Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #71   Report Post  
Old October 18th 05, 04:37 AM
John Kasupski
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

On 16 Oct 2005 15:43:37 -0700, wrote:

License testing for manual morse code cognition skill simply
became obsolete. A REAL problem is that those who passed
the manual tests refuse to let it BE obsolete...it is an
ingrained psyche touchstone, a mile-marker of how far they
came once. They refuse to look at the future and OTHERS
who may come later. It is a very personal thing to them.


For whatever reasons those who have opposed the elimination of code
testing over the years have done so, I personally feel the observation
that this was/is the root of the problem is spot on.

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL. It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use. A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative to ham
radio and its code testing. A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the testing
and spend $200 or so on a computer. Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.

Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week. It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you handed them
one gratis. As for young people today, they grow up with cell phones,
and game machines that have more processor power than the computers on
the space shuttles, and the computers in today's homes are capable of
real-time communication between almost any two points in the world
without regard to propagation or licensing procedures or any other
such inconveniences.

So, why should they have any interest in ham radio? We're nothing more
to them than a collection of fossils playing with a curiosity we call
CW which is good for a laugh but little else.

Interesting, then, that the state of the art in ham radio has now come
full circle with the advent of Voice-Over-IP systems like EchoLink and
IRLP. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.


Another casual factor is human mortality. Keeping things
as they were is a form of psychological stability..."all
things are as they were then" and there are no new things
to overcome. Keeping the status very quo is comforting to
those who have become "mature." :-) It has an artificial
stability sense of delaying their own demise...in addition
to the nostalgia and yearning for a youth now irrevocably
lost to the past.


Someone much wiser than myself (I forget who) once wrote that one
always retains one last bit of foolishness from childhood, that to
retain all of them is to be immature, but that to surrender all of
them is an even worse alternative.

From that standpoint, there is nothing wrong with people wanting to
maintain the status quo - for themselves. The error in judgement is in
trying to force the same status quo on the rest of the world.

In many Comments elimination of the
federal requirement of manual code testing will cause a
near-total cessation of manual morse code use if removed!
[extremists add the degeneration into anarchy and chaos,
supposedly the environment of CB]


It has been noted previously that CB-like behavior is engaged in by
some hams who have passed a code test, while at the same time there
are plenty of hams who have never passed a code test who do not behave
like some of the neanderthas who inhabit 11 meters, not to mention the
MURS, marine VHF, FRS, and other license-free or licensed-by-rule
radio services. Thus, the successful demonstration of telegraphy
skills is not a character reference, as FCC has pointed out in almost
exactly those words.

What I haven't seen discussed is the effect of economics. One can buy
a brand new CB rig for $50 or less these days. Stick a $20 mag-mount
antenna on something metal and you have a CB station of modest
capabilities for under $100. No code, no written test, and if you
happen to be a major asshole it's not a problem either. Ham rigs cost
a heck of a lot more, the cost of even used HF rigs is several times
what a CB rig costs. I think that is more likely to keep the CB cave
dwellers off the ham bands a lot longer than any code test would.

Note that not all CB operators fit the above comments, and however
unfortunately, not all hams fail to fit the above comments.

In the USA the FCC was on public record 15 years ago that
it did not feel that any manual morse code test was
necessary for their purpose in granting USA ham licenses
(FCC 90-53, a copy of which visible on
www.nocode.org).
However, the test requirements were still in the Radio
Regulations of the ITU-R and the USA was obliged to obey it.


Not really, the USA simply chose to obey it. The USA has similarly
chosen unilaterally not to obey other international agreements,
including one related to the use of land mines and another related to
greenhouse gases and the so-called "global warming" effect.

Say what you want about the lack of code testing, but at least
code-free ham radio doesn't blow people's legs off or threaten to melt
the polar caps and turn W1AW into an IOTA station.

Obsolesence in Radio Regulations finally was recognized,
not only in S25.5 but in many other parts of S25. S25 was
rewritten at WRC-03 and manual morse testing made optional
for each adminstration. [there won't be another WRC until
2007] Since 2003, 23 countries have removed the absolute
necessity of testing for manual morse skill for HF and
below. It should be noted that the International Amateur
Radio Union was FOR the modernization of S25 at least a
year prior to WRC-03...and the optionality of code testing
by each administration.


It should also be noted that the lone dissenting vote was cast by the
ARRL, which appears determined to go down with the ship at least.

One problem, a REAL problem, here in the USA is the un-
willingness of the ARRL to go with the desires of the
majority of American radio amateurs. They seem to cater
to their core membership which is the older, code-tested
amateurs. The ARRL membership is (as of July, 2005) still
only 1 in 5 licensed U.S. radio amateurs, definitely not
a majority. ARRL has to either "go with the flow" or
give up saying that it "represents the ham community."


On this point...okay, granted that ARRL does not go with the desires
of the majority of US hams, but why should they? As you point out, the
majority of US hams are not ARRL members. If the League seems to be
carrying out the wishes of its members, this should not be any great
surprise - that's what the hams who pay dues to belong to the ARRL
*expect* them to do.

If the ARRL does not represent the majority of hams, it's not their
fault. It's the 4 out of 5 hams who do not pony up their dues, and
then start telling their division directors to tow the line if they
expect to be re-elected.

There is no real membership/special-interest group
competitor to the ARRL in the United States, so it
doesn't seem that there is any "drive for growth" coming
from such groups.


It's about 30 years too late for that anyway. The gunshot wound to ham
radio's figurative foot was self-inflicted in the mid-1970's when they
turned their backs on no-code licensing then. Now we see the results
every few weeks courtesy of N2EY's postings.

The ARRL pays lip service in its electronic publications, but does
little of substance to foster any serious upturn in the number of
licensed hams beyond its participation in volunteer examining. By that
I mean, while real change is what's needed, the League continues to
oppose that change. Again, though, that seems to be the wishes of its
members, or at least a majority thereof - so again it goes back to the
4 out of 5 hams who aren't League members.

Few manufacturers need the amateur
radio market so it won't be them to any great extent.


The manufacturers can do little to encourage folks to become licensed.
They could advertise in places where non-hams would be exposed to
their products. Kenwood could advertise the TS-850 in Newsweek. People
could get interested. Then they find out that in order to actually use
the damn thing, you not only have to pass the two written tests, but
you have to spend who knows how long learning Morse Code so you can
communicate with the same people in the same places they just finished
chatting with over the Internet, without having to spend a thousand
bucks on the radio, and the idea goes out along with the magazine
before next week's issue even arrives.

Besides, the manufacturers are in business, their business is to sell
radios, they're going to advertise to their potential customers, so
their advertising dollars are going to be spent in a manner consistent
with that.

snip

Ditto.

A lot more is coming for the average citizen if EDN and
Electronic Design and SPECTRUM magazines can be believed.
VoIP is an accomplished fact today, the only real
drawback being some Common Carrier arguments against it.


I can think of some other drawbacks too, but obviously the point still
stands. VoIP has even found its way into the ARS.

The usual radio amateur argument for amateur radio is
that it is "low cost" and "independent from infrastructure."


In fact, increasingly it is neither.

Rigs aren't getting any cheaper. In an effort to one-up the
competition, the radio manufacturers keep adding more bells and
whistles to their products, and thus adding more dollars to the price
tag. A station consisting of just an entry-level HF transceiver and a
wire antenna, tuner, and power supply will still set one back about a
thousand bucks.

As for being independent from infrastructure, while a ham station can
be temporarily operated on emergency power, eventually, batteries need
recharging. Generators need refueling. Alternative power sources such
as solar power, or maybe a windmill, can be used, but how many average
hams happen to own a windmill? And have you checked out the price tags
attached to solar panels lately? And of course, adding capabilities
that utilize a computer (packet, SSTV, PSK-31, etc.) increases power
consumption considerably.


SOME amateur radio is low cost, yes, but the "independence"
from the infrastructure inhibits a greater utilization of
amateur radio in true emergency work (apart from the after-
the-fact health-and-welfare messaging). Thirty years ago
the "phone patch" was popular in connecting overseas
servicemen with their families in the USA but, now that
the military has the DSN with direct input to the Internet
plus direct connection to stateside telephone networks,
those phone patches are seldom needed; overseas military
people can call home directly from nearly everywhere.


Nevertheless, I still hear MARS ops running morale patches for
servicemen and women. Admittedly, though, I don't hear much of it on
the ham bands anymore.

"Low cost" equipment is highly debateable, even if out-
rageous claims of some are corrected. Really low-cost
HF transceivers HAVE to be used models, some with
their insides "modified." New ones require a kilodollar
across the counter minimum to set up a reasonable
station.


Agreed.

I look on the "companionship" of code testing and all testing
as a lot of rationalized, smoke-screen-for-effect misdirection
by the OT morsemen. :-)


Code testing, perhaps. But, all testing? I can't agree with you there.
There are certain technical requirements relative to an amateur
station which require some basic knowledge on the part of the operator
in order to maintain the station within those requirements. To the
extent that the RF spectrum is a natural resource, the stewardship of
significant portions of that resource in the hands of hams deserves
some indication that an operator has the knowledge to safely operate a
station in accordance with those requirements.

Only hams may legally yank the covers off their rigs and fiddle around
with the innards. Operators of public safety stations (police, fire,
EMS, etc.), marine VHF radios, GMRS, CB, etc. may not. They have a
factory rep, or a repair shop, do it for them. So do many hams, but
for them it's a matter of choise, for those other guys it's the law.

Try this experiment - show a teenage kid an
SSTV picture being received, and watch the reaction.....


Can't say I've had such an experience. If it's anything at
all like old-style facsimile (that I had to run tests on
in 1955), it would be deathly slow in generation for a
teener's normal rapid pace. :-)


Exactly. The reaction the original post was referring to is basically,
"Yawn!" which is the same reaction that will result from any attempt
to show how cool ham radio is by demonstrating that we can do
something over the radio that the kid has already done hundreds of
times using his cell phone, or a PC over the internet. The code test
isn't even a factor. You're showing the kid nothing he hasn't already
seen, and done, before.

I have observed some older teeners at a mall using cell
phones with camera-imaging capability (they were comparing
styles with friends in another mall). Quick, rapid
response, all appearing to know how to use their phones
as expertly as anyone.


There was a big deal made recently over the fact that in a contest
between a couple of very experienced CW operators and a couple of
cell-phone text messaging experts, the CW guys won handily. The
text-messaging folks were quite surprised. The hams looked at it as a
victory of sorts. Which it was. Except it's not going to make kids
trade in their cell phones (which fit in a shirt pocket, run for hours
on a tiny lithium ion battery, is paid for by his parents, requires no
license or testing, and allows him to call anybody anywhere) for a ham
station (which he has to pay for out of his allowance, requires a
license and a testing process, only allows him to call other licensed
hams, and can hardly be used while walking down the middle of the
local mall checking out the cute ass on the bunch of girls walking ten
yards ahead of him!).

We hams are becoming a rare breed as technology advances.


Sigh...that has been happening since a half century ago.
The miniaturization of nearly everything electronic is
defeating the hammer-and-anvil, big-brute mentality of
some hobbyists.


You check out the effect miniaturization has had on ham equipment,
though, and you see that the state of the art has evolved since half a
century ago. Compare my Kenwood TH-78A or Yaesu FT-100 of today to
what passed for a "portable" radio in 1955.

A REAL problem I see is the attitudes of some in vainly
trying to keep the old paradigms...such as amateurs are
"leading the way in state of the art developments." They
aren't and haven't been since the advent of solid-state
electronics a half century ago. They have to give up their
wish-fulfillment of "greatness in radio" and just continue
to have fun with their radios as a hobby. Nothing wrong
with that and perhaps better oriented mentally to just
enjoy a pastime. [that's what hobbies are]


To a large extent, I agree. It does occur to me, though, that few
hobbies provide the opportunity to do public service work and
contribute to community efforts in disaster preparedness and such.

Nearly 60 years ago I got interested in radio while both
flying model aircraft and being a part-time worker in the
model-hobby industry (Testor Chemical Co., makers of
cement, "dope" the lacquer paint, and balsa wood). Today
the model hobby industry is bigger than ever and the AMA,
the Academy of Model Aeronautics, has a quarter million
members (more than the ARRL ever had). In knowing many
modelers over the years, I've not heard any of them boast
of "advancing the state of the art" in aeronautics nor of
being anything else but hobbyists. The technology of air,
sea, and space has long ago gone FAR beyond the
capabilities of model hobbyists working by themselves.


Well, right...but then, NASA, the USAF, and the USN don't generally
employ these folks as volunteer assistants, either...and it's not
because they sniff too much glue, either.

The same is true for "radio," at least for the MF-HF bands
used by radio amateurs. It is basically a hobby, a fun
pastime done for personal enjoyment, an intellectual
challenge for those who want to get into the theory of
it, but also needing federal regulation due to the nature
of EM propagation and interference mitigation.


I agree on the above. However - If you admit that federal regulation
is needed, why decry "all testing" as you did earlier in your post,
when you stated:

I look on the "companionship" of code testing and all testing
as a lot of rationalized, smoke-screen-for-effect misdirection
by the OT morsemen. :-)


What other method is there, other than testing, for insuring that
those individuals responsible for mitigating potential interference
from their own stations are knowledgeable enough to do so?

73 de John, KC2HMZ

  #72   Report Post  
Old October 18th 05, 05:05 AM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:25:53 GMT, "Bill Sohl"
wrote:


"an old friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

Bill Sohl wrote:

cut
do you agree with my statement that a for a truly new arguement that
the FCC would wait and study awhile?


IF (big IF) some new compelling reason was identified to justify
keeping code testing, then yes, I think the FCC might look deeper
or perhaps rethink their proposal...BUT, as we both appear to agree,
no such new and compelling reason(s) have been offered up by
anyone. Even after several major widespread emergencies (Katrina, etc)
no additional arguments or even anecdotal evidence has surfaced
that points to any need for code knowledge.


I agree no new reason has been presented, w may disagree in that i
think if someone just came up with something truely NEW they would
delay and study it

but I don't expect even that

Cheers,
Bill K2UNK



_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 140,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account
  #73   Report Post  
Old October 18th 05, 07:20 PM
Michael Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

John Kasupski wrote:

On 16 Oct 2005 15:43:37 -0700, wrote:


License testing for manual morse code cognition skill simply
became obsolete. A REAL problem is that those who passed
the manual tests refuse to let it BE obsolete...it is an
ingrained psyche touchstone, a mile-marker of how far they
came once. They refuse to look at the future and OTHERS
who may come later. It is a very personal thing to them.



For whatever reasons those who have opposed the elimination of code
testing over the years have done so, I personally feel the observation
that this was/is the root of the problem is spot on.

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL. It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use. A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative to ham
radio and its code testing. A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the testing
and spend $200 or so on a computer. Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.



You look at it as an either or situation. Computers are not Amateur
radio, and amateur radio is not computers.

Now of course, there is intermixing of the hobbies, but for anyone to
think that every, or even many computer hobbiests are lost to ham radio
because of some competitive factor are really barking up the wrong tree.


Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week.


So.... the drop off is mostly Technicians who took no code test. They
are gone, and it is the code tests fault?





It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you handed them
one gratis.


One might suspect maybe they aren't all that interested in radio.




As for young people today, they grow up with cell phones,
and game machines that have more processor power than the computers on
the space shuttles,


So I guess they won't want to be astronauts either!!



and the computers in today's homes are capable of
real-time communication between almost any two points in the world
without regard to propagation or licensing procedures or any other
such inconveniences.


1. My telephone has been doing that ever since I knew what a telephone was.

2. If you think that Ham radio is just about talking to people around
the world, that shows a part of the problem.


So, why should they have any interest in ham radio?


Perhaps they are interested in Radio. If not, they might want to get a
different hobby....


We're nothing more
to them than a collection of fossils playing with a curiosity we call
CW which is good for a laugh but little else.


We have a lot of young hams in our area.



Interesting, then, that the state of the art in ham radio has now come
full circle with the advent of Voice-Over-IP systems like EchoLink and
IRLP. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.



All of the Internet based "Ham Radio" transmission methods would work
much much better if the radio were out of the picture.

Do you really think that Echolink and IRLP is "state of the art"?


But if you want to believe that Ham Radio is dying, and it is
inescapable because of the actions of Hams from 25 or more years ago,
then there isn't much to do about it except enjoy what is left, or turn
in your ticket as a symbolic protest of our ancestors stupidity...

- Mike KB3EIA -


  #75   Report Post  
Old October 18th 05, 11:53 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

From: John Kasupski on Mon 17 Oct 2005 23:37

On 16 Oct 2005 15:43:37 -0700, wrote:

License testing for manual morse code cognition skill simply
became obsolete. A REAL problem is that those who passed
the manual tests refuse to let it BE obsolete...it is an
ingrained psyche touchstone, a mile-marker of how far they
came once. They refuse to look at the future and OTHERS
who may come later. It is a very personal thing to them.


For whatever reasons those who have opposed the elimination of code
testing over the years have done so, I personally feel the observation
that this was/is the root of the problem is spot on.


We agree...and so do thousands and thousands of others. :-)

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL. It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use. A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative to ham
radio and its code testing. A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).


In 1975 there was only ARPANET tying in dozens of locations
containing mainframes (and a very few minicomputers)...the
BBSs (Bulletin Board Systems) were being experimented with on
a very small scale and the Internet would not be opened to the
public until 16 years later in 1991. Radio amateurs had
"access" to the FCC only through the United States Post Office.

In 1975 the ARRL had a legal firm in DC on retainer and acted
as the "representative" of U.S. radio amateurs. This
"representation" was little more than a minor dictatorship
of self-proclaimed "representatives" enjoying control over all
those individual radio amateurs who did not want to or could
not (probably due to time or intimidation of going up against
government officials) directly access the federal government.

ARRL "representation" amounted to the ARRL telling the feds
and amateur radio members that a no-code "communicator class"
license was no good for them. With so little input from
individual radio amateurs, the FCC believed the ARRL was the
"representative" and acceded to the ARRL's wishes.

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the testing
and spend $200 or so on a computer. Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.


The 1975-1980 period was also a high point in the explosion
of new integrated circuits, newer transistors, and an opening
up of new areas of electronics hobby activity that had little
or no relation to amateur radio. The communications
satellites were beginning to be used for worldwide
communication and there were breakthroughs aplenty in many
areas of electronics. Technically-inclined folks now had
the first of the microcomputer SYSTEMS that they could afford
and control. It was a terrific time of newness in a different
kind of communications, that of direct person-to-person
contact. Bulletin Board Systems took off worldwide, grew and
prospered and practical futurists were planning the Internet.

Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week. It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you handed them
one gratis.


30 years ago (again in the 1975 time frame), most of my
contemporaries in electronics engineering did NOT get into
that field through amateur radio. It was just fascinating
enough to them to get into and they did. This was the time
of very serious advancements in the state of all electronics.
While the computer industry began exploding in size and
capability, so did a lot of other areas in electronics and
with them came the people with interests in all of that.
The old paradigms of the 1930s (not to mention the mindsets
of the ultra-conservatives of "radio") did not apply to
the brave new world that came 40 years after.

As for young people today, they grow up with cell phones,
and game machines that have more processor power than the computers on
the space shuttles, and the computers in today's homes are capable of
real-time communication between almost any two points in the world
without regard to propagation or licensing procedures or any other
such inconveniences.


I got access to the RCA corporate computer network in 1973
after being able to use an HP 9100 programmable desk
calculator for some formidable problem solving. Those old
mainframes of 30 years ago PALE in comparison to the speed
and memory and peripheral power of today's desktops and
laptops! Clock rate of those mainframes was maximum at
around 20 MHz 30 years ago but today it is 3 GHz with a RAM
access rate of 200 MHz! Today I can hold a 250 GByte hard
disk with two fingers yet would need two people to help me
hold the "cake platter" containers for 500 MBytes worth of
mass-memory storage of the 1970s.

So, why should they have any interest in ham radio? We're nothing more
to them than a collection of fossils playing with a curiosity we call
CW which is good for a laugh but little else.


That's a bit severe, John. Having "one's own radio station"
is FUN, a personal enjoyment, an interesting hobby. So is
model railroading, Civil War reenactoring, and stamp
collecting...just as the new hobby areas of robotics and
general electronic gadgetry are FUN for the participants.

A problem occurs when those interested in on-off keying CW
HF radio take themselves too seriously, saying they are
some kind of "ultimate" radio skill individuals and such
radiotelegraphic skills are "needed by the nation." They've
been stuck in their long-ago brainwashed period of mental
conditioning that they can't really see beyond their own
immediate interests...or egos. Those that want to do
competitive contesting have personal enjoyment of that niche
area (even though it is NOT the "sport" of physical
athletics). However, some of them have glorified that niche
activity of the hobby into being some kind of all-around
"champions" of a hobby interest and that isn't descriptive
of the hobby in general.

Interesting, then, that the state of the art in ham radio has now come
full circle with the advent of Voice-Over-IP systems like EchoLink and
IRLP. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.


The Purists in ham radio (those still in Belief of the
standards and practices of the 1930s) will decry such
new-fangled notions as "not being 'real' amateur radio."
Just as radiotelegraphy skill is a "must" for all hams,
a bit of pure mental conditioning done long ago.


Someone much wiser than myself (I forget who) once wrote that one
always retains one last bit of foolishness from childhood, that to
retain all of them is to be immature, but that to surrender all of
them is an even worse alternative.


Perhaps. :-) ENJOYMENT on a personal level is not some kind
of "sin." At any age. Such is NOT immaturity...but a few
folks take their seriousness far too seriously and demand that
all "work hard (and long)" to be "successful" in achieving OLD
goals.

Fromthat standpoint, there is nothing wrong with people wanting to
maintain the status quo - for themselves. The error in judgement is in
trying to force the same status quo on the rest of the world.


Agreement 100%! Problem that I see is those individuals have
so identified with their OWN goals and the imprinted "standards"
of others telling them what to do, that they see themselves
ranging from "role models" to absolute judges of what all MUST
do. What they don't realize is that those old standards and
practices did NOT suddenly arrive on the amateur radio scene
from a divine source...they EVOLVED during the beginning of
radio. Yet, inexplicably, those standards and practices "must"
be retained WITHOUT any benefit for FURTHER evolving! :-)


It has been noted previously that CB-like behavior is engaged in by
some hams who have passed a code test, while at the same time there
are plenty of hams who have never passed a code test who do not behave
like some of the neanderthas who inhabit 11 meters, not to mention the
MURS, marine VHF, FRS, and other license-free or licensed-by-rule
radio services. Thus, the successful demonstration of telegraphy
skills is not a character reference, as FCC has pointed out in almost
exactly those words.


I question that the "CB behavior" is "bad" in any form. :-)
It is only against the OLD HAM STANDARDS of strict,
absolute maintenance of approved old-style procedure and
protocol of AMATEURS. What these purists don't (or can't)
understand is that ham procedure and protocol would be
laughed at by some other radio services. The professionals
in radiotelegraphy already bestowed the "ham" pejorative on
amateurs long ago; some old-timer hams enjoy playing the
part of using "professional conduct" yet don't realize how
they got their moniker. :-)

It's difficult to be emotional at 10 words per minute CW. :-)


In the USA the FCC was on public record 15 years ago that
it did not feel that any manual morse code test was
necessary for their purpose in granting USA ham licenses
(FCC 90-53, a copy of which visible on
www.nocode.org).
However, the test requirements were still in the Radio
Regulations of the ITU-R and the USA was obliged to obey it.


Not really, the USA simply chose to obey it. The USA has similarly
chosen unilaterally not to obey other international agreements,
including one related to the use of land mines and another related to
greenhouse gases and the so-called "global warming" effect.


Political views on OTHER things aside, the USA has so
MANY international communications activities going that
it would be international political disaster to ignore
agreement with ITU-R radio regulations. They MUST agree
in order to keep the EM environment open; disregarding
it would upset all common communications with others.
Don't forget that a chaotic, unregulated EM environment
would impact US just as much as the USA could impact
others by no following regulatory agreements.


Obsolesence in Radio Regulations finally was recognized,
not only in S25.5 but in many other parts of S25. S25 was
rewritten at WRC-03 and manual morse testing made optional
for each adminstration. [there won't be another WRC until
2007] Since 2003, 23 countries have removed the absolute
necessity of testing for manual morse skill for HF and
below. It should be noted that the International Amateur
Radio Union was FOR the modernization of S25 at least a
year prior to WRC-03...and the optionality of code testing
by each administration.


It should also be noted that the lone dissenting vote was cast by the
ARRL, which appears determined to go down with the ship at least.


Many think that the ARRL can do no wrong. They get very
disturbed if Big Brother is described negatively. :-)


On this point...okay, granted that ARRL does not go with the desires
of the majority of US hams, but why should they? As you point out, the
majority of US hams are not ARRL members. If the League seems to be
carrying out the wishes of its members, this should not be any great
surprise - that's what the hams who pay dues to belong to the ARRL
*expect* them to do.


The ARRL ought to quit playing at it being a "representative
body" for radio amateurs. Its officials seem to get a kick
out of controling the membership. Control is power. But,
they are "official" and say so. :-)

If the ARRL does not represent the majority of hams, it's not their
fault.


It is ABSOLUTELY their fault.

It's the 4 out of 5 hams who do not pony up their dues, and
then start telling their division directors to tow the line if they
expect to be re-elected.


Disagree. There is NO federal regulation that says U.S.
radio amateurs MUST belong to some organization. Ergo,
they don't have to "pony up any dues."

Who says those "division directors" have to "tow any line?"
They are NOT governed by any federal laws regarding
"representation," have NO checks-and-balances inherent to
the federal or state governments. A private membership
organization is NOT some branch or agency of the federal
government...even though the ARRL loves to play at that.


There is no real membership/special-interest group
competitor to the ARRL in the United States, so it
doesn't seem that there is any "drive for growth" coming
from such groups.


It's about 30 years too late for that anyway. The gunshot wound to ham
radio's figurative foot was self-inflicted in the mid-1970's when they
turned their backs on no-code licensing then. Now we see the results
every few weeks courtesy of N2EY's postings.


James Miccolis' postings just repeat what another private
organization does in tabulating publicly-available federal
government databases. [no one "checks his work"...:-) ]

Ah, but the ARRL decreed to all [USA] radio amateurs on
what they "should' think back 30 years ago. Ergo, they ARE
responsible for not attracting more members than they have.

The ARRL pays lip service in its electronic publications, but does
little of substance to foster any serious upturn in the number of
licensed hams beyond its participation in volunteer examining. By that
I mean, while real change is what's needed, the League continues to
oppose that change. Again, though, that seems to be the wishes of its
members, or at least a majority thereof - so again it goes back to the
4 out of 5 hams who aren't League members.


You are ignoring all those (who can't be counted) who are NOT
YET licensed. The ARRL is trying its damndest to CONTROL what
newcomers are required to do to get their license. The ARRL
just doesn't have that sort of "right." Finally, with the
opening of the Internet and all USA government agencies getting
on the 'net, the federal government isn't buying into a lot of
what the ARRL says or demands.


The manufacturers can do little to encourage folks to become licensed.
They could advertise in places where non-hams would be exposed to
their products. Kenwood could advertise the TS-850 in Newsweek. People
could get interested.


Disagree strongly based on a century of marketing practices
in the world. Manufacturers CAN do MUCH to "get folks
interested" in just about anything. Advertising is BIG
BUSINESS and an essential part of marketing practices.

Then they find out that in order to actually use
the damn thing, you not only have to pass the two written tests, but
you have to spend who knows how long learning Morse Code so you can
communicate with the same people in the same places they just finished
chatting with over the Internet, without having to spend a thousand
bucks on the radio, and the idea goes out along with the magazine
before next week's issue even arrives.


Tsk, the morsemen elitists state that the USA already has
a no-code-test license class for amateur radio. "Not a
problem" for newbies they imply. :-)


A lot more is coming for the average citizen if EDN and
Electronic Design and SPECTRUM magazines can be believed.
VoIP is an accomplished fact today, the only real
drawback being some Common Carrier arguments against it.


I can think of some other drawbacks too, but obviously the point still
stands. VoIP has even found its way into the ARS.


Ah, but the elitist morsemen keep on claiming that morse is
the epitome of radio skills and infinetly superior to just
"grabbing a mike and yakking." :-)

The usual radio amateur argument for amateur radio is
that it is "low cost" and "independent from infrastructure."


In fact, increasingly it is neither.

Rigs aren't getting any cheaper. In an effort to one-up the
competition, the radio manufacturers keep adding more bells and
whistles to their products, and thus adding more dollars to the price
tag. A station consisting of just an entry-level HF transceiver and a
wire antenna, tuner, and power supply will still set one back about a
thousand bucks.


Ah, but one in here has shown us a single digital photo of
an amateur radio HF transceiver that cost only "$100!" He
built it himself. Who can argue against him? :-)


I look on the "companionship" of code testing and all testing
as a lot of rationalized, smoke-screen-for-effect misdirection
by the OT morsemen. :-)


Code testing, perhaps. But, all testing? I can't agree with you there.


Code testing WITH all the other subject matter testing.
That's what the "companionship" means.

The standard morsemen argument is that "if code testing is
dropped, it is the 'same' as dropping all testing." Not so,
but they keep on with that rationale.


Only hams may legally yank the covers off their rigs and fiddle around
with the innards.


That's only because of the way the LAW is written NOW. That
could be gone in a flash with a single R&O.

Operators of public safety stations (police, fire,
EMS, etc.), marine VHF radios, GMRS, CB, etc. may not. They have a
factory rep, or a repair shop, do it for them.


Not entirely true since a Commercial license allows them
(legally) to do so. In broadcasting (now referred to as
"mass media") it's possible to "mess with innards" a lot
without a single legal license.


Try this experiment - show a teenage kid an
SSTV picture being received, and watch the reaction.....


Can't say I've had such an experience. If it's anything at
all like old-style facsimile (that I had to run tests on
in 1955), it would be deathly slow in generation for a
teener's normal rapid pace. :-)


Exactly. The reaction the original post was referring to is basically,
"Yawn!" which is the same reaction that will result from any attempt
to show how cool ham radio is by demonstrating that we can do
something over the radio that the kid has already done hundreds of
times using his cell phone, or a PC over the internet. The code test
isn't even a factor. You're showing the kid nothing he hasn't already
seen, and done, before.


Ah, but I've been told otherwise. Why, even in here, some
elitist morsemen have regaled us with stories of Field Day
and the "interest" generated by those skilled morsemen in
communicating by morse code! :-)


There was a big deal made recently over the fact that in a contest
between a couple of very experienced CW operators and a couple of
cell-phone text messaging experts, the CW guys won handily. The
text-messaging folks were quite surprised. The hams looked at it as a
victory of sorts. Which it was.


It was? Maybe I should watch Jay Leno more often and "learn
about radio communications?" :-)

I'm still waiting for the "showdown" between "expert" morsemen
and some ancient 60 WPM teleprinters run by "non-expert"
teleprinter operators. Say, over a continuous 24-hour period.
As it was a half century ago. Offhand, I'd say that the
teleprinters would win out now as they did back then. :-)

Except it's not going to make kids
trade in their cell phones (which fit in a shirt pocket, run for hours
on a tiny lithium ion battery, is paid for by his parents, requires no
license or testing, and allows him to call anybody anywhere) for a ham
station (which he has to pay for out of his allowance, requires a
license and a testing process, only allows him to call other licensed
hams, and can hardly be used while walking down the middle of the
local mall checking out the cute ass on the bunch of girls walking ten
yards ahead of him!).


It's not? Awwww.... :-)


A REAL problem I see is the attitudes of some in vainly
trying to keep the old paradigms...such as amateurs are
"leading the way in state of the art developments." They
aren't and haven't been since the advent of solid-state
electronics a half century ago. They have to give up their
wish-fulfillment of "greatness in radio" and just continue
to have fun with their radios as a hobby. Nothing wrong
with that and perhaps better oriented mentally to just
enjoy a pastime. [that's what hobbies are]


To a large extent, I agree. It does occur to me, though, that few
hobbies provide the opportunity to do public service work and
contribute to community efforts in disaster preparedness and such.


Well, getting an amateur radio license opens one up to some
really FINE areas of self-proclamation of "being of service"
and even "saving lives!" Great for wish-fulfillment. However,
I still seriously doubt that most radio amateurs got their
ham license to "be of service to their country." :-)


Nearly 60 years ago I got interested in radio while both
flying model aircraft and being a part-time worker in the
model-hobby industry (Testor Chemical Co., makers of
cement, "dope" the lacquer paint, and balsa wood). Today
the model hobby industry is bigger than ever and the AMA,
the Academy of Model Aeronautics, has a quarter million
members (more than the ARRL ever had). In knowing many
modelers over the years, I've not heard any of them boast
of "advancing the state of the art" in aeronautics nor of
being anything else but hobbyists. The technology of air,
sea, and space has long ago gone FAR beyond the
capabilities of model hobbyists working by themselves.


Well, right...but then, NASA, the USAF, and the USN don't generally
employ these folks as volunteer assistants, either...and it's not
because they sniff too much glue, either.


Sorry, but one doesn't "employ" "volunteers." :-)

If you've followed the developments of UAVs (Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles) you would have seen that they evolved from model
radio controlled aircraft. Such model builders and their
companies contracted with the DoD on prototype UAVs.

"Glue sniffing" was not a standard practice a half century
ago and NOT a social problem. Today, the model hobby
industry doesn't use the same acetate and nitrate base
glues near as much, preferring to go with epoxies and the
cyanacrylic ("crazy glue") varieties.

The same is true for "radio," at least for the MF-HF bands
used by radio amateurs. It is basically a hobby, a fun
pastime done for personal enjoyment, an intellectual
challenge for those who want to get into the theory of
it, but also needing federal regulation due to the nature
of EM propagation and interference mitigation.


I agree on the above. However - If you admit that federal regulation
is needed, why decry "all testing" as you did earlier in your post,
when you stated:

I look on the "companionship" of code testing and all testing
as a lot of rationalized, smoke-screen-for-effect misdirection
by the OT morsemen. :-)


As I said earlier, John, I did not "decry 'all testing'" but was
using the elitist morsemen's so-called connection (the "companion-
ship") of code testing WITH all other testing...and their saying
that "dropping the code test is 'the same' as dropping all
testing."

What other method is there, other than testing, for insuring that
those individuals responsible for mitigating potential interference
from their own stations are knowledgeable enough to do so?


More "mind control?" :-) Peer pressure? :-)

"Make more laws?" That's always a simplistic argument by those
who won't have to take any tests...just like the elitist morse-
man can keep on demanding that newcomers take those code tests.
One can make the amateur radio regulations (Part 97, Title 47
C.F.R.) far more draconian than they are. Currently, Part 97 is
one of the smaller Parts in Title 47 C.F.R. In one way, the
recent versions (prior to the 2000 Restructuring) WAS more
draconian with six license classes (there could be 60 or even
600 of those), three kinds of code test rates, all sorts of
sub-divided bands, and absolute retention of everything ever
transmitted using new modes such as Spread Spectrum. Is that
the kind of thing you meant?

Now there are only three classes, one code test rate, and the
VEC QPC gets to decide on ALL questions and answers (no more
sub-divided subject numbers) of any written test. There still
are the minutely-detailed "bandplans" plus the "new" 60m
"channels" on HF (good going, ARRL, "big boost" for the HFers).

As it was in 1934, so it is in 2005...the FCC is NOT any sort
of academic institution. It doesn't "teach" anything in the
way of all amateurs being responsible for mitigation or even
proper operation. Who and what teaches radio amateurs to BE
responsible is up to others. FCC regulations are expected to
be obeyed. [apparently they expect that six-year-olds can
always obey and be responsible to adult laws] Licensing is
only ONE tool of radio regulation. It was never a "diploma"
of accomplishment and it is never a 100-percent guarantee of
legal operation by anyone...although some fervently believe
that. :-)

"Testing" for a license grant is just part of the FCC's
regulatory toolbox. It is largely a legal formality and
doesn't guarantee anything other than an applicant having
completed - and passed - a particular test. It doesn't
guarantee anything more than a hunting license guarantees
all hunting within season or that a driver's license
guarantees a drive will always obey traffic laws and never
hurt anyone with a motor vehicle. On the other hand, if
there were NO testing, then there would be NO licenses to
grant and no amateur would have a piece of official paper
(suitable for framing) that allowed them to feel more
important than others for having accomplished that. :-)

Feel free to extrapolate "what I 'meant'" from the last two
paragraphs. I'm sure someone will...and they will be wrong.





  #76   Report Post  
Old October 19th 05, 12:31 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

John Kasupski wrote:

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL.


By widespread opposition by the amateur radio community. And it wasn't
a stand-alone proposal - it was part of an FCC proposed restructuring
that would have resulted in a 7 class "two ladder" license system, less
than a decade after the "incentive licensing" changes.

1975 was also when cb was booming and FCC proposing to convert 220 to
"Class E" cb.

It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use.


You might want to check the dates, costs, and capabilities of what
you're calling a "computer", John.

A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative
to ham radio and its code testing.


Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

Those early small computers weren't much in the way of communication
devices. Look up what a 300 baud modem for a TRS-80 cost...

Technically-inclined young people have *always* had lots of
alternatives. Look up "Williamson amplifier" and see how many "hi-fi"
folks were building their own audio systems in the 1940s and later.
Lots of other examples.

In my youth the hottest thing for the techno-kids was - cars. Old cars,
new cars, fixing up junkers, customizing, improving performance, you
name it. For less than the cost of a new ham rig, a kid could buy an
old car, fix it up with simple tools and easy-to-get parts, and get it
on the road. Even kids without licenses or the wherewithal to have a
car would help friends work on their cars, both for the experience and
in the hope of rides once the car was running.

No form of radio could compete with wheels.

A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had
for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other
kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).


In 1977 I bought and built a Heath HW-2036 2 meter rig. Cost a bit over
$300. Still have it and it still works. Heath lasted a while longer
after 1977.

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the
testing
and spend $200 or so on a computer.


I built ham stations for a less than $100 in those days. You might want
to see how little a $200 computer would actually do. And you needed a
TV set or monitor to use it.


Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.


"The best of a generation" went into computers? Hardly.

Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of
licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week. It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the
code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you
handed them one gratis.


Apples and oranges.

73 de Jim, N2EY

  #77   Report Post  
Old October 19th 05, 02:31 PM
Michael Coslo
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard



wrote:

John Kasupski wrote:

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL.



By widespread opposition by the amateur radio community. And it wasn't
a stand-alone proposal - it was part of an FCC proposed restructuring
that would have resulted in a 7 class "two ladder" license system, less
than a decade after the "incentive licensing" changes.

1975 was also when cb was booming and FCC proposing to convert 220 to
"Class E" cb.


It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use.



You might want to check the dates, costs, and capabilities of what
you're calling a "computer", John.


A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative
to ham radio and its code testing.



Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

Those early small computers weren't much in the way of communication
devices. Look up what a 300 baud modem for a TRS-80 cost...


I think its called technical time shifting, Jim. Somehow all those
early computers were imbued with all the features that the new ones
have. That Timex computer can do everything my G5 can do apparently! 8^)

The whole argument does this sort of thing. Assuming that for some
reason people make a conscious choice between Ham radio and computers
(and apparently between a hobby and a vocation) doesn't make sense to
me. If they had more in common, maybe, but computers as a hobby tends to
involve surfing the net these days, and as a vocation it means either
working with programs or programming. The two don't meet except at the
edges.

Technically-inclined young people have *always* had lots of
alternatives. Look up "Williamson amplifier" and see how many "hi-fi"
folks were building their own audio systems in the 1940s and later.
Lots of other examples.


Maybe people who are interested in radio would go into a radio type
hobby, and people who are interested in other things would be doing
other things. Simple sort of concept.

Or of course we could assume that the Morse code test was what kept
people from being hams, and then try to explain away why the first batch
of Hams who didn't have to take a code test are the group that comprises
the biggest part of the recent drop-off? Seems a strange conclusion.

In my youth the hottest thing for the techno-kids was - cars. Old cars,
new cars, fixing up junkers, customizing, improving performance, you
name it. For less than the cost of a new ham rig, a kid could buy an
old car, fix it up with simple tools and easy-to-get parts, and get it
on the road. Even kids without licenses or the wherewithal to have a
car would help friends work on their cars, both for the experience and
in the hope of rides once the car was running.

No form of radio could compete with wheels.




A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had
for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other
kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).



In 1977 I bought and built a Heath HW-2036 2 meter rig. Cost a bit over
$300. Still have it and it still works. Heath lasted a while longer
after 1977.



Anyone using Timex-Sinclairs for ham use?

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the
testing
and spend $200 or so on a computer.



I built ham stations for a less than $100 in those days. You might want
to see how little a $200 computer would actually do. And you needed a
TV set or monitor to use it.



Seems to me that the biggest thing they could be used for is learning
Basic programming. Okay.


Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.


"The best of a generation" went into computers? Hardly.


I missed that one.



Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of
licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week. It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the
code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you
handed them one gratis.



Apples and oranges.



Who is lamenting anyhow? I wish those new old Hams would have stuck
around, but beyond that, big deal.

What I take from the statistics is that an early generation of Hams got
their licenses without a whole lot of actual interest in radio. These
were the "honeydo" hams, who used 2 meter repeaters to get a shopping
list or the like on the way home from work. Their interests lay along
those lines.

Well along came cell phones, and the honeydo'ers went to that. Cell
phones are a better technology for getting a shopping list than using a
repeater.

Another subset of the dropoff is Hams who were somewhat interested in
radio, but became bored. They dropped off too.

My prediction of what will happen after Element 1 is history is that
there will be more new hams, and a higher attrition rate. People with
only a passing interest will become Hams. There is not likely to be a
net gain. I won't pass judgment on this being good or bad. It is just
different.

- Mike KB3EIA -

  #78   Report Post  
Old October 19th 05, 06:02 PM
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard

Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote:

John Kasupski wrote:

I can recall back in about 1975 or so, there was a proposal for a
no-code "Communicator Class" license. It was shot down, largely due to
opposition by ARRL.


By widespread opposition by the amateur radio community. And it wasn't
a stand-alone proposal - it was part of an FCC proposed restructuring
that would have resulted in a 7 class "two ladder" license system, less
than a decade after the "incentive licensing" changes.


1975 was also when cb was booming and FCC proposing to convert 220 to
"Class E" cb.


It was along about the same time that computers
first became reasonably affordable for home use.


You might want to check the dates, costs, and capabilities of what
you're calling a "computer", John.


A generation of
technically inclined young people suddenly had an alternative
to ham radio and its code testing.


Sorry, that doesn't make sense.

Those early small computers weren't much in the way of communication
devices. Look up what a 300 baud modem for a TRS-80 cost...


I think its called technical time shifting, Jim. Somehow all those
early computers were imbued with all the features that the new ones
have. That Timex computer can do everything my G5 can do apparently! 8^)


HAW!

My first "home computer" was a VIC-20 that I got used for $100. Needed
a TV set to use it. No printer, no communications. The least expensive
floppy drive for it cost almost $200 new...

The whole argument does this sort of thing.


You might consider looking up the dates and prices of some of the
hardware John mentions. The facts are somewhat startling.

Of course a lot of money could be saved, then as now, by buying a used
computer. That was because they lost value rapidly as newer models came
out.

Assuming that for some
reason people make a conscious choice between Ham radio and computers
(and apparently between a hobby and a vocation) doesn't make sense to
me. If they had more in common, maybe, but computers as a hobby tends to
involve surfing the net these days, and as a vocation it means either
working with programs or programming. The two don't meet except at the
edges.


I think the point is that computers somehow stole the spotlight from
ham radio. Perhaps that's true - but would eliminating the code test
have done anything to prevent it?

First off, the field of "computing" covers a lot of ground, of which
communcations/networking is only one part. There's also word and
document processing, accounting (in many forms), graphics and image
applications (again in many forms), games, training/educational
applications (like learning Morse Code...), and much more that can be
done on a stand-alone PC. Plus all the associated hardware.

Ham radio is communications, remote control, associated hardware, and
not much else, really.

Technically-inclined young people have *always* had lots of
alternatives. Look up "Williamson amplifier" and see how many "hi-fi"
folks were building their own audio systems in the 1940s and later.
Lots of other examples.


Maybe people who are interested in radio would go into a radio type
hobby, and people who are interested in other things would be doing
other things. Simple sort of concept.


Yup.

Or of course we could assume that the Morse code test was what kept
people from being hams, and then try to explain away why the first batch
of Hams who didn't have to take a code test are the group that comprises
the biggest part of the recent drop-off? Seems a strange conclusion.


Whole bunch of factors. For one thing, since FCC has been renewing all
Tech Pluses as Techs for more than 5-1/2 years, you can't assume that a
Tech isn't code-tested just from the license class.

In my youth the hottest thing for the techno-kids was - cars. Old cars,
new cars, fixing up junkers, customizing, improving performance, you
name it. For less than the cost of a new ham rig, a kid could buy an
old car, fix it up with simple tools and easy-to-get parts, and get it
on the road. Even kids without licenses or the wherewithal to have a
car would help friends work on their cars, both for the experience and
in the hope of rides once the car was running.

No form of radio could compete with wheels.


That sort of thing has become a niche activity. Part of the reason is
that cars are more complex and harder to work on. Another is that
increased affluence, decreased average family size and the perception
of a car as a necessity have made it more likely that parents will help
a kid get a car, rather than the kid being expected to do it all on
his/her own.

A Timex-Sinclair 1000 could be had for
around $50, an Atari or Commodore 8-bit computer could be had
for a
fraction of what ham rigs cost (since Heathkit and many other
kit
manufacturers vanished around this time period as well).


In 1977 I bought and built a Heath HW-2036 2 meter rig. Cost a bit over
$300. Still have it and it still works. Heath lasted a while longer
after 1977.


Anyone using Timex-Sinclairs for ham use?


I dunno, but the old 2036 still perks. Lots of older ham gear is still
perfectly usable today, where old computers are usually just
curiosities.

Let's see...spend weeks learning an arcane code from the 1800s and
then spend hundreds of bucks building a station, or skip the
testing and spend $200 or so on a computer.


More like $200 on a *modem*...

Those early computers required that you learn all sorts of arcane
'codes' to make them work. A typo could cause all kinds of havoc, too.

And the models changed relatively quickly so that what you learned on
one system was usually not very useful on a newer one. The time spent
to learn Morse Code is/was trivial compared to the time needed to get
familiar with a new system.

I built ham stations for a less than $100 in those days.


Here are some pictures of a receiver (part of the Southgate Type 4) I
built in the early 1970s for about $10.

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX1.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX2.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX3.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX4.jpg

http://www.qsl.net/k5bcq/Jim/SilverRX6.jpg

Almost all the parts came from old TVs, radios, and surplus military
gear. I had access to a machine shop so I cut and bent the chassis,
brackets and panels from some sheet aluminum scraps, and machined some
of the shaft extenders and adapters from brass rod.

The reason for the terminal strip and bunch of resistors on near the
rear edge of the rx was to permit the use of tubes with odd heater
voltages by changing jumpers.

Some may scoff at the parts and methods used, but the fact is that the
rx worked very well for its intended purpose. It was stable, selective,
easy and fun to use and I had many many QSOs with it and its matching
converter, transmitter and transmatch.

You might want
to see how little a $200 computer would actually do. And you needed a
TV set or monitor to use it.


Seems to me that the biggest thing they could be used for is learning
Basic programming. Okay.


I think you mean BASIC programming. And who uses BASIC today? Heck,
most people with computers don't write software, they simply use
applications written by others.

Thousands voted with their feet,
and the best of a generation or two or three said to hell with radio
and went into computers instead.


"The best of a generation" went into computers? Hardly.


I missed that one.


I guess someone who decided to become a doctor or nurse rather than go
into computers wasn't 'the best' of their generation, huh?

Now, 25 years later, hams lament the declining number of
licensees as
posted by N2EY every other week. It occurs to few that the guys who
might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the
code test
are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry and
probably wouldn't be interested in a ham ticket now if you
handed them one gratis.


The fact is that most people 25-30 years ago wouldn't have been
interested in a ham ticket back then either, with or without code test.

Apples and oranges.


Who is lamenting anyhow? I wish those new old Hams would have stuck
around, but beyond that, big deal.


What I take from the statistics is that an early generation of Hams got
their licenses without a whole lot of actual interest in radio. These
were the "honeydo" hams, who used 2 meter repeaters to get a shopping
list or the like on the way home from work. Their interests lay along
those lines.


Nothing wrong with that, either. But it is radio as a means to an end,
not an end in itself.

Well along came cell phones, and the honeydo'ers went to that. Cell
phones are a better technology for getting a shopping list than using a
repeater.


Some "honeydo" hams found themselves interested in radio beyond the
honeydo aspect. Others didn't.

Another subset of the dropoff is Hams who were somewhat interested in
radio, but became bored. They dropped off too.


Then there's the big ones: Antennas, the sunspot cycle, equipment
costs, and lifestyles.

My prediction of what will happen after Element 1 is history is that
there will be more new hams, and a higher attrition rate. People with
only a passing interest will become Hams. There is not likely to be a
net gain. I won't pass judgment on this being good or bad. It is just
different.


Let's look at history, shall we? Say from the end of WW2 to the present
time...

After WW2, there were about 60,000 US hams - a tiny fraction of what we
have today, even accounting for the lower population then.

In the postwar years the number of hams grew rapidly, in part because
some servicemen had learned radio theory and Morse Code in the
military, in part because of increased affluence, improved technology,
and pent-up demand. Lots of other reasons, too. By 1950 there were
almost 100,000 US hams.

Then in 1951 there came a restructuring that created new license
classes and renamed the old ones. Supposedly the restructuring would
have made it much harder to get a full-priviliges ham license, but in
late 1962 the FCC gave all ham operating priviliges to Generals and
above. The growth of US ham radio continued until about 1964 at a rate
that pushed license totals up to about a quarter million.

Some see that era as a golden age for the ARS, and in some ways it was.
But it must be recalled how big, heavy and expensive new ham equipment
was in those times, the constant problem of TVI, etc.

But about 1964 the growth just stopped. The number of US hams hovered
around a quarter million for several years in the 1960s, despite the
booming population and general affluence.

Then in 1968 and 1969 came "incentive licensing", which made it
*harder* to get a full-privileges license. Inflation made equipment
more expensive and times got tough with the stagflation of the 1970s.
Yet from about 1970 onward the number of US hams grew and grew,
reaching 350,000 by 1979, and 550,000 by the mid 1980s.
*Before* there were code waivers, and when all US ham licenses required
a code test!

The numbers continued to increase in the 1990s. But even though the
code and written testing requirements of the '90s were far less than
what was required in the 1970s and 1980s, the growth slowed down.

73 de Jim, N2EY

  #79   Report Post  
Old October 19th 05, 06:59 PM
KØHB
 
Posts: n/a
Default Docket Scorecard


wrote


I think you mean BASIC programming. And who uses BASIC today?


Good old MSBASIC has morphed into a slick RAD IDE called Visual Basic. It, and
others of that ilk like Borland Delphi (PASCAL in an object-oriented dress), are
very popular with computer hobbiests.


Heck, most people with computers don't write software, they simply use
applications written by others.


"Heck, most hams don't build radios, they simply use radios built by others."



but in late 1962 the FCC gave all ham operating priviliges to Generals and
above.


No they didn't. Some privs (satelite stations, as at least one example) were
reserved for Amateur Extras into the 70's.

But other than some isolated privs like that, General, Conditional, Advanced,
and Extra all had very similar "full" privileges going back to the early 50's.
Disincentive licensing changed that in the late 60's.

Beep beep
de Hans, K0HB




  #80   Report Post  
Old October 19th 05, 08:37 PM
Senior Member
 
First recorded activity by RadioBanter: Oct 2005
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Kasupski
It occurs to few that the guys who might have become hams 25-30 years ago if it weren't for the code test are now holding down good paying jobs in the computer industry.......
So their choice was "become a ham, or get a job"?

And there are no longer any "good paying jobs in the computer industry" --- they all moved to Bangalore and Delhi and are now "not-so-good paying jobs in the computer industry".

The Man in the Maze
QRV at Baboquivari Peak, AZ
__________________
The Man in the Maze
QRV at Baboquivari Peak
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Docket 05-235 Scorecard [email protected] Policy 83 September 7th 05 05:32 PM
Stonewalling on WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 13 September 6th 05 01:13 AM
Stonewalling WT Docket 05-235? [email protected] Policy 2 August 31st 05 09:10 PM
Status of WT Docket 05-235 [email protected] Policy 7 August 2nd 05 11:37 PM
WT Docket 04-140 Billy Preston Digital 0 July 22nd 04 09:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:09 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 RadioBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Radio"

 

Copyright © 2017