| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
October 28th 03, 10:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Leo wrote in message . ..
On 28 Oct 2003 01:17:46 GMT, (N2EY) wrote: Only problem with "200" is that it stops at 1936 and there was never a followup book. If you want a really good history of US amateur radio from the very beginning to almost the present day, google up W2XOY's "Wayback Machine". Excellent history in many chapters. Free for the download. Great articles - thanks! Wish there was a similar series for VE-land... (extra bonus question: what is the significance of that callsign?) Found this reference on Google: Feb. 1, 1939. Broadcasting reports General Electric engineers recently set up two experimental frequency modulation transmitters at Albany and Schenectady, operating on the same frequency. They drove a test car between the two cities and found almost no areas of interference between the stations. The stations were W2XDA Schenectady and W2XOY New Scotland hey, this guy's GOOD! Years ago, here in Canada, there was a special licence class required to operate using the Digital modes (!). This was dropped after only a few years. presumably because it was not demonstrated that there was any real benefit gained from the additional testing of digital proficiency. After all, the idea of a hobby is to be able to experiment and learn those aspects that are of interest or use to the individual! I thought it was dropped because so few applied for it. I recall something like 150 in 4 years. Haven't seen those stats - but seperate testing for Digital modes died out with it! Years ago I suggested here that one way out of the code test argument would be to create a new "Homebrew" class of license. No code test, Extra class written, all privs. Just one special requirement - amateurs with that license class could only use equipment they'd built themselves (except in a genuine emergency). No kits, either. You can imagine how that idea went over. And merely because something is old doesn't make it bad. Look at the way words are spelled... Certainly wasn't connecting 'old' with 'bad', Jim - just an observation that as times change, priorities tend to shift as well. All progress requires change but all change is not progress. Newer is not always better. Some folks hold up "change" as some sort of mantra, saying that we should all accept change without resistance or question. I don't buy it. Try telling the hams who searched for shuttle pieces, or who are right now helping fight the wildfires in California, that it's "a hobby". They might not agree. It's a unique hobby - one where the skills learned and practised within it can be taken out into the community in times of need, to augment the 'professional' emergency services. The emergency and public service aspects take it beyond being purely a "hobby". Is there any value in doing longhand math now? Why should we if we have a calculator? Exactly! Not quite - longhand is still required to be understood before relying on calculators, as it teaches the underlying principles of division (and works without batteries!). How does memorizing tables of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division teach underlying principles? It's just a mechanical skill, right? Memorize the tables, practice the way you are shown. Light-powered four-function calculators have been giveaway items for many years now. Yet we still spend enormous resources teaching children to do basic arithmetic manually - which usually requires pencil and paper anyway. Every single argument used against Morse code can be used against doing basic arithmetic by hand. It is simply a more rigorous method of accomplishing the identical task - but without competence in it, how would you know if the answer the calculator gave you was correct? How often are calculators wrong? How would you check it? Why does it need checking? By that logic, we should resend RTTY messages in Morse to check them. Yes, I know more advanced TOR modes include error detection and correction. So do more advanced calculators. If you are worried about a human typing in the wrong numbers, the same problem occurs with any TOR mode. You would not really understand the mechanics of division. Why is it necessary to do so? CW, in this analogy, is a different animal - more like comparing an abacus to a calculator. I disagree! Morse is like doing manual arithmetic. Direct interaction with the signal, just as manual math is direct interaction with the numbers. No difference. Your whole argument rests on *not* allowing Morse to be analogous to manual arithmetic calculation...yet it is. In skilled hands, an abacus can give you the same answer as a calculator (faster, too - watched a guy do it once!) - but it is outmoded, in a world where calculators are cheap and common.....one would be hard pressed to devise a compelling arguement for teaching the abacus nowadays! The abacus never achieved any great acceptance in western culture. Morse did! And Morse is still widely used by hams. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#2
October 29th 03, 12:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
