On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!

No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?


8^)

FWIW, I'm really disapointed in thoes two. 8^(


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.

- Mike KB3EIA -

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:


Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.

I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....


- Mike KB3EIA -

73, Leo

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Leo wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.


I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....


Do you always take history as fact?


FWIW, I have read that the US amateurs and their representatives were
pretty much the driving force in Amateur radio post WW1. The numbers of
Amateurs in the US was roughly equal to the Amateurs in the rest of the
world. These numbers coupled with a few organizations that represented
them from one country instead of spread out over the globe, would
naturally have a major influence on the hobby/avocation.

Now I don't know that for sure, since I wasn't around then, but it seems
sensible and logical enough, so I assign it a good probability.

- Mike KB3EIA

On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 08:29:01 -0500, Mike Coslo wrote:

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Leo wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:



Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!


No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.


I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....


Do you always take history as fact?

Not always, Mike. Depends on whether the source of the historical
information quotes verifiable references or not. Otherwise, it's just
the opinion of the writer.

I never take hearsay as fact, however.

The fact is, other countries were back on the air well before the ARRL
was successful in restoring amateur privileges in the US. Neither the
US nor the ARRL was responsible for the restoration of amateur
privileges in other sovereign nations.

Perhaps the ARRL overstated its importance in the lobbying for the
return of Amateur privileges as well - in recent history, the FCC does
not always follow their suggestions (incentive licensing comes to
mind, for one). Maybe the Government would have told the military to
back off and get out of the radio monopolization business? If the
military had been successful, there would have been no commercial
radio either - just military.

But hey, if you're lobbying for something and it ends up going your
way, then you get to claim that you made it happen, right! Even if it
would have happened anyway - who's to disagree?


FWIW, I have read that the US amateurs and their representatives were
pretty much the driving force in Amateur radio post WW1. The numbers of
Amateurs in the US was roughly equal to the Amateurs in the rest of the
world. These numbers coupled with a few organizations that represented
them from one country instead of spread out over the globe, would
naturally have a major influence on the hobby/avocation.

If the international unions were structured like corporations, that
would be true. The US would have a majority share, and could
implement anything that they wanted based upon the number of
'shareholders' (amateurs, in this case) that they represented.

In reality, it's not structured like that at all. Otherwise, how would
comparitively small countries like Albania or Turkey have any chance
of having their national interests recognized?


Now I don't know that for sure, since I wasn't around then, but it seems
sensible and logical enough, so I assign it a good probability.

Perhaps they were a driving force - but if they hadn't been (i.e. if
the US military had successfully locked them out after WW1), why on
Earth would the rest of the planet have abandoned amateur radio? It
might have been different, and ther might have been contention between
US military traffic and the rest of the world - but I really don't
believe for a second that the US influence over the amateur policies
of the rest of the world was ever that strong. Not then - and not
today.

Historically speaking.


- Mike KB3EIA

73, Leo

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

Leo wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 22:44:04 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Leo wrote:

On Tue, 10 Feb 2004 19:15:37 -0500, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Doggone it Dee! Your factual post is going to ruin another anti-US rant!

No rant intended, Mike. Just looking for facts!

You wouldn't happen to have any on you, would you?

Facts? I have the history I've read.

I'll have to take that as a 'no' then....

Do you always take history as fact?

Do you take ARRL sole-source history as "fact?"

FWIW, I have read that the US amateurs and their representatives were
pretty much the driving force in Amateur radio post WW1. The numbers of
Amateurs in the US was roughly equal to the Amateurs in the rest of the
world. These numbers coupled with a few organizations that represented
them from one country instead of spread out over the globe, would
naturally have a major influence on the hobby/avocation.

Feel free to believe what you want to believe.

The entire four-decade period up to about 1930 was one of great
change, reorganization, new technology discovery, etc. in "radio."
Something involving communications at the speed of light and
without wires was suddenly created after 1895. NO ONE had a
real coherent, expert prognostication of the future of "radio" in the
early days, those first four decades. Everyone involved with this
new thing was groping in the dark, experimenting, entrepreneurs
seeing potential profit, tinkerers busy with a fascinating new
technological interest.

As to communications by 1895, there was already the beginnings
of international cooperation in wired commercial telegraphy
standards and practices, that made firm over two decades prior to
that turning-point year. [Marconi's experiments started in 1895 but
were witnessed by only one other person...a full demonstration was
not done until the following year] This whole last decade of the 1800s
involved a lot more international discussion of other things besides
mysterious "radio."

As with any technological breakthrough showing potential monetary
profit, lawyers and courts began to get busy on patent disputes which
continued on into the 1930s; one of the things affecting Ed Armstrong's
personal life and subsequent depression was a constant coming and
going to courts for patent suits that lasted over a decade. The newly-
formed Marconi Company in England was proceding at a fast pace to
attempt international control of as many patents in "radio" as possible.
International political relations were a fighting ground, made worse by
the armed conflict of World War One. Lots and lots and lots of folks
in the commercial and government fields were fighting it out to
control "radio" in all manner, shape, and use. With the advent of the
first active control valve for electrons, the triode vacuum tube promising
miraculous applications for other than radio, the fighting got worse.

The beginnings of the RCA Corporation (originally Radio Corporation
of America) was due to an effort to keep "foreign" monopolization of
"radio" technology out (i.e., England was as "foreign" as anybody to
American businessmen and government men). The main cause was
the mechatronics of radio (on the way to obsolescence then) to be
replaced by electronics, the "foreigners" trying to hold control of the
mechanical side of radio away from US.

The beginnings of broadcasting was in the 1920s with enormous
potential profit for business. There was NO regulation of radio in the
USA until 1912 and everyone plopped down on whatever "frequency"
they were comfortable at (or that primitive technology of that time
allowed). RF-wise, the spectrum was chaos. With the first regulation
of the EM spectrum came the restricted-to-broadcasters broadcast
band at the low half of the MF band. Tinkerers such as amateurs
were shoved off to a relatively unknown region of "short waves,"
largely unexplored territory at wavelengths shorter than 200 meters.
Broadcasters needed fixed frequencies for thousands, then millions
of listeners, listeners having still-primitive technology receivers.
Broadcasting had the potential for enormous control over public
opinion, especially for the thought-control processes known as
"advertising" (already begun in printed media).

Wired telegraphy didn't just disappear but it was in a steady decline
from the previous turn of the century. The cause was the teleprinter
displacing the telegraphers reading paper tapes. "Stock tickers"
with their pretty glass domes were appearing on executives' desks
able to tell those executives quickly how stock values were going.
Telegrams were delivered with nice printed strips of text glued onto
message forms, no longer scribbled with handwriting or that new
writing machine called a "typewriter." Teleprinters did the text
printing. Teleprinting didn't need morse code specialists at wired
communications circuits. Even as the commercial morse comm
carriers were peaking at their busiest time, the teleprinters were
edging them out, first at a small scale then on and on in a juggernaut
of displacement of old, manual wired comm technology.

The maritime world got a bonanza, a miracle in "radio" able to reach
over the visible horizon. It was something they never had before.
Maritimers could get by on LF with relatively slow pace of water
travel. The maritime world was the first big user of "radio" and the
radio operators got their nickname of "Sparkies" from using that
high-tech transmitter known as "spark." Arc, spark, and alternator
"transmitters" reached a peak of 1 MegaWatt on LF...but eventually
would have to go since they transmitted simultaneously on MF and
on up into HF (mostly without realizing it). While "radio" was not a
popular topic of conversation at the ordinary dining table then, many
were involved in its use and millions of dollars involved in equipment
contracts. "Radio" was already big business by the start of 1920.

Displaced morsemen, downsized from landline wire comms by the
teleprinter and telephone, took to radio. Early radio could only
communicate by simple on-off keying of primitive RF generators.
Landline telegraphy was on-off keying of a battery source. Landline
telegraphers need only learn how to twist radio knobs, throw radio
switches to use their morse skills. They "upgraded" to high-tech of
the times...and invented all sorts of mythology about their new craft
using old skills. That mythology persists in some minds today.
The print media ate all the mythology up and printed glorious tales
of "pioneering in technology" in the exaggerated prose of earlier
times around the previous turn of the century. Journalism it was not,
storytelling it was.

Now I don't know that for sure, since I wasn't around then, but it seems
sensible and logical enough, so I assign it a good probability.

If the only source of information comes from one source, a special
interest group, you should be aware that some things ar (deliberately)
left out in order to improve the status of the particular special interest
group. You will be hard-pressed to find objective history of the radio
amateur organizations that existed before the formation of the ARRL
from ARRL publications. Such history does exist in 90-year-old
archives of other print media, of government records, of patent papers.

Special interest groups must be self-serving for survival. ARRL is a
special interest group. For a more objective view of early radio
history, Thomas H. White has done a superb job of presenting a part
of that overall history in the USA. See it beginning at -

http://earlyradiohistory.us/index.html

No special interests involved other than showing a more complete
picture of early USA radio history, of ALL radio, not just amateurism.
Fascinating stuff to see all the chaos, change, triumphs and tragedies
in the first few decades of a more-than-fascinating technology.

Or, you can be content with being spoon-fed "history" from a single
source who controls what they want you to hear. Your choice.

LHA / WMD