Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Differences..!
On May 5, 8:38�pm, AF6AY wrote:
One thing that should NOT continue is to keep thinking in the paradigms of pre-WWII 'radio' as is often presented in amateur radio magazines. What paradigms do you mean? �Technology has gone through several plateau jumps of advancement since that long-ago time. In some areas, that's true, but in others (such as simple practical HF antennas and transmission lines) things haven't changed very much. �Fantasies of some amateur radio licensees are still rooted to back then. �Those are lost in the reality of today's radio capabilites and uses. �The general public has its own fantasies and it is foolish to attempt trying to tell them other fantasies. Could you give some specific examples of the paradigms you mean, the "plateau jumps" in technology, and the fantasies you describe? Amateur radio is a HOBBY. �Let's try to focus on that. Amateur radio isn't *just* a hobby, though. The record of public service communication by radio amateurs shows there is a lot more to it, to give just one example. Model vehicles are a hobby for others. �The Academy of Model Aeronautics doesn't pretend to advance the state of the art of aviation but it was successful in lobbying for a hundred frequency channels for radio-control two decades ago. Let's consider that idea in detail... Model control radio frequencies consist of those 100 channels near 70 MHz. Power output is limited to 1 watt and the transmitting antenna can be no larger than a quarter-wave monopole. Model control isn't about using radio for its own sake, which IMHO is the heart-and-soul of amateur radio. Model control is about using radio for a single purpose, as a means to an end. Does anyone think amateur radio should be limited by rules similar to those for model control? Or that the kind of allocations given to model-control enthusiasts would be adequate for amateur radio? �Consider that hobbyists are citizens and that the US government does listen to its citizens. �Work from that basis. It seems to me that you are saying that radio amateurs should not talk about their roles in emergency communication (Hurricane Katrina, for example), public service communication (New York City Marathon), experimentation (K3TUP and cancer research), education (Space Shuttle hams), etc. IOW, all that should be deemphasized and ignored. It seems to me that you're saying we hams should define ourselves as hobbyists *only*, and expect that to be the sole reason we have amateur bands and FCC/ITU protection. Is that correct? Jim, N2EY |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Differences Between Two of the Same Radio | Shortwave | |||
Differences Between Two of the Same Radio | Shortwave | |||
Differences between Hammarlund 170 and 180 | Boatanchors | |||
Heath SB-101 and 102 differences? | Equipment | |||
Drake T-4C vs T-4XC differences | Boatanchors |