In article Steve Bonine writes:

It amazes me to think that there are people who are reasonable in other
respects, but who can say with a straight face that there is no evidence
that using ham radio while driving results in distraction. Somehow hams
have a mysterious ability to tune around looking for a QSO, check the
antenna match, and carry on a conversation without this activity
distracting them from driving? If it wasn't for the clear danger it
poses, that would be funny.

What clear danger?

Tuning around looking for a QSO? Does that mean hitting the up/down
button to scan on a VHF or UHF radio? Perhaps stepping through the
stored memories, since most use those now to keep track of PL tones and
the like.

No method of checking the antenna match exists on the mobile rigs
I have seen. Hard to check it.

Carry on a conversation? If talking to someone while you are driving
overloads your mental capabilities to impair driving, you should not be
driving in the first place.

Clear danger? Even the danger of handheld cellphones is far from
clear. Some very good observations have been made to refute the claims
of the dangers (phones, not amateur radio).


After 47 years as an ARRL member, we parted ways on this issue. I think
it is morally irresponsible for a national organization to encourage
their members to engage in what is obviously dangerous behavior that
puts other people at risk.

Different people have different abilities, as we used to say, some
cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. What seems an obvious
danger to you may be no more difficult than chewing gum to another.


It amazes me that society hasn't figured out that people will multitask
while driving if they can. We would be far better off to educate folks
on how to do it safely instead of simply preaching abstinence.


Alan
wa6azp

In article ,
Alan wrote:

What clear danger?

Carry on a conversation? If talking to someone while you are driving
overloads your mental capabilities to impair driving, you should not be
driving in the first place.

I mentioned earlier that I think other hams are accustomed to mobile
participants dropping out of a conversation suddenly. If the person
was talking when it needs to happen, he/she will usually have time
to say "Hang on." If someone else had the channel, then the other
person simply won't be there next time it's their turn, and the
other hams will go on to the next person. Even if it's just you and
one other ham chatting, they'll understand if you go away temporarily.

I find this to be midway between cellphone conversations (where
there is usually only one other participant and that peerson is
likely to be confused if you suddenly disappear) and in-car
conversations. Regarding the latter, I've heard talk-show callers
say, "If we ban cellphones in cars, what's next? Not letting you
talk to other people in the car?" But that situation is very
different, because someone in the car can *see* when a driving
situation is happening, and as long as they're above the age of
reason, they'll stop talking immediately.

So I don't see mobile amateur radio conversations as being quite
as safe as chatting with another person who's in the car, but I
still think they're qualitatively different from cellphone calls.


Patty N6BIS

On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:06:24 EST, (Alan)
wrote:

Even the danger of handheld cellphones is far from
clear. Some very good observations have been made to refute the claims
of the dangers (phones, not amateur radio).

Drive in downtown "any city" during commute hours and see the
distracted drivers with the cellphones make movements which are
dangerous.
--

73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest
Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon

e-mail: k2asp [at] arrl [dot] net

In article Phil Kane writes:
On Wed, 21 Dec 2011 08:06:24 EST, (Alan)
wrote:

Even the danger of handheld cellphones is far from
clear. Some very good observations have been made to refute the claims
of the dangers (phones, not amateur radio).

Drive in downtown "any city" during commute hours and see the
distracted drivers with the cellphones make movements which are
dangerous.

While some folks are a hazard if they are driving while talking,
some are a hazard without cellphones. We notice the folks who are
driving poorly while on phones, but we don't notice those that can
do the activities well.

The notice of inept drivers using phones does not prove that all
drivers using phones are hazards, nor does it prove that the phones
were the cause of the noticed drivers problems.

Mobile amateur radio would benefit from a program teaching operators
how to be safe during mobile operation. It would be far more useful
than banning mobile operation.

Alan

On 12/21/2011 8:06 AM, Alan wrote:


No method of checking the antenna match exists on the mobile rigs
I have seen. Hard to check it.
Alan
wa6azp


Both the Ham HF Mobile I know best (Kenwood TS-2000) and one of my CB's
(I have several for some reaons.. actually I know why, but only one)
have built in SWR meters.. on the TS-2000 there is also one-touch
antenna matching provided you are using a compatible antenna.

That said, the TS-2000 is around 15-20 feet from the driver's seat in
this motorized house. And I never do SWR checks on the CB when
driving. Not that the antenna is adjustable from there.


MANY ham rigs now days have built in tuners and meters by the way.

--
Nothing adds Excitement like something that is none of your business.

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1901 / Virus Database: 2109/4704 - Release Date: 12/26/11