Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
Howard Lester wrote:
Reading all the back and forth discussion of Steve's upcoming classes and his concerns... I'm getting really confused. When I was a teenager playing with CB, I didn't know nuthin' from nuthin' about radio, antennas, you name it. Once I became determined to become a ham, I eagerly learned all about it in order to pass my Novice, and then the General, and.... and at points when I saw the need (such as "gee, what is this 'swr' business?"), I learned more. So Steve, if you're so concerned about how these "students" are going to respond to your technical talks and related licensing materials, why are they even invited? Are they really interested in becoming hams? Or (at an extreme), are you recruiting potential hams like "Psssst! Hey kid - come 'eah - you wanna get a ham license?" If they're going to whine about "Why do I have to learn this stuff??" then *I* don't think they deserve the privilege of a license. Let me try to address your questions and comments from Jim. I understand what you are both saying, and agree with much of it. But we have some basic disagreements. Let's remind ourselves of the five purposes of the amateur radio service from Part 97: (a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications. (b) Continuation and extension of the amateur’s proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. (c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art. (d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts. (e) Continuation and extension of the amateur’s unique ability to enhance international goodwill. Items b, c, and d require technical knowledge of radio. Items a and e do not. There are two reasons why I do not expect the students in my entry-level class to develop a detailed understanding of electronics. First, this knowledge is not necessary in today's hobby. Sure, it's desirable, and it's necessary if you want to actually get involved in certain aspects of the hobby, like building your own equipment. But it is perfectly possible to participate in emergency communications, or to enhance international goodwill, and not know an ohm from an amp. Second, most people today simply do not have any desire to learn radio theory. Does that mean that these individuals should be excluded from the ham radio hobby? I do not think so. It's certainly your prerogative to believe differently. Related to this, I know that most of these folks are "learning" this material simply so that they can pass the test and that within a couple of weeks they'll retain none of it. If that bothered me, I wouldn't teach the class. In short, my goal is to get some new hams licensed. At worst, they can fulfill two of the five stated goals of the service. At best, they will discover the wonders of the hobby and get involved, and in that process they'll learn a lot more because they want to. I hope that I can help them get involved, but they'll never get involved if they don't pass that first exam. I have about 18 hours of one-on-many time with these folks. I have to figure out how to "best" use this time. "Best" is really what we're talking about in this subthread. I'd love to give them a good electronics background, but that's simply not possible in 18 hours. My primary goal is to get them through the exam, and that factors into my definition of "best use of time". I don't think that my standards are too low. I would rather give these folks an opportunity to be productive members of the ham radio fraternity than to insist on a burning desire from the beginning to learn about radio fundamentals. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
Steve Bonine wrote:
If I may interject here, I think we may be treating people as a group more so than individuals. Some of those people in your class may just want to fire up the repeater and chat. Some of them may just want to do emergency comms. Some may want to build stuff. Very importantly though, they may not know until they are exposed to it. When I first became a Ham, my interests were in applying the hobby to my other hobby, amateur astronomy. After that, I joined a club, and went to FD. I operated Field day with a control OP. I thought WOW! this is a lot of fun. So I went for my General Test. After Struggling with Morse Code - it is not easy for some of us, I got my General Ticket. Then I discovered Digital modes, and a whole new part of the hobby opened up for me. I kept on discovering things, the latest being how enjoyable HF Mobile is. I built my own bugcatcher, and have been surprised how well it works, given the low efficiency of mobile antenna setups. My point here is that I discovered a lot of things about Ham Radio that I didn't expect, and they became the focus of my hobby. Oddly enough, I never integrated Amateur radio as I had originally planned to, in Astronomy. Don't sell the students short. Some of them may indeed just want to "pass the test". But by exposing them to a little of the different aspects of the hobby might just awake something in them that they didn't know existed. Some thoughts for demos: Obvious ones like the repeater operations. An FT-817 with a miracle whip might be just the ticket for demonstrating SSB, CW and Digital. With all the "hot" setups out there, a less than mediocre setup such as this will still be able to make QSOs with. I'd suggest going from FM to SSB to PSK-31, to CW, just to keep things lively. Could be done by bandwidth, with an explanation of how the smaller bandwidth signal tends to get across better. It's always good to have a sked setup with another Ham in case propagation is bad. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
On Oct 25, 5:51?pm, Steve Bonine wrote:
In short, my goal is to get some new hams licensed. At worst, they can fulfill two of the five stated goals of the service. At best, they will discover the wonders of the hobby and get involved, and in that process they'll learn a lot more because they want to. I hope that I can help them get involved, but they'll never get involved if they don't pass that first exam. I have about 18 hours of one-on-many time with these folks. I have to figure out how to "best" use this time. "Best" is really what we're talking about in this subthread. I'd love to give them a good electronics background, but that's simply not possible in 18 hours. My primary goal is to get them through the exam, and that factors into my definition of "best use of time". I don't think that my standards are too low. I would rather give these folks an opportunity to be productive members of the ham radio fraternity than to insist on a burning desire from the beginning to learn about radio fundamentals. Steve, from all the talk of the others and your very patient replies, I think you are doing the right thing with your preparations. It is very basic stuff you are doing and that is a good step, perhaps the best step for your Class of collected tabula rasas. I applaud your efforts. Since I've been involved in radio and electronics (one way or another) for 6 decades, making the "Compleat Ham" (as Phil put it) just can't be done in 18 hours. It would take at least a thousand hours, perhaps two. Had it been that long a 'class' the drop-out rate would be large. As you say, some aren't interested in theory, some are only interested in certain aspects of radio. Those who only want VHF and up operation probably could care less about the ionosphere and all that long-distance propagation. But...the thing others haven't mentioned or others just gloss over is that you HAVE some that are interested enough to come for 18 hours. "The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." So far, the 'discussion' has been a lot of argument by others all about stepping, which way to go, etc., etc., ad something or other. I doubt that anything of that applies. They have taken the first nibble of the bait and aren't yet hooked, but I sense you can play them in. PRESENTATIONS of anything are always better with a sense of theater about them. That involves the personality of the presenter, the prime focus of all in this classroom. Their interest must be held and focussed on the material and that comes from their sensing the presenter' mood and personality. Projection of the presenter to this 'audience' requies confidence and a friendliness with them. Preparation and presentation go hand-in-hand. It is nice if you can do some audio-visual things but simple, easy-to-read-at-distance graphics will do. It breaks the flow a bit, but that's good. It lets the class focus on the material; they don't always have to watch the presenter. Being at ease in front of an audience is sometimes a toughie. It was for me the first few times, but I adapted to it. The ease of the presenter is absorbed by this 'audience.' Lack of ease will reflect in the audience drifting away from the presentation and they may feel uncomfortable. Since I'm a bit far from you, I can't watch a rehersal of your presentation and suggest some improvement, but maybe there's one or more there who would be willing to stand in for the 'audience?' I don't know how much experience you've had before such an audience but I think you will get the feel of it right quick. You know the material. The only thing left is letting your enthusiasm rub off on the folks in class. You've made the first step for them. Now it is time to extend your hand to have them follow. I hope they ALL follow you...and eagerly. 73, Len AF6AY |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
AF6AY wrote:
Since I've been involved in radio and electronics (one way or another) for 6 decades, making the "Compleat Ham" (as Phil put it) just can't be done in 18 hours. It would take at least a thousand hours, perhaps two. Had it been that long a 'class' the drop-out rate would be large. "Compleat Hams" are not made in class. They are "made" by participating in the hobby. Traditional classes should be a part of that participation (I have little patience with the people who say, "I don't have time to attend your class on emergency communication or participate in your exercise, but I'll be around when there's a real emergency") but experience is the real teacher. And you can't begin that experience until you pass that first written test. As you say, some aren't interested in theory, some are only interested in certain aspects of radio. Those who only want VHF and up operation probably could care less about the ionosphere and all that long-distance propagation. But...the thing others haven't mentioned or others just gloss over is that you HAVE some that are interested enough to come for 18 hours. One of the things that continues to amaze me about the hobby is that it's not one hobby, but many. That's one of the things I hope to be able to communicate to the students in the class . . . not by preaching to them, but by describing the various aspects of the hobby (or by having someone who is passionate about "their" aspect come to class and expound on it). I do think that those who only want VHF should at least be exposed to propagation and how it works; how can they know if they might be interested in HF if they never even know it exists. "The journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step." The journey into the ham radio hobby begins with passing a written exam. I suppose that's not really true. The journey begins with deciding to take the journey. For these students, the "single step" is attending this class. That fact sure puts the pressure on the instructor . . . So far, the 'discussion' has been a lot of argument by others all about stepping, which way to go, etc., etc., ad something or other. I doubt that anything of that applies. They have taken the first nibble of the bait and aren't yet hooked, but I sense you can play them in. I hope so. Time will tell. As a related comment . . . when I started this thread, one of the issues I was trying to explore was walking the tightrope between "teaching the pool" and teaching a general electronics class. As I continue to prepare the details of the class, I'm realizing that teaching a concepts class based on the pool questions isn't really that bad. If the students come out of the class understanding the concepts upon which the pool questions are based, they will have a pretty good start at an electronics background. There are some huge gaps, of course. For example, somehow the concept of inductance doesn't appear at all. But after living with the pool for a while, I feel better about using it as the basis for an 18-hour introductory class. I'm sure that some of the students will spend their study time memorizing the specific questions from the pool. I hope that I have some students who will embrace the concepts. All I can do is present the material in the clearest and most engaging way that I can, let my passion show through, and provide the mentoring and encouraging environment to get them into the hobby. Since I'm a bit far from you, I can't watch a rehersal of your presentation and suggest some improvement, but maybe there's one or more there who would be willing to stand in for the 'audience?' I don't know how much experience you've had before such an audience but I think you will get the feel of it right quick. You know the material. The only thing left is letting your enthusiasm rub off on the folks in class. I don't mean this to be critical of your suggestion Len, but I'm reminded of an article I saw last night on the network TV news. It seems that FEMA decided to give a news conference, and when no reporters showed up, FEMA employees pretended to be reporters and asked questions of the FEMA presenter. I'm afraid that rehearsals of this class, which would likely be held with members of the local radio club taking the place of the students, would be a lot like that. It would certainly be useful to do it, and I'm sure my presentation would benefit, but the "audience" that I get for the real class is likely to be much different from the "audience" that I would have in a trial run. I think that the single biggest challenge I'm going to have is finding the right "pitch point" for this class. I'm expecting to have a few folks whose eyes glaze over as soon as I try to cover anything even remotely difficult and a few who will think that my level of coverage is much too general. Trying to keep the interest of the one group and not bore the other is going to be a challenge. I hope I'm up to it. 73, Steve KB9X |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 08:51:57 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote:
"I don't have time to attend your class on emergency communication or participate in your exercise, but I'll be around when there's a real emergency" Yes, there's always one more place in what we call the Resource Pool Net where untrained and un credentialed hams can sit around and wait to be called - if ever. The days of a random appearance, HT in hand, are over in this era of Emergency Comm Centers and Incident Command Systems. They can't even get in the door of the comm centers today, and there are no resources available to train them to assist properly during a "real emergency". Knowing how to rag chew or work a contest doesn't quite cut it. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
Phil Kane wrote:
and there are no resources available to train them to assist properly during a "real emergency". Allow me to rephrase in case someone misinterprets: There are no resources available during a real emergency to train them. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
Phil Kane wrote:
On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 08:51:57 EDT, Steve Bonine wrote: "I don't have time to attend your class on emergency communication or participate in your exercise, but I'll be around when there's a real emergency" Yes, there's always one more place in what we call the Resource Pool Net where untrained and un credentialed hams can sit around and wait to be called - if ever. The days of a random appearance, HT in hand, are over in this era of Emergency Comm Centers and Incident Command Systems. They can't even get in the door of the comm centers today, and there are no resources available to train them to assist properly during a "real emergency". Knowing how to rag chew or work a contest doesn't quite cut it. I think that amateur radio is changing in a way that those rag chewers and contesters won't be wanted at all. What I have been seeing recently is that people who are already working in emergency operations have been getting Technician licenses, and intend to commandeer repeaters as needed during emergencies. Even in our area, whole groups of folk have been getting licensed in this reverse manner. We have ambulance drivers, paramedics, comm center staff. I suspect in the near far term, we won't be getting in the door period, unless we become some kind of semi professional unpaid volunteer. I would surmise that regular hams probably won't need to concern themselves much longer, as once this happens their services will not be needed. I think a new class of Ham is inadvertently coming about - that of the quasi-professional ham - one who is employed in a field that occasionally calls on them to use their amateur radio license in pursuit of their work. Note that the FCC has upheld this as legal IIRC. In some respects, it will be much better for the agencies involved. They will be able to require things that Hams have balked at, such as investigation of our lifestyles and financial info. All of this can take place in the work environment, where it is a condition of employment. Mandatory training sessions are another item in the same line. The major downside of all this is that as Emergency ops move toward this mode, the question arises of why they would be using amateur radio to perform the function at all - they might as well have their own system on their own frequencies, that they alone use. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
In article ,
Michael Coslo wrote: The major downside of all this is that as Emergency ops move toward this mode, the question arises of why they would be using amateur radio to perform the function at all - they might as well have their own system on their own frequencies, that they alone use. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - One of the REAL Reasons that Amateur Radio can play a part in Emergency Comms, is really very simple, and usually not thought of, in many Govt. EMS/Enforcment Groups. What happenes when the Repeaters, and or Remote Bases, are lost due to Power Loss, FIRE, or EarthQuake, at the High Point Remote Locations that the EMS/Enforcment System uses, or secondly, what happens when the Telco Links from the EMS/Enforcment Comms Center fail, due to these same situations and the CommCenter can work the Repeaters and Remote Bases via RF Links but can't communicate with the next higher Govt entity? Cases on Point here. World Trade Center Collapse. All local South Mannhatten VHF and UHF Remote Base and Repeaters for New York, as well as most of the other Govt. Frequencies were installed on Top of the WTC. When it collapsed, they lost 95% of their Repeated, and Remote Base Comms, and couldn't talk to each other except on one or two simplex Emergency Backup Freqs, that weren't common to ALL the EMS People from ALL the Mutual Aid Responders. LA Fire a couple of years ago. Again, 90% of the local Camms were taken out when one of the MAIN Remote Base and Repeater Location up on the Rim of the World Highway was caught in a Flashover during a major fire. None of the equipment, that was inside the building was damaged, but ALL the Coax, and most of the Antennas were destroyed by the heat of the fire, causing these systems to be OFFLine from that point, untill MONTHS later when the tower was rebuilt. Our EMS People depend on their Comms to work, and work reliably, in oreder to be effective in thier jobs. when these systems fail, they can still work their individual jobs, but their effectivness as a EMS System is greatly reduced. A good Emergency Plan, with TRAINED Volenteers, and Backup Equipment, and Frequencies, can help keep these EMS folks effective. How many EMS Systems have a Backup, Mobile, EMS RemoteBase and Repeater Comm Infostructure, ready to deploy, should the fixed Infostructure Fail? Is there an Backup EMS/Enforcment Comms Policy, inplace, that sets the rules for use of the minimal Simplex Frequencies that will be common to ALL Mutual Aid Responders, for a given Massive Comms Failure, and who is in charge of that traffic, and getting the traffic to the right places. The Feds have been trying to deal with these senerios since 9/11, and are just NOW, starting to get a handle on SOME of the problems, and solutions, that will be involved. We see the RED Cross, starting to require their volenteers to be Credentialed. I understand that SOME of the Enforcment folks are issuing Limited Credentials to Trained Ham Club folks that they have used before, and incorporate into their Backup Emeregency Comms Policies and Proceedures. All this is just for local EMS/Enforcment Comms, but who can provide the Long Distance Comms, to the higher Govt. Entities, when the longlines are out. This was a MAJOR problem in the Post Katrina New Orleans Senerio. The National Guard usually HAS the equuipment, and MAY have the personnel, but are they ready on a moments notice, or does it take Days to ManUp and Deploy. Wouldn't it be nice if the Hams via their own Club System, could have a BackUp Emergency Comms Plan and Policy to provide such Systems from Local to County, and County to State, should their be an urgent need, should disaster, of these magnitudes, happen. Bruce in alaska just one of many, who actually Think about such stuff...... -- add path before @ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
Bruce in Alaska wrote:
In article , Michael Coslo wrote: The major downside of all this is that as Emergency ops move toward this mode, the question arises of why they would be using amateur radio to perform the function at all - they might as well have their own system on their own frequencies, that they alone use. What happenes when the Repeaters, and or Remote Bases, are lost due to Power Loss, FIRE, or EarthQuake, at the High Point Remote Locations that the EMS/Enforcment System uses, or secondly, what happens when the Telco Links from the EMS/Enforcment Comms Center fail, due to these same situations and the CommCenter can work the Repeaters and Remote Bases via RF Links but can't communicate with the next higher Govt entity? There you have it. I would say that those who are running the show are very VHF/UHF centric. They don't know about long distance radio, except for perhaps satellite Operations, which are still line of site. Someone somewhere has to know what bands to use at what time and for what distance. A bunch of good stuff snipped The Feds have been trying to deal with these senerios since 9/11, and are just NOW, starting to get a handle on SOME of the problems, and solutions, that will be involved. Your post is pretty accurate, Bruce. One of the things that I want to add is that while Amateur radio was one of the few things that worked very well, those who are in command are bent on turning it into something more like what failed. I believe that the present day post 911, and even more post Katrina emphasis on emcomm Amateur radio is imposing a structure upon those Hams who would volunteer their time, when in fact, what has allowed Ham radio to work in emergencies is that very lack of structure among knowledgeable Hams who in a random fashion come forth and offer their services and know-how to the problem at hand. I believe that imposing a structure on the ARS, and bringing it into the fold, so to speak, will increase the chances that Amateur radio will be the one to fail along with other parts of the emergency operations. As we are called upon to have our backgrounds checked, our lifestyle and financial dealings investigated, and resign ourselves to hauling out the trash or unloading trucks, there will be less of us willing to spend our vacation time or even simply lose money to offer our services. At that time, most of what will be left is those quasi-professional technicians who are licensed to talk, but know precious little else about how to make sure the comms continue. Then comes failure. It's a real problem, because those who make the decisions can only see solutions as application of structure, and if there is a problem, the answer must be more structure. Its like the old saying "If your tool is a hammer, all problems look like nails." This is a very controversial position for sure, as witnessed by local Emergency people's reaction when I bring it up. My only suggestion is for people to look at what causes failure, and correct it. Some times what seems like a good idea is what causes failure. If that is the case, no application of more of that "good idea" will create success. - 73 de Mike KB3EIA - |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Entry-level class
On Mon, 29 Oct 2007 13:21:40 EDT, Michael Coslo wrote:
What I have been seeing recently is that people who are already working in emergency operations have been getting Technician licenses, and intend to commandeer repeaters as needed during emergencies. Our district-wide ARES/RACES groups have several repeaters licensed to members so no "commandeering" is necessary. In addition, we routinely test simplex paths between our served agencies in case repeaters go down for any reason. Even in our area, whole groups of folk have been getting licensed in this reverse manner. We have ambulance drivers, paramedics, comm center staff. I suspect in the near far term, we won't be getting in the door period, unless we become some kind of semi professional unpaid volunteer. We've kicked this around too. All of our active members have been "vetted" by the state police for RACES ID cards and most of us carry Sheriff's Office entry passes (picture ID, not law enforcement officer credentials) that are necessary to get into facilities where the SO provides security. We've also kicked around the situation where in our hospital we have to go through the Emergency Room entry area to reach the EOC, and the ER docs and nurses are empowered that if during an emergency/lockdown they see anyone in the ER whom they do not recognize they are to have security detain them for interrogation. For that reason those of us who serve hospitals also have hospital picture IDs issued by the security department. Welcome to the 21st Century. I think a new class of Ham is inadvertently coming about - that of the quasi-professional ham - one who is employed in a field that occasionally calls on them to use their amateur radio license in pursuit of their work. Note that the FCC has upheld this as legal IIRC. Most, if not all of our served agencies have ruled that in a "real" emergency, the employee does his or her regular job, not serve as part of the Amateur Radio teams. We have MOUs with the served agencies that we will provide the necessary comms if their regular comms become unavailable. The only exception is with the HEARTNET role as the secondary backup for the inter-hospital ER status and reporting system carried on 800 MHz with a primary backup of 155 MHz, and if both of those "commercial" services go down, the 146 MHz simplex net is used by ER personnel who are licensed hams. We have no problem with that because the traffic that would be handled is very medical-specific and decisions have to be made "on the fly" over the radio, and it's better to have the RNs do it than to have to pass messages through non-medical personnel. The major downside of all this is that as Emergency ops move toward this mode, the question arises of why they would be using amateur radio to perform the function at all - they might as well have their own system on their own frequencies, that they alone use. And they do. We are the "whenever all fails, we are still there." And the "modern" 800 MHz systems are virtually useless when things get hot because of either system hardware failure or priority public safety traffic making the system unavailable to "lower on the ladder" users. A very small payback for the privilege of using the spectrum that we get. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Class envy, class warfare, begins with Democrats creating it? | Shortwave | |||
$40 entry level Halli $163 on ebay | Shortwave | |||
FS: Discriminator Tap? New 2-Level and 4-Level FSK Decoder | Swap | |||
ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License | CB | |||
ARRL to Propose New Entry-Level License | Swap |