time? How many non-hams know anything about any of this? It will probably be years before the results are in. Yes, an accurate portrayal won't be possible until some time in the future. However, this day is only the end of March and the code test ended on 23 February 2007. I was showing what was thought to be the beginning of a trend, based on the FCC database information as collected - en toto - by third parties. As far as I can see, the FCC database numbers are "what really happened" in the 30-day period following (and including) the day that amateur radio license testing excluded the code test. Disclaimer: The numbers for the 30-day period ending 24 March will be skewed slightly in (approximately) the first week of code test elimination. That is a result in delay of applicant test results being delivered to the various VEC headquarters, re-checked, then (if VEC approval occurs) being delivered to the FCC. That delay time is unknown but can be speculated as at least a week, perhaps two weeks. As a benchmark for comparison, I used the 30-day period which began during the start of US year-end holiday time, when the code test was mandatory for General and Amateur Extra license classes. I did not download and save either the publicly-posted Hamdata or ARRL statistics prior to that time on a daily basis. Note that the earlier period can also be "skewed" since the Technician class license has not required a code test since it was first created by the FCC in 1991. I may be erroneous in the assumption that the end of code testing was a landmark decision of major proportions in United States amateur radio. That news has been a topic of news and conversation of organizations and news and discussion sites about amateur radio for at least two years. For references there are www.qrz.com, www.eham.net, several equipment classified ad websites, QST, CQ, Popular Communications magazines, and newsgroups, all concerning US amateur radio policies and practices. I am aware that a few radio-interested individuals were not up-to-date on the cessation of code testing...but, in fairness, the majority of individuals were cognizant of the end of code testing and exceptions to that do not adequately eliminate the majority awareness. Argument aside on the veracity of information that is available, there is no real evidence that the end of code testing resulted in any great tidal-wave of "no coders" suddenly appearing in US amateur radio. There was a very evident condition of many already-licensed who applied for, and got, "upgrades" to General and Amateur Extra class licenses. I am not approving nor disapproving of that practice, just showing the result of publicly- available numeric information gathered and presented in a format for comparison of two selected time-periods. I have to apologize to readers for the very un-neat appearance of my tabulations. Those were done in fixed-size typeface in Notepad off-line and its conversion to Google-accepted message format destroyed a neat columnization of numbers of fixed- font. If anyone wants the original text of columnization I will be happy to forward that in private e-mail. 73, Len AF6AY -or- magazines |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Mar 31, 8:57�am, "KC5FM/WX5EM/WQDE391" wrote:
On Mar 31, 12:48 am, "AF6AY" wrote: * *happened I looked atwww.handata.cominformationand selected http://www.hamdata.com/ 73 Lloyd Colston, KC5FMhttp://kc5fm.ld.net My apologies are tendered for an apparent run-together of text by the time my off-line prepared message got into whatever form the message robot uses. I will pay better attention to columnization in the future. If you desire a copy of the original message (using Courier fixed-font-spacing) I will be happy to send that in private e-mail, either direct or converted to PDF, on a private e-mail inquiry. 73, Len AF6AY |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Mar 31, 1:59�pm, "AF6AY" wrote:
On Mar 31, 8:02�am, xxx wrote: *"AF6AY" wrote: * *Prior to the cessation of code testing for US amateur radio * *license testing, there were a number of speculations on what * *would happen in the amateur radio ranks. *To see what really * *happened [...] * * Are you sure that you've given it enough time? How many non-hams know anything about any of this? It will probably be years before the results are in. * *Yes, an accurate portrayal won't be possible until some time * *in the future. *However, this day is only the end of March and * *the code test ended on 23 February 2007. *I was showing what * *was thought to be the beginning of a trend, based on the FCC * *database information as collected - en toto - by third parties. Extrapolation from such limited data may or may not be representative of a trend. The daily variation of the license totals can exceed the apparent growth, too. For example, on February 23, 2007 the total number of current FCC-issued amateur license held by individuals was 654,710. On March 29, 2007, the total was 654,774, which looks like a growth of 64. But in between the daily total has fluctuated all over the place. On March 16, 2007, the total was 655,025, and on March 19, 2007 the total was 654,094. That's a variation of 931 in just three days! Of course those are extremes, but you can see how much of a different conclusion could be drawn depending on which days you choose to compare. Over time the trend will become clearer, but a month is a very short baseline. * *As far as I can see, the FCC database numbers are "what * *really happened" in the 30-day period following (and including) * *the day that amateur radio license testing excluded the code * *test. They are certainly one indicator. There are others. IMHO, it is more accurate to use the number of current, unexpired licenses rather than including those in the grace period. Renewal is free, easy and can be done several ways including online. Why would any licensed amateur with continued interest allow the license to be in the grace period without renewing? * *I may be erroneous in the assumption that the end of code * *testing was a landmark decision of major proportions in * *United States amateur radio. * When the debate over Morse Code testing was going on, "growth" was one of the main reasons given to remove it. I saw many claims that the number of US amateurs would continue to shrink unless all Morse Code testing was eliminated, and that many "otherwise qualified people" would flood into Amateur Radio if all code testing were eliminated. So far, that doesn't appear to be happening. But it's only been a bit over a month. Perhaps there will be long-term growth, perhaps not. The numbers will tell the story over time. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"AF6AY" wrote:
Yes, an accurate portrayal won't be possible until some time in the future. However, this day is only the end of March and the code test ended on 23 February 2007. I was showing what was thought to be the beginning of a trend, based on the FCC database information as collected - en toto - by third parties. Extrapolation from such limited data may or may not be representative of a trend. Please forgive me for not having a working crystal ball. The figures for April to December 2007 and all of 2008 were not available to me. :-) However, some "trends" should be clearly visible: 1. There was a sudden jump of seven times the number of upgrades in a 30 day period as compared to the 30 day period two months prior. 2. There was a sudden jump of four times the number of license class changes in a 30 day period as compared to the 30 day period two months prior. 3. There was an approximate doubling of the number of NEW (never before licensed) amateurs in a 30 day period as compared to the 30 day period two months prior. The daily variation of the license totals can exceed the apparent growth, too. For example, on February 23, 2007 the total number of current FCC-issued amateur license held by individuals was 654,710. On March 29, 2007, the total was 654,774, which looks like a growth of 64. I specifically used a 30-day period as an averaging scheme and such averaging over time is quite common in sensing trends in statistical work. Day-to-day variations DO occur but a total of actions in a 30-day period do have a smoothing effect and come closer to an average. Note that most of the VEC testing schedules are monthly or bi-weekly. IMHO, it is more accurate to use the number of current, unexpired licenses rather than including those in the grace period. Renewal is free, easy and can be done several ways including online. Why would any licensed amateur with continued interest allow the license to be in the grace period without renewing? For several possible reasons: 1. Death, natural, suicide, or as the result of (2). 2. Accident or stroke (or similar medical problems) not allowing full use of communications faculties. 3. Spousal or family or friends' disapproval. 4. Extended military or business relocations. 5. Incarceration or arrest (rare). 6. Growing dissatisfaction with amateur activities and/or policies. Now, item (6) might be debateable, but then observe that your conditional "...with continued interest" implies that no other reasons are valid, including the possibility of growing dissatisfaction. I don't choose to argue that point with you since the rest of your posting appears too confrontational and argumentative. I merely compared two 30-day periods based on the numbers available to all on www.hamdata.com, a service provided by them and one that is derived from FCC database information which is available to the public. I trust in the veracity of that information since it compares well with other Internet-access sources of statistical information, also derived from the same FCC database. The conclusions I came to were my own observations, not my "opinion" nor of having any preconceived notion of what "might" happen...only that some did speculate on "what would happen" in other discussion venues. I have PDFs of the downloads I used and will ZIP them up and send them privately via e-mail attachments to anyone having a valid Internet address. That includes a "nice" formatting of my original post. If there are errors between my numbers postings and the www.hamdata.com numbers, I will acknowledge those errors. At this point I don't believe there are any errors in my postings' numerical values. 73, Len AF6AY |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
The FCC database derived numbers can be inconclusive, because the "new/
upgrade" numbers are masked by expirations, giving a "net" number. Here are some interesting numbers compiled by NCVEC just from test/ upgrade-paper numbers are "bare" of the influence of expirations. These numbers compare the period of Jan 1 to March 25 of this year (2007) vs. last year (2006) New Tech (2006) 4685 (2007) 6565 Change = +40% New/Upgraded Generals (2006) 945 (2007) 7395 Change = +683% New/Upgraded Extras (2006) 775 (2007) 1910 Change = +146% 73, de Hans, K0HB |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
wrote in message oups.com... The FCC database derived numbers can be inconclusive, because the "new/ upgrade" numbers are masked by expirations, giving a "net" number. Here are some interesting numbers compiled by NCVEC just from test/ upgrade-paper numbers are "bare" of the influence of expirations. These numbers compare the period of Jan 1 to March 25 of this year (2007) vs. last year (2006) New Tech (2006) 4685 (2007) 6565 Change = +40% New/Upgraded Generals (2006) 945 (2007) 7395 Change = +683% New/Upgraded Extras (2006) 775 (2007) 1910 Change = +146% 73, de Hans, K0HB Yet the net number is far more meaningful. It is what tells us if we have growth or not. Many (but not all) proponents said that this would bring growth and, at least so far, it has not. Admittedly the time frame is as yet too short. However, it's also too short to see if this change in new Technicians is sustained or is a momentary blip in the curve. Dee, N8UZE |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
On Apr 9, 5:16 pm, "Dee Flint" wrote:
Yet the net number is far more meaningful. "Meaningful" is context dependent. If the context is "compare the number of new/upgraded licenses by class for the period January 1 through March 25, 2007 with the corresponding period in 2006", then the "net" number is not meaningful and would be misleading. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"Dee Flint" wrote:
Yet the net number is far more meaningful. It is what tells us if we have growth or not. Many (but not all) proponents said that this would bring growth and, at least so far, it has not. Admittedly the time frame is as yet too short. However, it's also too short to see if this change in new Technicians is sustained or is a momentary blip in the curve. As I see it, the time frame is too short to draw any conclusions of any sort. Imagine that we were discussing a change to the tax laws that was intended to increase reinvestment. How many YEARS would you have to wait before you could say that you had conclusive proof that the policy had succeeded or failed? I still believe that the vast majority of persons who have an interest in electronics, computers, radio and related fields; the demographic segment from which one would reasonably expect to attract new hams, knows nothing whatever about any of this. While they probably read technical publications of some sort, most of them probably read no publications that are explicitly about amateur radio. I have seen virtually nothing on this topic in any other media. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"xxx" wrote in message ... "Dee Flint" wrote: Yet the net number is far more meaningful. It is what tells us if we have growth or not. Many (but not all) proponents said that this would bring growth and, at least so far, it has not. Admittedly the time frame is as yet too short. However, it's also too short to see if this change in new Technicians is sustained or is a momentary blip in the curve. As I see it, the time frame is too short to draw any conclusions of any sort. Imagine that we were discussing a change to the tax laws that was intended to increase reinvestment. How many YEARS would you have to wait before you could say that you had conclusive proof that the policy had succeeded or failed? I still believe that the vast majority of persons who have an interest in electronics, computers, radio and related fields; the demographic segment from which one would reasonably expect to attract new hams, knows nothing whatever about any of this. While they probably read technical publications of some sort, most of them probably read no publications that are explicitly about amateur radio. I have seen virtually nothing on this topic in any other media. Which is precisely my point. Changes in requirements don't have any effect when the potential recruits have no idea that the hobby even exists. Dee, N8UZE |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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. 73, de Hans, K0HB |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
|
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
wrote in message oups.com... 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. Well I certainly run into a lot of people who don't know about it. They ask me what my antennas are for and I tell them ham radio. The next question out of their mouths is "Ham radio, what's that?" I don't believe the "changes in requirements" were intended to grow ham radio. I don't know if that was the intent or not but some people tried to convince the rest of us that it was absolutely necessary for amateur radio to grow. 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. 73, de Hans, K0HB Personally I think there will be ups and downs. Dee, N8UZE |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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. 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. The system is even better, now, unless, of course, the Illuminati use thermite to take out the building the cellular switch is located in like 9/11 in NYC. Larry -- .. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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 - |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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 - |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
Paul W. Schleck " wrote in
: I believe that there is a significant difference between "never heard" of ham radio versus just aren't aware of aspects of ham radio that may be appealing to them personally. The latter is far more prevalent, and worrisome, in my opinion. What is the lay perception of ham radio? Probably the most positive is that of of hard-core techies with antennas all over their houses and cars (as hard-core techies are the force behind popular, sometimes useful, things like the space program, cellular telephones, digital music, HDTV, the Internet, etc.). Being admired as techie heroes doesn't necessarily mean that a lot of people want to become such techie heroes themselves, however. The most negative image would be that of reclusive individuals engaging in an obscure, possibly obsolete, pastime with no apparent redeeming social value beyond preserving history and reminiscing about the past. This rings true for me, Paul. I've been trying to talk my XYL into getting a license for a bit now. Unfortunately she is convinced that my approach to the hobby is de rigeur. She sees my pile of test equipment in the garage, and all the homebrewing that I do, and has assumed that that is how Hams have to be. I'm still working on convincing her that you don't have to be an ubergeek to be a Ham. It sure would be nice to have someone to talk to in the shack while I'm in the backyard or on the roof tuning the antennas.... 8^) - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
Larry wrote:
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. 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. If I want to talk to a buddy in New Zealand, I'll pick up the telephone. That does, indeed, provide me with pleasure and the satisfaction of talking with a buddy in New Zealand. If I want to enjoy a different kind of satisfaction, I'll walk into my ham shack and crank up the rig. There, I might also experience the satisfaction of chewing the rag with a buddy, or I might call CQ just to see who responds, or I might see if I can snag that rare DX station, or check into a traffic net, or help with the local Skywarn operations, or perform any number of other tasks. From those I receive satisfaction. You're right about the fact that if you view ham radio as the ability to have a spoken conversation with another individual, there are better ways to do that. Frankly, that's not the specific aspect of ham radio that interests me; there's not even a microphone hooked up to my HF rig. Another example: If I want to travel from Chicago to Kenosha, I'll jump in my car or perhaps take the train. If I want the *trip* to be the point, perhaps I'll use a motorboat. If I want to have a different kind of experience and hone a skill that not everyone has, I'll join some friends and race sailboats to Kenosha, enjoying the mental challenge of figuring out what is the best course, rigging, and strategy based on current wind and weather conditions. The fact that the most efficient method of travelling from Chicago to Kenosha is not by sailboat does not diminish the fun of sailing as a hobby. The system is even better, now, unless, of course, the Illuminati use thermite to take out the building the cellular switch is located in like 9/11 in NYC. You are correct that communications infrastructure grows better and more resilient as more and more money is poured into it. You are wrong that it always survives a disaster. I'm thrilled that you were able to wander through a hurricane chatting on your cellphone. I can counter that story with the opposite one from Katrina, where communications infrastructure disappeared from large areas for long time periods. I can also tell you that FEMA, the Red Cross, and other organizations are spending large sums of money to prepare mobile equipment to move into place to take care of those interruptions that you don't acknowledge. Ham radio does still have a place in those sorts of events, even if it's not the same role that it might have had a decade ago. But that's not really the point. The point is that ham radio is a multi-faceted hobby, with many different interest groups. That doesn't mean that it's for everyone, but there's a lot more than chatting with a buddy or supporting emergency communications. 73, Steve KB9X |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
Paul W. Schleck wrote:
Over the years, I have observed the following common reactions by the lay public to ham radio publicity and recruitment: - Oh, isn't that like CB? I suspect that is the majority opinion among the lay public. It's hard to explain the difference between a CB operator and an amateur radio operator using a modified CB rig on 10m with two inches chopped off the CB antenna. :-) -- 73, Cecil, w5dxp.com |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 - |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 - |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
|
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
|
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
"Michael Coslo" wrote in message
wrote: I don't think that we are ever going to see Amateur Radio appeal to the public at large. Probably not. Do we want to? Much of what passes "interesting" for the public at large is not interesting to people such as myself. After all, we can only handle so much of "Star Search". 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. Hey, *I'd* like to be able to talk to someone in North Dakota..! A bit difficult on 70cm from here though g The ability to talk to someone across the world through a gargantuan network is everyday stuff now. Even so, I still get stopped in the street if I'm using my 70cm handportable. Notably the other week by a couple of police officers who were wondering what I was up to..! (If I were doing something "shifty" would I be drawing attention to myself by using a UHF radio, or would I be mumbling into a phone like the other 30 people walking by on the street..?!) The magic is to be able to do it with no more structure that provided by a few components made from essentially refined dirt is the magic part of the whole thing. If what people want to do is yak at each other, the Telephone is great, and audio chat rooms allow for an internet based talking experience. No thanks. A valid opinion, but there are alternatives. One of my other interests is old telephones. Most people here will have heard of VoIP (Voice over IP) telephony. The vast majority of this is run by commercial networks, rather along the lines of mobile/cellular phone providers, i.e. you pay so much a month and get a phone number etc. There is, however, a completely separate network run by and for those who are interested in hooking up their phone systems. Many people around the world, including myself, collect and restore old phones, and some even have complete old electromechanical Strowger-type ex-public exchanges, for example there's a guy I know in Wales who has a complete 1929 exchange up and running in his house..! Someone thought "wouldn't it be great if we could hook these up and actually use these old phones to actually talk to one another rather than sitting on shelves in a museum type environment" and so the Collector's Network (CNET) http://www.ckts.info was born. There are people from all over the world on it, anyone can call anyone else completely free, and there are several gateways from the PSTN so anyone anywhere can call in and dial someone's old phone somewhere..! If however, you enjoy putting a station together, homebrewing and experimentation with the same end in mind, technical acumen accumulation, Emergency comms, or just dealing with a mostly fine group of people, then maybe Amateur Radio is for you. I like talking to people direct, with little or no other infrastructure in the way. Ok I'll chat on the local repeater if I'm mobile, but I prefer to work direct. 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." Sounds like a Amateur - unfriendly place. Too bad that! The appeal of ham radio is almost historical, like being a classic car buff, but it appeals only to certain segments of the population. That applies to almost every hobby, surely..? Some parts are historical. And the hobby is all the richer for it. I enjoy my modern synthesized, memory laden and DSP aided radios, and I enjoy my old time tube rigs, which have a lot of "cool factor". Other parts are every bit as modern as the internet. Actually even more so. One of my favourite aspects of the hobby was packet radio. I ran a BBS here for 11 years, but it eventually died through sheer lack of interest on the part of the users. I think there were only 2 or 3 regulars left (compared with over 80 in its heyday) at the end. The internet killed it off; why bother with a 2m radio and TNC when you can just send an email or connect to usenet..? 73 Ivor G6URP |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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. |
Before and After Cessation of Code Testing
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 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:25 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com