|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
Landlubbers
Eric P. Nichols (KL7AJ)
on
September 22, 2007
View comments about this article!
There are some surprising similarities between Amateur Radio and sailing. Both involve a good deal of adventure, freedom, unpredictability, and danger. Or, at least, they should.
The sailor is at the mercy of the elements. Sure, he has tide tables and weather reports, a sound vessel, and millennia of sea lore to guide him; but when all is said and done, it's just the wind and the sea. A good sailor knows how to make the best of whatever blows his way; a bad sailor gets an outboard motor, commonly known in sailing circles as a “stinkpot”.
Likewise, an amateur radio operator is at the mercy of sunspots, magnetic storms, QRM, static crashes, and Murphy. A good radio amateur learns how to work with the elements, using his ever-expanding knowledge of his equipment and well-honed operating skill. A bad radio amateur uses Echolink.
Alas, amateur radio seems to be proliferating with “stinkpots” of various mutant forms: Winlink, IRLP, Echolink…even repeaters. Each of these “enhancements” effectively serves to remove any semblance of danger, unpredictability, or challenge from the high seas of ham radio.
Let's face it; we have become a bunch of pantywaist landlubbers, lolling about on the shallow shores of the great ether. Isn't it about time we launch into the deep and set sail?
I was exposed to both sailing and radio at around the tender age of eight. My dad had fulfilled a long-time dream of buying a sailboat, a Danish Folkboat, specifically. We spent innumerable weekends sailing around the San Francisco Bay in that 24 foot racing sloop (still one of the most beautiful boats ever created by Man). Since the boat was wood, it required a good deal of maintenance, which was really no problem; Mom and us three kids were a good source of slave labor. I knew how to sand and varnish and splice ropes as well as the best of them by the time I was in fifth grade. It didn't seem like a lot of fun at the time, but it did wonders for me in the long run.
Although my dad wasn't a ham, he had quite a few friends that were, and I just seemed to grow up knowing about radio. My brother and I had a land line telegraph between our bedrooms, and Dad didn't seem to object too strongly to us staying up till the wee hours sending secret messages back and forth; at least we were learning a skill.
Now, maybe I was smacked in the head by a wayward boom a few too many times in my formative years, but my few remaining brain cells still suggest that one isn't going to learn a lot about radio unless one actually DOES some radio. Doing radio, furthermore, suggests transmitting a radio signal from an actual transmitter to an actual receiver.
Using a motorboat isn't inherently evil. Neither is standing on the shore, collecting pretty shells. It's just that neither activity qualifies as sailing. Sailing implies the use of sails.
In the same manner, there probably isn't a sinister plot behind Echolink, IRLP, or other overlooked or yet-to-be-conceived pseudo-wireless communications modes. It's just that they aren't radio. It would seem fairly obvious that Amateur Radio would involve the actual use of radio.
Or have I just been inhaling too much salt air?
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N0AH on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Sysops run Echolink...........you have to kiss butt most of the time to get time on one. I lost interest after one hour dealing with the Denver Radio Club's BOZO's.
Look, real hams use a keyer and their brain to make contacts. Be it new hams or oold, ham radio is not some stupid computer taking us into the 21st century. The world may be flat these days in many economic terms, but it will be forever round with a tribander on the roof and a wire for the low bands.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W7ETA on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Nope.
You been smoking too much reindeer moss which causes one to worry about what other people do instead of what you are doing.
Its a form of paraNOIA!
Except, now after getting this rant posted, people will really be talking and wondering about you.
Best Wishes
Bob
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by OE5AKM on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Not my philosophy!
73, Alfred, OE5AKM
Telecom (not only Radio) Amateur
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W2RDD on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interesting analogy. Has some merit. Agree on many points. "Wireless" marine operators were, mostly, on motorized vessels, though.
Happy sailing.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just look at the Spotlight pics at top right of eHam homepage - not a tool in sight - except the 'operator' - that speaks for itself.
My shack is a constant delightful eyesore - it's better to travel hopefully than to arrive - possibly analogous to sailing?
Buffalo Gil AKA Dr Gil W2/G3LBS NY
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC8ZEV on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let me get this straight, a mic and a boat motor are bad and a key and the wind are good. Sounds like there is a code v.s. no code debate in here somewhere wrapped around Al Gore's treehuggers. Where does the "boatanchor" term fit in here?? Seems like the tube crowd got left out in the elements. Besides which, there is no good "earth ground" when you are out to sea. I guess running "aground" isn't so bad after all!!
73
KC8ZEV
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A sailing instructor once told me in front of the whole class that I was the only person he ever knew who capsized before getting in the boat.
So far I have not been electrocuted before calling CQ.
Gil
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Eric,
I like the analogy between amateur radio and sailing, and the way you dveloped it in your article. I recall Marty, AE6IP, making such an analogy in one of these forums several years ago.
Some of the first questions to be asked concerning any new technology are: "Why do we need it? What are its benefits? What are its hazards or drawbacks? Who benefits and who suffers losses as a result of its deployment? Basic questions, to be sure, but frequently ignored in our society.
Almost exactly a year ago, eHam published my article on DX spotting: http://www.eham.net/articles/14879
I'm surprised you didn't mention the DX clusters in your article, but perhaps you are as unfamiliar with them as I am with echolink and the other applications you cited as examples.
The DX clusters are definitely used as a crutch. It was even suggested in one of these forums that CW DX'ers need not copy the callsign of a DX station, as they could get it from the cluster! That is a bad operator, to be sure-- certainly not one of what we Dx'ers call "The Deserving."
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NA4IT on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Motorboat vs sailboat, CW and HF vs Echolink and repeaters...
Just remember, had we not evolved and electricity been discovered...
THERE WOULD NO HAM RADIO!
de NA4IT
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K1CJS on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Let me get this straight, a mic and a boat motor are bad and a key and the wind are good."
Not at all what was said. Stop trying to turn this into another debate--please?
What was said is radio connection to INTERNET by some hams is like the motor is to sailing, a crutch to keep the not-so-good sailor going. And I fully agree--internet and computer tie-ins are skewing this hobby. As far as repeaters, well, at least they're still radio. Repeater tie-ins to the internet to expand their range? Skewing the hobby again.
I agree with the writer, leave the internet out of the hobby. Good operators really don't need it.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K9OSC on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
You've told it like it is. Great article and one for thought by all amateurs.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC8ZEV on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Some of you guys are taking all of this far too seriously. K1CJS, your conjecture on my motivation to change this thread into another debate is incorrect. An injection of jest and brevity is much needed here.
Fortunately for you, I am not that funny. Some may question the brevity, however.
"A bad radio amateur uses Echolink." That is a pretty broad stroke of the judgemental brush, in my opinion.
Do I consider Echolink "real radio"? No. I gotta burn my own RF from my antenna for it to be "real radio", in my opinion.
But using Echolink does not make for a "bad radio amateur".
A prime example is it's use with fledgling Hams in a middle school or junior high. It makes for easy hookup within a large building where long and difficult coax runs (not to mention loss)would be required. It can cover some distance, and some thick accents are easily heard for the young, newbie hams. I am glad Echolink has it's fans, it makes for some fun QSOs in a time limited science club/radio club time slot after school. Think of it as a "radio operation trainer mode" if you will. It is a fantastic modality for basic radio procedural operations. Plate and grid control comes much further down the line. Labeling its use in a negative fashion is honestly not giving it a fair shake. There is always mention of bringing new blood to the hobby, Echolink is a great way to do that. It's a great first step on the journey to cooking your own RF from an antenna.
So much for brevity.
73
KC8ZEV
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K0BG on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The old cliche about sinking or swimming comes to mind. Nowadays, fortunately or unfortunately depending on your point of view, there's eham.net to bail out those who get in over their heads. While Elmers have always been helpful, in the old days they encouraged the novices to study the requisite material. Alas, there are still novices, but the class distinction is gone!
Alan, KØBG
www.k0bg.com
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KX8N on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"What was said is radio connection to INTERNET by some hams is like the motor is to sailing, a crutch to keep the not-so-good sailor going."
If you want to put it that way, repeaters are cheating. A repeater is a crutch to let you be heard further away than you deserve to be heard with the signal you are putting out.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K1CJS on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"If you want to put it that way, repeaters are cheating. A repeater is a crutch to let you be heard further away than you deserve to be heard with the signal you are putting out."
Agreed--fully. At least radio to repeater to radio is keeping it all radio. Radio to repeater to INTERNET to repeater to radio is not--and there is the point this article is seen to bring up. 73!
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB2DHG on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You hit a very soar point of my feelings... I agree with you 100%...
RADIO the art of creating an electromagnetic wave to converse via wireless...
As generations get older and die off, will the art die with them?
I becme a HAM because I was amazed with the wonders of wireless communication and the magic and mysteque of it all! To me there is nothing that can compare to being able to radiate a signal from my home to anywhere around the world! THAT IS RADIO!
The art the skill the reward! CW a skill and craft and expermentation of all kinds of gadgets from home brew rigs to antennas!
AMATEUR RADIO KEYWORD RADIO!
Good article...
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N5PVL on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree with the article's premise, so I guess its no surprise that I enjoyed reading it.
The comments have been interesting too.
73,
Charles Brabham, N5PVL
USPacket.Org
|
|   |
|
Great article!
|
|
|
by W8KQE on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is an excellent subject/article! In short, you can't stop progress and technology, and each to his/her own, but my opinion is that there is nothing that exemplifies or typifies Ham Radio (and is more fun) than HF 'skywave' DX between 2 separate standalone Ham Radio transmitters/receivers/antennas using CW, AM, or SSB. Personally, I don't care much for digital data or voice modes. Or 'DX spots', but that's another subject!
Bottom line- whatever aspect of the hobby/service you're into, ENJOY! Life is short!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KR4WM on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>There is always mention of bringing new blood to the
>hobby, Echolink is a great way to do that. It's a >great first step on the journey to cooking your own RF
>from an antenna.
OK, so let's make Echolink use like the old early Novice class license. Hams may use it for the first year after they get their license. Afterwards, they either switch to RF or lose their licenses! <GRIN>
TRUTH IN REPORTING: Amateur radio operator Mr. So-and-so used his connection to the internet to save the life of a Smallville woman today who was drowning in a culvert. "I'm just lucky that my internet service was still up and operating", stated Mr. so-and-so. "I was happy to perform the service, and I'm glad Mrs. Such-and-such is alive. I could just as easily have picked up a telephone and done the same thing, but I chose to use the internet as an experiment and it worked", said Mr. So-and-so. "I don't have access to a working amateur radio, and the internet is a workable substitute as long as it's functioning. In fact, I don't even need to own a radio anymore as long as the internet is working", Mr. So-and-so stated. When asked why he bothered to obtain an amateur radio license, Mr. So-and-so merely shrugged his shoulders, saying "you know, you have a point! I don't know why I even bothered to learn all that technical mumbo-jumbo. I can stay in a chat room on the internet all day and talk to everyone I want to reach without all the bother of static and band fading. The only thing is, if I didn't have a license, I couldn't register with Echolink and it wouldn't be ham operators I was talking to."
LIE IN REPORTING: Amateur radio operator Mr. So-and-so used Echolink, a form of amateur radio, to save the life of a Smallville woman today who was drowning in a culvert. "I'm glad I was able to use amateur radio to save her life", Mr. So-and-so stated.
See? It's not difficult to tell the truth and still give a rescuer a proper pat on the back, and also get a plug in about amateur radio.
73, -KR4WM
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W6TH on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
.
Alas, amateur radio seems to be proliferating with “stinkpots” of various mutant forms: Winlink, IRLP, Echolink…even repeaters.
Could add eHAM to that list as more inactive, dead bands today.
.:
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AA4PB on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You might be a real ham if:
1) You build all of your own equipment or use modified military surplus.
2) You operate only CW using either a straight key or a mechanical bug.
3) You don't have any heater in your shack - the warmth from the tubes is plenty of heat.
4) In the winter you send your wife out to the cold shack to turn on the filiments so the shack will be warm and the equipment stabilized before you get there.
5) You walked at least 10 miles to the FCC office to take your license exam, including Morse sending and receiving tests.
6) You can draw the schematic of an ARC-5 from memory.
7) You are sure that transistors will never amount to anything useful.
8) You used a hacksaw to cut an ARC-5 in two and use half of it for your VFO.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KI6EAA on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Or have I just been inhaling too much salt air?"
I would question the use of the Internet to send this message. CW on 40 meters would be much more appropriate. Reminds me of the group who is living in trees in Berkeley, trying to save them from being cut down. They handed out flyers stating their case about not killing trees. Of course, the flyers were printed on PAPER. Apparently, the irony was not noticed by the local press. I wonder if the eHam group will notice the similar irony of this article.
Of course, I do not take it seriously. I enjoy sailing and enjoyed your article, thanks for taking the time to share it. Fair winds and good propagation to all.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WL7CMG on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You must be only sailing in your mind these days now eh Eric? As not a whole lot of it going on in North Pole is there? Or maybe you are dragging that sloop up over the haul road to Prudoe Bay and sailing north??? Getting a bit nippy about now isn't it? Just kidding....hi-hi, but after first seeing your call and then your topic about sailing I had to first look you up on QRZ to see if you actually were in AK. (or one of those wannabes that still wish they were here and just can't bring thmselves to change their call) I too am from CA. Born in Santa Cruz in 56. Sailed in Tahoe in the 70s-80s......it's a beautiful thing no doubt.
Altho I don't begrudge anyone who wants to play with any "form" of "radio?" be it internet or key, the PC and screen has no "radio" appeal whatsoever to me either. Talking "about" radio, like here, is about as far as it goes.....(just love to see the needles swing I guess). But....to each his own I say.
73 & All the best up North, from an old salty dog down south.....
Dave / WL7CMG
|
|   |
|
Where's Our Sails, Sir?
|
|
|
by W4XKE on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
“Sailing implies the use of sails.”
You should explain that to the United States Navy when the carrier CVN-76: Ronald Reagan leaves shore the crew asks, “What time do we SAIL, sir?” (The CVN-76 doesn’t even have a SPINNAKER!)
I believe your point is that the modern warships should go back to using sails because that is the purest form of war vessel. It was also said of rifles, that the firearms rendered war an ungentlemanly engagement. Hand to hand combat was more a gentleman’s battle.
If you want to go to sea on a wooden boat, carrying a sextant, fine business. Just because that is your personal preference, it still doesn’t persuade everyone else to toss their GPS over the rail and disconnect their radar Klystron.
While you wait out the sunspot cycle in your plywood pram, the rest of us will be talking to each other and enjoying our contacts.
Johnny (node 4007)
|
|   |
|
RE: Where's Our Sails, Sir?
|
|
|
by N6AJR on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One of the best things about ham radio is the diversity of options.
You can do irlp or echoling,
you cand do moon bounce,
you can play with 1.2 gig, or 160 meters,
you can do side band, fm, am, fsk, psk, tv, cw, packet, pactor, and many other modes.
you can use 1500 watts or 15 miliwatts, qro or qrp.
you can make your own antennas or buy the very best and newest ideas like the steppir, and of course the good old fan dipole.
I don't kow what the original autor has against echolink etc., but it is just one mor way to play radio.
So go do what you want, and don't worry about every one else.
|
|   |
|
RE: Where's Our Sails, Sir?
|
|
|
by N6AJR on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One of the best things about ham radio is the diversity of options.
You can do irlp or echoling,
you cand do moon bounce,
you can play with 1.2 gig, or 160 meters,
you can do side band, fm, am, fsk, psk, tv, cw, packet, pactor, and many other modes.
you can use 1500 watts or 15 miliwatts, qro or qrp.
you can make your own antennas or buy the very best and newest ideas like the steppir, and of course the good old fan dipole.
I don't kow what the original autor has against echolink etc., but it is just one mor way to play radio.
So go do what you want, and don't worry about every one else.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WR8D on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I read up to the comment on a bad amateur operator uses "echolink" and that pretty much told me this guy really didn't have a clue. Yes om you've breathed way to much salt air.
Now understand i don't have echolink on my computer although i tried it when it first came out.
I had just about the best two meter qso "ever" via two repeaters linked by echolink. Mine is here in southern Wv and the one linked into it was in "ENGLAND" . . . yeah you guys read that correct. I was running two meter mobile around the crooked mountain roads here in Wv, and the amateur in England was just out for an evening drive in the English country side. When i first heard this English amateur i thought he was vacationing here somewhere locally due to his perfect signal into the repeater. I just about cleaned out a ditch line with i found out he was dx across the pond.
The point here i'm making is there's all kinds of differant aspects to amateur radio and we each as individuals make what we can of it. I just could'nt bring myself to read the rest of the above thread without making this comment of my own in relation to echolink and the authors comments about being a bad amateur if one uses echolink.
I could say if you can't work in high voltage and repair your own amplifiers, "which i can do", without killing yourself... then you're just a bad amateur but that would be senseless as is that first comment by this guy that turned me off to the rest of his comments.
"Sitting in my chevy truck talking on an icom V-8000 through my two meter repeater....linked by echolink into a two meter repeater in England"...
This isn't amateur radio???????? Hi Hi, i've heard this comment just way to much. It's just another aspect of amateur radio and i must say the finest linking tool i've ever seen.
Now off my soap box and the wife and i are off on our beautiful goldwing to some fancy hillbilly eat'n establishment.
73 John WR8D
|
|   |
|
RE: Where's Our Sails, Sir?
|
|
|
by KC8VWM on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm with Tom's thoughts.
To coin a phrase from Microsoft,
"Amateur Radio, where do you want to operate today?"
73 de Charles - KC8VWM
|
|   |
|
RE: Where's Our Sails, Sir?
|
|
|
by KF4HR on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm not exactly sure how to respond to your posting, but I'll take a stab at it...
It seems to me if someone ventured absolutely positively FULL BORE into our great ham hobby - I mean no holes barred; big towers (lot's of them), big amps, multiple $10K rigs, award winning Contest station, taking advantage of every mode & every band, the whole nine yards... heck EME too, wouldn't that equate more to someone racing across the water in an off-shore power boat doing 100+mph with their hair on fire..., than it would someone in a sale bote doing 6.7 knots? :^)
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N4DSP on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Honest and accurate post. Thank You.
Best of all the "stinkpots" are those primadonas up at Newington who call themselves the National Association of Amateur Radio. Not only did they abolish the code for all license testing to generate more membership money but now they are going to proceed with the bandwidth proposal to the FCC to operate such digital systems as Winlink2000 and work with developers of digital systems to cause further broadband pollution to the shrinking ham bands. Notice on page 45 of the October
2007 QST titled "Summary of Major Board Actions" and scroll down to minute 34 which reads,,,,
"Board thanks Winlink Team and Pledges Support for Digital Networks that serve ARES.
League affirms its desire to work with developers of digital systems including Winlink 2000 system to improve effciency address control issues and enhance compatibility with other users of the amateur bands."
The above statement suggest we operators are the minority when they say enhance compatibility with other users. Should be the other way around and the ARRL certainly has this backward. They should be working for us, their paid members, to prevent this pollution from developing. And most of all the ARRL disguises it by saying it is being developed for the ARES Program. The ARRL still thinks we are morons out here.
So get ready for another proposal to the FCC. Money talks up at Newington. Sure wish Sumner would retire to Iran.
john-n4dsp
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB1NRB on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, i guess ill fire up my stinkpot and get my email even though the powers out and every cell tower in range has suffered severe damage... Even better, ill travel to an effected area and help victims of a disaster contact there familys in moments instead of days....
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W8ZNX on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
your postings, here and on qrz
do nothing, but cause discord
i do not have a motor on my sailboat
have homebrewed about a dozen tube and solid state
transmitters, built lots of kits,
have fixed old non working
widow maker rigs like a Globe King 400
passed the old 20 wpm extra test,
cut my teeth as a old style novice op over 40 yrs ago
do these things make me a better sailer or ham
than others that have out board motors
or only run phone using store bought gear
........... sometimes yes, often no .............
you need to spend more time on the air
and less time on the internet
trying to label people
mac
|
|   |
|
No brains, no amateur service.
|
|
|
by AI2IA on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is yet one more garbage article intended to incite the chronic complainers and good old days old men to post their grumbilings.
AMATEUR RADIO IS ADAPTIVE.
AMATEUR RADIO IS WHAT YOU, YOURSELF, MAKE IT FOR YOURSELF.
2007 HAS NOT BEEN A YEAR OF HIGH QUALITY ARTICLES ON EHAM.NET.
BE GREATER THAN YOU SEEM!
|
|   |
|
RE: No brains, no amateur service.
|
|
|
by ICR71A on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K1CJS Wrote: "Not at all what was said. Stop trying to turn this into another debate--please?"
Given the tone of the "letter to the editor" that started this thread, and the predictable behavior of the eHam crew, what else could happen?
The trolls have already come out from under the bridge in full force...
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I think this is one of the dumbest, most intentionally inflammatory and divisive articles ever to show up here. And it comes right after one of the best (the one on ham radio blogs).
Possibly the most valuable aspect of ham radio is the diversity it offers, much of which is the result of new technologies and new applications of old technologies. To restrict the hobby (and that's ALL it is, folks) to anyone's limited perception of what it ought to be is just another nail in it's coffin. I could just as easily make the claim that ham radio started with home built CW only equipment (or worse, spark gap) and that anyone using commercial gear on phone is undermining the sacred roots of the hobby.
There are many transmission modes and operating practices in ham radio that don't appeal to me in the least, but shame on KL7AJ for trying to diminish the hobby for those who find them to be fun or useful. No wonder we can't interest young folks in this dinosaur.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E: "And it comes right after one of the best (the one on ham radio blogs)."
Careless me ... I meant ham radio podcasts.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KR4WM on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>anyone using commercial gear on phone is
>undermining the sacred roots of the hobby.
To a point, I agree with you. And on a daily basis, I probably do use commercially manufactured radios. But, I built my Elecraft K2 from a kit after about 15 years in the hobby. I think every ham (who is physically capable) should enjoy the pleasure of building their own radio from a kit. It's barely possible these days to find the components to roll your own, but it's simple to open a box, find everything there, and follow easy instructions. If you get stuck, Elecraft has a great group of advisors available. Of course, you wouldn't expect a beginner to tackle this great kit, but after you've been in the hobby a few years... c'mon, there's no excuse why 85% of hams can't do it! Sideline the excuses and jump on in, the water's fine! If not the Elecraft K2, certainly a ham should tackle building a simple QRP rig such as a Ten Tec T-kit! I realize building a radio is not for everyone, but most of us became hams because we are technically oriented. Building our own gear is something we should all learn to do eventually.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC2FTN on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Please feel free to stop by my Echolink node and say hello to us up here in Northern New York. And don't worry...I'll be talking to you on a radio!
Mike KC2FTN
Node 130382
www.hamwave.com
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AD5TD on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by G3LBS on September 22, 2007
"Just look at the Spotlight pics at top right of eHam homepage - not a tool in sight - except the 'operator' - that speaks for itself."
LMAO!!!!
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC9KQL on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here's how I (as a total Newbie) see it:
I grew up with early PC's, putting together digital kits, and writing assembly code in college. My day job involves high-end networking, computing, and storage.
So when I looked at Ham Radio as a hobby, the high-performance electronics aspect of it appealed to me. I find no joy in tubes! So, while building a one-tube regenerative radio is within my skillset (If I can find my soldering iron), building an IRLP node was a more enjoyable weekend project.
This hobby has enough facets to interest many people - there really isn't a need to trash one side of the hobby because it's the only one you like (or understand). If it weren't for the local repeater system and affordable 2-meter HT's I wouldn't have given amateur radio a second through.
IRLP, Echo, and all the other technologies are just evolution - just like a VFO replacing a pile of crystals and transistors replacing tubes.
I suppose CW by Smoke Signal is always an option..
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W9THD on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I've often wondered "how many of the hams that feel IRLP and Echolink aren't worthy of amateur radio status used to use phone patches, either on their own equipment or through a repeater?"
I enjoy a good DX qso on the hf bands as much as anyone, but I don't feel I've soiled myself by using an HT on a beach in Florida to call back to Indiana and talk to my father or brother through Echolink. I'm using RF....they're using RF....so what ?
73 to all
W9THD
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AD5TD on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let me add, that I don't use Echolink, IRLP, Winlink, Pactor, Packet, etc. IMHO they are not radio. I have tried a little PSK, it was fun for a while, may do it again. At least it's two operators using RF DIRECTLY.
I agree, computers and the internet have ruined this service. Well, not ruined, but skewed it off in odd directions. I don't put down anyone that wants to operate with any of them, they are just not for me.
I swear that Thailand reflector is driving me bonkers. I had to stop listening to that repeater completely.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W6TH on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
.
"Mind is like a transparent crystal which takes on the color of whatever cloth it rests on: yellow on a yellow cloth, blue on a blue cloth, and so forth. Likewise, your attitude colors the mind, and this determines the true character of your actions, no matter how they may appear."
.:
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2ZXE on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I personally do not consider Echolink Amateur Radio.
It's the "Radio" part that it is missing. Yes, it is convenient, Yes, it allows you to contact people through a radio or repeater... or not. No, I do not have anything against using it, I have it installed and I use it on occasion. But reality is that it is not different than using Skype or any SIP based voice system (Gizmo Project, Yahoo or MSN).
This is what makes me wonder... How come digital radio is in its infancy in amateur radio at this day and age? I also wonder how come is my cellphone has more advanced features and looks more appealing than a "state of the art" D-Star Radio. It's not for lack of free software to do it... a state of the art, radio with features and services could be developed using something like OpenMoko or QTopia as operating environment, both available with open source.
These are the things that I put question in our hobby. I wonder if anybody else feels the same way.
My 2 cents...
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KL7AJ wrote: "There are some surprising similarities between Amateur Radio and sailing.
Both involve a good deal of adventure, freedom, unpredictability, and danger. Or, at least,
they should."
Danger? From WHAT? Loss of "face" as in the oriental manner? Danger "should" be?
Last I heard, amateur radio was a HOBBY involving radio, not some kind of
danger-man adventuring-in-the-wilds world-exploration kind of endeavor.
KL7AJ: "Likewise, an amateur radio operator is at the mercy of sunspots, magnetic
storms, QRM, static crashes, and Murphy. A good radio amateur learns how to work
with the elements, using his ever-expanding knowledge of his equipment and well-
honed operating skill. A bad radio amateur uses Echolink."
I would presume you are ranting heavily against Echolink. :-(
I could care less, not having used Echolink. Ech...
KL7AJ: "Alas, amateur radio seems to be proliferating with “stinkpots” of various mutant
forms: Winlink, IRLP, Echolink…even repeaters. Each of these “enhancements” effectively
serves to remove any semblance of danger, unpredictability, or challenge from the high
seas of ham radio."
Wow! Now you rant against repeaters! Oh, heavens, what has this hobby come to?
KL7AJ: "Let's face it; we have become a bunch of pantywaist landlubbers, lolling about
on the shallow shores of the great ether. Isn't it about time we launch into the deep and
set sail?
Oh, my, you want DANGER and ADVENTURE! Tell you what, apply for a job at JPL
and insist you want to work on the DSN out at Goldstone. You can "launch yourself"
into the "great ether" of deep outer space!
KL7AJ: "I was exposed to both sailing and radio at around the tender age of eight. ....
I knew how to sand and varnish and splice ropes as well as the best of them by the
time I was in fifth grade. It didn't seem like a lot of fun at the time, but it did wonders
for me in the long run."
Don't tell us...you eventually joined the Navy! Coast Guard?
Well, by just after 1900 the maritime world was really, really taken by RADIO, a means
to communicate beyond the visible horizon, something that NO mariner had in instant
form ever before. The Legends of the "sparkies" were born and can't quite understand
that they died long ago. I can understand the connection affection of radio and the
maritimers of a century past. But, but, that was in the PAST and isn't there today.
EVERYONE else has been taken by radio...for broadcasting, for TV, for cell phones,
for handhelds, all sorts of communications gadgets that (gasp) ordinary civilians can
use and enjoy. I'm not interested in promoting the past, of bringing back SAILING
vessels (with actual sails) or trading our Chevy Malibu MAXX for a horse-and-buggy.
KL7AJ: "Doing radio, furthermore, suggests transmitting a radio signal from an actual
transmitter to an actual receiver."
Really? :-) Sunnuvagun, I was doing that beginning 54 years ago, communicating
(by actual transmitter) from a LAND site to several (actual) receivers on LAND sites
across the Pacific and Sea of Japan, etc. Last time I used (an actual) transceiver
"on the sea" was from a friend's sailboat in a harbor, three years ago. By your
description I seem to have "wasted" 51 years of radio operating or something...
KL7AJ: "Using a motorboat isn't inherently evil. Neither is standing on the shore,
collecting pretty shells. It's just that neither activity qualifies as sailing. Sailing
implies the use of sails."
Wow. Another absolute definition. Okay, if using a motor/engine "isn't" "sailing"
then just what would you call all those cruise liners or the container ships
carrying all those goods into our ports? Give us a name, title, whatever.
KL7AJ: "In the same manner, there probably isn't a sinister plot behind Echolink,
IRLP, or other overlooked or yet-to-be-conceived pseudo-wireless communications
modes. It's just that they aren't radio. It would seem fairly obvious that Amateur Radio
would involve the actual use of radio."
Sending a QSL card by USPS doesn't sound like "radio" use to me. Guess we
all should cancel sending QSL cards, right? Better toss all those little cell phones
too...even if they ARE little two-way radios, they use (gasp) those dreaded cell
site REPEATERS (which communicate by more radio) and are connected to the
commercial telephone infrastructure! Better give up the wired telephones, too.
Those are mediums of communication but they involve crass commercial
communications interests! Not at ALL like AMATEUR radio.
KL7AJ: "Or have I just been inhaling too much salt air?"
I haven't the foggiest idea but whatever you are inhaling doesn't sound too good.
You are busy mixing up your rantings. Maybe a tranquilizer will help you out?
Or working some locals in this period of low sunspot activity?
Excuse me, but I'm going to use an (actual) transceiver to communicate with
another also using an (actual) transceiver. It's local but it IS radio to radio.
It won't guarantee world peace or find a cure for cancer or rescue any woman
drowning in a culvert, but it is a HOBBY activity. Don't get all uptight if everyone
doesn't follow YOUR preferences for life...
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NL7W on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Of course, Eric is right!
Real amateur radio contacts are point-to-point contacts involving RF -- throughout the communications path. "Real ham" contacts never included voices being packetized, forwarded via the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) to some distant location, with the process being reversed at the far end. That's just cheating...
Heck, why bother with a RF at all. Just boot up the computer and your "fav" VoIP software, and talk. You can do the same with SKYPE and its variants.
Good grief! Technology has taken the mystic and RF experience away from so many.
73 de Steve, NL7W
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 22, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NL7W: "Real amateur radio contacts are point-to-point contacts involving RF -- throughout the communications path."
Why is that? Because you say so? You just made that up because it feels nice and conventional to you, not because it has any basis in ANYTHING. I don't believe I've ever seen a formal definition of ham radio that requires the complete path to be RF. The FCC requires a license for the operator of any portion of a communication link that travels via wireless, but that doesn't imply that the entire link needs to be wireless. In fact, the FCC has repeatedly ruled that it doesn't.
There are all sorts of pretty traditional ham radio links that are neither point-to-point nor continuous RF. We have repeaters to extend VHF and UHF line-of-sight communications, we have VHF and UHF packet systems that store-and-forward, we have satellite transponders that process the signals mid-stream, and we have remote stations that are controlled via all sorts of non-RF links. I'm sure I've missed several others, and don't even get me started in computers versus receiver DSP.
Every time someone spouts off on what a "real amateur radio operator" should be I want to puke. Aside from generally accepted behavioral norms (operating practices, courtesy, etc), there isn't any such thing as a "real ham". I personally spend almost all my time on the air on CW either chasing DX or contesting, and I have rather little sustainable interest in most other operating facets of the hobby. But every single licensed holder that operates within the law has the right to call himself or herself a real ham, and I'd bet that the majority of those you so smugly look down upon would be a heck of a lot more interesting to talk to than you and the other xenophobes here.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KL7AJ said: "In the same manner, there probably isn't a sinister plot behind Echolink, IRLP, or other overlooked or yet-to-be-conceived pseudo-wireless communications modes. It's just that they aren't radio. It would seem fairly obvious that Amateur Radio would involve the actual use of radio.
To that I have to ask ... what difference does it make? Let's say for the sake of this stupid contention that using Echolink or other "pseudo-wireless" modes should not be called ... "AMATEUR RADIO" (ta da! fanfare trumpets in the background). What do you want to do about it? Do you want to outlaw such modes? Do you want to separately license them? Do you want to restrict them to smaller band segments than they already are? Do you merely want to call that aspect of the hobby something else? Should we make the people who use those modes wear arm bands?
Or do you just want to have some identifiable group of adherents that you can sneer at, thereby propping up your own self esteem?
I've read your little diatribe a half dozen times and I can't figure out a point to it. Please enlighten me ... where do you want to take us with it?
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2QGV on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
An outboard motor on a sailboat is a "Kicker".
A "Stinkpot" is a motor boat.
When conditions are down some opt for a big "Amplifier" for use with the minimal power requirement.
Echolink, well I guess some would still perfer to light their homes with candles or have their mail delivered by horseback.
I guess there are plenty of people who can't live without a glass of "wine" about ........
I enjoy many aspects of the hobby, if there are some I don't, I just don't fool with it. Life is too short.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WD9ICU on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Well....I seen Bigfoot paddling down the creek the other day in his homemade canoe.He was calling CQ Dog Xray on his FRS (family radio service ) radio. His exploits were short lived though,he hit a big rock,broke his canoe and disappeared below the rapids. I have to give the poor critter credit though,he was doing the best he could with what he had
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To AB7E:
The points that our friends from KL7 were making really are pretty simple. It's too bad that you get sick over it. I'm not a doctor; however maybe I can help explain things for you.
There is a century of tradition behind the valid claim that amateur radio communications use strictly an RF link. Anything else is some sort of hybrid communications.
Perhaps another analogy to amateur radio besides sailing would help. How about the hobby/sport of cycling? I used to compete in local road races, and once qualified for the national USCF road race. The technology of the bicycle has evolved quite a bit in the last 25 years-- aluminum frames and titanium components have made today's bicycles much lighter than the double-butted steel technology that I used. Its still called cycling, though, and nobody argues about that. That's similar to amateur radio DX'ers using DSP technolgy to help receive weak signals.
However-- when a DX'er starts using the internet clusters to pick out the callsign of the DX he/she just "worked," it's time to cry "foul." That's analagous to a bicycle racer hitching a ride in a pickup truck to avoid the difficult 200 meter sprint at the end of the race.
The burden of proof for claims that such hybrid forms of communication involving ham radio operators should still be called amateur radio fall on those making such claims-- not the other way around.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by VE3XDB on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Recently, several items have appeared in the eHam.net "Articles" section, telling the reader how he/she should act or what he/she should believe. These wide ranging judgments span the spectrum from putting up a tower, how to "manage" your wife, to domestic relations, to this obviously inflammatory statement telling me that amateur radio should involve DANGER!!!!!!!
"There are some surprising similarities between Amateur Radio and sailing. Both involve a good deal of adventure, freedom, unpredictability, and danger. Or, at least, they should."
These recent nonsensical incitements exhibit a similar two-step pattern. First, the reader is being told what to be/do/say/believe, as in the statement above, and then a judgment is made on the basis of the readers expected response.
Here's a quote from another recent post:
"I read between the lines when possible. A lot of these statements can really be taken to mean, “I'm too lazy!” or perhaps, “I've never had a real antenna, so I have no idea what I'm missing.” Or in some cases, perhaps, “My XYL wears the pants in the family, and I just stay in line.”
What a load of manure. When I saw the title, I thought it might be an article about operating marine mobile. I thought the other article might be about techniques for reducing the visibility of towers. Instead, I read these kind of comments. Frankly, the opinions of the writers on domestic affairs, danger, and other non-technical areas are at best, worthless, and at worst, dangerous.
Perhaps it is time that eHam.net separates articles into two categories: "technical articles" and "opinions". Then, discerning hams can focus on the former, and ignore the latter.
I'm not a fan of radio talk shows, and the eHam.net articles section is degenerating to that level of discourse. I hope eHam.net recognizes this soon, and implements an editorial policy and an updated design that can seperate the wheat from the chaff.
In the interim, I will be "steering clear" of the articles section, and spending my time on eHam in the "forums", where more useful information about amateur radio can be obtained, and real learning can occur from people who have some knowledge, with much less opinion. Perhaps another idea is to "swap" the location of the forums and articles on the homepage, with the forums being prominent, and the articles in a sidebar that is less prominent, requiring the reader to take deliberate steps to find the articles. Then the editorialists can go at it, invisibly and quietly!
Wouldn't it be great if eHam.net could become a collaborative version of some of the very sound technical sites on the topic of amateur radio?
Best regards,
Doug VE3XDB
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA2DTW on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
A terse, and well-written article. Makes some very good points. Thanks, Eric.
73
Steve WA2DTW
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AK2B on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
From AB7E:
“I've read your little diatribe a half dozen times and I can't figure out a point to it.”
”Every time someone spouts off on what a "real amateur radio operator" should be I want to puke.”
“Should we make the people who use those modes wear arm bands?”
I was going to respond to this article but the astute comments above sum up my thoughts completely.
Tom, AK2B
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K3UD on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I enjoyed the article for its simplicity and how analogous it can be to some types of ham radio operations.
There was a time when I had a Ten Tec PM-3 CW transceiver. I could set it up almost anywhere (usually a park) with a battery, some wire for an antenna and counterpoise, a key, headphones, and a simple home brew L network tuner. No reliance on commercial mains or external amplifiers. Total reliance on natural propagation, ability to be able to use CW as the mode of communication as that was all it offered and the know how to pick your spots on the 40 or 20 meter band.
Like sailing, it could be very frustrating, when the wind dies or when propagation paths shut down. On the other hand when you catch the wind or experience good propagation and make contacts, the frustration goes away and you have an experience to remember.
73
George
K3UD
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W8ATA on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This has been interesting to watch, and now I just have to jump in. One thing I have learned in my 70 plus years is that things change and I change with them. That doesn't mean that I have to compromise my sense of values in the process. I am one of the old farts who learned to use wire cutters and a torch heated soldering iron long before I learned to use a computer mouse. But now I have every imaginable tool, a controlable soldering station, and yes, a cordless mouse. And I have sailed, and yes paddled the small boat back to the slip when the wind quit. So I've been there and done that and still do that. I am traditional but thankfully not set in my ways. I don't want life to pass me by, especially if there isn't much of it left. What's my point?
I have a nice shack with equipment that covers 80M through 2M and antennas that don't send back much RF. And I have a computer on which is a VOIP program called QSOnet. Each day with a nice looking rig pictured on my modern flat panel monitor and controlled by my mouse I rag chew with some other 70 and 80 year old hams around North America. Then we close our net on the web and try the same thing on 20 meters. One of our guys is an old true sailor who does the same thing with a bunch of old salt hams on the west coast, but then they too try it the old fashioned way with RF. Some of us won't make it for great sun spots again. But we will keep on trying with what we have and we will be grateful for the modern ways of communicating some of which have come out of hams just experimenting. And I have a feeling that simple RF antenna to antenna communicating will be around for quite a while....if we want it to remain. And I am one who wants it to stay.
Fifty years ago I had a big old rig that took up most of the front seat of my old Chevy. A girl friend had the gaul to tell me it was either ham radio or her. I lost track of her, but I'm still a ham who may not climb his tower any more, but I'm not a Landlubber.
Peace and 73,
Russ
W8ATA
|
|   |
|
You Might Not Be A "Real" Ham If
|
|
|
by N6NKN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You can't copy CW above 20 WPM.
You use repeaters, Echolink, Winlink or IRLP.
You were licensed after 1940.
You use DX clusters.
Have a vanity call.
Do not have a tower.
Do not handle traffic.
You do not have 250 countries confirmed.
You use a tube tranceiver.
You use a transistorized transceiver.
You use a SDR tranceiver.
Anyone care to add a few more?
Rick N6NKN
|
|   |
|
RE: You Might Not Be A "Real" Ham If
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
N6NKN if you post to a wrong topic in a forum
|
|   |
|
RE: You Might Not Be A "Real" Ham If
|
|
|
by N6NKN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Forgot one:
You're not a "real" ham if you don't have tools on your operating desk.
|
|   |
|
RE: You Might Not Be A "Real" Ham If
|
|
|
by N3OX on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"You're not a "real" ham if you don't have tools on your operating desk.
"
I keep trying to clean them off but they always come back somehow.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC7QDO on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is why I don't do voice anymore.
This attitude has filterd into the local VHF community and as well as the HF arena. Hams are not helping each other out anymore either. For instance when it comes to antenna raising parties and theh BBQ afterwards with the taking turns testing the radio. That don't happen anymore.
I don't understand why people have to have issues with the newer means of linking with the technology that is already in place.
Now Eric and the this new stuff is not radio geeks; I want you to put yourself in someone elses shoes. Now lets say you are in a nursing home as a ham and can't have an outside antenna. And you want to talk to far point and all you have now is a computer and the net while on a fixed income. And echolink is the only out that you have to continue in the hobby. I have talked with people in that boat that are no longer able to setup a outside portable hf station. Then at that point would it not be radio? Or what if you have a ht and use the local irlp node to talk around the world would that not be radio if you were in a home and no hf?
Like the one gentleman shared in a previous post. My cell phone enables me to talk to all my friends, surf the web, send text, send voice messages and pictures and it fits in my pocket.
The newer technologies depend on a networked systems. But then again you can alway become Omish and then for people like you Eric will no longer have to worry about us young pups enjoying the hobby our way which was the way it was ment to be.
Bruce
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KD5RGJ on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I BET THE AUTHOR HAS A RADIO WITH MENU'S AND MEMORIES
AND USES THEM....SAME DIFFERENCE!!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C: "There is a century of tradition behind the valid claim that amateur radio communications use strictly an RF link. Anything else is some sort of hybrid communications."
Tradition doesn't have anything to do with it. Tradition would suggest you should build your own gear, that you should be proficient in CW, that you would tune for DX instead of using a spotting net (VHF or internet), and that you should understand propagation based upon experience instead of VOACAP or other software. Amateur radio is an evolving hobby that requires adjustments as technology brings inevitable change, but trying to make arbitrary definitions of what is encompassed by the hobby and what isn't is simply reactionary. The same people who rail against the new hybrid modes would be the same ones who argued that sideband wasn't a natural mode if they had lived a few decades ago. Who knows, given the aging demographics of our hobby and the stick-in-the-mud comments from some of KL7AJ's supporters, maybe they actually were the same ones back then.
NI0C: "However-- when a DX'er starts using the internet clusters to pick out the callsign of the DX he/she just "worked," it's time to cry "foul.""
That isn't analogous to this discussion at all. When a DX chaser uses the internet to determine the callsign of the station he just worked it's called cheating. That's because contest, DXCC, and other award rules clearly require all contact information to be gathered during the actual contact. Contacts using a repeater or Echolink don't qualify for those awards either, but since when does that make them not an "amateur radio" contact?
NI0C: "The burden of proof for claims that such hybrid forms of communication involving ham radio operators should still be called amateur radio fall on those making such claims-- not the other way around."
That's garbage also. The FCC and every single amateur radio organization recognize hybrid modes as being part of the hobby. Their is no requirement for a "burden of proof" (either way) except in the minds of those like yourself who think they have a right to restrict the definition for everyone else to something they are personally comfortable with.
Besides, I'll ask you the same question I asked KL7AJ ... what action do you want to result here? Do you want those who enjoy hybrid modes to seek a different license? Do you want them to dye their hair purple so we can spot the deviants? What do you gain by trying to isolate them or denigrating their operating choices? It seems to me that the only thing you "gain" is some sort of twisted comfort factor in excluding things you don't identify with.
Regarding your analogy to cycling, for several years I raced time trials here in Arizona at the masters (old fart) level, but you misunderstand my comments about DSP. I have no problem with using technology to enhance communication, and that includes DSP and whatever weak signal processing that might show up in the future. My comment about DSP was directed toward those who claim computers have ruined the hobby, yet they have one or more of them in their rig, use one for real time logging and contest exchanges, and post ignorant messages to internet forums with one. People and their attitudes ruin the hobby ... not the hardware.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E posted:
.............
"NL7W: "Real amateur radio contacts are point-to-point
contacts involving RF -- throughout the communications path."
Why is that? Because you say so? You just made that up
because it feels nice and conventional to you, not because it
has any basis in ANYTHING. I don't believe I've ever seen a
formal definition of ham radio that requires the complete path
to be RF. The FCC requires a license for the operator of any
portion of a communication link that travels via wireless, but
that doesn't imply that the entire link needs to be wireless. I
n fact, the FCC has repeatedly ruled that it doesn't."
...............
The FCC isn't involved in "what hams are supposed to do" in
the traditional sense...they establish a general definition and
lots of technical standards on RF emitters, the same as every
other USA radio service. If an RF emitter is involved, the FCC
is involved; if no RF is emitted, the FCC isn't involved...except
for certain very commercial interstate communication services.
AB7E: "There are all sorts of pretty traditional ham radio links
that are neither point-to-point nor continuous RF. We have
repeaters to extend VHF and UHF line-of-sight communications,
we have VHF and UHF packet systems that store-and-forward,
we have satellite transponders that process the signals mid-
stream, and we have remote stations that are controlled via
all sorts of non-RF links. I'm sure I've missed several others,
and don't even get me started in computers versus receiver DSP."
Once upon a time there were "phone patches" where 'patriotic'
hams made a big thing about completing a communications
link started on ham bands for third parties (servicepeople and
their families) was completed via the Plain Old Telephone
System. Was a BIG thing up to about 30 years ago before the
military got its DSN going (Digital Switched Network, the
government's 'own Internet')...allowing servicepeople to talk
direct to their friends and family without ham help. Just one
added example from recent ham history.
The Condor Net is a three-state '220' open-access repeater
net that extends much of the length of California, was planned
and implemented by radio amateurs...before the 'computer'
was a widespread tool for control. It's still in operation. But,
using 'repeaters' it is considered by KL7AJ as a 'bad thing?'
AB7E: "Every time someone spouts off on what a "real
amateur radio operator" should be I want to puke."
I share your malady. Unfortunately, there are many disease
carriers amongst us who do that sort of "defining" in every
walk of human behavior. :-(
AB7E: "Aside from generally accepted behavioral norms
(operating practices, courtesy, etc), there isn't any such
thing as a "real ham"."
I differ somewhat with that opinion. The ARRL seems to be
bound and determined to DO that defining with every issue of
QST and their own somewhat jaundiced viewpoint emanating
from a suburb of Hartford. Since that membership magazine
(which I get every month) is about the only major source of
news - and views - of and about radio amateurs, readers'
opinions tend to be colored by all that subtle brainwashing.
AB7E: "But every single licensed holder that operates within
the law has the right to call himself or herself a real ham, and
I'd bet that the majority of those you so smugly look down
upon would be a heck of a lot more interesting to talk to than
you and the other xenophobes here."
Hear, hear! "Xenophobes!" :-) Tart remark but apropriate...
The "do as I do or you aren't as good as I" crowd are in full
voice here on e-ham as well as on Usenet. Not encouraging.
I care little for maritmer's love of the sea and cannot see any
analogues of amateur radio to sailing only by wind power.
Perhaps some of that 'wind power' is what they are trying to
blow us all off with...?
Len AF6AY (I "lubb" the land)
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "Tradition doesn't have anything to do with it. Tradition would suggest you should build your own gear"
This is the crux of the problem as stated by AB7E. "Tradiiton doesn't matter." If you truely believe tradition has no place in amateur radio then we are headed down the slippery slope where anything goes - where the RF portion of a communications link is either completely or near completely suborinated to the internet portion and yet called radio. I understand why AB7E argues that tradition is not relevant - his position on what radio is and what it is not demands ignoring both historical precedent and convention. Ignore history and most any argument becomes plausable.
From all those who wish to pretend radio has no past, we will continue to hear the term used as a misnomer.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: No brains, no amateur service.
|
|
|
by K1CJS on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
By ICR71A:
>>K1CJS Wrote: "Not at all what was said. Stop trying to turn this into another debate--please?"
Given the tone of the "letter to the editor" that started this thread, and the predictable behavior of the eHam crew, what else could happen?
The trolls have already come out from under the bridge in full force...<<
The debate I meant is not something I wanted to name--I was referring to another code test elimination debate--as the comment I was answering tried to do that.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E posted:
....................
"NI0C: "There is a century of tradition behind the
valid claim that amateur radio communications
use strictly an RF link. Anything else is some
sort of hybrid communications."
Tradition doesn't have anything to do with it. Tradition
would suggest you should build your own gear, that
you should be proficient in CW, that you would tune
for DX instead of using a spotting net (VHF or internet),
and that you should understand propagation based
upon experience instead of VOACAP or other software.
Amateur radio is an evolving hobby that requires
adjustments as technology brings inevitable change,
but trying to make arbitrary definitions of what is
encompassed by the hobby and what isn't is
simply reactionary."
....................
The reactionary defense posture by old-timers is not
new. Coming up on ten years of retirement, I can
recognize it very easily in all the other old hobbyists.
It's a combination of denial-of-aging and plain old
trying to make everyone do as they do. Not to
mention an overlay of ego with some who insist that
whatever they did is SO much better than what any
who came into the hobby later could do.
AB7E: "The same people who rail against the new
hybrid modes would be the same ones who argued
that sideband wasn't a natural mode if they had lived
a few decades ago."
Most of those are dying out. An interesting sidelight
is that John R. Carson of AT&T published the math
of the three basic single modulation schemes back in
1915. I would suspect that was the math basis for
the long-lines "carrier" frequency-multiplexed systems
that became the basis for HF SSB in the early 1930s.
Such "carrier" equipment HAD to use SSB techniques
to compress three of the four voice channels into 12
KHz total bandwidth. While it was for wired comms,
it could have become part of HF ham radio before
WW2. But, the theory wasn't the stopper...it was the
terrible insistence (in the ham literature) that PA finals
HAD to be Class C for "efficiency." PA finals for SSB
must be Class B or Class AB to get linearity in power
amplification. Class C finals were, in relative terms,
very easy to do compared with "linears." Then there
was the stability of frequency problem in both Tx and
Rx equipment before WW2...which didn't improve
much until quartz crystals were finally cheap enough
for hams in the late 1940s, and man-grown quartz was
available in the 1950s.
It took the US military to boost SINGLE-CHANNEL
SSB in the 1950s for radio amateurs. The average
radio amateur of the 1950s just wanted to do comms
on the radio...they didn't care to learn more about radio
theory (they were already licensed and that made them
'experts' or something). Techniques in US amateur
radio of the 1950s were all about being super-good CW
ops and reinforced by the shade of H.P.Maxim still
haunting Newington and the pages of QST.
The Army assigned me to a large HF transmitter
station in Tokyo in 1953. Some of those transmitters
were SSB (of the four-voice-channel commercial format)
and I didn't think it was a strange mode at all. SSB
worked and had been working for two decades.
However, I've run across younger folk whose only
education in radio has been old ARRL publications
and they can't seem to grasp SSB or basic modulation
theory at all. They know it exists since they've seen
countless examples, but they don't know the basics...
which are really quite simple.
........................
"NI0C: "The burden of proof for claims that such hybrid
forms of communication involving ham radio operators
hould still be called amateur radio fall on those making
such claims-- not the other way around."
"That's garbage also. The FCC and every single
amateur radio organization recognize hybrid modes as
being part of the hobby. Their is no requirement for a
"burden of proof" (either way) except in the minds of
those like yourself who think they have a right to
restrict the definition for everyone else to something
they are personally comfortable with."
........................
Hear, hear!
AB7E: "Besides, I'll ask you the same question I
asked KL7AJ ... what action do you want to result here?
Do you want those who enjoy hybrid modes to seek a
different license? Do you want them to dye their hair
purple so we can spot the deviants?"
A forehead tattoo saying "NO Hybrid" in purple? :-)
[scarlet letters have already been done...]
AB7E: "What do you gain by trying to isolate them
or denigrating their operating choices? It seems to me
that the only thing you "gain" is some sort of twisted
comfort factor in excluding things you don't identify with."
I'd say you hit it on the money. It's an EGO trip of
theirs. They've spent a lot of time and effort in their
hobby and imagined they were 'experts' at what they
did, therefore they are 'better' than any newcomer (or
lesser being).
I've spent a half century being IN electronics and radio
and don't proclaim myself any 'expert.' Maybe 'very
good' in certain areas. But, I still look forward to the
whole world of electronics constantly evolving, coming
up with something new every month. Those who want
to hold back the dawn to pre-WW2 radio should be
forced, yes FORCED, to communicate ONLY with the
equipment that was available then. That might change
a few minds to grudgingly admit that newer technology
is improved over the 'good old days.'
AB7E: "People and their attitudes ruin the hobby ...
not the hardware."
Absolutely! The "old-timers'" attitudes may be the
cause for the drop-off in license statistics. Despite
the old-timers' attitudes of unceasingly promoting old,
antiquated standards and practices, the newcomers
are the ones keeping the license numbers at a steady
total. Those newcomers more readily accept new
technology and "hybrid communications" concepts
than old-timers.
But, we newcomers "don't know enough" according
to some old-time hams who've been licensed 30 to 40
years. [I've been licensed for 51 years as a 'pro']
We don't follow the Maxims laid down like bricks in a
terrace in the NE USA. Tsk.
Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AD5TD on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "Tradition would suggest
you should build your own gear, that you should be proficient in CW,
that you would tune for DX instead of using a spotting net (VHF or
internet), and that you should understand propagation based upon experience
instead of VOACAP or other software."
IMHO, this is the essence of AR, Tradition. Sure I haven't built my own rig YET... However, I do enjoy tinkering with a lot of other stuff. How I envy those that have the time and money to build their own gear.
Hams built their own gear because they HAD to. There was not a lot of stuff out there that the average Joe could afford. Look up the price of a good transceiver in 1955 and you'll find that, after adjusting for inflation, it costs about the same as a FT-9000 does today. Not chump change.
What it boils down to is this, do what you love to do. Let others do what they love to do. Support the traditions that got us here. I love that connection with "things past", it gives me a good feeling inside to know that someone loved AR like I do many years ago.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "This is the crux of the problem as stated by AB7E. "Tradition doesn't matter." If you truly believe tradition has no place in amateur radio then we are headed down the slippery slope where anything goes - where the RF portion of a communications link is either completely or near completely subordinated to the internet portion and yet called radio. I understand why AB7E argues that tradition is not relevant - his position on what radio is and what it is not demands ignoring both historical precedent and convention. Ignore history and most any argument becomes plausible." <spelling and grammar corrected>
I never said tradition doesn't matter in ham radio. That's your extrapolation of my comments, but it's not what I said or meant. I said tradition doesn't have anything to do with the tirade against hybrid communication modes. Hybrid modes are legal, they utilize enough RF to require a license, and they aren't any less relevant to effective communication than is, say, SSB. Ignoring tradition diminishes the culture of the hobby, but invoking "tradition" to narrow the hobby to your own comfort level damages it far worse.
So ... here's that question again. What do you want to do about those modes? Do you want to outlaw them? Do you want to banish them to whatever band you personally don't use? What??? I don't see a problem here, but since you obviously do what is your proposed solution? Or do you simply want someone to throw stones at when you're feeling marginalized?
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB5DPE on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"...or have their mail delivered by horseback."
In my neighborhood, I think they do!
Tom
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N7YA on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
VE3XDB...
>>Perhaps it is time that eHam.net separates articles into two categories: "technical articles" and "opinions". Then, discerning hams can focus on the former, and ignore the latter.
No way, folks seem to ONLY come here for opinions so the second one would be the most popular and the first one would get only a few visitors. We feel the ingrained need to fight, only about 15% of us come here to truly discuss ham radio in a fraternal sense, the rest are here for the Jerry Springer aspect...its the drama that doesnt happen in most lives that frequent this forum.
As far as hams using the DX Cluster to log calls, i agree...if you didnt get it, you didnt get it. but what the hell do i care? I cant change how so-and-so ham operator got his award, it didnt come out of my pocket and i cant change how he conducts his life in general...and i dont want to anyway because i dont have this undying need to control other people and what they do. I have my own worries.
I consider myself dynamic enough to roll with changes that happen around me, both good and bad, ones i agree with and ones i dont...i CAN affect how i personally conduct myself, how i am perceived, and how i operate. I also know what it means to me personally and the fact that i alone earned any award i get or how i operate...or any respect i may garner.
Granted, I understand the concern of many that by allowing these practices without saying something will appear to be endorsing the demise of the value of the award or tradition, but seriously...just look at the world around you, its a terse place, people are not the same as they were only a few short years ago. Even we hams are biting eachothers heads off at an increasing rate...theres a lot more people wanting to control what others feel, think and do in order to provide a continued comfort level for themselves.
On the other hand, theres a large number of folks who lament change in an agressively outward manner due to an inability to roll with the punches...these folks just give up and freak out, some of them even become dangerous, fueled by fear and anger. All because of a perception that leaving others to their devices and worrying about your own life makes you invalid or a wimp. I simply view things differently because i know i can handle change and welcome new ideas, but what i lament the most about is how divided we all are. This is disheartening to me.
Its not a crime to be an elitist or a purist, its not a crime to shut others out and fortunately, its still not a crime to speak your mind in this country. But it makes me wonder if our own human nature wont be our downfall eventually. By taking a quick look over mankinds historical timeline, we have a tendency to attempt world domination, absolute control over the rest of the worlds inhabitants...history also shows, time and time again, it never works! were a weird dichotomy of desires, we all want control with complete freedom attached...figure that one out.
I disagree with the original posters generalization of what 'real ham radio' is, well...most of it, anyway. I agree that we need to maintain a line to tradition, but the day we shun new technology is the day the limb dies and falls off, were the limb. Its not my choice as to what my neighbor ham views as real ham radio, its not my choice who he votes for, sleeps with, listens to, thinks, feels and worships...in turn, i expect the same respect.
Thats an uneasy prospect for some, even some on here...you know what? i dont care what you are into. If you want to use a computer to make your contacts through Echolink, or use the spotting net to complete your log entries...go for it if it makes you happy. it simply isnt what i want for myself...see? simple as that. Im not going to force a doctors visit because you want to cheat on DXCC, let the guys in Newington work that out, just like my own QSL cards, i personally know i worked them so i have no need to prove anything because its not going to affect my ability to pay my bills or make new friends.
I am all about Life, Liberty and the Persuit of Happiness...all three are important to me, but i will never forget that it might also be important to my neighbor as well. We should try to be careful about infighting in ham radio, or this country for that matter. We reap as we sow, its almost harvest time and im concerned.
73...Adam, N7YA
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To AD5TD
I actually agree with you. My personal perspective on ham radio includes those things, and I've done them all and more. They represent the things that brought me into the hobby, and keep me here in spite of the dwindling relevance of ham radio as a utlilitarian communication medium.
My disagreement with the other postings in this thread is simply that none of us should be trying to institutionalize our personal perspectives as if they were the only ones that count, or denigrating the various alternatives that give ham radio of today such breadth. I love watching glowing filaments on a chilly winter evening, but that could hardly be expected to be relevant to a teenager today. Same with operating modes, in my opinion.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB2HSH on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Radio+Antenna=Good
Radio+Ionosphere=Good
Radio+Internet=Yet another example of the new generation/era wanting something for nothing.
And I'm 35 years old.
Friends don't let friends use Echolink.
John KB2HSH
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB9TMP on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is for those who do not believe any radio communication using the internet to link to a radio is Ham Radio. DON'T buy a new Ten Tec OMNI-VII and use it's ethernet ability to run your radio using your computer, IT'S NOT REAL HAM RADIO!!! I wonder if anyone has told the boys down in Sevierville, TN that?
WW Warren - KB9TMP
For every action,
there is an equal
and opposite criticism.
-Harrison's Postulate
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K0RGR on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NO, No, NO, No!
The true spirit of ham radio is to constantly expand the capabilities of hams, whether it involves CW, laser beams, satellites, or the Internet.
Rather than calling anyone a 'bad amateur' - something none of us is qualified to do - it would be beneficial to point out what is a 'good amateur'.
A 'good amateur' is capable of providing communications under a wide variety of conditions, without resorting to the use of infrastructure. 'Infrastructure' includes repeaters. However, the 'good amateur' is also equipped to make use of that infrastructure whenever it is available.
In today's reality, the ham 'sailboat' - i.e., Morse Code on the HF bands - will usually allow someone to make contacts somewhere, but it might also be nearly worthless. During Hurricane Katrina, we experienced the worst solar flares in decades, making nationwide HF nearly useless for long periods of time. And, contrary to some reports, the Internet was working at some of the downtown hotels nearly the whole time, and the dreaded WINLINK was credited with handling a great deal of useful traffic.
I could not agree more that I worry about our ability to operate without infrastructure. During our recent disasters here, we were about 3 dB away from not having any communications into one of the inundated towns nearby, because they could barely access only one repeater in another county, requiring very difficult relays. But, if we'd been equipped to actually use it, the APRS network was working great into that town!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB2HSH on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
TMP:
Now that's telling half the story (sounds like a Republican). The ethernet port is to operate YOUR OWN HF setup remotely. You're still relying on the ionosphere to make contacts, etc. Think of it as PC Anywhere for Ham Radio. I'm sure that it could be used for Echo-suck, but I doubt highly that that was its main intention.
HSH
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NL7W writes:
"Real amateur radio contacts are point-to-point contacts involving RF -- throughout the communications path."
Why "throughout the communications path"?
I agree that if it does not involve amateur-band RF at all, it's not ham radio. But that's not the same thing as having to be amateur-band RF the whole way.
""Real ham" contacts never included voices being packetized, forwarded via the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) to some distant location, with the process being reversed at the far end. That's just cheating..."
I disagree.
Consider amateur radio 'phone patches. They're now pretty rare, as the growth of telecommunications has all but eliminated the need for them.
But for decades they were a major communications link to people and places that did not have other options. Were none of those 'phone patches "real ham radio"?
Or consider repeaters that use remote receiver sites to improve coverage, connected by leased lines. Is a QSO through one of them not a "real ham contact"?
How about autopatch? Is it not "real ham radio", even if a ham saves a life by calling 911 via the autopatch?
"Heck, why bother with a RF at all. Just boot up the computer and your "fav" VoIP software, and talk. You can do the same with SKYPE and its variants."
Because when you eliminate the amateur-radio RF completely, that's when it stops being ham radio.
"Good grief! Technology has taken the mystic and RF experience away from so many."
Not for me!
Where I could see a problem is if similar claims are made for vastly different QSOs. For example, working all states on 2 meters 'direct' is very different from contacting people in all 50 states using a 2 meter HT and autopatch with long-distance capability.
I think the bicycle analogy is the most accurate. All sorts of technological things can be done to a bicycle (including adding a computer), yet it's still a bicycle. But add an engine - even a small one - and it's no longer a bicycle.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: You Might Not Be A "Real" Ham If
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well, let's see how I score...
"You can't copy CW above 20 WPM."
I can - well above 20 per.
"You use repeaters, Echolink, Winlink or IRLP."
I do, now and again.
"You were licensed after 1940."
1967
"You use DX clusters."
I don't. Nothing wrong with them, but they're the same thing as multi-oping
"Have a vanity call."
Not me.
"Do not have a tower."
Don't have one.
"Do not handle traffic."
I used to be a traffic-net regular, and still do a little to keep the skills up.
"You do not have 250 countries confirmed."
I don't.
"You use a tube tranceiver."
I do. Homebrew, at that!
"You use a transistorized transceiver."
Got a couple of those.
"You use a SDR tranceiver."
No, but there's nothing wrong them.
So - am I a "real ham" or not?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KR4WM on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|But for decades they were a major communications link to
|people and places that did not have other options. Were
|none of those 'phone patches "real ham radio"?
No, they weren't ham radio. They were a method for non-hams who didn't have a license or a radio to get on the air with the help of a licensed ham who did have a radio. I ran an Army MARS phone patch station for awhile, and also ran phone patches for the Halo net. Never once did anyone I dialed have a ham radio license. The ones I called who I knew were hams I told to get on the air and talk to their party. Phone lines and the internet are for tying non-hams into the radio. A ham should have their own radio and won't require (key word: require) phone lines or the internet. A ham should not be dependent on an internet connection or telephone connection for getting a message through. Having a radio connected to the internet or to the phone lines is merely an option to be tended to AFTER they get on the air. That is, unless they're bound up in some kind of situation that gives them no other choice (like being bed-bound in a nursing home, or living in an antenna-restricted HOA area (which is not really a valid excuse, there's always stealth antennas)). That's my opinion and I'm stickin' to it! -KR4WM
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN posted:
.................
"AB7E "Tradition doesn't have anything to do with it.
Tradition would suggest you should build your own gear"
"This is the crux of the problem as stated by AB7E.
"Tradiiton doesn't matter." If you truely believe tradition
has no place in amateur radio then we are headed
down the slippery slope where anything goes - where
the RF portion of a communications link is either
completely or near completely suborinated to the
internet portion and yet called radio."
.................
Sorry, but I don't see that at all. Nichols has a
problem with that. Further, Nichols insisted that
amteur radio is analagous to wind sailing. It isn't.
Radio, as a publicly demonstrated communications
medium, is only 111 years old. The first such radios
used NO active devices; the triode vacuum tube was
invented 10 years after that. Would you want "tradition"
based on crystal set receivers and spark-gap trans-
mitters? [sorry, but damped-wave oscillation is not
allowed in FCC regulations] Worse yet, would you
want a hundred yards of antenna strung over several
lots (assuming you have a typical urban residence)
for a 1920s aerial?
How about basing amateur radio tradition in the 1930s?
Some superhet receivers but a lot of regeneratives,
almost all operating below 30 MHz? CW-only trans-
mitters with a few rich hams having humongous-power
audio amplifiers called AM "modulators?" Automatic
dot-dash keyers were only mechanical. Any nice
rotary beam Yagis on tall towers then? [parasitic
antennas were invented in the 1930s by Yagi and Uda
in Japan]
How about basing amateur radio tradition in the 1940s
post-WW2 period? Wow, yes, now we are getting
closer to some of the old-timers times in here. Lots
and lots of converted war surplus stations with a few
rich hams able to afford Collins radios and those of
other designer-makers who aren't making rigs now
(Hallicrafters, National Radio, Millen, RME, etc.).
Maybe the "tradition" of the 1950s is better? The SSB
craze was on (for many, not all) and some hams were
able to actually TALK into microphones! (horrors)
VHF was being explored a bit better. All sorts of new
HF and VHF antennas were on the market. More foreign
hams to "work DX" with now that recovery from WW2
was fairly complete. Audio-range transistors had hit
the market but no real ICs yet.
"Tradition" of the 1960s? Okay, SSB was pretty well
established on ham HF bands, commercial surplus
Teletypes were being used by hams for (some)
message traffic. Transistors were appearing more and
more in ham radio electronics and some of the early
ICs were showing up in those. "Incentive licensing"
was all the rage with its dependency on 1930s radio-
telegraphy skills. VHF was established in ham radio
and amateurs were working towards UHF. "EME" got
a newer name than 'moon-bounce' with the few who
could get big arrays to point at the moon. All sorts of
new things appearing then and license totals were
beginning to peak with all the technological advances
in everything else (space travel, comm sats, etc).
By the 1970s the "tradition" was going solid-state
and "DXpeditions" were going everywhere to fulfill some
need to collect rare QSL wallpaper. Stalwart hams of
the old school insisted, indeed shouted, that 'real' hams
"worked DX on HF with CW!" The only 'good' radio op
was one who could do 20 WPM CW or better, there-
by keeping up the myth that 1930s standards and
practices "must be kept" (at all costs). HTs were on
the market all the way up to the '420' band. "Keyers"
for CW now used ICs and the PLL was appearing in
tech articles for multi-frequency crystal-stable control.
Any ham who was "good" had a rotary beam antenna
to show he lived in a radio station, not a house. Ham
shacks on wheels were now the 'thing' as interest in
mobile radio operation grew. The electromechanical
Teletypes were giving way to "dumb" terminals using
CRTs and keyboards and the (then) rare dot-matrix
printer for hard-copy. The first of the ham radio
modems to handle "data" appeared.
By the 1980s most of ham radio was solid-state and
the only tubes were the ones in gallon-rig PAs. Trans-
ceiver finals were now Class B or AB and could handle
SSB or CW or RTTY with ease. The no-extra-knobs
wideband PA was gaining popularity and the first auto-
matic antenna tuning units appeared. Personal
computers were beginning to be used for ham station
uses, especially the complicated programs that solved
Ohm's Law for those hams lacking rudimentary math
skills. A few heretics shouted the blasphemy of doing
away with morse code skill testing for ham licenses!
By 1991 the Internet went public and opened up vast
new vistas for everything from communications to trade
to spreading all sorts of opinions and hysteria. The
Big 3 of Japan (Icom, Yaesu, and Kenwood) held the
top spot on the ham transceiver market. Heathkit had
gone bust and renowned standard of excellence
Collins Radio had long since left the ham market. Off-
shore makers brought consumer electronics way down
in price and the electronics technology in newer ham
gear was beyond the ken of the average amateur. The
CW afficionados used PCs and the Internet to spread
their love of mode all over with morse training programs.
The no-code-test Technician Class license appeared
in USA hamdom and some said amateur radio was
doomed, never before to rise to its splendid, magnificent
past. The hounds were loose and began sniffing about
to end the code testing altogether...and they did.
WA4KCN: "I understand why AB7E argues that
tradition is not relevant - his position on what radio is
and what it is not demands ignoring both historical
precedent and convention."
I just summarized "historical precedent" for you. Tell
me what the similarity is to now. Tell me the
"tradition" basing era you want to establish for
everything in ham radio of now. Tell me the
"convention" you want to use in ham radio for now.
Shall everyone follow like blind sheep everything that
the ARRL says we should? They've hardly deviated
from those conventions that Maxim editorialized on
back before 1932.
"Ignore history and most any argument becomes plausable."
Blabber. Shall my wife and I go down to the Chevy
dealer and sell our 2005 Malibu MAXX because it
isn't as "traditional" or "conventional" as a horse
and buggy? Shall we give up our 8-year-old front-
load washer and dryer because a scrub board and
sun-drying was "traditional" or "conventional" once?
Shall the Navy bring back wind-sail ships and junk
aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines? Shall
medical science retro into "traditional convention"
of brute-force surgery, giving up MRI scanning and
minimal-invasion abdominal surgery, give up joint
replacements, in-the-ear hearing aids, all sorts
of phramaceuticals to promote longer life? Yeah,
lets stop donating blood and transfusions and go
back to "traditional" leeches and 'bleeding' to cure
ills. The brothers Wright didn't prove heavier-than-
air flight until 1903. Shall we abondon the old 707
and go back to wire, spruce, and fabric biplanes to
satisfy "tradition and convention?" Or would you
retain the near-sonic 767 and fly to another continent
in less than a day in comfort and convenience?
WA4KCN: "From all those who wish to pretend radio has
no past, we will continue to hear the term used as a
misnomer."
Radio HAS a past...but it is only 111 years old. It began
before vacuum tubes were around, well before the first
transistor was made (1947). The only "misnomer" is in
trying to base the beginning of radio as it was in YOUR
YOUTH. I began in HF radio communications in 1953
at age 20. Radio was already 57 years old then, almost
at the brink of the solid-state era electronics beginnings.
"Radio" is CONSTANTLY CHANGING, like it or no.
Misnomer myass. The only "misnomer" is expecting the
"tradition" and "convention" that exists in YOUR mind.
I'm sorry, but I've been IN the electronics industry a long
time, have DESIGNED radios, but none of them according
to what the ARRL dictated.
If I were advising folks, I'd say Keep An Open Mind and,
more importantly, Keep Learning. If you want peace,
tranquility, stability-of-what-is-already-known, do some-
thing like re-enacting old battles or being a docent
at a historical park. Radio and electronics is advancing
all the time and isn't about to stop because some old
farts can't keep up with it.
Len AF6AY [Amateur Extra out of the box]
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Anyone who saws, or has sawed an ARC-5 in half to make a VFO should be made to WALK THE PLANK!
ARRRRRRRRGGGGGHHHH, Matey! 73, AE6RO
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY wrote:
"insisted that
amteur radio is analagous to wind sailing. It isn't."
*Amateur* radio is analagous to wind sailing, Len, in lots of ways.
"Worse yet, would you
want a hundred yards of antenna strung over several
lots (assuming you have a typical urban residence)
for a 1920s aerial?"
A hundred yards, Len? That's 300 feet. By the 1920s, amateurs were on the "short-waves" and using much smaller antennas.
"CW-only transmitters with a few rich hams having humongous-power audio amplifiers called AM "modulators?""
'Phone operation in those days was not limited to only the rich, Len.
"Any nice rotary beam Yagis on tall towers then? [parasitic antennas were invented in the 1930s by Yagi and Uda in Japan]"
Some hams had directional antennas in the 1930s, mostly all-driven arrays.
btw, Yagi and Uda invented their antenna in the 1920s. Their first article on it appeared in 1926, and the first English-language translations in 1928.
"Maybe the "tradition" of the 1950s is better? The SSB
craze was on (for many, not all) and some hams were
able to actually TALK into microphones! (horrors)"
A handful of hams were on SSB in the 1930s. 'Phone operation by hams on AM, FM and SSB was common in the 1950s.
""Incentive licensing" was all the rage with its dependency on 1930s radio-telegraphy skills."
Incentive licensing required more additional written testing than it did Morse Code testing.
"license totals were
beginning to peak with all the technological advances
in everything else (space travel, comm sats, etc)."
The number of US hams did not peak in the 1960s. Not in total numbers nor in hams-per-capita.
"Any ham who was "good" had a rotary beam antenna
to show he lived in a radio station, not a house."
Though I have lived many places, part of my home has been an amateur radio station for almost 40 years.
"Heathkit had
gone bust and renowned standard of excellence
Collins Radio had long since left the ham market."
Meanwhile, new American companies such as Ten Tec (started in the late 1960s) were growing.
"The
CW afficionados used PCs and the Internet to spread
their love of mode all over with morse training programs."
Great stuff, too.
"I just summarized "historical precedent" for you."
With some mistakes that I corrected for you.
"Tell me what the similarity is to now."
That's easy.
The fundamental basis of Amateur Radio is, and always has been, "radio for its own sake". That's the common theme from the earliest days to now.
"Shall everyone follow like blind sheep everything that
the ARRL says we should?"
Not like blind sheep. But what ARRL recommends as "good amateur practice" is usually (not always) well-thought out ideas.
Would you rather that amateurs go off in all different directions with no standards, no procedures, no regard for traditions or the lessons of history?
"They've hardly deviated
from those conventions that Maxim editorialized on
back before 1932."
You mean the Amateur's Code? What parts of it are not good ideas today?
"The only "misnomer" is in trying to base the beginning of radio as it was in YOUR
YOUTH."
If an idea is a good idea, why should it change?
"I began in HF radio communications in 1953
at age 20. Radio was already 57 years old then, almost
at the brink of the solid-state era electronics beginnings."
But you did not become a radio amateur until early this year.
""Radio" is CONSTANTLY CHANGING, like it or no."
Sounds like a tradition!
"I'm sorry, but I've been IN the electronics industry a long time, have DESIGNED radios, but none of them according to what the ARRL dictated."
None of them were for amateur radio, were they? Did you design the 'radios' in your amateur station, or just buy them ready-made?
"If I were advising folks, I'd say Keep An Open Mind and, more importantly, Keep Learning."
Sounds like good advice. Perhaps you should follow it!
After all, you've proved to be extremely resistant to ideas that differ from your own. And extremely hostile to anyone who expresses those ideas.
Plus you didn't get an amateur radio license until a few months ago because you stubbornly resisted learning Morse Code for decades.
Keep An Open Mind and, more importantly, Keep Learning.
Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "I never said tradition doesn't matter in ham radio. That's your extrapolation of my comments, but it's not what I said or meant. I said tradition doesn't have anything to do with the tirade against hybrid communication modes. Hybrid modes are legal, they utilize enough RF to require a license, and they aren't any less relevant to effective communication than is, say, SSB. Ignoring tradition diminishes the culture of the hobby, but invoking "tradition" to narrow the hobby to your own comfort level damages it far worse."
I am pleased you believe tradition has its place in amateur radio even though your position in the use of the word radio is liberal and non-traditional. Tradition in amateur radio is under seige with many believing everything that is old must go. It does seem though Dave you and others are not understanding the basis of the article and the authors use of hyperbole to make a point. The article should be read as a blunt challenge to you and others to focus on the radio amateurs core competency of generating and receiving radio frequency energy. The internet should be viewed as an adjunct of communications and not as a core competency of the radio amateur. The disagreement is one of nomenclature and not the use of a hybrid mode.
73 Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY "If I were advising folks, I'd say Keep An Open Mind and,
more importantly, Keep Learning. If you want peace,
tranquility, stability-of-what-is-already-known, do some-
thing like re-enacting old battles or being a docent
at a historical park. Radio and electronics is advancing
all the time and isn't about to stop because some old
farts can't keep up with it.
Len thanks for your long reply to my post. I enjoyed reading it; however, you seemed to only make the point you are unfamiliar with the difference between the concept of cultural tradition and technological advancement. I do not believe you read the article or my post and deduced from either an argument in favor of going down the radio technological ladder. And yet your post reads as such. You demonstrated an intellect beyond that in your history lesson. I suggest you read again the authors contention, and reply using persuasive argument once you understand the debate.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by VE6CNU on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I'd say if the point of the article was to spark a little debate and have a few opinions put forward, it was a HUGE success. With this crowd, debating the kind of cheese you like could also cause a similar uproar. The great thing about our hobby is that it offers so many things to so many people that it cannot be easily defined or categorized. And that is how we all like to think of ourselves... as individuals, with brains and capabilities that make us a bit different from the average crowd. We should concentrate on our common traits, like the enjoyment of communicating with others, tinkering with things, figuring out how things work, helping out in times of need, and being in such a unique position to spread goodwill around the world. As for our differences, we should celebrate these too, as if it weren't for a bunch of "nerdy" people doing their own thing every now and then, we'd still be using paper cups and string. Life is short, so enjoy!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "Len thanks for your long reply to my post.
I enjoyed reading it; however, you seemed to only
make the point you are unfamiliar with the difference
between the concept of cultural tradition and
technological advancement.
Tsk, my bad? There's a SIMILARITY of cultural
tradition and technological advancement? In what
way? Please elucidate.
I did a very brief synopsis of USA amateur radio
history and was expressly looking for this cultural
tradition. The only binding elements to that MIGHT
be the ARRL and "The Amateur's Code" written by
Paul M. Segal. Considering that Segal's nice-nice
"Code" toadies up to the ARRL (he said all must
belong to them), one can consider them one and the
same. I'm rather familiar with most history of ALL
radio, not just the amateur kind.
In the beginning (of amateur radio) there was ONLY
on-off keying. Early radio was primitive. From all the
writings of those times, all amateurs expressed the
notion that all banded together in some cozy group.
Maybe that's true, maybe not. There were enough
in the USA population of the beginning 1900s that
there should have been more diversity of opinion
among those amateurs (none of them licensed
before 1912). Now if some "cultural tradition" was
brewing then, it is what is seen by the self-induced
vision of the ARRL doing its PR schtick from its
beginnings in 1914. Nobody disagreeing among the
radio amateurs of yore? Hardly. Human nature will
out, always has.
So, just WHAT are these "cultural traditions" that
some of you state? WHAT are they? Name them.
Try as I might, I can't connect any "cultural
traditions" of 1912 that were the norm in 1952.
Other than "working DX on HF with CW" and
sending QSL cards and (supposedly) being kind
and courteous to fellow hams on the air, I don't
seem to remember others. What I do remember
is a bunch of individualists of the 1952 time who
were as different from one another as night and day.
That in a city of about 80 thousand population with
just one store that sold amateur radio equipment.
WA4KCN: "I do not believe you read the article or
my post and deduced from either an argument in
favor of going down the radio technological ladder.
And yet your post reads as such."
Whoa! I did most certainly READ all postings that
I reply to, including "articles" [what e-ham calls
its provocative opinion pieces in here] I have been
a semi-pro wordsmith of some experience in
addition to being an engineer an even longer time.
Not only that, but I've been doing computer-
modem communications for 24 years...and being
able to meet some of those communicators in-
person.
I did that "ladder" thing (the synopsis of amateur
radio through the decades) to show exactly the
DIVERSITY of what was going on in ham radio over
a long period of time. In truth, some amateurs
haven't deviated from that and still keep up the
refrain of "working DX on HF with CW" as some sort
of "cultural tradition." Fine for them. Not fine for
all. Lots and lots and lots of things were
CHANGING in amateur radio between the end of
WW1 and time-now. Remember that I've also been
employed in the far larger world of electronics and
have seen lots more changes in communications,
including modes and methods that didn't exist
until relatively recently...most of them not in use
by radio amateurs yet. But, there is hope that
some will be tried out since not all radio amateurs
are bogged down into forever serving this nebulous
"cultural tradition." [whatever that is]
WA4KCN: "You demonstrated an intellect beyond
that in your history lesson."
Thank you (I think).
WA4KCN: "I suggest you read again the authors
contention, and reply using persuasive argument
once you understand the debate."
Oh, my, you ruined your own compliment. :-)
I understand Nichols' rant very well and I do NOT
contend that amateur radio is analagous to wind-
sailing. He was expressing HIS own ideas. Most
of the replies in here showed THEIR OWN ideas.
I do not think that diversity of opinions is "bad."
Now, I DID reply to Nichols' "article." It is still on
e-ham. I didn't phrase it like a "debate," but rather
as in a conversation. You know, the "point-counter-
point" kind of thing, up-close and personal. :-)
What you seem to want is my agreement with what
YOU wote and what Nichols wrote. Sorry, but I'm
not forced into any "cultural tradition" of having to
agree with such opinions. If and only If I agree with
opinions will I say so. Any other opinions get
silence or my own style of replies. I just don't
agree with what you and Nichols wrote. It doesn't
bug me that you don't like my opinions. :-)
73, Len AF6AY [ex-RA 16 408 336]
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to say one thing here any sailor on any vessel goes to sea without a motor,even on a sail boat is asking for trouble. I been sailing 31 years and have always had one in my vessel. Its there for safety reasons. I would never venture past those breakwaters without a motor in the Hold. As there is always a time when your wind is going to die. You need one anyways as I believe its required by law, I might be wrong but I can ask my fellow shipmates.And I aint a tincan sailor.
Now as for the other stuff I have never installed echolink in any of my computers, but did operate it once from Guam island and like some in the world dont consider it Ham radio.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KB9TMP on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Now that's telling half the story (sounds like a Republican). The ethernet port is to operate YOUR OWN HF setup remotely. You're still relying on the ionosphere to make contacts, etc. Think of it as PC Anywhere for Ham Radio. I'm sure that it could be used for Echo-suck, but I doubt highly that that was its main intention."
HSH
And the point is??? Your still using internet to link to a radio remotely. No different than using your PC to link to someone elses EchoLink RF node. You can be in China and use your Ten Tec back in the states. Yes it's your radio but it's still using internet to access RF. I will agree that if you use EchoLink or eQSO to chat computer to computer that is nothing more than Skype or whatever type of chat you want to call it. That ISN'T radio at all. If it hooks your computer to a radio and transmits RF it's remote operation. It don't matter if its EchoLink getting the audio to the radio or another type of program sending audio and control data it's still using the internet to transmit over a radio 'somewhere'.
And as far as my politics go, I think they are all crooks and liars. I don't claim any of the thieves.
WW Warren - KB9TMP
"The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing..
if you can fake that, you've got it made."
-Groucho Marx
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by G3SEA on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
VE6CNU summed up the discussion perfectly ;)
"Per Ardua Ad Astra " !
KH6/G3SEA
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY "I understand Nichols' rant very well and I do NOT
contend that amateur radio is analagous to wind-
sailing. He was expressing HIS own ideas. Most
of the replies in here showed THEIR OWN ideas.
I do not think that diversity of opinions is "bad."
Fine business Len. I again enjoyed reading your post. It is very commendable you are open to others opinions showing a high degree of emotional maturity. I especially enjoyed the dry humor in your post. All to often one senses anger getting the best of an individual here on eham. And your humility is a breath of fresh air too. However, as to many of your specific points I see not how they relate to the article. Attempting not to begin the discourse a new, the author's proposition is radio amateurs should concentrate on core competency rather than adjuncts. For me to make an effort at teaching you what is meant by cultural traditions is beyond what I am willing to attempt on eham. I will try and help using one elementary example. Without using vernacular, radio traditionally was associated with the transmission or reception of electromagnetic waves within the radio frequency spectrum through a media other than wires. An attempt to alter this meaning for many radio amateurs represents a radical change in our belief characteristics.
Len congratulation on getting your amateur radio license. I wish you great success as you learn and discover the world of amateur radio.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NL7W on September 23, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N2EY:
Please go ahead... enjoy your IRLP and Echolink experience. It holds exactly zero interest for many of us. It does not further the RF art. Though, it does further voice communications. It is an "easy" way to communicate, and doesn't involve any appreciable RF capabilities.
Maybe it's because I'm 41 and have worked as a project manager that drove a government Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDT&E) process utilizing the EXACT technologies being discussed here -- linking disparate radios and/or digital, trunked, radio systems using VoIP and high-grade encryption technologies via a combination of the PSTN and commercial shared IP over satellite transport networks. I know how to make these systems work over high latency and jitter transport networks; they hold zero interest and are rather cut and dried for me now -- I've a 80+ page, published paper on this subject on a federal website (DoJ) at this moment.
So I sporadically I press on, as my family allows, with my 26-year love of learning & understanding the subtleties of RF-related propagation, antennas, and station building -- building my RF knowledge and capabilities. It is the engineer in me that continually desires to better my knowledge in these areas.
Personally, I believe this same goal -- the desire to obtain greater knowledge surrounding the intricacies of RF -- should be held by all hams. But, that is not now the case, given the rise of digital-related IT technology and its ever-increasing melding with RF transport. It seems to have become far less important and passe' -- just like in industry.
The hobby is changing. It's too bad that what used to be the core competency of amateur radio, knowledge & understanding of RF systems, is fading from spotlight as new and exciting, IT-related technologies supplant and exploit RF tech.
73.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
'Ham Radio' is a Construct. Therefore it means something different to each one of us.
(See Kelly G.A. - The Psychology of Personal Constructs)
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The original article, and the discussion that followed is not about being reactionary or opposing change as some have suggested. Nor is it about labelling people. Rather it is about definitions and technical accuracy.
If I ride my bicycle to the local Amtrak station in St. Louis and take it with me on the train to Chicago, it would be misleading to claim that I had ridden my bicycle to Chicago. What I've done instead is to augment my cycling with another transportation mode with the infrastructure of the railways. There's nothing at all wrong with this, but it's not pure cycling.
I've had dozens of people ask me about my backyard vertical antennas. When I explain that I am a ham operator, they invariably ask: "How far do you get with that?" I say truthfully-- all over the world, then I cite an example, such as Mongolia or Singapore. People are always impressed by this, even though they're carrying a cell phone in their pocket that could reach those same places.
Ham radio has always been fundamentally about direct RF communications, without intervening infrastructure. Anything else is hybrid or augmented communications-- not necessarily bad, but not pure ham radio.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by W5JAO on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No one or no regulation requires you to ues a motor or any of the alternate modes.
Get rid of your motor that is probably on your sailboat and the radio you have with a modulator in it.
You have a code specific frequencies. stay on them.
If you don't like the alternate modes, Just don't use them, no is twisting you arm to make you.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One of the gentlemen herein suggested that we turn amateur radio back to pre- World War II technology.
Amen, bruddah! Count me in! 73, AE6RO
Wait a minute! That would mean no ARC-5s.
Oh, well. I'm in anyway.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K2MEN on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Excellent article. Generated lots of interest and comments. I thoroughly enjoyed it. btw, I own a motorboat but love to sail!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Most sailors I have known for the past 31 years wouldnt go to sea without a Motor on there sail boats as many of them use it to get in and out of there berths. The Coast Guard would tell you, its just like all the other rules of the sea, you don't go out with out a Life Jacket, or some form of water survival device. Motors can and do come in handy when you lose a sail.
Been sailing all my life and have run into many who use and carry em.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K8QV on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Why might I paint a picture when cameras are available? Why would I ride a horse when there is a car in the driveway?
Because it's fun, takes skill, and provides satisfaction.
If I ever claim the product of my camera is a painting, or say a car is just like a horse, only faster, then I can also claim that this post is actually a radio transmission, and I'm sure many will agree.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KK6AS on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Mr. Nichols
Has a point. but ham radio is a multifcited hobby.
EME IRLP. Personaly I operate barebones SSB and CW.
When time permits we try to experiment.
But keeping the CW skills honed requires practice.
So we work as time permits cw. But are is a service hobby. Many of the technologic advances have been from ham radio. Keep on experimenting that what it is all about.
Signed
Ben nichols KK6AS
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA3SKN on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Bring back SPARK!
And yet another article based on "The Good Old Days" that never were!
There were issues and problems from Day 1, and it seems that more and more, people forget how things really were!
This just proves how selective the memory can be.
-Mike.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WB2WIK on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't know a real sailor who doesn't know how to tie a sheepshank. A sailor isn't somebody who buys a sailboat and then has somebody sail it for him.
I've thought for many years (most of my life, actually) that the defining test for an amateur radio license -- anywhere -- should be that an examiner tosses the applicant a box of parts, wire, maybe some solder and a heat source to melt it, and ask the applicant to build a transmitter.
60 minutes later, those who built a transmitter and put a signal on the air with it would "pass," and those who didn't could try again another time.
Then, I woke up!
WB2WIK/6
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN posted:
........................
AF6AY "I do not think that diversity of opinions
is "bad."
Fine business Len. I again enjoyed reading your post.
It is very commendable you are open to others
opinions showing a high degree of emotional maturity."
........................
Several would disagree with that...:-)
I don't mind anyone expressing an opinion that
is different from mine. I DO strenuously object
to such folk as demanding I "obey" their desires
or be thought of as the blasphemer, the heretic
who must be burned at some stake. :-(
I would rather follow good old Marty Luther in
nailing some theses to the church door to do a
bit of "cultural belief system" changing. :-)
.........................
WA4KCN: "I especially enjoyed the dry humor
in your post. All to often one senses anger getting
the best of an individual here on eham."
The lack of humor is endemic on computer-modem
communications media. It was visible back on the
old ARPANET long before it morphed into USENET
and changed further to the Internet. It was visible
on thousands of BBSs that once networked the
USA with earlier PCs. Mostly it comes from the
relative isolation of the computer user losing touch
with the fact that there are real people on the other
side of the screen, separated by time and distance.
That is somewhat analagous to amateur radio
contacts except that ham radio contacts are done
in real-time, not delayed by storage on a server
until another has a chance to read it and reply.
Spending some time as a BBS Sysop (as I've done
as co-sysop) and getting to meet such folk in-person
does change one's concept of how they appear on-
screen. Trust me on that.
..................................
WA4KCN: "And your humility is a breath of fresh
air too."
Me humble?!? :-) :-)
..................................
WA4KCN: "Attempting not to begin the discourse
a new, the author's proposition is radio amateurs
should concentrate on core competency rather than
adjuncts."
I can understand the "core competency" no sweat.
Mixing it up with wind-sailing as an "analogue" to
amateur radio is not a good example in my view.
But, what are these "core" things of competency?
Ability to do on-off keying modes? Sorry, but that
is a specialty, dropped by nearly ALL of the rest of
the radio world decades ago; only radio amateurs
keep that skill alive now.
Is it to "make DX contacts?" No, only for those
who like to do those things, perhaps to justify their
ability to DO it and be able to show others they did.
Maybe it is to collect other "wallpaper?" Nice,
pretty certificates of competency in something
hanging in frames on the wall, something to
show friends and family "how good one is?"
The essence of radio communications to me is
to be ABLE to communicate via radio, to contact
another human being to exchange information.
In that way it is no different than the telephone
(which has been around longer than radio). But,
radio can operate without wires, therefore it is
not dependent on any particular infrastructure.
However, the paragraph above can become
inter-mixed. I'll cite an example of what began
as a telephone call to a ham on an article of his
to be published in Ham Radio magazine. As a
part-time Associate Editor for HR it was my
responsibility to double-check the manuscript
for accuracy and resolve a few details. I called
the author's number, his wife answering. She
called him on VHF explaining to me that he
was out but mobile. Via their phone patch he
and I continued the conversation with the
author while he was driving and got the answers.
Now, was he "not" doing amateur radio
communications or was he? I was using a
telephone to reach the author's house but was
patched via VHF (I think on 2m) to the author's
car. The author was using ham radio. I was
not in using the telephone. Yet we were
definitely communicating in real-time (allowing
for his PTT function on his radio). Part of the
comm link was amateur radio but also part of
it was by the POTS. Conundrum?
[there will be an expected segue to some radio
police butting in on that example but they can
go to Riley H. and complain...it was years ago]
...........................
WA4KCN: "For me to make an effort at teaching
you what is meant by cultural traditions is
beyond what I am willing to attempt on eham."
Ahem...don't cast yourself as the "Master" and
me as "grasshopper" Kwang Chai Caine. :-)
The "Kung Fu" TV series was cancelled long ago
but actor David Carradine lives not too far from
me here in the San Fernando Valley of L.A. :-)
The only culture I'm really into is some sharp
cheddar from Land O Lakes. No yoghurt.
.............................
WA4KCN: "Without using vernacular, radio
traditionally was associated with the
transmission or reception of electromagnetic
waves within the radio frequency spectrum
through a media other than wires. An attempt
to alter this meaning for many radio amateurs
represents a radical change in our belief
characteristics."
Far be it for me to "change any belief systems."
I'm a pragmatic Lutheran, not an evangelist.
Having begun in large-scale HF radio comms
54 years ago, let's just say I am acquainted with
what RADIO is. Been there, done that, from
land, from the sea, from the air while at
controls of an airplane. In some instances
the "control point" was remote, interconnected
by wires or other radio systems. In some
cases the "other station" was so operated.
To me it was all RADIO communications.
As to the AMATEUR part of amateur radio, to
me and the FCC it is defined as radio comm-
unications without pecuniary interest; i.e., no
pay, no money compensation for doing such.
That's the main reason the FCC calls the
it Amateur Radio. HOW it is done is a
composite of necessary laws governing that
and the "belief systems" which are many and
varied among those licensed in that radio service.
.....................
WA4KCN: "Len congratulation on getting your
amateur radio license."
Thank you but it was not a great emotional
epoch of my life. On a Sunday afternoon I
drove a mile and a half down my nearest major
street, parking in a familiar supermarket to
walk across the corner to a former LAFD fire
house which now houses part of the LA
Auxilliary Communications System (under the
control of the LAFD). Within three hours I'd
passed all the necessary three tests. I did
not follow the "cultural belief system" criteria
of walking barefoot through snow uphill both
ways to be under the glare of steely-eyed
old FCC examiners as a teenager. I was 74
on 25 February 2007. [still am]
That test was a week earlier than 51 years
past when I took a train into Chicago to pass
all four tests necessary for a First Class
Radiotelephone (Commercial) operator
license. In the half-century-plus in between
I've had to take all kinds of tests, for driving
and formal schooling. It was just a thing
one had to do to be lawful in any activity.
Now, to some that test is a TEST causing
great anxiety, worry, and some discomfort.
I don't accept that "belief system" either but
I've seen others suffer from it, then brag
incessantly about being able to PASS it.
BFD. If one is going to DO something, I
feel that they should prepare for it and
have the confidence that they can
complete it.
..................
WA4KCN: "I wish you great success as
you learn and discover the world of amateur
radio."
Thank you again, but let's be fair, I've been
acquainted with amateur radio almost as
much as with that great big rest of the radio
world for a very long time. I don't plan on
doing the "cultural" thing and devoting the
rest of my life just to ham radio...to show
some "dedication" or "committment." It is
a fun hobby, yes, but just a hobby. Life is
just too short to take up arms, storming
some ideological barricades, armed with
inflexible, stubborn definitions that some
will not let go without a fight to the death.
Pax.
74, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AE6RO: "One of the gentlemen herein suggested
that we turn amateur radio back to pre- World War II
technology. Amen, bruddah! Count me in! 73, AE6RO
Wait a minute! That would mean no ARC-5s.
Oh, well. I'm in anyway."
..........................
Not to worry. According to various write-ups on the
history of Aircraft Radio Corporation's series 5 sets,
the "surplus" ARC-5s were designed BEFORE the
USA entered World War II. :-)
The VHF variants of that series were designed after
1945 although I'm sure they got the idea during the
war period.
Structurally, mechanically, the ARC-5 series was a
wonderful example of craftsmanship for a lightweight
radio. ARC was a sort of Collins Radio of its day.
Electronically, their choice of IF was NOT a thing of
beauty for selectivity in the HF receivers, but that is
quite another subject.
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N7YA on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>don't know a real sailor who doesn't know how to tie a sheepshank. A sailor isn't somebody who buys a sailboat and then has somebody sail it for him.
I've thought for many years (most of my life, actually) that the defining test for an amateur radio license -- anywhere -- should be that an examiner tosses the applicant a box of parts, wire, maybe some solder and a heat source to melt it, and ask the applicant to build a transmitter.
60 minutes later, those who built a transmitter and put a signal on the air with it would "pass," and those who didn't could try again another time.
Then, I woke up!
WB2WIK/6<<<
...I hope theres a dummy load in that box, he shouldnt be transmitting anything before actually having passed the test and receiving a license. ;-)
73...Adam, N7YA
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC2WI on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have nothing against EchoLink or IRLP, but...
Real Amateur Radio involves RADIO. That means making a contact using RADIO WAVES not the Internet.
If you are sitting at your computer talking to someone via EchoLink, YOU are not operating a radio. Well, maybe you are interfacing with one on the other end, but you are not really controlling the radio. You did not set it up or configure it, etc.
You can not "work DX" on Echolink. You can't "work DX" using a repeater either.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Bring back the crystal radio - it's green
Bring back Crystal Gayle "Don't you make my green eyes blue'
I know what (who) I'd choose.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KE5PPH on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
And all of this on the planets largest repeater/ echolink? Kinda Hypocritical.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KC2WI on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It's "Don't it make my brown eyes blue."
[Green-Eyed Lady is a song by Sugarloaf.]
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WB2WIK wrote:
"I've thought for many years (most of my life, actually) that the defining test for an amateur radio license -- anywhere -- should be that an examiner tosses the applicant a box of parts, wire, maybe some solder and a heat source to melt it, and ask the applicant to build a transmitter.
60 minutes later, those who built a transmitter and put a signal on the air with it would "pass," and those who didn't could try again another time."
I like it!
I took that test 40 years ago - and passed. In order to get on the air as a Novice, I had to build a transmitter. Once I had the parts and tools, it took me about an hour to assemble it.
Wasn't very powerful or complex, but it put out a clean signal and I made many contacts with it.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by PT9KK on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would like to say that not all of us spend the whole week or month at home. Some, and I for one, work either overseas or very far away from home. Some times you are not allowed to operate your little VHF HT or any other kind of rig just because you cannot leave work to apply for a ham radio ticket in a foreign country. A software like the one being blamed on this long debate can and will do wonders if you are willing to talk to some ham radio buddies.
I see no problem if you want to use the Internet to reach friends. To each, his own.
Amateur radio is all about having fun by learning and making friends at the same time, if all possible.
Life is just too short to drink bad wine.
Last but not least, I fell in love with CW for the 4th time since I got my ticket 27 years ago.
73,
Luciano PT9KK
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by VE6AAO on September 24, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If it wasn't for electricity we would have to operate our radio's by candle light, opinions are like mid ship orfaces, every one has one. Whatever, have fun, play nice.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
PT9KK wrote: "I see no problem if you want to use the Internet to reach friends. To each, his own."
I don't believe anyone in this forum has a problem with that. After all, that's just what we are doing by participating in these forums! However, none of us calls what we're doing here ham radio.
Now, add to this massive commercial infrastructure called the internet an amateur radio link at one or more ends of the conversation. Does that make it amateur radio? Many of us think that's a real stretch, when the radio part of the link is used as a mere transducer to couple to the internet.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W5JAO writes:
"You have a code specific frequencies. stay on them."
The only part of the US amateur bands that are Morse Code only are 50.0-50.1 and 144.0-144.1 MHz. Everything else is shared with other modes. On the amateur HF/MF bands there are *no* "code specific" frequencies.
"If you don't like the alternate modes, Just don't use them, no is twisting you arm to make you."
That's not the point of the article.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Green-eyed lady, passionate lady/ child of nature/
"Friend of Ham."
Maybe it's a Secret Code for the Magic Eye tubes which resemble a Green Eye. 73, AE6RO
PS. Since I can have my 1936 ARC-5 in the new/old prewar/postmodern world of Ham RAdio, let the Green-Eyed lady wave her magic wand and turn ham radio back to pre-WW II technology. Zap!
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
On a slightly more serious note. The talk about building a transmitter as test reminds me of a James Michener book, "The Drifters." It's about the glorious 1960s.
In one part a 17-year-old ham volunteered to join a tank crew in the Six Day War. A shell ripped through the tank, destroyed the radio, and killed the radioman.
While the crew fought on, he stripped parts out of the wrecked radio to build an improvised transmitter. All that while the battled raged around him.
He succeeded and called in an airstrike. Now there's a test! AE6RO
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K1DA on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Point 1. Ya don't see many sailboats over 16 feet or so WITHOUT a motor of some sort to bail skipper Sammy the Sail Snob out when he wants to dock his prize.
Point 2. When Sammy the Sail Snob "blanks the pooch"
and sails right into a bridge piling because of the great field of vision the sail snob vessel provides, guys with "stinkpots" have to come to his rescue as
he screams his guts out on vhf 16.
Point 3. If Sammy the Sail Snob didn't want to piss off powerboat owners who are hams he would have used the term "powerboat" instead of the deliberatly inflammatory term he used. Petty and small, Sail Snob, petty and small.
Point 4. I look at repeaters as instruments by which the usefulness of VHF bands otherwise propagation limited have been greatly increased. Maybe Sail Snob wants us to go back to Heath Lunchboxes and 3 watts of AM because it is pure and simple and the bands would be empty again except for Snail Snob and his friend down the street.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey! Sailing and Stinkpot snobs shouldn't be using ham equipment unless you have a license.
A Heathkit Lunchbox is pure ham radio. A fine piece of equipment. But you'd be suprised at the odd problems that cropped up with my E-bay lunchboxes. Not so easy to get one to work. Maybe you should try it. Buy one on E-bay and see what happened to it by the time you get it. Then try to fix it.
And the bands are already pretty empty. Low sunspot count, as you might know already.
How about calling him Sammy the Ocean Snail or SOS for short. Ha, ha, funny. 73, AE6RO
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How about "Sammy the Ocean Snailor?!" Huh? Funny, still says SOS. Ha, ha.
And Lunchboxes are closer to one watt AM output.
On six meter simplex my sixer got all the way to Westminster, but he said a guy in Riverside heard me. I couldn't here him 'cause the superregen receiver wasn't sensitive enough (one microvolt.)
AE6RO
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K1DA on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Back when I was building Lunchboxes one had to measure INPUT power per FCC rules. Most of the golden screwdriver stuff I see today is in the Collins and Drake gear I restore. Some of the WORST repair jobs I have seen and redone were in Collins gear formerly used by airlines and other commercial users.
I live on a small island in Narragansett Bay. Boats
are simply part of the landscape. My son works on a
40 foot ferry as a summer job and is helping a buddy restore an O'Day sailboat. We call boats ... boats, sail OR power. Social Climbers who live 40 miles from the bay and keep a driftboat (woops) at the marina growing seaweed
are the only ones who use stupid terms like "stinkpot".
(Notice how cleanly the the new 4 cycle Honda outboards run?)
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AE6RO on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I live in Long Beach, CA and there are lots of boats in the marina. But the last time I went into a marine store a big blue bag of lifesaving gear fell down and bopped me on the back of the neck.
So much for blue water . . .
I recently bought three E-bay Lunchboxes (CB-1)and of these two arrived with the power transformer loose. In each case one screw was out and stuck to the speaker magnet. The other screw was loose so the transformer could conveniently flop around.
I was lucky with one but the other one bashed a tube out, bent the chassis and tore the leads through the paper insulation. Too bad 'cause it was pretty cherry otherwise.
This had also happened in 1997 with a Tener which I had packed and mailed myself to Hawaii from Long Beach.
Two different sellers, two different shippers from two different states. So whose golden screwdriver was it, anyway? Not to mention the coils that lose inductance on the way. That's why I stick to simple gear. I wouldn't want to imagine what could happen to a Collins on its way to me. John AE6RO
PS. I think any oceangoing vessel should have an engine, no matter what.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
the only time i use a computer on a ship or in ham radio is when I wanna work PSK or TTY but as for using the ECHOLINK its not usually my bag to playwith as I dont consider it true dx when it comes to long distance comms.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K8QV on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Radio: Reception and transmission of electromagnetic waves at radio frequencies.
This is a definition of a word, not a personal "construct."
I call my playing with the computer my Computer Hobby.
I call my playing with the ham radio my Radio Hobby.
The computer can be used to facilitate certain radio functions, as it can aid other endeavors. However, the word "radio" must still meet the definition to truly be considered a radio transmission.
Redefining terms to suit one's wishes doesn't change reality.
Learning spelling and grammar wouldn't hurt our image either.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by K6YE on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Eric,
WINLINK, IRLP, and ECHOLINK have their place. Some of them are:If one is in a place where HOA/CC&Rs reign tightly; or where one is confined to a retirement village or skilled nursing center; or if one simply desires to employ these methods.
I enjoy personally touching yagis, slopers, verticals, transceivers, and amplifiers at my abode. However, whatever floats the boats of others is fine with me.
No matter what, enjoy the hobby while you can.
Semper Fi,
Tommy - K6YE
DX IS
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N7YA on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
For some reason, im having a hard time simply saying "Sammy the Sail Snob"...i keep saying snail! you might have a good toungue twister here....
|
|   |
|
Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AI2IA on September 25, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hopefully by this point in time the topic has been beaten to death. If it has not yet had that benefit, then I will add this:
In amateur radio we have certain conventions, all well and good. There are also some so-called "traditions" hanging around. Phooey on them. This is RADIO. This is not Radio History 101. If you want to play old time radio, go ahead, but you cannot turn ALL of amateur radio into it.
As long as the FCC sanctions it, any new mode, device, technique, or whatever using our portions of the radio spectrum should be welcomed by all license holders. If you don't willing prepare for the future, then you don't deserve one.
How many types do you want in your lovely amateur radio caste system? Extra Lites, No Code Generals, Landlubbers, etc., etc. All real hams are license holders, and they are right and proper doing anything and everything, old or new that their licenses permit. Everything else is nonsense.
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"As long as the FCC sanctions it, any new mode, device, technique, or whatever using our portions of the radio spectrum should be welcomed by all license holders. If you don't willing prepare for the future, then you don't deserve one."
Really? I suppose you have no objection to BPL, then.
I really feel sorry for you folks who have been so beaten down by neo-liberal corporate propaganda to accept and .. here's the word that really cracks me up, "embrace" change in whatever form it takes. Throw away your copies of "Who Moved My Cheese," and think for yourselves!"
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KG6UTS on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Folkboat! Excellent for the SF area. I like all the Ham technology including IRLP etc.....and my Johnson Ranger and BC-610
EdZ (born at sea 1946)
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C: "Really? I suppose you have no objection to BPL, then."
Silly analogy. Just about every ham is against BPL and wants to ban it. On the other hand, I've directly asked you and KL7AJ what you want to do about Echolink and other hybrid modes, but so far all you seem to do is want to pin a label on those who use them.
What I don't understand is why some of you seem to be so upset with those modes. Do they interfere with you in some way? If so, it would only be the RF portion of the link that does so.
Do those modes offend you as being easy? So what? A VHF line of sight rag chew is hardly any more difficult, yet I'm sure you don't feel there is a problem there.
Do you think those modes are technically inferior, or require less knowledge to use them? I might remind you that the license requirements are the same, and the operating requirements are certainly no easier than turning on your rig for a 40m SSB sked with your buddy in the next state.
Do you think those modes allow cheating for awards or contests? Cheating is cheating, and there are zillions of ways to do it for those so inclined. I'd be more worried about the guy running 5 KW and claiming low power status than somebody trying to operate a contest via Echolink, and I'll bet there are have been more DX contacts "facilitated" by friends in another state with better propagation than have been aided by the internet (although I agree this is becoming a growing issue).
Or do these people just irritate you because they are doing something different than you are? What's the story, and more importantly, what specific action do you want to see taken?
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AI2IA posted:
"Hopefully by this point in time the topic has
been beaten to death. If it has not yet had
that benefit, then I will add this:
In amateur radio we have certain conventions,
all well and good. There are also some so-called
"traditions" hanging around. Phooey on them.
This is RADIO. This is not Radio History 101.
If you want to play old time radio, go ahead,
but you cannot turn ALL of amateur radio into it.
As long as the FCC sanctions it, any new mode,
device, technique, or whatever using our portions
of the radio spectrum should be welcomed by all
license holders. If you don't willing prepare
for the future, then you don't deserve one."
.........................
Many aren't prepared for any future. :-)
The stubborn ones want to hang onto THEIR
perceptions of amateur radio no matter what.
Some of it is simple brainwashing by the very
limited specialized media as examplified by
the ARRL publications. Some of it is vainly
trying to hold onto a youth that they once had,
still trying to preserve their personal
discoveries of something terribly NEW to them
(radio). Perhaps some want to anthropomorphize
the hobby in THEIR terms, holding themselves up
as the ultimate example of what all should be.
I've seen and experienced six decades of
total CHANGE in electronics and radio, almost
several magnitudes of change, improvement,
revision, in both technology and how radio is
used. I've loved nearly all of it and can't
wait to see what is just around the corner.
A few others want NO change whatsoever...it
bothers them...they want everything to
always be the same...the same as when They
began...that is safe, secure, and they need
no anxiety about having to learn something
new...they "know it all" anyway so don't
bother them.
.............................
AI2IA: "How many types do you want in your
lovely amateur radio caste system? Extra Lites,
No Code Generals, Landlubbers, etc., etc.
All real hams are license holders, and they are
right and proper doing anything and everything,
old or new that their licenses permit."
No, we aren't. At least not in US ham radio.
If we didn't "come up through the ranks" like
the old-timers, we are "newbies," "know-
nothings," "beginners," and other assorted
denigrations that would fit a Dill Instructor
to condition His troops. Wow, I'm tired of
those self-righteous "experts" who are
always, always better than anyone. :-(
..............................
AI2IA: "Everything else is nonsense."
True, but it IS the human condition. :-)
73, Len AF6AY [always older than the FCC]
|
|   |
|
Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In addition to his attempt to interrogate me (which I will not succumb to), AB7E wrote: "Silly analogy."
I wasn't making an analogy. I was responding to a literal interpretation of AI2IA's words.
I am willing to concede that hybrid modes, whereby amateur radio is linked in various ways to the commercial infrastructure of the internet, can be referred to as ham radio. It's just that I believe it appropriate to add the adjective, "half-assed," in front of the words "ham radio" for these cases.
This simply expresses my feelings on the subject. I realize that there are others who feel differently, and I respect their opinions. There is no need (nor any point) to interpolate, extrapolate, or otherwise distort what I have said.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "On the other hand, I've directly asked you and KL7AJ what you want to do about Echolink and other hybrid modes, but so far all you seem to do is want to pin a label on those who use them."
Dave with all due respect you are reading too much into the author's comments. He was using hyperbole. If you and others wish to consider communications on the internet as radio you may do so. There is no action that need be taken against hybrid modes. They are just fine and even fit rather well into the mind set of many new amateurs. Most newly licensed amateurs do not look like the traditional "radioman" having abilities in both morse code and radio theory anyway. Most new licensees will be more competent in the use of computers and the internet than radio operation. It might well be expected the lines between the two will further blurr as time passes. Your way of thinking wins out. It is rather foolish of you though to expect seasoned radio amateurs to agree with the new notion of what radio is.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "It is rather foolish of you though to expect seasoned radio amateurs to agree with the new notion of what radio is."
With all due respect, I don't think it has anything to do with "seasoned amateurs". I've been a ham for 40 years, and spent almost all of that time DXing and contesting on HF, probably 95% of it on CW. I think it has much more to do with how badly each of us as individuals need reinforcement from uniformity and conformity ... or not. I agree though, that it is indeed foolish of me to expect some of these folks to see things differently.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 26, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "With all due respect, I don't think it has anything to do with "seasoned amateurs". I've been a ham for 40 years, and spent almost all of that time DXing and contesting on HF, probably 95% of it on CW. I think it has much more to do with how badly each of us as individuals need reinforcement from uniformity and conformity ... or not. I agree though, that it is indeed foolish of me to expect some of these folks to see things differently."
Reinforcement from uniformity and comformity. I would enjoy hearing more about this theory. On the issue of hybrid modes being considered radio, I personally believe viewpoints on this matter are more patterned by time spent as a radio amateur with experienced radio men in your camp being in the minority. This might make for a good survey question on e-ham. Dave, the reason you are struggling with comprehension of opposing points of view (even though a great number have given lucid explainations for the basis of their opinion) is many believe you are asking more than to look at things differently - that in fact you are asking them to look at things wrongly.
Many believe you are asking for a false, invalid, and lazily thought out paradigm shift and that my friend suggests a difficult argument to make. The idea of hybrid modes being radio will however sell much better to an inexperienced group of newly licensed operators who have less familiarity with radio and more with computers, the internet, etc. It is just fine though for you to feel the way you do. It does not make you less of an operator.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by K8QV on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Radio and Internet are both used for communication. So are smoke signals, telephones and two tin cans with a string.
Communication may employ any of the above. To be a smoke-signaler you must use a fire, to be a tin-canner you must have string and cans, to be a radio operator you must use a radio. Why is this concept so difficult to grasp by so many?
I see the old timers (here and in real life) embracing new technology, but without redefining standard definitions. I also see the younger folks hating amateur radio while all the time wanting to call their computer hobby "radio". If you think so little of radio why do you want to be called a ham?
You may call a chicken "two-legged beef" but it's still a chicken.
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY wrote:
"The stubborn ones want to hang onto THEIR
perceptions of amateur radio no matter what.
Some of it is simple brainwashing by the very
limited specialized media as examplified by
the ARRL publications. Some of it is vainly
trying to hold onto a youth that they once had,
still trying to preserve their personal
discoveries of something terribly NEW to them
(radio). Perhaps some want to anthropomorphize
the hobby in THEIR terms, holding themselves up
as the ultimate example of what all should be."
Who are these anonymous people, Len?
Being opposed to certain changes isn't wrong all
by itself. New things are not, by definition,
better or worse than the old ones.
"I've seen and experienced six decades of
total CHANGE in electronics and radio, almost
several magnitudes of change, improvement,
revision, in both technology and how radio is
used. I've loved nearly all of it and can't
wait to see what is just around the corner."
But you've only been a radio amateur for a few
months, Len.
"A few others want NO change whatsoever...it
bothers them...they want everything to
always be the same...the same as when They
began...that is safe, secure, and they need
no anxiety about having to learn something
new"
You mean like folks who resisted having to
learn a new skill, and pass a simple test
on it, just to get an HF amateur radio license?
"...they "know it all" anyway so don't
bother them."
Who are these people that are so resistant
to new things, Len? How do you know their
motivations?
Perhaps they are motivated by things you
have not considered.
For example, many experienced hams have a considerable
investment in amateur radio. Not so much in dollars
spent but in time, effort, work to build a station,
etc. They've acquired lots of experience in amateur
radio even if they are not "professionals". Often
they enjoy some things just the way they are. It is
reasonable for them to be a bit cautious about changes
that may threaten the things they value and enjoy.
A newcomer like yourself doesn't have that investment
nor experience in amateur radio. That's not a
put-down, it's just a plain and simple fact.
The situation is somewhat like that of a
long-established neighborhood. If new people
buy property and propose changes, the "old"
residents may need a bit of convincing that the
proposed changes are a good thing. Are they
wrong to oppose changes they disagree with?
.............................
AI2IA wrote earlier:
"All real hams are license holders, and they are
right and proper doing anything and everything,
old or new that their licenses permit."
And he's right about that! I would add, however,
that "anything and everything" includes following
good amateur practice.
AF6AY replied:
"No, we aren't. At least not in US ham radio.
If we didn't "come up through the ranks" like
the old-timers, we are "newbies," "know-
nothings," "beginners," and other assorted
denigrations that would fit a Dill Instructor
to condition His troops."
"Newbie" and "beginner" are not denigrations if
they are true. And it's true that you are a
new radio amateur if you've only had the license
a few months. So as far as amateur radio is
concerned, you *are* a newbie and a beginner.
However, your experience outside amateur radio
does not automatically make you an expert radio
amateur.
"Know-nothing" *is* a denigration, but I don't
see anyone tossing out that one but you, Len.
"Wow, I'm tired of
those self-righteous "experts" who are
always, always better than anyone. :-("
Why does the expertise of others bother you?
Fact is, there are things that I can do
better than you, and there may be things
that you can do better than me. So what?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN posted:
"AB7E "With all due respect, I don't think it
has anything to do with "seasoned amateurs".
I've been a ham for 40 years, and spent almost
all of that time DXing and contesting on HF,
probably 95% of it on CW. I think it has much
more to do with how badly each of us as
individuals need reinforcement from uniformity
and conformity ... or not. I agree though, that
it is indeed foolish of me to expect some of
these folks to see things differently."
Reinforcement from uniformity and comformity.
I would enjoy hearing more about this theory."
...................
It's not a theory, it is observable fact and
mentioned in Psychology 101-102 which was
once a requirement in California for all college
undergrad students (in the 1950s, at least).
'Uniformity and conformity' reqpresent security,
safety to many. It is the known, the already-
learned, the 'comfort food' for the mind. It fits
into some of the Basic Survival needs of
humans. It's part of the holding-back of time,
a denial of the mortality that exists for all of
us. It is pleasureable to hearken back to the
days of youth and enthusiasm we've all had,
the nostalgia for things some of us enjoyed
once upon a time.
What I find curious (after being IN radio and
electronics for over a half century) is how some
cling so steadfastly to a past era and MUST
preserve everything about it...especially in a
hobby pursuit. Electronics as a whole has
undergone a TREMENDOUS technological
change in just a half century. That includes
technology in amateur radio.
.......................
WA4KCN: "Dave, the reason you are
struggling with comprehension of opposing
points of view (even though a great number
have given lucid explainations for the basis
of their opinion) is many believe you are asking
more than to look at things differently - that
in fact you are asking them to look at things
wrongly."
"Wrongly?!?" Whoops, that's a bit harsh and
one-sided, isn't it? I don't see Dave "struggling"
with anything, including comprehension. He is
not steadfastly clinging to the past when it comes
to what ALL radio amateurs are "supposed to
believe." Dave seems to enjoy what he does for
himself and seems to think that all should do the
same...and without new things being branded
with "half-assed" ham radio methods as NI0C
has stated.
...........................
WA4KCN: "Many believe you are asking for a
false, invalid, and lazily thought out paradigm
shift and that my friend suggests a difficult
argument to make."
No kidding? :-) By life experience I've seen
and experienced a LOT of this armor-plated,
cement-reinforced stubbornness in human
beans. They are RIGHT and anyone who thinks
differently than they do are "wrong." :-)
..........................
WA4KCN: "The idea of hybrid modes being
radio will however sell much better to an
inexperienced group of newly licensed
operators who have less familiarity with radio
and more with computers, the internet, etc.
Hey, Russ, how about some of us 'newbies'
who've been IN the electronics industry or in
actual HF communications for a very long
time? Oh, yeah, I forgot...ham radio is
'different' than commercial/military radio.
It must work by different principles of physics
and that works its way into the hearts and
minds of hams everywhere? :-)
Where's Lamont Cranston when we need him?
:-)
......................
WA4KCN: "It is just fine though for you to
feel the way you do. It does not make you
less of an operator."
Hmmm...sounds like we've been preached to
by someone judgemental?
By such standards, I'm a terrible ham radio
operator...don't and won't do CW nor try to
work every call in the world on HF. I must be
less than less of an operator. My very
first amateur license said Amateur Extra on
it so I can't claim 30/40/50 years in ham
radio. Didn't even walk barefoot through the
snow (uphill both ways) to sit before the
FCC as an anxiety-filled teenager. But, I
DID pass all the lawful tests the same
as everyone else had to. And I DID do over
a half century of work in electronics,
beginning it all doing HF comms in the
military. Not ham radio, of course, so that
must not count...according to the 'judges.'
Now, I haven't used Echolink nor any of the
Internet-based aids for ham communications.
Since I have no desire to Do Contests, I've
got no need for such aids. Do I think that
using such aids is "half-assed ham radio?"
No. I'm intrigued by D-Star which some say
"isn't 'real' ham radio." Maybe that makes
me a "half a half-assed" ham operator? :-)
It's so nice to find a 'welcome wagon' for
new licensees. But, why are so many old-
timers driving it like they trying to run us
newbies down? Hmmm?
Pax
Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C posted: "I am willing to concede that hybrid
modes, whereby amateur radio is linked in various
ways to the commercial infrastructure of the internet,
can be referred to as ham radio. It's just that I
believe it appropriate to add the adjective, "half-assed,"
in front of the words "ham radio" for these cases.
This simply expresses my feelings on the subject.
I realize that there are others who feel differently,
and I respect their opinions. There is no need (nor
any point) to interpolate, extrapolate, or otherwise
distort what I have said."
........................
The bottom line seems to be that if you've been
in amateur radio since the year dot and haven't
changed much in all that time, it is "okay" for you
to put "half-assed" in front of descriptions done by
more liberal, progressive, free-thinking amateurs.
It is therefore "wrong" for some us to object to
being insulted outright by "half-assed" adjectives.
:-)
Len AF6AY [always older than the FCC]
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by KE7IPY on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
IRLP is a crutch on 2M. Bad ops can't talk to Europe from the West coast on that band without it. Great analogy there.
|
|   |
|
Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions.&qu
|
|
|
by AC7ZL on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
On *my* web browser, the eHam articles page appears with a link labeled: "Reply." By clicking on this, visitors are allowed to comment on an article and on the comments others have made. Nowhere have I seen a button labeled "Insult," "Criticize," "Belittle," "Demean," or "Flagellate." Yet, every time somebody posts something here, no matter what the topic, this forum seems to degenerate into something like a drunken brawl at O'Malley's pub.
Still fresh in my mind is the article written by the guy who reflected on memories of his father and ham radio, and how these experiences were emerging in the relationship he had with his own son. I was shocked at some of the comments that appeared. The man was called a phony, was ridiculed, and insulted.
Another guy wrote an article about something he had purchased and was tinkering with, and made the mistake of jokingly referring to his income tax refund as cash from George Bush. Sheez! That was like raw meat in a shark tank. After the bloody water ceased churning, who remembered what the article was really about?
This article ("Landlubbers") is shaping up the same way. A guy poses an interesting point of view, and many have made thoughtful and productive comments, including those who disagree with the article's premise. For too many posters, however, this is not enough. They are not happy unless they are slamming somebody, whether the author of the article, or another poster.
I wonder how many quality articles/stories will never be posted here because there is no "upside" to the beating a potential author knows will surely come. Who loses? Everyone.
What puzzles me is this: I have a hard time picturing even the worst of the eHam bullies behaving this way if all of us were physically seated together at a table in a conference room somewhere. There would still be disagreement, but the dynamics would surely be different--- hey!...these names and call signs have faces! I think the participants would recognize the people sitting across from them as *human beings*, worthy of some level of courtesy and respect. All too often, this basic respect seems to evaporate when messages travel in electronic form.
As to ham radio cultural traditions, I think courtesy may once have been among them. Patience, essential to the art of Elmering was probably one of them too. However, if the eHam forum is any indication, these are traditions that are rapidly being abandoned.
There are those who have suggested that the eHam forum really needs a moderator. Maybe, but I don't think that civility can be imposed from the top-down. It's something that has to exist on the individual level and it emerges from the ground-up. I'm not singing Kumbaya here, but I just think that a little consideration goes a long way.
In the end, literally millions of keystrokes have documented the hand-wringing over issues like BPL, the potential loss of spectrum space, the aging and declining ham population, and code-vs-no code. Yet, I can think of nothing more destructive to a hobby predicated on communication than a culture in which the practitioners of that hobby regularly treat each other like dirt.
AF6AY asked:
>So, just WHAT are these "cultural traditions" that
>some of you state? WHAT are they? Name them.
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY "By such standards, I'm a terrible ham radio
operator...don't and won't do CW nor try to
work every call in the world on HF. I must be
less than less of an operator. My very
first amateur license said Amateur Extra on
it so I can't claim 30/40/50 years in ham
radio. Didn't even walk barefoot through the
snow (uphill both ways) to sit before the
FCC as an anxiety-filled teenager. But, I
DID pass all the lawful tests the same
as everyone else had to."
Hello Len. It was good to read your latest post. I enjoy them! For the record, I have no idea wheather or not you are a solid operator. You most likely have lots to learn being newly licensed and without experience. No physics is not unique in amateur radio but yes operation on the ham bands is unparalleled. Although biased I believe you have clearly lost the debate concerning radio and the internet. Having said that I believe amateur radio is better off for having you Len AF6AY as a licensed member of the amateur radio service. Your opinions and strong beliefs (sometimes being off the mark) will work to the good for the future of amateur radio. I consider you a good radio amateur and a friend. You should worry less about being new to the hobby though - it shows.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AC7ZL: "This article ("Landlubbers") is shaping up the same way. A guy poses an interesting point of view ..."
Considering the concern you raise (a valid one, by the way), I'm mildly surprised you pass off the original article as merely "an interesting point of view". To me the original article is exactly an example of what you seem to be disturbed about. KL7AJ had the bluster to say (and I quote) "A bad radio amateur uses Echolink." KL7AJ's article was intentionally inflammatory ... it had no other purpose than to create the divisiveness and rancor that you lament. It was a troll ... as are, it seems, many of the "articles" that get posted here on eHam.
Dave AB7E
p.s. I don't use Echolink, IRLP, not even AMTOR or similar message forwarding modes ... never have, probably never will.
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "To me the original article is exactly an example of what you seem to be disturbed about. KL7AJ had the bluster to say (and I quote) "A bad radio amateur uses Echolink.""
Dave you must understand the author was using a writing structure know as comparision and contrast. He describes in narrow "context" a good and bad operator for the sake of argument through a writing style. The statement in literary terms was not meant to be taken as fact. What better place to debate issues of amateur radio than on e-ham.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "
Dave you must understand the author was using a writing structure known as comparison and contrast. He describes in narrow "context" a good and bad operator for the sake of argument through a writing style. The statement in literary terms was not meant to be taken as fact."
Oh give me a break ... I don't need a condescending lesson in English writing here. And if you don't think KL7AJ didn't mean for his statement to be taken literally, why don't you ask him and see if he posts a response here?
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "Oh give me a break ... I don't need a condescending lesson in English writing here. And if you don't think KL7AJ didn't mean for his statement to be taken literally, why don't you ask him and see if he posts a response here?"
Ok lets give this a try. KL7AJ please respond for the sake of those who have sucessfully defended your position.
Did you mean for the statement bad operators use Echolink to be construed as an infallible truth for the ages while conceptualizeing the statement as meaning an operator who uses Echolink during his days as an amateur radio operator should be branded as a bad operator until a silent key.
Or were you simple using intentional exaggeration and an aggressive writing style taken in context to make your case and to encourage participation in the discussion.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 27, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Uhh, Russ ... couldn't you have just asked KL7AJ a simple "did you mean what you said literally or not"? Don't you think maybe, just maybe, that you're putting words (quite a lot of them, actually) in his mouth? Still, it will be interesting to see if he steps up and responds one way or the other to you, since he didn't to me.
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY made this astonishing extrapolation of my words:
"The bottom line seems to be that if you've been
in amateur radio since the year dot and haven't
changed much in all that time, it is "okay" for you
to put "half-assed" in front of descriptions done by
more liberal, progressive, free-thinking amateurs.
It is therefore "wrong" for some us to object to
being insulted outright by "half-assed" adjectives.
:-)"
You have no idea of how wrong you are. You seem to think you have nothing to learn about this hobby that you have only recently joined. You ought to QRX more, and "transmit" less, OM.
"[always older than the FCC]"
A legend in your own mind.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by G3LBS on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
In the interest of free speech, why don't you ask President Tom from Iran to join us?
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by KE7IPY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN said:
"Dave you must understand the author was using a writing structure know as comparision and contrast. He describes in narrow "context" a good and bad operator for the sake of argument through a writing style. The statement in literary terms was not meant to be taken as fact. What better place to debate issues of amateur radio than on e-ham."
Actually, KCN, what you're describing is called a Strawman argument, and it's a logical fallacy. If you have to construct your enemy, then you're arguing against an opponent that isn't real, that you've created for the purposes of knocking down. This isn't a compelling argument, it's a sham meant to impress the ignorant. It should make things easier for the arguer, but it doesn't provide anything germane to the argument at hand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by N7YA on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KL7AJ had to have known what was going to happen after a post like his....this is eHam for crying out loud. He's posted here before, he knows how it works...firecracker in the henhouse. Have fun guys, and be sure to thank KL7AJ for the entertainment.
73...Adam, N7YA
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by N5XM on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I think it's a nice post and a reasonable comparison. I am reminded of the old phrase, "it is what it is". Amateur radio is what you make it. I am pure CW, but so what? I've done more than my share of phone, but so what? We are what we are, that is, a group of mixed tastes. Enjoy what you enjoy. More than sailing, which is a great example, I see Ham Radio more like fishing...you never know what you are gonna get until you get a call sign, whether it be from Moffet, OK or Paris, France! What you are just learning today, in a year can be a great understanding. Just keep learning, folks!
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE7IPY posted:
.........................
WA4KCN said:
"Dave you must understand the author was
using a writing structure know as comparision
and contrast. He describes in narrow "context"
a good and bad operator for the sake of
argument through a writing style. The statement
in literary terms was not meant to be taken as fact.
What better place to debate issues of amateur
radio than on e-ham."
Actually, KCN, what you're describing is called
a Strawman argument, and it's a logical fallacy.
If you have to construct your enemy, then you're
arguing against an opponent that isn't real, that
you've created for the purposes of knocking down.
This isn't a compelling argument, it's a sham
meant to impress the ignorant. It should make
things easier for the arguer, but it doesn't provide
anything germane to the argument at hand.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman
...........................
Well put! The original article was alread loaded
with straw and biased to the extreme insofar as
opinions are concerned.
But, strawmen arguments are used all the time,
especially to reinforce the mindset of those that
must Keep The Faith of old-time amateur radio,
complete with all the trappings of Tradition ("we've
always done it that way and we always will"!). :-)
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Conduct in this forum and "ham traditions
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AC7ZL posted:
.....................
"This article ("Landlubbers") is shaping up the same
way. A guy poses an interesting point of view, and
many have made thoughtful and productive comments,
including those who disagree with the article's premise. For too many posters, however, this is not
enough. They are not happy unless they are slamming
somebody, whether the author of the article, or
another poster.
I wonder how many quality articles/stories will never
be posted here because there is no "upside" to the
beating a potential author knows will surely come.
Who loses? Everyone.
What puzzles me is this: I have a hard time picturing
even the worst of the eHam bullies behaving this way
if all of us were physically seated together at a table in a conference room somewhere. There would
still be disagreement, but the dynamics would surely
be different--- hey!...these names and call signs have
faces! I think the participants would recognize the
people sitting across from them as *human beings*,
worthy of some level of courtesy and respect. All too
often, this basic respect seems to evaporate when
messages travel in electronic form."
.....................
As one who has had a quarter century of computer-
modem communications I would put it down to just
"It's the Nature of the Beast." Isolated by time and
space, sitting alone in front of a terminal, many just
forget that the people who wrote what is on their
screen are real. <shrug>
I've seen it on the old ARPANET, on USENET, on
countless Bulletin Board Systems, finally on the
Internet (the biggest Beast of all). The style of
response has been long established.
AC7ZL: "As to ham radio cultural traditions, I think
courtesy may once have been among them. Patience,
essential to the art of Elmering was probably one of
them too. However, if the eHam forum is any
indication, these are traditions that are rapidly
being abandoned."
I don't think so. Being a "newbie" I can't say what
was the Standard behavior of the olde dayes. All I've
heard were the Tales of Yesteryear that all brag
about. Never mind that I began in HF radio 54 years
ago, "ham radio was always 'different' in regards to
civility, always pure and simple." :-)
The e-ham forums are all on the Internet and are an
evolution of the computer-modem style of personal
communications. That's a blessing and a curse.
Those with time-reinforced Opinions will out, whether
they are biased or not.
AC7ZL: "There are those who have suggested that
the eHam forum really needs a moderator. Maybe,
but I don't think that civility can be imposed from
the top-down."
A Moderator system will be the death of discussion.
rec.radio.amateur.moderated on USENET was created
to impose "civility" and it is not working out well.
Activity dropped off drastically when the Moderator
Team there rejected so many posts...and the same
carbon-copy Guidelines (a small manual in itself) kept
appearing (about once a month) as a "warning" to be
nice.
If the Moderators are biased, the content will be biased. Human beings are still human beings.
<shrug>
AC7ZL: "It's something that has to exist on the
individual level and it emerges from the ground-up.
I'm not singing Kumbaya here, but I just think that
a little consideration goes a long way."
I'm with you there even if I tend to sing "It's a Small
World After All" instead of "Kumbalaya" (or whatever
that title is). Been there, done that, got the bloodied T-shirts. :-)
No problem for me. I was harrassed, intimidated,
insulted, told I was a nothing person on rec.radio.
amateur.policy for a decade. Still, I got an amateur
radio license and more radio equipment. :-)
AC7ZL: Yet, I can think of nothing more destructive
to a hobby predicated on communication than a
culture in which the practitioners of that hobby
regularly treat each other like dirt."
That is curious, isn't it? :-)
But, if you look at US amateur radio over a long
span of time, the "culture" has CHANGED subtly
from what was originally just a hobby of radio-
interested people to one of some kind of Culture
complete with certain Ways It Must Be Done.
Deviate from those Ways and one is considered
a heretic or blasphemer...by certain others.
The above is no different than any other human
endeavor in any activity. No real originality in
that regard for US amateur radio. :-)
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "Hello Len. It was good to read your latest
post. I enjoy them! For the record, I have no idea
wheather or not you are a solid operator. You most
likely have lots to learn being newly licensed and
without experience."
Wow, Russ, WELL DONE! :-)
You've managed to be "civil" and "complimentary" and
then sneak in with a judgemental tone and say "I have
no experience" (without clarifying that to JUST amateur
radio). Gooooood technique for computer-modem comm!
You learn well "grasshopper." :-)
WA4KCN: "No physics is not unique in amateur radio
but yes operation on the ham bands is unparalleled."
Sorry, but CB (on 27 MHz) is a definite parallel. And,
there are MORE CB-ers than licensed radio amateurs.
"Personal communications." The number of cell phone
users dwarf both hams, CB-ers, FRS-ers, and PLMRS
licensees put together.
WA4KCN: "Although biased I believe you have clearly
lost the debate concerning radio and the internet."
Oh? Was I in a "debate?" No, I wasn't, just making
some comments to a few who were already BIASED
well beyond Class C, even Class E... :-)
WA4KCN: "Having said that I believe amateur radio is
better off for having you Len AF6AY as a licensed
member of the amateur radio service."
Russ, I volunteered once for military service. That
was in 1952 and there was a definite war going on in Asia at the time. Northeast Asia, not southeast
Asia. I did NOT "volunteer for service" in US amateur
radio. Are we squared away on that? I got an amateur radio license for MYSELF, not for any "good of the
amateur radio service." Please try to figure out that
there is NO parallel between military service and a
radio service.
WA4KCN: "Your opinions and strong beliefs (sometimes
being off the mark) will work to the good for the future of amateur radio."
Nonsense. As an advocate for ending the morse code
test for US radio amateur licensing, I've already been
branded, flogged (verbally), and generally thought ill of by hundreds of upright, uptight, self-righteous old-timers who wanted their own place in the sun with
their morse skills and "incentive" Extra class
license. Knowing all that, I went ahead and passed
all three tests for the Amateur radio license. In one
day. No "elmering" needed nor necessary. Had I
waited just a week longer I could have done it on the
51st anniversary of getting my First 'Phone
license...after having operated and supervised HF comms
in the military for three years before that. Yeah, right, I am "inexperienced in radio"... :-(
WA4KCN: "I consider you a good radio amateur and a
friend."
Put it more truthfully...I'm not an enemy. :-) To me a "friend" is one who can communicate on many levels
with respect from mutual in-person interaction over years. "Friendship" is word prone to being used wrongly, such as in the typical Hollywoodian entertainment business "close personal friend" by entertainers here in L.A. (the film captital of the
world, which I've never worked in).
WA4KCN: "You should worry less about being new to
the hobby though - it shows."
It "shows" on every FCC database download...that I am
new to amateur radio...first licensed on 7 March 2007.
So what? Did I not live a whole life before then? Did I not touch a piece of radio equipment before
then? When you go and get all judgemental about a
person, try to expand your knowledge horizon beyond
the Event Horizon of some black hole of "amateur-radio-is-all-there-is" remarks.
Sorry, I don't "worry" about being "new to radio." I was "new" to radio about 54 years ago. Since then
I've learned a few things, formally but mostly on my own in LOTS of radio services, a few of those not even
under jurisdiciton of the FCC. I'm not a pretender of
expertise in amateur radio, don't care to do
competitive contesting ("radio sport") nor
"working the world" from my own amateur radio station.
I'm in amateur radio simply because of an interest in ALL radio and having been IN the electronics-radio
industry of aerospace for a working career. It seems
to be fun, and an enjoyable pastime. I DO have to
slip into the mindset of some of the old-timers now
and then to be "civil" and worship their mighty
expertise and tales of radio adventure lest I be
banned entirely from the clubhouse with all its
tales told around the fireplace. They are, all things
said and done, the "best radio ops" anywhere. :-)
"QRX" and all that. [I know how to "hit my mark"] Bye.
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C looked down from the mountaintop and exclaimed:
................................
"AF6AY made this astonishing extrapolation of my words:
"The bottom line seems to be that if you've been
in amateur radio since the year dot and haven't
changed much in all that time, it is "okay" for you
to put "half-assed" in front of descriptions done by
more liberal, progressive, free-thinking amateurs.
It is therefore "wrong" for some us to object to
being insulted outright by "half-assed" adjectives.
:-)"
You have no idea of how wrong you are."
................................
Yes I do. But, the "wrongness" is of YOUR perception,
not from the Supreme Grey Council of all sentient
beings. Do babylon, however... :-)
NI0C: "You seem to think you have nothing to learn
about this hobby that you have only recently joined."
Whatever you say, SIR! [am I required to salute, or
what?] :-)
What you gonna do next, SIR? Tell me to "fall down
and give you twenty?" :-)
NI0C: "You ought to QRX more, and "transmit"
less, OM."
Guess you've Told Me Off, huh? :-)
...............................
NI0C: ""[always older than the FCC]"
A legend in your own mind."
................................
No, actuarial fact. I was born in 1932. The FCC
was created in 1934...ergo, I've always been older
than the FCC. :-)
Oh, and I DO have much to learn about ALL radio.
It keeps advancing in technology, improving, even
adding new modes and methods of communications.
I've got to keep learning every day, just as I've
had to do in my working career as an electronics
design engineer and always the hobbyist.
But many of the old-timer Believers and self-righteous
gurus demand that everything be kept "pure" and
even "ethnically-cleansed" of dangerous thoughts of
newness that would upset the old-timers' concepts
of What Should Always Be.
You keep the Faith of the Church of St. Hiram and
may God Bless...
A half-assed 73 right back to you,
Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY:
I have no quarrel with you. The fact is, you and I probably have a lot more in common than you imagine.
Ironically though it is your imagination that seems to have gotten you in trouble in this forum-- you keep making up things about those with whom you disagree. You tout your "life experience," and bring up various bullet points from your resume as if the rest of us have no life or career experiences from which we draw.
I do wish you well in ham radio. All I really meant by the "half-assed" remark is that the hybrid modes would represent a less than satisfactory ham radio experience for me.
A full-blown sincere 73 to you,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE7IPY -"Actually, KCN, what you're describing is called a Strawman argument, and it's a logical fallacy. If you have to construct your enemy, then you're arguing against an opponent that isn't real, that you've created for the purposes of knocking down."
You are right in that the strawman technique used in a debate works well to persuade. However my post that you sight is not an example of the strawman approach given the fact the authors statement was I believe meant as rhetoric and not to be taken as a self evident obvious truth for the ages. He has not responded to my plea to explain what he meant. This question is a sidebar to the more interesting proposition that there is no difference at all between the internet and radio - a fine example of a strawman.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N7NRA on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I spent 9 years in the US Navy on active duty, made 2 Caribbean cruises, 2 Med cruises, 2 North Atlantic cruises and one WesPac cruise. My "boat" was powered by two 1200PSI steam turbines, not by sails. But I'd be insulted if you said I wasn't a real Sailor. My rating (job title) was "Gunner's Mate". I was trained to operate and worked on a specific guided missile launcher (Mk-13), rather than any sort of gun mount. But I'd be very upset if you said I wasn't a real Gunner's Mate.
I remember my first QSO via CW and an HW-8 Heathkit I built, using a long wire I attached along the eaves of the appartment building I was living in at the time. I remember my first phone QSO using a SSB CB radio from the mid 70s that I re-crystaled to run on 10M, directly connected to an old Starduster CB antenna that was sitting on its tripod legs on my driveway. No mast. I also remember the PSK-31 QSO I had with VP6TD on Pitcairn Island this summer. I've dreamed of that place since I was in junior high when I read the book about it that was part of the "Mutiny on the Bounty" trilogy. I don't know why I remember these. According to K3UD I shouldn't, because I wasn't operating from a park, off the power mains.
I don't directly use Echo Link, but four mornings a week I do use a 440MHz repeater in the Phoenix, AZ, area to connect to IRLP, link it to the Western Reflector in Las Vegas, where several other Hams connect in from several cities in Arizona, California and New Mexico using Echo Link for our morning net. The others are mainly retirees, but I still commute to work during the net and have to link in via radio. Frequently we have visitors from around the US and, occasionally, from foriegn countries who join in using IRLP. South Africa, Thailand and Brazil come to mind as recent contacts on our net.
I also operate HF most evenings after supper. I use phone, PSK-31, RTTY and SSTV, the last three augmented by computer. I don't use CW. I have used it, but I don't now. Don't care for it. PSK-31 accomplishes the same thing and gives me the same level of satisfaction. Does this disqualify me from being a real Ham?
Amateur licensees are communicators and innovators. We are licensed to keep order within the RF electromagnetic spectrum. This does not preclude other means of communication. The new modes and means of cummunication can be considered tools in our communication tool box. I believe the poor communicators are those who limit themselves to the old communications tools. This is like only using the hammer in your toolbox for all repairs, when wrenches, pliers, saws and a myriad of other tools, including power-assisted ones, make the work easier, faster and more precise. These add finesse for the wood worker or machinist, just as alternate modes allow us to more precisely target our communications to the job that needs to be done.
Amateur radio and its operators (most of them) have evolved to make use of new technology, just as our automobiles and their mechanics have evolved and improved. Personally, I wouldn't want to go back to the cars and mechanics of the early 50s. While the cars were simple to work on, they were polluting deathtraps. What we have these days is a much better, more precisely made, cleaner, safer, longer lasting product. By the way, I drive a stick shift by choice, so please don't call me a poor driver, just because I don't have to adjust the points in my distributer every 5,000 miles.
Evolve and enjoy. Life didn't stop in the 50s.
Regards,
Stew
N7NRA
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AF6AY "Sorry, but CB (on 27 MHz) is a definite parallel. And,there are MORE CB-ers than licensed radio amateurs."
Hey Len. I hope you had a good day. Thanks for responding to my earlier post. I thought you might. Your last post was very informative and very well solidified a picture of your mental state of mind I have formed from your earlier posts. You have for me a unique way of being both rebellous with a chip on your shoulder, (an unattractive trait), predictable and yet likeable at the same time. I know you need not my sympathy but I cannot help but feel sorrow for you. You writtings depict anger and I am sad for that. I dont know why you never passed the code exam. If it prevented you from earning a license, I am sorry. It really matters not. But you must have wanted to become a radio amateur for many years and now that you have accomplished such, I wonder if you will be able to enjoy the hobby. Stop concerning yourself over what others think of you! You are a bigger man than that. Dont lower yourself to the haters. So what you are a beginner in amateur radio. It matters not. Dont let the past destroy your future enjoyment in amateur radio. Don't do it Len. Not being an enemy is a plus, but I consider you a friend! And to anyone who wishes to pick on Len - please stop!
WA4KCN
Russ
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C: "I have no quarrel with you. The fact is,
you and I probably have a lot more in common
than you imagine."
'We' are male and licensed in the US amateur
radio service as Amateur Extra. It ends there.
:-)
NI0C: "Ironically though it is your imagination
that seems to have gotten you in trouble in
this forum-- you keep making up things about
those with whom you disagree."
My "imagination?" :-) Tsk, tsk. :-)
I'm "in trouble?" Are the Group Think police
getting a warrant for my arrest? :-)
I haven't described you as "A legend in his
own mind." Nope, haven't done that. Guess
whose "imagination" is running wild? :-)
NI0C: "You tout your "life experience," and
bring up various bullet points from your
resume as if the rest of us have no life or
career experiences from which we draw."
Will you agree that I DO have a "life
experience?" :-) Don't bet on it (touting)
since I do.
"Bullet points?" I'm not making a Power-
Point thing here. I just can't state common
things like "My first license was back in
the state of BW in 19nn" or "I work ex-
clusively in CW and do contesting." Oh, and
if showing a picture of a personal station,
be absolutely sure there is an ARRL
publication visible beside the Key. :-)
NI0C: "I do wish you well in ham radio."
Thank you. I prefer to think of it as Amateur
Radio since I'm sure not making any money
doing it. The word "ham" got stuck on
amateurs by the pro radiotelegraphers a very
long time ago...as a pejorative. [ARRL's own
statement of amateur history] I regularly
get pejoratives tossed at my by the "pro"
amateurs. :-)
NI0C: "All I really meant by the "half-assed"
remark is that the hybrid modes would
represent a less than satisfactory ham radio
experience for me."
Your remark was not couched in such a form.
All too often foks spit out something at the
spur of the moment and dismiss it...possibly
under the delusion that "everything thinks like
that." Not everyone thinks like that. And that's
the absolute truth. Even Ernestine would say
that... :-)
Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Mindlesslubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 28, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "Your last post was very informative
and very well solidified a picture of your mental
state of mind I have formed from your earlier posts."
Nonsense. I can write in any style I choose.
I'm a part-time pro wordsmith with a few years
of experience getting paid for that.
WA4KCN: "You have for me a unique way of
being both rebellous with a chip on your shoulder,
(an unattractive trait), predictable and yet likeable
at the same time."
More nattering nonsense. What you want to
say but cannot admit is that I do NOT practice
the Group Think of US amateur radio. That's all.
I have some independence of thought and opinion.
It doesn't side with what the ARRL says I should
think, it doesn't side with what all the old-timers
say I Must Do. In the modern culture of US ham
radio that is a no-no. From so many carbon-copy
statements about US ham radio from so many, all
must get with the Group Think and march to the
same drummer.
WA4KCN: "I know you need not my sympathy
but I cannot help but feel sorrow for you."
Look around you locally for a better outlet for
your "sorrow." Be a good Do-Gooder and help
them. You aren't helping me.
WA4KCN: "You writtings depict anger and I am
sad for that."
Are you an attorney? Do you do "writtings?"
I do writings. In whatever style I choose at the
moment.
Remember that it is NOT wrong to think
differently than the Group Think. Really. It
doesn't mean one is "angry" if they go against
it. :-)
WA4KCN: "I dont know why you never passed
the code exam. If it prevented you from earning
a license, I am sorry. It really matters not."
If it doesn't matter, why bring it up here?!? :-)
WA4KCN: "But you must have wanted to
become a radio amateur for many years and
now that you have accomplished such, I
wonder if you will be able to enjoy the hobby."
Why do you care? Do you have any 'solution'
for my enjoyment...even though you aren't
really sure I "hate it?"
Why "MUST" I have gotten an amateur license
first? The US Army didn't require anyone to be
licensed in anything to run KiloWatt HF trans-
mitters or microwave radio relay equipment.
My FIRST FCC license was as a commercial
radiotelephone radio operator, first class in one
sitting at an FCC Field Office. 51 years ago.
Was that "wrong?" Yes, it is, it doesn't fit the
Group Think profile. Very bad. Tsk, tsk.
Did you think US amateur radio was some kind
of "classified," secret activity? That NO ONE
who wasn't officially, federally licensed in it
could ever know about it? :-) Not so. It's one
of the most open of all US civil radio services.
Stop and think a moment. Not everyone
WANTS to become a licensed radio amateur!
Amazing but true! Not everyone thinks that
morse code is the ultimate skill in radio
operating! [it remains in large use in the USA
ONLY in amateur radio]
WA4KCN: "Stop concerning yourself over
what others think of you!"
You a fan of Dr. Phil on TV? :-)
WA4KCN: "You are a bigger man than that."
Sorry, only very average height and weight
for a male of my age group.
WA4KCN: "Dont lower yourself to the haters."
I'm sorry...just WHO are these "haters?"
Are they the ones in the Group Think group
who insist that US amateur radio remain
static and un-changing in the Good Old
Ways? I know they hate having changes
made in US amateur radio regulations.
Boy howdy, do some of them really hate
that! :-)
WA4KCN: "So what you are a beginner in
amateur radio. It matters not."
BULLFEATHERS, Russ. It matters a
Great Deal to some of the old-timers. Some
of them can't think outside the Group Think
box. A few of those outright refuse to do so.
If you haven't seen the above, then you
really need to have your eyes rechecked
for a possible new eyeglass prescription.
WA4KCN: "Dont let the past destroy your
future enjoyment in amateur radio."
Tsk, I didn't know it was. Thanks for the
heads-up on learning that. :-) Whatever
other mysterious things am I supposed
to toss? Let us know, Dr. Phil, you might
even get some sponsors for a TV show on
all that! :-)
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KA0YKO on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"And I fully agree--internet and computer tie-ins are skewing this hobby."
Sort of like what transistors and surface mount electronics did to spark gaps and germanium crystals, eh?
I am amazed at the curmudgeons (*see below) that criticize everything that people do to improve the hobby and advance the technology of Ham Radio.
Radio, computers, and TCP/IP networks are tools that not only compliment each other but also make the whole greater than the sum of their parts.
If attitudes like the curmudgeons on these forums express were dominant, modern radio technology wouldn't even exist -- heck, maybe even spark gaps and germanium crystal receivers wouldn't even exist because smoke signals were just fine and didn't need any improvements.
---
(From Merriam-Webster's online dictionary...)
curmudgeon
One entry found for curmudgeon.
Main Entry: cur·mud·geon
Pronunciation: (")k&r-'m&-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: origin unknown
1 archaic : MISER
2 : a crusty, ill-tempered, and usually old man
- cur·mud·geon·li·ness /-lE-n&s/ noun
- cur·mud·geon·ly /-lE/ adjective
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"I'm "in trouble?" Are the Group Think police
getting a warrant for my arrest? :-)"
No, but you just can't seem to help but make an ass of yourself.
"I haven't described you as "A legend in his
own mind." Nope, haven't done that. Guess
whose "imagination" is running wild? :-)"
Again, you have invented false assumptions about the motivations and qualifications of others.
"Will you agree that I DO have a "life
experience?" :-)"
Of course. It would be absurd to deny it.
"Bullet points?" I'm not making a Power-
Point thing here."
No, but if it were possible in this forum, I'm sure we would have all seen it by now.
"I prefer to think of it as Amateur
Radio since I'm sure not making any money
doing it. The word "ham" got stuck on
amateurs by the pro radiotelegraphers a very
long time ago...as a pejorative. [ARRL's own
statement of amateur history] I regularly
get pejoratives tossed at my by the "pro"
amateurs. :-)"
Well, you seem to have lapsed into the use of the pejorative in your later post to WA4KCN.
"Your remark was not couched in such a form."
I acknowledged the obvious--that others hold different opinions.
All too often foks spit out something at the
spur of the moment and dismiss it...possibly
under the delusion that "everything thinks like
that." Not everyone thinks like that. And that's
the absolute truth. "
Well, I stand by my "half-assed" remark. And, as I already said above I was well aware that not everybody thinks like that.
CUL
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by N6NKN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN, NI0C and AF6AY:
Can you fine fellows take a few moments to contact me in the CQWW RTTY contest? I could use the points.
TNX De N6NKN
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N1OC "No, but you just can't seem to help but make an ass of yourself."
It would be best to discontinue the discussion with Len and the name calling. Len was born in 1933 - a long time ago. As the senior adult in the conversation he desirves respect. I agree he is mislead on much of what he thinks and over simplifies amateur radio and its participants. Yet, he is the elder and should not be spoken to in a harsh manner. We should hope he can enjoy amateur radio. This thread is working to exacerbate rooted hostility and is not working to his good. Let's stop.
73 Russ
Wa4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N6NKN posted:
....................
WA4KCN, NI0C and AF6AY:
Can you fine fellows take a few moments to contact me in the CQWW RTTY contest? I could use the points.
....................
I'd love to except the Group Think police
of the Curmudgeon Division won't let me
put an electronic digital terminal on my
Icom to run Ritty...it's not "real radio!" :-)
Cheers, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by N6NKN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I really don't care what *they* call it. I call it FUN!!!
Rick N6NKN
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AB7E on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN: "It would be best to discontinue the discussion with Len and the name calling. Len was born in 1933 - a long time ago. As the senior adult in the conversation he desirves respect. I agree he is mislead on much of what he thinks and over simplifies amateur radio and its participants. Yet, he is the elder and should not be spoken to in a harsh manner. We should hope he can enjoy amateur radio. This thread is working to exacerbate rooted hostility and is not working to his good. Let's stop."
Russ, don't you ever get tired of talking down to people? What's with that? You've done it several times here in this thread. That's an old and rather sleazy debating technique to get an implied edge in the absence of persuasive substance.
Dave AB7E
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
AB7E "Russ, don't you ever get tired of talking down to people? What's with that? You've done it several times here in this thread. That's an old and rather sleazy debating technique to get an implied edge in the absence of persuasive substance."
Hello Dave. I enjoyed the discussion when we were arguing the difference between radio and other means of communications. As Len continued to demonstrate a disturbed attitude toward amateur radio in general and experienced operators in particular, I could not help but to feel sad for him and to respectually respond in defense of amateur radio. I wish him to have the same enjoyment with the hobby as I have had over the past 30 years;however, without a change in disposition this will not be possible. I will gladly make any concession to either you or Len if it will work to the good in helping Len.
73 Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I do agree with Dave, AB7E, that Len is capable of holding his own here, and that speaking honestly with him about points of disagreement shows him more respect.
Having said that, I'm rather fed up with this whole conversation. It is obvious that Len, for all his bluster about learning new things and enjoying changes, is here to bestow his wisdom upon the rest of us, and really seems incapable of listening.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N6NKN:
Sorry but I'm not setup right now to operate RTTY. My ham radio goals for the weekend are:
1. Dig a posthole and put in a 1-1/4 inch pipe in concrete for my 80 meter vertical. (just completed a few minutes ago).
2. Work 9U0A for a new country. (Maybe on 40m Sunday night, after the RTTY contest is over).
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN posted:
.......................
N1OC "No, but you just can't seem to help but
make an ass of yourself."
It would be best to discontinue the discussion
with Len and the name calling."
........................
Certainly in computer-modem communications.
It might be dangerous for self-righteous
opinions held by the group curmudgeondry!.
:-)
Been there, done that, got the bloodied
T-shirts. :-)
WA4KCN: "Len was born in 1933 - a long
time ago."
Ahem...1932. "A long time ago" is subjective.
While I don't remember much of that year,
recorded history (by even longer-ago old-
timers) of amateur radio says it was a
flowering of advancements in the wizardry
of wireless. :-)
WA4KCN: "As the senior adult in the
conversation he desirves respect."
Why? :-) That hasn't stopped others
from showing Their disrespect in a
long, long time. :-)
WA4KCN: "I agree he is mislead on much of
what he thinks and over simplifies amateur
radio and its participants."
'Misled" am I? :-) Independence of thought
and opinion is a NOT-good thing? Since when
have I stated that US ham radio "should use"
all those computer and Internet aids? I don't
believe I've said that. Truth is, I'm too new to
have taken advantage of them so far. :-)
Remember, as one who has been around a
"long time" (or is that 'long, long time?'), I'm
rather rooted in the one radio to another radio
of radio communications. That's how I first
learned to use it a long, long, long time ago.
But, having said the above, I think it is quite
foolish to just ignore, even denigrate some of
the newer aids to radio comms...whatever the
radio service...including amateur radio.
I've always thought the whole purpose to
radio communications was communication,
not to hold fast to certain modes and
methods...for the sake of some nebulous
"tradition." Ah, but curmudgeondry will out
in amateur radio and all MUST enjoy what
the curmudgeons enjoy...or be labeled
anything from "asses" to "legends of their
own minds." [much harsher words said
elsewhere by other curmudgeons omitted]
:-)
Russ, you are focussing too much on
others and losing sight of the Article's
main purpose: a denigration of the
Internet as an aid to ham
communications of the Traditional
Manner.
WA4KCN: "Yet, he is the elder and should
not be spoken to in a harsh manner."
[oh, geez, this is almost too easy...:-) ]
You got it WRONG, Russ. Independence
of thought and opinions is certainly NOT a
provence of the "elderly." Curmudgeondry
is...by any poll, formal or informal. There's
a personal security factor at work in trying
to preserve the "traditional." It is familiar,
it is known, doesn't present a threat to the
ego if one is good at the "traditional"
methods. It also reinforces denial of
mortality that is common to all humans.
Now, being good at the "traditional"
methods is NOT a bad thing. However, it
IS if the ego over-rides it and doesn't
permit acceptance of anything new.
[curmudgeondry again]
If all radio amateurs steadfastly held on
to "tradition" we would not have the
vacuum tube and certainly not the
transistor or integrated circuit in our
radios...it would have to remain As It
Was In The Beginning: Spark gaps
and coherers. There would be no such
thing as VHF, UHF, or microwave
allocations. It would be pure on-off
keying CW on LF, MF because that's
all that was possible for radio
amateurs at Day One.
The above is obviously an exaggeration.
We are IN the solid-state era. We
HAVE personal computers (as good
or better than the mighty mainframes
of 1970). We HAVE SSB voice radio
on HF. We HAVE repeaters. We
HAVE beacons on HF to gauge long-
haul paths. We HAVE all kinds of
solar activity data, MUFs can be
predicted and we have the Internet to
let us all access that info. Why not
USE what we already have?!?
Curmudgeons: "It's WRONG!" :-)
WA4KCN: "We should hope he can
enjoy amateur radio."
I think I've already been doing that a
long, long time before getting an
official, federally-approved, suitable
for laminating and hanging on the
wall amateur radio license. :-)
WA4KCN: "This thread is working to
exacerbate rooted hostility and is not
working to his good. Let's stop."
In other words, I got you trumped on
trying to play Master to my grass-
hopper. :-) Kung fooey it became.
Patronizing attidues don't become
you...nor anyone else.
73, Len AF6AY
PS: My thanks to KA0YKO for
bringing up "Curmudgeons" as an
apropriate subject in this thread.
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Ahem...1932. "A long time ago" is subjective.
While I don't remember much of that year,
recorded history (by even longer-ago old-
timers) of amateur radio says it was a
flowering of advancements in the wizardry
of wireless. :-)"
Hello Len. I appreciate your comments and thoughts. I'm sorry I don't live close by. If I did I would help with your antenna work.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN posted:
........................
AB7E "Russ, don't you ever get tired of talking down to people? What's with that? You've done it several times here in this thread. That's an old and rather sleazy debating technique to get an implied edge in the absence of persuasive substance."
Hello Dave. I enjoyed the discussion when we were arguing the difference between radio and other means of communications. As Len continued to demonstrate a disturbed attitude toward amateur radio in general and experienced operators in particular, I could not help but to feel sad for him and to respectually respond in defense of amateur radio."
........................
WOW! Now it's about "disturbed attitude!" :-)
Not to mention something along the lines of Homeland Security where you are "in defense of
amateur radio!"
Other than from BPL, I didn't know that US amateur radio was being "attacked!" :-)
Tsk, anyone with independent thought and opinions is now "profiled" as a Terrorist! Yes, and
probably a "half-assed terrorist" as well! Gotta love it! :-)
......................
WA4KCN: "I wish him to have the same enjoyment with the hobby as I have had over the past 30 years;however, without a change in disposition this will not be possible."
Good grief, now failing to obey the Classic Traditions of Ham Radio (as some know it) one is now
not only disturbed but mentally unbalanced!
Right, if I don't enjoy amateur radio as WA4KCN does (or all the traditionalists), then I can't
possibly "enjoy" the hobby! :-)
.....................
WA4KCN: "I will gladly make any concession to either you or Len if it will work to the good in helping Len."
"Concession?" You have a stand? OK, I'll have a Kosher hot dog with ketchup and a medium-
size Coca-Cola. [it's lunch time here and I've not eaten yet]
Russ, you've got the Wrong Words for self-righteous evangelism about ham radio. The ARRL
speaks that from the pulpit of the Church of St. Hiram. I've read all that literature. Even paid
my dues for membership. I just don't worship the same way they say I must do. That is NOT
being mentally disturbed or playing at "Terrorist." If you think so, then YOU need some
counseling, not me.
Thanks but no thanks, I'll enjoy what I enjoy, not what you say I MUST enjoy. Got that?
Let's try to stay focussed on the subject of this Article, The Denigration of Echolink and
other Internet aids to amateur radio communications. It ain't about anyone denigrating
amateur radio. Except maybe in your imagination...
72, Len AF6AY
"Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday" - Anon.
|
|   |
|
RE: Half-assed ham radio
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Russ, you've got the Wrong Words for self-righteous evangelism about ham radio. The ARRL
speaks that from the pulpit of the Church of St. Hiram. I've read all that literature. Even paid
my dues for membership. I just don't worship the same way they say I must do. That is NOT
being mentally disturbed or playing at "Terrorist.""
I think you have hit the nail on the head here Len. I agree with you in that the ARRl is taking amateur radio in the wrong direction acting as a for profit concern rather than a not for profit with additional membership being their "corporate objective." I think it is past time for Mr Sumner to go. Amateur radio is without national leadership causing a great deal of division within our ranks. Can you imagine any large organization manuevering itself through mind fields of potential conflect without leadership. That is exactly what we are experiencing with Mr. Sumner at the helm. With effective leadership any divisive issues surrounding hybrid modes might be put down more readily. All sorts of benefits can accrue. Do you have any thoughts on ARRL reorganization? Have you given any thought to running for a position? This might be a way for you to correct the wrongs you see in amateur radio. Also why did you decide to join given your distrust with the organization?
73 Russ
WA4KCN
73 Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For many out here Echolink is not Ham radio and its not DX and I agree it doesn give a person the pleasures of working a station 1000 miles away on vhf. Thats DX and its worth the pleasure and fun. Just like other parts of Ham radio when we had to work for it.
Some part of computers are fun when it comes to working PSK or other modes but that's as far as it goes.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN writes:
"And to anyone who wishes to pick on Len - please stop!"
Russ,
Nobody is "picking on" Len, AF6AY.
They're simply giving
him exactly what he wants: attention and
targets that he can argue with and insult.
It's true that Len is a very new radio amateur,
licensed less than a year now. But that is by
his own choice. Nobody stopped him but himself.
---
It's interesting to look back on some of Len's
online discussions of the past decade-plus.
For example, way back in January of 2000,
Len declared his intention to "go for Extra
out of the box". Only took him a bit over
seven years of retirement time to do it.
Here's the claim:
http://tinyurl.com/c5qyv
Len has long been an advocate of the removal
of all Morse Code testing from the requirements
for an amateur radio license, though he
was not a radio amateur even after the Technician
class lost its code test. His comments to FCC on
the subject run to hundreds of pages.
But his advocacy has also included suggesting that
FCC create a minimum-age requirement of 14 years
for all classes of amateur radio license. He
proposed this minimum-age thing in reply comments
to FCC back before the 2000 restructuring, even
though he cannot cite any examples of problems caused
by the licensing of people younger than 14.
Len’s reply comments are here:
http://tinyurl.com/y6uhr3
check page 13 of the 16 pages.
Some postings where this was pointed out
(by an amateur who also advocated the
end of Morse Code testing) are classics:
Pointer:
http://tinyurl.com/y2er8x
Len’s reply:
http://tinyurl.com/yxq3rr
Len's claim of fraud by ARRL:
http://tinyurl.com/2k5mb5
Len's trouble with young people
in "adult" activities:
http://tinyurl.com/yosolv
There's lots more, on a wide
variety of subjects. For example,
Len will sometimes include factual
errors in his comments, then attack
and insult the person who points
out the errors.
Strawman arguments are a specialty
of his, where he accuses nameless
others of certain behaviors, but
never gives real evidence.
I saw "psychology" mentioned earlier.
Look up "transference" and "projection",
then think about how Len behaves online.
...
I'm not saying Len is a bad person
or that anyone (including Len)
should shut up. That's Len's game.
Just remember one thing:
His hobby is wasting time. Your time.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AD5TD on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In the venacular of the "internet geek":
RE: above post
Len, "You got owned"
From the "Urban Dictionary":
1. Owned 1606 up, 370 down
v. owned, 0wned, pwned, 0wn3d, pwn3d, own3d.
v. tr.
To be made a fool of; To make a fool of; To confound or prove wrong; embarrasing someone: Being embarrased.
I owned you in counter-strike. You were owned at the party yesterday.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 29, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N2EY "I saw "psychology" mentioned earlier.
Look up "transference" and "projection",
then think about how Len behaves online."
Anyone reading Len's postings can figure out there are issues he is dealing with. However, he is an elderly person and for that reason alone he should be treated with respect and dignity regardless of what he has to say or how he says it. There is a saying that what is internal becomes external and I believe this applies to him. He is troubled inside over something related to amateur radio and it gets the best of him yes. But, if you understand this you then can then have empathy and understand his postings. I enjoy reading his messages and I consider him an e-ham friend. If it helps him in some way posting to me then I am all for it regardless of what is said. It's called compassion. And I bet in his day he was a top notch radio technician.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN writes:
"Anyone reading Len's postings can figure out there are issues he is dealing with."
That's true! However, the term 'issues' covers a *lot* of ground.
WA4KCN: "However, he is an elderly person and for
that reason alone he should be treated with respect
and dignity regardless of what he has to say or how
he says it."
'Advanced' age, by itself, is not a reason for someone to get unearned respect and a free pass on their
behavior.
Everyone, regardless of age, does deserve a certain
level of respect and dignity. And everyone has the
responsibility to treat others with respect and
dignity.
Side question: When does a person become 'elderly'?
Len's behavior online in amateur-radio forums is not
new - it's been going on for over a decade.
WA4KCN:"There is a saying that what is internal becomes external and I believe this applies to him. He is troubled inside over something related to amateur radio and it gets the best of him yes."
That's certainly possible. And if it is the case,
we more-experienced amateurs should help him deal
with those troubles.
But there are other possible explanations, and
they should not be ignored.
WA4KCN:" But, if you understand this you then can
then have empathy and understand his postings."
Of course.
But empathy and understanding do not mean a person
gets a free pass on their behavior - online or offline.
WA4KCN: "I enjoy reading his messages and I consider
him an e-ham friend."
Why?
How is an e-ham friend different?
WA4KCN:"If it helps him in some way posting to me
then I am all for it regardless of what is said.
It's called compassion."
Agreed!
But how do we know if he is being helped or not?
Any good parent knows that simple acceptance of
a child's behavior regardless of what it is does
*not* help the child. The same applies to many
behaviors displayed by adults.
WA4KCN: "And I bet in his day he was a top notch
radio technician."
Maybe he was - and maybe not. 'Top notch' can
cover a lot of ground. What independent
evidence do you have to support that bet?
Besides, brilliance in one area does not earn someone
a free pass on their behavior.
And consider this:
Online discussion is one thing. Comments to FCC are
quite another.
Do you think there should be a minimum-age requirement
of 14 years for all classes of US amateur radio
license?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by WA4KCN on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Do you think there should be a minimum-age requirement
of 14 years for all classes of US amateur radio
license?"
No Jim I certainly do not. In fact Len has written very little that is correct and good for amateur radio. Challenging him does not work to his good though. As he continued to post I simply began to feel sad for him and wanted to help in some way. A prideful man filled with rage apparently over never passing the code examination and allowing that to take control over his emotions and further preventing him from enjoying amateur radio. Are you not a little disappointed for him? Part of my professional duties are in corporate counseling of employees who are having personal difficulties allowing such to interfer with their work life. Sometimes just getting these folks to express themselves helps. I admit now e-ham is not the place for this. I read Len's letter to the FCC and yes it was verbose and stilted but he has the right to express his views. Len needs support and love and that is what veteran radio amateurs should be giving him - not more argument.
73 de Russ
WA4KCN
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by NI0C on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"A prideful man filled with rage apparently over never passing the code examination and allowing that to take control over his emotions and further preventing him from enjoying amateur radio. Are you not a little disappointed for him?"
Hell, no. Does he not have an amateur extra license now?
"Part of my professional duties are in corporate counseling of employees who are having personal difficulties allowing such to interfer with their work life."
I think the operative word in this sentence is "part." You don't sound like a professional counselor to me.
"Sometimes just getting these folks to express themselves helps. I admit now e-ham is not the place for this."
Of course it isn't.
"I read Len's letter to the FCC and yes it was verbose and stilted but he has the right to express his views. Len needs support and love and that is what veteran radio amateurs should be giving him - not more argument"
I guess to you "support and love" equates to agreement with whatever crackpot opinions a person has. That's just plain goofy on your part.
73,
Chuck NI0C
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N2EY: "Do you think there should be a minimum-age
requirement of 14 years for all classes of US
amateur radio license?"
WA4KCN: "No Jim I certainly do not. In fact Len
has written very little that is correct and good
for amateur radio."
I agree!
WA4KCN: "Challenging him does not work to his
good though."
Why not? Not challenging can sometimes be
interpreted as approval or agreement.
WA4KCN: "As he continued to post I simply began
to feel sad for him and wanted to help in some
way. A prideful man filled with rage apparently
over never passing the code examination and
allowing that to take control over his emotions
and further preventing him from enjoying amateur
radio."
It is a sad situation in some ways.
However, please note that he claims to have learned
Morse Code to a speed of about 8 wpm back in the
early 1960s. He wanted to bypass the Novice license
back then and go straight for General. His choice.
In 1990 - 17 years ago - it became possible to
get any class of US amateur license with just
the 5 wpm code test by means of medical waivers.
But Len chose not to.
In 1991 - 16 years ago - it became possible to
get the Technician license with no Morse code
test at all. But Len chose not to.
In 2000 - 7 years ago - Len wrote in a public
forum that he was "going for Extra out of the
box". This was when the 5 wpm Morse Code test
was still required for all license classes
except Technician. But Len chose not to even
try until after February 23 of this year.
WA4KCN: "Are you not a little disappointed for
him?"
No. Not at all. He made his choices, not me.
What I am is puzzled as to why any person
with a decades-long interest in something,
and the means to achieve it, would wait so
long.
WA4KCN: "Part of my professional duties are
in corporate counseling of employees who are
having personal difficulties allowing such to
interfer with their work life."
That's a really good thing to do, Russ.
Some people do need help at times.
WA4KCN: "Sometimes just getting these folks to
express themselves helps."
Agreed - with accent on the 'sometimes'!
But Len has been "expressing himself" on
amateur radio online forums for over a decade
now.
WA4KCN: "I admit now e-ham is not the place
for this."
Why not? As much as I disagree with Len, I
have never, ever told him (or anyone else
in an online forum) to shut up. Nor would I.
WA4KCN: "I read Len's letter to the FCC and
yes it was verbose and stilted but he has the
right to express his views."
*Everyone* has that right. But with that
right comes the consequence that others
have the right to disagree and point out
errors of fact and reasoning.
WA4KCN: "Len needs support and love and
that is what veteran radio amateurs should
be giving him - not more argument."
I agree about the 'support' part.
But "support" does not always mean agreement
with a person, or not challenging what they
do. It does not mean they get a free pass to
say whatever they want without opposing
comment.
Support can and often does take the form
of saying "No" and "You're mistaken" to
someone who needs limits set for them, and
who needs "a big bite of a reality sandwich".
---
Telling Y not to argue with X can be a way
of telling Y to shut up.
Why is what Y has to say less important than
what X has to say?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Disappointed for?
|
|
|
by N2EY on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4KCN wrote:
"Are you not a little disappointed for him?"
After reading this again, I'm a little perplexed
about the phrase "disappointed for".
The way I've always seen that phrase used, it
meant an emphatic reaction when someone else
had worked hard for something, then had not
gotten it. As in:
"She trained really hard for the marathon,
did everything right, but then got sick a
week before the race and ran poorly. I was
really disappointed for her"
or
"He had excellent grades, lots of extracurricular
activities and great SATs. His application essay
was more than excellent, but his #1 college choice
turned him down. I was really disappointed for him."
or
"He had really worked on his code, fixed up his
rig and antenna to work as well as possible, and
was all set to make a record score in the contest.
But a solar flare made that impossible. I was really
disappointed for him."
See what I mean?
How can someone be 'disappointed for' another who hasn't even tried?
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AF6AY on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NI0C posted:
..................
""A prideful man filled with rage apparently over never passing the code examination and allowing that to take control over his emotions and further preventing him from enjoying amateur radio. Are you not a little disappointed for him?"
Hell, no. Does he not have an amateur extra license now?"
..................
According to many, it isn't a "real" license. No code test, therefore it is just a
Technician license called Extra. Some old-time hams call anyone who hasn't passed
a code test as being "just a technician."
........................
""Part of my professional duties are in corporate counseling of employees who are having personal difficulties allowing such to interfer with their work life."
I think the operative word in this sentence is "part." You don't sound like a professional counselor to me."
........................
Nor to me. I have some advantage there: My wife is retired from private-
practice Social Work (previously licensed in states of Illinois and
Washington), has two MAs (in Education and Social Work) in addition
to a BA and also worked for the government of Illinois in Social Work.
She doesn't agree with his commentary...on a professional basis, not of
personal bias.
In a whole working career, I've never had "personal difficulties" that
needed "counseling" by any "professionals." The FBI and assorted
alphabet-soup government agencies never found anything like that
for my security clearances (to "Top," missed a "Q" due to work
assignment re-arrangement)...and was never fired for cause by any employer.
.......................
""I read Len's letter to the FCC and yes it was verbose and stilted but he has the right to express his views. Len needs support and love and that is what veteran radio amateurs should be giving him - not more argument"
I guess to you "support and love" equates to agreement with whatever crackpot opinions a person has. That's just plain goofy on your part."
.......................
The "letter" that Mr. Rogers (nee' Dr. Phil) mentioned must be my Reply
to Comments on NPRM 98-143, the Restructuring Notice of
Proposed Rule Making, dated 13 January 1999, two days prior to the
official end of all Comments. That was over 8 years ago. It is on public
display at the FCC ECFS, can be seen by anyone. {search by the NPRM
number and date, name not necessary since a listing for that date will appear]
My other Replies and Replies to Comments are also visible on every
Peitition and NPRM concerning morse code testing for an amateur
radio license. That is no secret. I was against it. That subject is now
history, the FCC having removed the code test from all amateur radio license
test elements as of 23 February 2007. The petty vindictiveness of some tries
to bring the subjectt up again and again as if one more battle might reverse
it. See N2EY's comments in here and his abject refusal to give up on old,
old arguments in Usenet rec.radio.amateur.policy newsgroup. It kept up in
there until others turned the newsgroup to trash. I won't bother to reply to
such old, outdated vindictiveness in here.
The subject of this article was the usual opinionated subject posted by
someone else on the use of Internet-related aids to amateur radio operation.
I think we should restrict commentary on that subject, not some "rage and
anger" expressed by others about those whom they dislike. Call such things
"crackpot" as you will, no one person or some small group of persons is the
final judge of "crackpottery" nor of laws. We have due process of law in this
country and "McCarthyism" doesn't rule.
"Dissent is not synonymous with disloyalty." - Edward R. Murrow
73, Len AF6AY
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KA0YKO on September 30, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"My thanks to KA0YKO for
bringing up 'Curmudgeons' as an
apropriate subject in this thread."
You're welcome, Len. Thank you for your well-reasoned arguments as well.
73, KA0YKO
---
"There was no respect for youth when I was young, and now that I am old, there is no respect for age, I missed it coming and going." -- J. B. Priestley
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KF6JQO on October 1, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I became a Ham primarily to be able to use one of the mutant “stinkpot” modes, Winlink, from my sailboat, which has an engine. Yes, I use the engine to propel the boat because even the best sailor can’t make anything out of no wind. The engine also provides power for the radio.
Winlink was an essential tool in the achievement of my life-long dream of sailing to and staying in many of the enchanting anchorages in the Sea of Cortez. It reassured my non-Ham spouse by providing the means of maintaining long-distance contact with her non-Ham family from isolated locations. Many cruising sailors become Hams for the same reason. Most of us also get involved in other modes, especially voice, to participate in nets.
My point, and I do have one, is that Sailing and Ham Radio each have options. There are lots of rigging styles and hull types on sailboats. There are lots of antennas, equipment and operating modes to try out and use in Ham radio. If you don’t like a Ketch, sail a Sloop. If you don’t like Echolink, use CW.
You may not like the cut of a man’s jib or the fact that he is using an engine. But if he is sharing the waterway and wind with you best respect his course and speed or you’ll risk a collision.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by KF6JQO on October 1, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I became a Ham primarily to be able to use one of the mutant “stinkpot” modes, Winlink, from my sailboat, which has an engine. Yes, I use the engine to propel the boat because even the best sailor can’t make anything out of no wind. The engine also provides power for the radio.
Winlink was an essential tool in the achievement of my life-long dream of sailing to and staying in many of the enchanting anchorages in the Sea of Cortez. It reassured my non-Ham spouse by providing the means of maintaining long-distance contact with her non-Ham family from isolated locations. Many cruising sailors become Hams for the same reason. Most of us also get involved in other modes, especially voice, to participate in nets.
My point, and I do have one, is that Sailing and Ham Radio each have options. There are lots of rigging styles and hull types on sailboats. There are lots of antennas, equipment and operating modes to try out and use in Ham radio. If you don’t like a Ketch, sail a Sloop. If you don’t like Echolink, use CW.
You may not like the cut of a man’s jib or the fact that he is using an engine. But if he is sharing the waterway and wind with you best respect his course and speed or you’ll risk a collision.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N2EY on October 1, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"I became a Ham primarily to be able to use one of the mutant “stinkpot” modes, Winlink, from my sailboat, which has an engine."
Nothing wrong with any of that, IMHO.
"Winlink was an essential tool in the achievement of my life-long dream of sailing to and staying in many of the enchanting anchorages in the Sea of Cortez. It reassured my non-Ham spouse by providing the means of maintaining long-distance contact with her non-Ham family from isolated locations. Many cruising sailors become Hams for the same reason. Most of us also get involved in other modes, especially voice, to participate in nets."
So far so good. But there is one big difference
between your motivation and that of many others:
You see radio as a tool - a means to an end, not
an end in itself.
Many if not most other hams see radio as an end
in itself.
I'm not saying either is "wrong", just pointing
out the difference.
"My point, and I do have one, is that Sailing and Ham Radio each have options. There are lots of rigging styles and hull types on sailboats. There are lots of antennas, equipment and operating modes to try out and use in Ham radio. If you don’t like a Ketch, sail a Sloop. If you don’t like Echolink, use CW."
Of course.
"You may not like the cut of a man’s jib or the fact that he is using an engine. But if he is sharing the waterway and wind with you best respect his course and speed or you’ll risk a collision."
As long as that respect works both ways. Like listening before transmitting to avoid transmitting
on top of an existing QSO. Or not letting 'robots'
all over the band.
73 de Jim, N2EY
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on October 4, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember there was a guy who had a Winlink repeater in San Diego and it reminded me alot of Echolink or something similar. It didnt really impress me on the Vhf side. I never used it much but did hear others. For me it wasnt true radio as it was via the internet to me, and that to me is not real dx. I would rather sit along side my rig doing it the old fashion way and get the enjoyment of knowing I worked a person a few hundred miles or thousand miles then to have known I worked some one on a internet radio.
On a ship at sea the ham radio comes in handy as I can work my family or friends. Its just a different principle to me.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on October 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I asked one of my fellow hams in the Philippines if there is a age requirement and it does exists, my comment to them was why didnt they change it as this would help improve the membership and those who are willing to learn the world of Ham radio. They mentioned they have been working on it.
As what was mentioned by one person about the person who waited for years to obtain his license, makes me wonder what if the FCC never dropped the code requirements, how many more years would they have waited. I mentioned a while back that I felt it was well worth doing it and well worth the extra effort to pass it. I wasnt about to wait 26 to 27 years for the requirements to change and still don't like what happened. I still wished it stayed in place and so do some others I met.
To me it wasn't worth wqaiting that long for the new rules to change when I could have been having all that much fun being on the airwaves with some new contacts..The code never stopped me and was fun learning.
|
|   |
|
Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N5RO on October 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You are free to operate ham radio the "old-fashioned" way, just as you are free to use CW and admittedly it's a lot more challenging and more fun.
However, if you refer to the FCC Part 97.1, the VERY FIRST purpose of amateur radio is "(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications."
During Katrina, with health and welfare messages coming at the rate of over 1000 per hour, there was NO WAY to handle this volume in a timely manner using voice/phone or CW modes! Connection to the Internet was required, which is why ARES is pushing Winlink, Airmail, etc. In fact during Katrina - ARES, supporting the Red Cross, could not handle that volume and ported it over to SATERN, which has had a ham radio-Internet system for a long time. (You may recall the Internet was originally designed as ARPANET by the DOD to be decentralized so that a singular disaster or attack could not take out the entire system.)
So you're perhaps right about normal amateur communications but don't discount the value of the linked systems, especially for EMCOMM. It's nice to think romantically about the "good old days", but if the purpose in EMCOMM is to get the message through, relying on old technology alone is simply unrealistic.
Don't forget either that many of us now have to live with antenna restrictions, etc. which precludes us from enjoying the DX we used to enjoy. Also as mentioned by another responder, many kids (which we're trying to recruit into amateur radio) and school ham clubs don't have the funds, space, or facilities to outfit a complete station, and IRLP, Echolink, etc. give them a chance to experience ham radio - an experience they can later use in what you call "real radio".
Another advantage of amateur radio we did not have 15 years ago, is the ability to send email via radio through packet, Winlink, & Airmail when access to wireless computing and cell phone signals are not available and during disasters. This is a big selling point when recruiting new hams, who we desperately need for volunteering in our wildfire, flood, and lost/injured hikers and off-roaders prone area.
So enjoy "real radio" all you can but please refrain from criticizing others who use additional technologies for meaningful purposes. This is not going to go away just because you don't think it's what hams should do, so get used to it. It will only get worse in your opinion as newer capabilities come along - deal with it!
Meanwhile I'll get back to my own HF-only activities, but remain "hooked up" for the times when I'm called upon to provide some public service or disaster communications.
Signed: A REAL HAM for almost 40 years.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by AD5TD on October 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
why do we mess around with winlink at EOC's? at one local hospital's EOC radio room the are installing, not one but two satellite internet systems. This makes much more sense than fiddling with a qwerky RF, propigation dependent system that MIGHT work. I am also going to recommend that our EOC do the same. Sure you can't use it in the rain, but once it passes, we will be able to offer HIGH SPEED internet to the entire EOC and at speeds that they are used to having. No problems with large files or attachments, pictures will be no problem.
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on October 5, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well in an emergency situation it might come in handy but there are some who might still consider it Internet radio. I travel on ships and HF is the only way we can go out here. Yes we do have internet but its not gonna work that well for us.
In South Korea and traveling the world for 30 years, to many out here the winlink won't work that well
|
|   |
|
RE: Landlubbers
|
|
|
by N6HPX on October 8, 2007
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Maybe on HF radio it might be ok but if I am able to use HF from my QTH then I won't need the winlink that much, as it would be hard to find em from the other side of the world. But still to me internet radio might be also Ok if you have the phone lines,etc to cover it. When I was on Guam during the aftermath of Pongsang there were no power to the island, and no phone lines as internet was also down.
So for me its got alot of draw backs
|
|   |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Progress
Tube Caddy -- Where Did the Term and Product Come From?
Visiting (Chapter 3)
Icom 756PRO3! Rumor or Reality?
Where's the Innovation?
Other Operating Articles
Safety First
My First Date with Olivia
D-STAR/Analog Interference Experience
Using Twitter During Mobile Operation
First HF Contact and Other Stuff
|
|
|