Vshah101 wrote:

Dee, you must of not read what I wrote. The Hamfest was on Friday and Saturday.
Friday is a work day. Several Hams took a day off to attend on Friday and
Saturday. Therefore, it was partly scheduled during work. Yet, people were able
to come.

What is that to you?

I meant that hams should not be at their
radios on Saturday night. Yet, at hamfests and ham gathering events (such as DXpeditions), hams are at their radios the whole night.

What is that to you? Why not try something different for your amateur
radio activities, Vipul? You do what you want and let others do what
they want. It is obvious that your group fetish isn't working out.

Dave K8MN

Vshah101 wrote:

From: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP)

Calling "contesting" competition is offensive..?!?!
You have teams of Amateurs trying to beat other teams scores...

Its competetive. Things is hams don't like other kinds of competitions, such as
radio direction finding.

Yes, there are hams who enjoy radio direction finding.

Hams stay with their activities.

Yes, they do. You'll find it difficult to persuade other hams to drop
what they're doing and to do what you want to do unless it coincides
with what they enjoy doing. You seem to have a problem with the
concept.

From: "Carl R. Stevenson"

Numbers = use of our spectrum = justification for keeping what we have
(and maybe getting a bit more in the future)

Don't forget, having more activities, rather than fewer also helps. More growth
in homebrewing, tuning, direction finding, emergency communications, APRS, etc.

So start doing those things. I'm sure that "tuning" thing will catch on
rapidly.

Dave K8MN

Dave Heil wrote in message ...
Vshah101 wrote:

Don't forget, having more activities, rather than fewer also helps. More growth
in homebrewing, tuning, direction finding, emergency communications, APRS, etc.

So start doing those things. I'm sure that "tuning" thing will catch on
rapidly.

I am sure that if "they" ever create a picture dictionary,
Vippy's picture will premier next to the term "clueless".

Steve, K4YZ

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

(Vipul wrote
what does it matter about ARS license numbers?

Numbers = use of our spectrum = justification for keeping what we have
(and maybe getting a bit more in the future)

Not necessarily! What really matters is how many ACTIVE hams we have, and
how
active they are.

I agree that that is true, but in purely political terms, the number of
licensees counts,
too.

There are more US hams now than ever before. More modes, more activities,
smaller and much less expensive equipment, etc. We have about the same
amount
of spectrum below 500 MHz as we had 45 years ago, when there were fewer
than
half as many US hams. (WARC-79 added 250 kHz of HF in 3 bands, and we lost
220-222 MHz about a dozen years after that).

But are the bands full-to-busting with activity 24/7? Yes, it's hard to
coordinate a new repeater in some metro areas - but are all the existing
ones
tied up around the clock so that we need more?

That's a whole different argument.

with today's demographic,

What IS today's demographic? Do you have a reliable source?

The last data I saw, the average age of US hams was somewhere
in the 60's ... how that's changed in the last couple of years is probably
anyone's guess, since the age data no longer seems to be available,
but I doubt it's come down dramatically.

the sad reality is that a large
percentage of current hams will be SK in the next 10-20 years, resulting
in a major drop in our numbers unless we make ham radio more attractive
and interesting to the younger generation.

Actually, the younger generation first has to know ham radio even exists.

This is true ...

To do that, we can't force the
PC/internet generation to cling to/embrace some "traditions" (such as
Morse)
in which the "older generation" iks so deeply invested (in an emotional
sense).

How do you know, Carl?

It seems obvious that you generally can't force anyone to do something
they don't want to do ...

eliminating Morse testing will help

No, it won't. The entry-level license is already code free. Eliminating
Morse testing will not cause more people to want to join.

I disagree. Eliminating Morse testing will remove a barrier to advancement
that many folks find disagreeable ... keep the carrot, eliminate the stick.

Many folks are interested in HF access as part of their "portfolio" of
capabilities ... the entry level license currently precludes them from
HF use ... that is a major disincentive to many.

I disagree 100%, but let's put that aside for a moment.

We obviously disagree. What makes you think that "Many folks are interested
in HF access as part of their 'portfolio' of capabilities." ???
(That the entry level license currently precludes them from HF use is a fact
and
I don't see how you could begin to dispute that.)

Suppose tomorrow morning, next week or next month, by some method or
another,
FCC just dumps Element 1 and merges the Tech and Tech Plus licenses. The
entry-level license will then have some HF access, consisting of little
CW-only
slivers of 80, 40 and 15 meters, plus a slightly bigger chunk of 10 meters
with
SSB and CW. All with a power limitation. Above 30 MHz, though, the entry
level
license has all privileges. Is that really the best arrangement? Will the
removal of Element 1 fix that alleged disincentive problem?

I believe so ... getting even a "taste" of HF operation as a Tech will be a
good
thing.

I also believe that many current Techs will upgrade to General rather
promptly
once the code test goes away. (some won't, being content with their current
privs, but I believe many will want to extend their privs to HF and will
take,
and pass, the General written to get there).

Or are other changes needed?

Is that supposed to be a "trick question" ???

NCI's "agenda" is to eliminate Morse testing.

Carl - wk3c

Vshah101 wrote:
From: (Steve Robeson, K4CAP)


Don't forget, having more activities, rather than fewer also helps. More

growth

in homebrewing, tuning, direction finding, emergency communications, APRS,

etc.

Again, it has already been proven that the things you insist don't
happen DO happen. Why do you insist that they don't?


They don't happen to me. Doesn't happen in the four closest clubs to me, at
Hamfests in MA, NH, CT. Doesn't happen despite my best efforts to search for
such activities. Its not what Hams are interested in.


Perhaps you need to look to other possibilities for why you don't get
along with hams.


- mike KB3EIA -

Scott Unit 69 wrote:

As of July 15, 2003:
Technician - 257,319 (increase of 51,925)

It would have been 51,922 if I hadn't dragged 2 others with me...

And I got someone to renew their license after 1.5 years had passed
after expiration.

My current total: 4

1 for me.
2 for new.
1 for renew.

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

(Vipul wrote
what does it matter about ARS license numbers?

Numbers = use of our spectrum = justification for keeping what we have
(and maybe getting a bit more in the future)

Not necessarily! What really matters is how many ACTIVE hams we have, and
how active they are.

I agree that that is true, but in purely political terms, the number of
licensees counts, too.

Sure - but it's only part of the picture.

There are more US hams now than ever before. More modes, more activities,
smaller and much less expensive equipment, etc. We have about the same
amount
of spectrum below 500 MHz as we had 45 years ago, when there were fewer
than
half as many US hams. (WARC-79 added 250 kHz of HF in 3 bands, and we lost
220-222 MHz about a dozen years after that).

But are the bands full-to-busting with activity 24/7? Yes, it's hard to
coordinate a new repeater in some metro areas - but are all the existing
ones tied up around the clock so that we need more?

That's a whole different argument.

I mean it as a discussion. One of the reasons hams have stuck with technology
such as FM repeaters on dedicated pairs is that except in a few areas there's
no pressing need for more. Also why bands like 222 and above 450 are
underutilized.

For example, one of the things that drove hams to abandon AM and NBFM in the
'50s was the crowding and heterodynes in the 'phone bands when AM was king.
This may be a big reason for the "great giveaway" of late 1952.

with today's demographic,

What IS today's demographic? Do you have a reliable source?

The last data I saw, the average age of US hams was somewhere
in the 60's ...

From what source? FCC has been on-again, off-again with the requirement for DOB
info.

"average age" tells us very little unless we know how it is determined. Mean?
Median? What's the distribution curve look like?

I recall seeing an 11 year old Extra and a 79 year old Advanced talking at FD a
few years back. Their "average age" works out to 45...

how that's changed in the last couple of years is probably
anyone's guess, since the age data no longer seems to be available,
but I doubt it's come down dramatically.

Perception can be quite different from reality. Unless we have the entire
database or a truly representative sample, impressions are misleading.

the sad reality is that a large
percentage of current hams will be SK in the next 10-20 years, resulting
in a major drop in our numbers unless we make ham radio more attractive
and interesting to the younger generation.

Actually, the younger generation first has to know ham radio even exists.

This is true ...

Something we gotta fix.

To do that, we can't force the
PC/internet generation to cling to/embrace some "traditions" (such as
Morse)
in which the "older generation" iks so deeply invested (in an emotional
sense).

How do you know, Carl?

It seems obvious that you generally can't force anyone to do something
they don't want to do ...

Of course. But how do you know that young people won't embrace traditions? For
many people, the novelty of doing something that isn't mainstream is a big
attraction. PCs used to be like that - now they're appliances.

eliminating Morse testing will help

No, it won't. The entry-level license is already code free. Eliminating
Morse testing will not cause more people to want to join.

I disagree. Eliminating Morse testing will remove a barrier to advancement
that many folks find disagreeable ... keep the carrot, eliminate the stick.

And if removal doesn't change the growth appreciably?

Many folks are interested in HF access as part of their "portfolio" of
capabilities ... the entry level license currently precludes them from
HF use ... that is a major disincentive to many.

I disagree 100%, but let's put that aside for a moment.

We obviously disagree. What makes you think that "Many folks are interested
in HF access as part of their 'portfolio' of capabilities." ???

The disagreement is that the code test is a major disincentive to many. It's
just a requirement. However, let's put that aside because it will soon be a
moot point.

(That the entry level license currently precludes them from HF use is a fact
and I don't see how you could begin to dispute that.)

I'm not disputing it

Suppose tomorrow morning, next week or next month, by some method or
another,
FCC just dumps Element 1 and merges the Tech and Tech Plus licenses. The
entry-level license will then have some HF access, consisting of little
CW-only
slivers of 80, 40 and 15 meters, plus a slightly bigger chunk of 10 meters
with
SSB and CW. All with a power limitation. Above 30 MHz, though, the entry
level
license has all privileges. Is that really the best arrangement? Will the
removal of Element 1 fix that alleged disincentive problem?

I believe so ... getting even a "taste" of HF operation as a Tech will be a
good thing.

Even if that "taste" consists of nothing but Morse/CW on little parts of four
bands, plus a bit of SSB on a fourth band that will largely be dead as we head
into the sunspot minimum? That's what you're saying - take away the code test
but leave most of the entry-level HF privs as CW/Morse!

I also believe that many current Techs will upgrade to General rather
promptly
once the code test goes away. (some won't, being content with their current
privs, but I believe many will want to extend their privs to HF and will
take,
and pass, the General written to get there).

We'll see. I think many won't. Look what happened to existing Tech Pluses -
even after three years, the number of Tech Pluses is about half what it was in
April 2000. Of those are gone from the Tech Plus numbers, some upgraded, some
dropped out, and some were renewed as Techs - even though none of them had to
take a code test to get a General, and many didn't even have to take a written
test.

Look at how little the Advanced numbers have dropped, even though getting an
Extra only takes a written test.

Or are other changes needed?

Is that supposed to be a "trick question" ???

Nope. The whole artificial above/below 30 MHz thing came about because of
S25.5. That's not going to be an issue much longer. Time to take a fresh look
at things.

NCI's "agenda" is to eliminate Morse testing.

I'm not asking "NCI". I'm asking a wideranging question of anyone who's
interested. It's time to look beyond the code test as the only issue on the
table, if we're really interested in improving the future of the ARS.

73 de Jim, N2EY

In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...

"Carl R. Stevenson" wrote:

eliminating Morse testing will help,

Depends on an accurate definition of "help". I seriously doubt any help
will accrue
from allowing all the freebanding illiterati to migrate down to HF.

That's a bogus argument

Not really. It's not universal, either.

... since the "freebanders" operate without any
regard for the law, why would the allow a Morse test requirement to
dissuade them ...

I think you meant "why would they allow" - I'll go on that assumption

they have no licenses to operate any way (and don't
care to get them) ...

Here's how it works - in theory, anyway:

Most freebanders started out as cb users who then got tired of the limitations
of 5 watts and 40 channels. But, having had "a taste of HF", they wanted more -
more power, more spectrum, etc. Some became hams. Others looked into the
requirements for a ham license, saw the code test, and said 'no thanks".
Instead, they began running higher power and on frequencies adjacent to the
legal 40 channels.

With the code test gone, it will be a lot easier for folks like that to get ham
licenses. Most of them already know enough theory and regs to pass the
Technician written. They already have antennas and equipment that will work on
10 meters.

Carl, you have told us repeatedly that you know engineers who would have become
hams except for the code test. I think the word was "disincentive". And even
after the code test was gone for VHF/UHF, they did not become hams because they
wanted HF access.

If that was true for those engineers, why wouldn't it be true for lots of other
people?

This reminds me of the "We'll be over-run by the 'mongrel hordes' from
the CB bands FUD ... that hasn't happened either.

A lot of today's hams were or are cb users. Most are well behaved, but a few
are not.

Get real.

One of the most-repeated arguments I have heard from the nocodetest folks is
that the code test acts as a "barrier" to a ham license for many people who are
interested in radio not interested in code. If that is true, why wouldn't it be
true for cb users, freebanders and lots of other people?

--

Now maybe, just maybe, the removal of the code test will result in lots of new
law-abiding, progressive hams, interested in helping the ARS progress into the
21st century with new modes, new technologies and a new vision of the future.
We'll know pretty soon.

73 de Jim, N2EY

73 de Jim, N2EY

From: Mike Coslo

Perhaps you need to look to other possibilities for why you don't get
along with hams.

I was re-invited to the last DXexpedition I went to, so I get along with Hams.

From: (N2EY)

Carl, you have told us repeatedly that you know engineers who would have
become
hams except for the code test.

And even
after the code test was gone for VHF/UHF, they did not become hams because
they
wanted HF access.

The full spectrum, except HF, is a good incentive to get a Ham license.
Probably not all Engineers want or need HF so much that they wouldn't become a
Ham because of a code test.

A lot of today's hams were or are cb users.

Not me.

Now maybe, just maybe, the removal of the code test will result in lots of
new
law-abiding, progressive hams, interested in helping the ARS progress into
the
21st century with new modes, new technologies and a new vision of the future.

There is a code free license right now, so probably not.