|
Mode/Band Use in 1961
While perusing QST for September, 1961, I came across the following..
In 1961, ARRL's BoD conducted a survey of band/mode use of 8000 hams (membership and license class not specified). Results (operating time): HF: CW: 34.4% AM: 27.8% SSB: 23.3% RTTY: 1.5% FM/NBFM: 0.3% Other modes: 0.6% VHF/UHF (all modes): 12.1% 73 de Jim, N2EY |
"N2EY" wrote in message ... While perusing QST for September, 1961, I came across the following.. In 1961, ARRL's BoD conducted a survey of band/mode use of 8000 hams (membership and license class not specified). Results (operating time): HF: CW: 34.4% AM: 27.8% SSB: 23.3% RTTY: 1.5% FM/NBFM: 0.3% Other modes: 0.6% VHF/UHF (all modes): 12.1% 73 de Jim, N2EY I believe the ARRL has a relatively recent survey on its website about the same thing. I'd dig it out but will wait till later to do so as it's time to hit the sack. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
N2EY wrote:
While perusing QST for September, 1961, I came across the following.. In 1961, ARRL's BoD conducted a survey of band/mode use of 8000 hams (membership and license class not specified). Results (operating time): HF: CW: 34.4% AM: 27.8% SSB: 23.3% A big reason for SSB is that, in a pile up, the receiving station can make out people's voices without carrier heterodyne whistles. Also no wasted power transmitting carriers. Take a listen to a crouded CB channel sometime and hear all those heterodyne whistles. RTTY: 1.5% FM/NBFM: 0.3% NBFM might have been better than SSB except it's wider bandwidth... Other modes: 0.6% VHF/UHF (all modes): 12.1% Even back then, half the hams perferred voice (phone) modes (AM, SSB, FM). Compared to a bit over 1/3 perferring CW. |
In article . net, robert casey
writes: A big reason for SSB is that, in a pile up, the receiving station can make out people's voices without carrier heterodyne whistles. Not just in a pileup, either. Also no wasted power transmitting carriers. Take a listen to a crouded CB channel sometime and hear all those heterodyne whistles. I'll take your word for it ;-) The biggest reasons for SSB displacing AM on the ham bands, IMHO, a 1) Allows more simultaneous QSOs in a given amount of spectrum 2) Greater "talk power" from a given rig (all the power is in the sidebands on SSB vs. ~2/3 of it in the carrier on AM) 3) High power SSB can be less expensive to build and operate than high power AM. RTTY: 1.5% FM/NBFM: 0.3% NBFM might have been better than SSB except it's wider bandwidth... No, NBFM was even worse than AM in terms of "talk power". At the narrow deviations allowed for hams below 29 MHz, an NBFM transmitter was roughly equivalent to an AM transmitter running one-fourth the power. OTOH heterodynes were much reduced - capture effect meant you heard the strongest signal and little else. Other modes: 0.6% VHF/UHF (all modes): 12.1% Even back then, half the hams perferred voice (phone) modes (AM, SSB, FM). Compared to a bit over 1/3 perferring CW. Yep - despite the fact that in those days the spectrum available for US hams to use HF 'phone was much less than today. And the rig-cost differential was much greater. No WARC bands back then, and 160 wasn't included in the survey. It should be remembered that in 1961: - only ~8 years had passed since Generals and Conditionals got access to HF 'phone on the ham bands between 2 and 25 MHz - only ~7 years had passed since 'phone was allowed on 40 meters, and 15 meters was opened to hams - there were less than a quarter million US hams - VHF/UHF repeaters were almost unknown on the ham bands. RTTY meant an electromechanical teleprinter in the shack, whose cost new exceeded the cost of many hams' entire stations. It would be interesting to see how the mode and band use would break down today. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
That is almost interesting.
|
N2EY wrote:
In article . net, robert casey writes: A big reason for SSB is that, in a pile up, the receiving station can make out people's voices without carrier heterodyne whistles. Not just in a pileup, either. Also no wasted power transmitting carriers. Take a listen to a crouded CB channel sometime and hear all those heterodyne whistles. I'll take your word for it ;-) The biggest reasons for SSB displacing AM on the ham bands, IMHO, a 1) Allows more simultaneous QSOs in a given amount of spectrum 2) Greater "talk power" from a given rig (all the power is in the sidebands on SSB vs. ~2/3 of it in the carrier on AM) 3) High power SSB can be less expensive to build and operate than high power AM. RTTY: 1.5% FM/NBFM: 0.3% NBFM might have been better than SSB except it's wider bandwidth... No, NBFM was even worse than AM in terms of "talk power". At the narrow deviations allowed for hams below 29 MHz, an NBFM transmitter was roughly equivalent to an AM transmitter running one-fourth the power. OTOH heterodynes were much reduced - capture effect meant you heard the strongest signal and little else. Other modes: 0.6% VHF/UHF (all modes): 12.1% Even back then, half the hams perferred voice (phone) modes (AM, SSB, FM). Compared to a bit over 1/3 perferring CW. Yep - despite the fact that in those days the spectrum available for US hams to use HF 'phone was much less than today. And the rig-cost differential was much greater. No WARC bands back then, and 160 wasn't included in the survey. It should be remembered that in 1961: - only ~8 years had passed since Generals and Conditionals got access to HF 'phone on the ham bands between 2 and 25 MHz - only ~7 years had passed since 'phone was allowed on 40 meters, and 15 meters was opened to hams - there were less than a quarter million US hams - VHF/UHF repeaters were almost unknown on the ham bands. RTTY meant an electromechanical teleprinter in the shack, whose cost new exceeded the cost of many hams' entire stations. It would be interesting to see how the mode and band use would break down today. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
Without a single poll to back me up, the following could be said to be accurate for 1911: Any Frequency: CW: 100% [on-off keying] Someone inserted a carbon telephone microphone in the feedline between the transmitter and antenna, and produced a crude form of AM. Couldn't have been much power else the mic would have burnt up. These mics vary in resistance along with the sound they hear. AM: 0% Near but not = 0 SSB: 0% RTTY: 0% FM/NBFM: 0% Other modes: 0% VHF/UHF (all modes): 0% Well, how far up did spark go? In fact, there was NO ARRL and NONE of the amateur radio enthusiasts were legal! [NO radio regulating agency active in the USA in 1911] :-) No, *all* activity on radio was legal. Anything not specifically outlawed is legal. The radio regulations came later. |
"robert casey" wrote No, *all* activity on radio was legal. Anything not specifically outlawed is legal. The radio regulations came later. "Everything not specifically prohibited is mandatory!" 73, Hans, K0HB |
In article . net, robert casey
writes: Someone inserted a carbon telephone microphone in the feedline between the transmitter and antenna, and produced a crude form of AM. Actually, Reginald Fessenden did a lot more than that, as early as 1900. By 1906 he had two-way transatlantic *voice* radio communications working. Couldn't have been much power else the mic would have burnt up. He got at least a kilowatt from one set. These mics vary in resistance along with the sound they hear. Which is all an AM modulator really does. Point is, there were folks using practical voice radio years before 1911. It's all well documented. Of course that early voice equipment was more expensive, less reliable and did not perform as well as its Morse code counterparts. AM: 0% Near but not = 0 Exactly! Well, how far up did spark go? Depends entirely on the design. In those days, the conventional wisdom was that longer waves = longer distance, so there was little interest in going above about 1 MHz. No, *all* activity on radio was legal. Anything not specifically outlawed is legal. The radio regulations came later. There was *some* radio regulation in the USA as early as 1906. In the years leading up to 1912, there were a number of bills introduced into Congress to regulate radio even more. But there was no great urgency to enact any comprehensive radio regulation until the Titanic disaster. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:58 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com