RadioBanter

RadioBanter (https://www.radiobanter.com/)
-   Policy (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/)
-   -   Just for grins - CW (https://www.radiobanter.com/policy/71134-just-grins-cw.html)

[email protected] May 25th 05 10:18 PM

Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:
wrote:


One possible explanation is that the real problem
is publicity and image, not license requirements.


If people don't know what ham radio is, the license
requirements have no effect on them.


Ham radio just isn't very appealing to the current generation. There are
too many other things to compete, computers, the Internet, vidoe games.
Kids had rather be skilled at playing the latest video game than have
technical skills in some outdated (to them) mode of communication. They
had much rather build a computer than a radio. Who needs a ham radio
station to talk to someone in another state or even in another country,
just whip out the cell phone. Almost every teenager now has one.


That's true of most of the population - but most of that has been true
for decades now.

I was high school class of 1972. In a school of over 2400 boys, with a
curriculum that emphasized math and science, we had no more than a
half-dozen hams.

Back then ham radio had "competition" (in no particular order) from
sports, school activities, music, counterculture events, antiwar
protests, CB, TV, radio, music, cars and girls. Also family chores,
schoolwork and after-school jobs.

We didn't have cell phones or the internet but we had the telephone and
we could get around pretty well, with or without cars.

In those days the #1 technical hobby for teenage boys was working on
cars. For less than the price of most ham rigs, you could buy a $100
used car and fix it up well enough to get around. Some lucky rich kids
got 10-year-old hand-me-down cars from the parental units, which they
then worked on to keep on the road. Cars were simpler then, and a
mechanically-minded kid knew all about how they worked long before
driving age.

So "competition" for kids' time is nothing new.

The most-often-asked questions about ham radio, then and now, a

"Who do you talk to?"
"What do you talk about?" and
"Why go to all that trouble to talk to strangers?"

Most people back then "didn't get it". A few did. Same as today.

IMHO the prime time to attract kids to ham radio is middle school or
earlier.

73 de Jim, N2EY


[email protected] May 25th 05 10:24 PM

John Smith wrote:
It is obvious there is a decline in interest in amateur radio, I think the
reasons are many, since the gear is constructed for such a small "nitch" of
users--the equip is expensive--this is only one more reason for the decline.


The equipment *is* expensive if you buy it new. That's always been a
problem.
But it's cheaper now (relative to inflation) than ever before.

I have never heard anyone complain the exams were too difficult (of course,
I am mainly around college age kids who go for a license),


Of course - they have plenty of math and science background, I bet. And
they're used to taking tests.

I got the Advanced in the summer before I entered high school - 1968.

it is always the
code--they hate it--some can be pushed to complete the code to get the
license--after, they simply never use the code again...


I think a lot depends on how something is presented. If the code is
presented as some sort of difficult thing you "have to do", then of
course it's going to be resented.

IMHO the prime time to attract kids to ham radio is middle school and
earlier.

most of these young
fellows are interested in GHz freqs and above...


They don't need to pass a code test to get all amateur radio privileges
above 30 MHz. Just a 35 question written test.

and how a computer can be
interfaced with the radio...


If that's what they're really into, the code test isn't involved at
all.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Warmest regards,
John

wrote in message
oups.com...
John Smith wrote:
By the ARRL own statistics, ham radio is dying


Well, shrinking, anyway. The total number of US hams is down slightly
from the peak of a few years ago, while the total US population
continues to grow.

But I would note that the shrinkage occurred *after* the
April 2000 reductions in both Morse Code and written
testing for all available license classes. IOW, making
the licenses easier to get in 2000 did not result in
sustained growth.

Looking further back, examine the growth from 1990 or 1991 to
2000. (1990 is when medical waivers made it possible to get
any amateur license with a 5 wpm test, and 1991 is when the
Technician lost its code test. Then compare the growth in that
9 year period to the growth in an equal period of time before
1990 or 1991. You'll find that the overall increase in the '80s
was *greater* than in the '90s.

73 de Jim, N2EY



Dee Flint May 26th 05 12:17 AM


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
It is obvious there is a decline in interest in amateur radio, I think the
reasons are many, since the gear is constructed for such a small "nitch"
of users--the equip is expensive--this is only one more reason for the
decline.

I have never heard anyone complain the exams were too difficult (of
course, I am mainly around college age kids who go for a license), it is
always the code--they hate it--some can be pushed to complete the code to
get the license--after, they simply never use the code again...most of
these young fellows are interested in GHz freqs and above...and how a
computer can be interfaced with the radio...

Warmest regards,
John



If all they are interested in is the GHz frequencies and up, they never need
to bother with code for the license. The codeless Technician license gives
them full privileges, full power levels, and all modes for all frequencies
above 30 MHz.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE



John Smith May 26th 05 02:21 AM

Dee:

You suggest that to them... they will take it as personal slur on their
intelligence... if they don't have the top licence--they don't want any--it
is akin to getting an "A" in the class--you would never get the
under-achievers to even bother--they'll just fire up IRC or P2P phone and
chat to Australia all night long... or, whip out the cell phone their
company internship is furnishing... grin

Warmest regards,
John

"Dee Flint" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
It is obvious there is a decline in interest in amateur radio, I think
the reasons are many, since the gear is constructed for such a small
"nitch" of users--the equip is expensive--this is only one more reason
for the decline.

I have never heard anyone complain the exams were too difficult (of
course, I am mainly around college age kids who go for a license), it is
always the code--they hate it--some can be pushed to complete the code to
get the license--after, they simply never use the code again...most of
these young fellows are interested in GHz freqs and above...and how a
computer can be interfaced with the radio...

Warmest regards,
John



If all they are interested in is the GHz frequencies and up, they never
need to bother with code for the license. The codeless Technician license
gives them full privileges, full power levels, and all modes for all
frequencies above 30 MHz.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE




Jim Hampton May 26th 05 05:08 PM


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Dee:

You suggest that to them... they will take it as personal slur on their
intelligence... if they don't have the top licence--they don't want

any--it
is akin to getting an "A" in the class--you would never get the
under-achievers to even bother--they'll just fire up IRC or P2P phone and
chat to Australia all night long... or, whip out the cell phone their
company internship is furnishing... grin

Warmest regards,
John



Hello, John

Are you suggesting just giving away the license? Heck, I learned grade 1.5
Braille in under two weeks (and I can see). I decided I wanted to as a
friend is blind and he provided me a Braille slate (that was many decades
ago). It was not a big deal; in fact my friend then got on my case asking
if I could learn Braille in two weeks, what was the big deal with the code.
The reality was that I was lazy. One week later, I was copying 18 words per
minute. A few years later, I put 40 words per minute, perfect copy, on
paper. It is all a matter of what you want.

As to the cell phone, heck - I can talk to someone anywhere anytime using a
land-line telephone. Or my HT (yes, even Australia, thanks to the 10 meter
repeater). Of course, amateur radio is not designed to replace the
telephone.

I just had some good information from someone via the Internet on fixing a
big Hammond X-66 from the 60s. I've repaired a lot of 'em, but this one had
me bugged. The guy is in Mexico. The telephone would be of no use as I had
to locate someone who knew something about it.

When folks start arguing against amateur radio, they usually bring up a
subject that amateur radio is not ideally designed for. Heck, do you want
to build a house using only a saw? Perhaps only a hammer? No, you choose
the tools you need at the time you need them. In the case of getting help
with the Hammond (gawd, I hated the thought of pouring paint thinner down
into the scanner - but it worked!), how are you going to locate someone
knowledgeable in the subject? Organ repair? No, the organ service guy in
this area has referred a few folks with old Hammonds to me. I've always
been able to fix 'em even if he can't. But this time I was stuck. Calling
the organ repair guy would have yielded no help as I have more knowledge
than he. I did call organ repair service in Chicago as that is all that is
left of the original Hammond company (it was sold to Ford and then Suzuki)
as the new owners didn't want to handle the old stuff. They didn't know, so
the telephone was no longer of any use.

Despite the failure of the telephone, I would not suggest that the telephone
has no use.

Amateur radio has far to many facets to try and pinpoint exactly what it is.
As far as someone not wanting the code, fine. It will go away, but when is
unknown. Had I waited for a codeless tech license, I would have delayed 30
some years waiting for a ticket that didn't require cw.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA




John Smith May 26th 05 07:52 PM

I am saying, it really doesn't matter, it is too late, possibly if the exams
were made twice as difficult so the intellectuals felt challenged and the
code was dropped--perhaps it would appeal to more... however, I think there
is little chance of any changes which will save it, ancient old men keep
reciting the same mantras, are in denial that the methods they think will
work, WON'T and keep trying to find answers reading tea leaves...

.... truth is, there is not a large enough group of people in their teens and
twentys to breath life into it... and I don't see anyway of getting them
in... other than what I have already suggested... we need some of the
brightest minds comming from college right now--I teach a course at a Jr.
college... I have found the WILL NOT bother with the code... they would have
no problem passing an exam ten times as tough... I have seen this in
action...

A lot of people worry about their kids cell phone use and would like to
limit it... I say put a code exam on the damn thing... problem would be
cured overnight!

Well, they would probably just switch to IRC and instant messaging--if they
are not already there--so put a damn code exam on those too!!! grin

Warmest regards,
John

"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Dee:

You suggest that to them... they will take it as personal slur on their
intelligence... if they don't have the top licence--they don't want

any--it
is akin to getting an "A" in the class--you would never get the
under-achievers to even bother--they'll just fire up IRC or P2P phone and
chat to Australia all night long... or, whip out the cell phone their
company internship is furnishing... grin

Warmest regards,
John



Hello, John

Are you suggesting just giving away the license? Heck, I learned grade
1.5
Braille in under two weeks (and I can see). I decided I wanted to as a
friend is blind and he provided me a Braille slate (that was many decades
ago). It was not a big deal; in fact my friend then got on my case asking
if I could learn Braille in two weeks, what was the big deal with the
code.
The reality was that I was lazy. One week later, I was copying 18 words
per
minute. A few years later, I put 40 words per minute, perfect copy, on
paper. It is all a matter of what you want.

As to the cell phone, heck - I can talk to someone anywhere anytime using
a
land-line telephone. Or my HT (yes, even Australia, thanks to the 10
meter
repeater). Of course, amateur radio is not designed to replace the
telephone.

I just had some good information from someone via the Internet on fixing a
big Hammond X-66 from the 60s. I've repaired a lot of 'em, but this one
had
me bugged. The guy is in Mexico. The telephone would be of no use as I
had
to locate someone who knew something about it.

When folks start arguing against amateur radio, they usually bring up a
subject that amateur radio is not ideally designed for. Heck, do you want
to build a house using only a saw? Perhaps only a hammer? No, you choose
the tools you need at the time you need them. In the case of getting help
with the Hammond (gawd, I hated the thought of pouring paint thinner down
into the scanner - but it worked!), how are you going to locate someone
knowledgeable in the subject? Organ repair? No, the organ service guy in
this area has referred a few folks with old Hammonds to me. I've always
been able to fix 'em even if he can't. But this time I was stuck.
Calling
the organ repair guy would have yielded no help as I have more knowledge
than he. I did call organ repair service in Chicago as that is all that
is
left of the original Hammond company (it was sold to Ford and then Suzuki)
as the new owners didn't want to handle the old stuff. They didn't know,
so
the telephone was no longer of any use.

Despite the failure of the telephone, I would not suggest that the
telephone
has no use.

Amateur radio has far to many facets to try and pinpoint exactly what it
is.
As far as someone not wanting the code, fine. It will go away, but when
is
unknown. Had I waited for a codeless tech license, I would have delayed
30
some years waiting for a ticket that didn't require cw.


73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA






Phil Kane May 27th 05 03:03 AM

On 24 May 2005 10:10:34 -0700, wrote:

And even after the exams
became multiple choice type,


(about 1960 for the General)


Way before that. In took my Novice and Tech exams in 1952 and they
were multiple choice.

BTW - relative to when the marital and parent draft deferments
stopped - it was at the end of August 1965. My wedding to my
now-deceased former wife was on August 22, 1965 and there were a lot
of weddings that weekend because of the end of the deferment (which
didn't affect me because I had a medical deferment).

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane



Mike Coslo May 27th 05 03:04 AM

wrote:
Mike Coslo wrote:

wrote:

Michael Coslo wrote:



Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:



John Smith wrote:


... the "anateur exams" are certainly no hinderence, they always
have
been as simple as pie--a college grad trained in the art of "test
taking" could study for a day and pass the most challenging


I think you need to go back and look at the early exams. There was
a time when an applicant was required to actually draw a schematic of
various circuits and explaine how they worked.

Is that supposed to be hard?


Depends on the person. For someone who knows a little radio theory and
the regulations of the amateur radio service, none of the tests were
very hard.

Heck, I passed the old General and Advanced class tests in 1968 - at
the age of 14. That was the summer between 8th and 9th grade for me. No
big deal, there were younger hams than me with Extras back then.

The difference between then and now is the test *method* more than the
content.


And even after the exams
became multiple choice type,


(about 1960 for the General)



one had to know the material to get the
correct answer as the answers to the acutal questions were not
available.

Yeah. You'll find that question pool bugaboo in a lot of fields
thesedays, including fields where if a person makes a mistake because of
not knowing the material, lives may be lost.


Good or bad, I don't think FCC will go back to the old way.


Nope.



So it's really immaterial what the old exams were like, other than to
point out the differences. Newer hams have no choice in the matter -
they can't take the old tests even if they wanted to.


Indeed, what would be the reason? Those old tests aren't really
relevant today. One poster asked questions about push-pull amps and
obscure modulation schemes. (except to a few AM'ers) While all this is
very interesting - it isn't relevant to most of hamming today.

One more difference about the old tests, though: Judging by the
study guides, the old tests focused on a few subject areas in depth,
while the new tests cover more subject areas but in much less detail.


There were study guides with sample questions, but no
questions pools with the exact answer available for memorization.

Now if you want *really* hard, make it no study guide, no question
pool, and the applicant has to do all the learning research with NO
idea of what is on the test! 8^)


The old study guides were essay-type Q&A that outlined the general area
of knowledge. One question could cover a *lot* of ground. The old Extra
study guide was as much as 279 questions at one point.



If you
did not know the theory, then you probably weren't going to pass.
Again john smith knows not of what he speaks.

I took the tests from the question pools. For me, they were all
pretty easy. They were not easy because of the question pools. They were
easy because they were fairly basic material.


But you had seen the exact Q&A before, right?


Weell, the key word is "exact". I noticed that when I took my Extra
exam, many of the answers appeared in a different order than they were
in the question pool. I came away convinced that the person who
memorized the question pool was actually doing things the hard way.



The way most people would set out to "memorize" the Q&A is to simply
learn to associate the right answer with the question by any means
possible. You don't need a verbatim memorization nor any info about the
distractors.

That's a lot different than actually understanding the material.



Do you really think "most" people would do that? I would expect that I
have something in common with most who want to become a ham, which is to
say an abiding interest in the subject. As a person who came up through
the pool system, it didn't take much time to figure out that I was going
to spend a lot more time memorizing the test than I would just learning
the material.


For the Extra, I spent a week taking the on-line tests. Questions
that I knew the answer to, I got right of course.

Those that I got wrong earned me a trip to the books or online to
find out why I got it wrong. By the time I was finished, I aced the test
just about every time on line, and then in the actual test.

And I knew the material.

Elapsed time, one week.


For you.


Absolutely.


But I bet you had more than a little electrical/radio knowledge before
you ever looked at a ham radio study guide.


Yup. I think that my level of expertise was just a little skewed. I got
sidelined onto computers fairly early in the 1970's. Then I worked
mostly in digital, then changed careers, going into photography,
videography, and 3-d animation (waaayy too many hats to wear, but
whatever) But I did have a good bit of electrical experience



So you knew most of the material already! And what you didn't know was
more of
an extension to your existing knowledge base in the electricity area,
rather
than a completely new field.


Now the Morse code was another thing entirely. That was hard.



Besides your auditory situation, it was hard for another reason: It was
new,
and did not represent an extension of your existing knowledge base the
way
learning some more electronic/radio theory did.


But then I'm just a dum nickel extra! ;^)



I bet it says the same thing on your license as it does on mine. With
no mention of dumb or nickles, Mike.

Each of us met the requirements in force at the time of being licensed.
That the requirements changed over time isn't usually due to the people taking
the new tests.


Yup. My comment was mostly sarcasm. The only way that anyone knows my
"vintage" is by my callsign



Sort of. I know hams with 2x3 callsigns who have been Extras for 30+
years. They
just never went for a vanity call.


Looking down on somebody today because they didn't take the same tests
you took years ago is kind of like getting mad at someone who paid less
for a VCR last week than you paid 20 years ago....


HAR!


But isn't that true?

Back in 1997 I paid over $2k for a new Dell system. 200 MHz 32 MB
Pentium II, 17" Trinitron monitor, HP 820 printer, etc. Today you
couldn't get $50 for it (if you
could even find someone to buy it!) - in part because for $500 you
could buy a new Dell system that was an order of magnitude more
computer in almost every way.

Should I be mad at the person who spends $500 today because s/he got a
new Dell
for 1/4 what I paid 8 years ago?


Obviously some do!

I just like to tweak some of the folk who *know* that the hams of old
were so superior. As time goes on, I hear of old time 20 meter and 80
meter shenanigans, and there was no no-coders to blame it on, just
people who passed their difficult tests in front of a steely eyed F.C.C
agent, after having to travel 5000 miles in a blizzard or monsoon or
dust storm or whatever with cardboard tied to their feet and two hot
potatoes in their pockets for sustenance... ;^)

Things like that are for the most part just examples of how time has
changed.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Mike Coslo May 27th 05 03:09 AM

Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:
wrote:


One possible explanation is that the real problem
is publicity and image, not license requirements.

If people don't know what ham radio is, the license
requirements have no effect on them.



Ham radio just isn't very appealing to the current generation. There are
too many other things to compete, computers, the Internet, vidoe games.
Kids had rather be skilled at playing the latest video game than have
technical skills in some outdated (to them) mode of communication. They
had much rather build a computer than a radio. Who needs a ham radio
station to talk to someone in another state or even in another country,
just whip out the cell phone. Almost every teenager now has one.


Probably be a good idea to get rid of the idea that ham radio is just
about talking to people in different countries.

- Mike KB3EIA -

Scott in Baltimore May 27th 05 04:24 AM

-.-. --.- ?

Jim Hampton wrote:

Hi gang!

Just for some grins, check this out:
http://www.lildobe.net/video/

It will take a bit of time for the folks on dial-up, but it is worth
remembering that those two guys were not setting any speed records. It
sounded about like the commercial CW circuits on the marine bands I listened
to about 37 years ago ....

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:18 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com