eHam

eHam Forums => Misc => Topic started by: K9FON on November 19, 2009, 09:51:54 PM



Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 19, 2009, 09:51:54 PM
I have noticed lately that 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters with the foul language, power idiots, and "bathroom humor" I always thought 160 was the "gentlemans band." Guess Im wrong.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 20, 2009, 07:59:32 AM
This is on 'phone, right?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N6PJB on November 20, 2009, 05:44:10 PM
Welcome to the 21st century. The times they are a changin'.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K4DPK on November 20, 2009, 09:48:36 PM
Stand up for what you believe, Eric.

If you don't like what's going on, tell them.

Telling us won't help, unless you happen to have your post read by one of the perpetrators during the midst of a soul-searching session.  Probably not gonna happen.

Phil C. Sr.
k4dpk


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: WW5AA on November 21, 2009, 02:22:09 AM
Do you know your section OO?
Have a recorder?
Contacted the FCC?
We are a self rule enforcing service, have you said anything to the offenders?

In my case, yes to all of the above.

73 de Lindy


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 21, 2009, 02:22:33 PM
Nope i have said nothing. I have a tape recorder but playing FCC isnt my job.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KA3TKZ on November 23, 2009, 06:29:16 AM
K9FON,

Please use a recording device and send in to the FCC.

laura.smith@fcc.gov  is the address you send a recording to.  I will advise you that  foul language is permissible.  I sent in a recording of kz8o saying F'you to me 3 times and she said this was o.k.  I do have the e-mail in hand to prove this.  There must be an obscene nature for any violation.  Good Luck.


Whitney
N3ZV


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 23, 2009, 10:26:16 AM
Switch to CW. Phone is for CBers.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 23, 2009, 01:16:03 PM
Oh it is huh? So everything that isnt CW is CB???? Is everything to some of you hams CB??? What a narrow minded thing to say. Oh wait. Most OTer 20 WPM extra class hams are narrow minded! I forgot about that! Inflexible to anything that they dont think is the norm to them is considered CB!!!! Get a life..
For one i HATE CW and refuse to use it..


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K6LO on November 23, 2009, 01:49:54 PM
Thirty one years on the bands and I still find that the majority of ops are really decent folks. Whether old timers or new. Occasionally one encounters jerks. My recent on-air experience tells me that has not changed, and there is therefore no cure for jerks.

If you like phone, and hate jerks, tune past them, and join some of us narrow minded, CB hostile, 20 year + CW loving guys who also like to use SSB.  You will find new hams there too.

Typed with a smile  : )

73 - Luke


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 23, 2009, 03:24:02 PM
.... . .   .... . .

-.-. --.- -.. -..-


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 23, 2009, 06:48:18 PM
-.- ----. ..-. --- -.
---.. ...--


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K6LO on November 23, 2009, 07:15:40 PM
83?  You are really serious.  You don't like CW.  ;)


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 23, 2009, 07:47:04 PM
There really is nothing wrong with someone working phone. It' just not for me. I don't like hearing so many bad players.

If you want to hear the bad players on CW go to a big DX pileup and you can hear the 'policemen' sending UP UP UP endlessly and cussing at those who (like me more than once) forget to punch the right button on the rig and end up calling on the DX stations frequency.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K4DPK on November 23, 2009, 08:30:05 PM
K9FON said:  " Most OTer 20 WPM extra class hams are narrow minded! I forgot about that! Inflexible to anything that they dont think is the norm to them is considered CB!!!!"
_____________________

Is that why you started this thread, so you could beat up on us OTs again?

Come on!  Get real.

What's your definition of an Old Timer?  Anyone who's had a ticket longer than six months?  

Phil C. Sr.
k4dpk


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: WZ9O on November 24, 2009, 03:32:09 AM
You can take the op out of cb…..but you can’t take the cb out of the op


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 24, 2009, 06:56:33 AM
I appologize for my comment that phone is for CBers.
My lame attempt at humor does look like an insult.

I think that so many apartment dwellers and others with antenna restrictions can have a great time on the air by using CW. 5 watts to a small antenna and you can work DX on CW where no Phone QSO would be possible.

Unofficial "novice" bands on 80, 40, and 20 meters could encourage new hams to try CW. Where do they go now to try out CW? Jump in with the fast guys and they become intimidated. But have 10 kHz novice segments that they can go to for QRS QSOs and more new hams will be introduced to CW.


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 24, 2009, 11:11:24 AM
K4DPK asks: "What's your definition of an Old Timer?"

I seem to recall that 20 years licensed makes one an Old Timer, and 40 years makes one an Old Old Timer.

But those are old definitions, from a time when 20 years licensed meant the ham had been licensed before WW2 and 40 years licensed meant the ham had been licensed in the spark era.

I've got 42 years in so far, and I'm 55.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K4DPK on November 24, 2009, 11:33:39 AM
Ouch, Jim.

There you go, trying to make me feel old.  :)

I guess it all depends on where you stand, but I guess by your definition some of us (like me) must be Ancient Timers, or Jurassic Hams. :)

No, I just don't like these broad, sweeping statements about "Old timers causing all the problems".  Most of the time, that kind of statement comes from someone who believes 5 years licensed puts one in that category.

I can see how that happens, though, because after almost 55 years on the air, I think OTs are anyone licensed longer than me.

Phil C. Sr.
k4dpk


Title: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 25, 2009, 07:03:05 AM
K4DPK writes: "There you go, trying to make me feel old. :)"

Sorry, wasn't my intent. I know what ya mean, though, somebody mentions a song or movie that to me is "recent", and it turns out to be 25-35+ years old.  

K4DPK: "I guess it all depends on where you stand, but I guess by your definition some of us (like me) must be Ancient Timers, or Jurassic Hams. :)"

Maybe we need to redefine the terms. Perhaps Old Timer should require 40 years licensed and Old Old Timer should require 60 years licensed.

Works for me!

K4DPK: "No, I just don't like these broad, sweeping statements about "Old timers causing all the problems"."

Me neither. Particularly since, if it weren't for those same old-timers, we wouldn't have amateur radio at all.

K4DPK: "Most of the time, that kind of statement comes from someone who believes 5 years licensed puts one in that category."

Which is nothing new.

Way back in the days of spark and the early refugees from the light-bulb factory, there was a series of stories about "Rotten Radio" by The Old Man. In those stories were characters such as Young Squirt, Radical, and Final Authority. Change the technology a little and those stories apply today.

K4DPK: "I can see how that happens, though, because after almost 55 years on the air, I think OTs are anyone licensed longer than me."

Me too. I remember the Ancient Ones who were long-time hams when I got started - and now I'm older and longer-time than they are.

It's easy - and incorrect - to blame the old timers for the way things are. That's because:

- Not all the old timers agreed on everything or anything

- Old timers had only limited control over what happened

- There were many factors back-when that newcomers don't understand or take into account

Most of all, though, it's an easy out rather than dealing with the complexities.

--

I think we really do need a "Mythbusters" forum here on eham, because there are so many myths and inaccuracies that more than a few hams have accepted without question. Such as why we use LSB on 75 and USB on 20. Or the use of resistors as fuses.



73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 25, 2009, 07:25:54 PM
Yes i still have a CB or two here. And if someone has an issue with it tough luck! Nobody is better than someone else. We all put our pants on the same way. Ask yorself WWJD???
The response to me typing 83 was just a typo. I meant 73 so shoot me. I DO know CW and ill admit that I HAVE used it. Its just not for me. CW isnt the end all be all of ham radio IMHO.
I also use PSK 31, RTTY, Olivia, ect ect.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K6LO on November 25, 2009, 08:20:35 PM
I know you meant 73, Eric.  Your QRZ photo clearly shows a CW paddle.  Happy Thanksgiving.  

83, Luke


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 26, 2009, 08:47:40 AM
"Nobody is better than someone else."

An admirable philosophy but it rings hollow. By establishing criteria of "better" we can surely rank people and say who is better or not.

When comparing the average CB operator and the average HAM operator we might use the criterion of 'intellectual development through their radio hobby' to rank them. We might use the criterion of 'adherence to FCC rules and regulatons.' We might use the criterion of 'formal education.'

By a majority of reasonable criterion I believe we would find that a HAM is "better" than a CB operator.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 26, 2009, 11:13:32 AM
At the risk of igniting a firestorm of unsupported opinions, what prevents us from applying criteria of this very type to CW hams and non-CW hams?

My curiosity and philosophical education gets the better of me and so...

To categorize intellectual endeavor with its attendant devotion of time and effort as "better" places CW as being "better" than non-CW. to categorize intellectual endeavor as 'no better' places CW and non-CW at equal levels of betterness. And to categorize intellectual endeavor as 'less better' places CW below non-CW.

We therefore have three choices based on my argument:

1) CW hams are better than non-CW hams
2) CW hams are no better than non-CW  hams
3) CW hams are less better than non-CW hams

We can eliminate (3) out of hand. That leaves us with a choice between (1) and (2). Given the weight that our society gives to intellectual endeavor the win goes to (1).

I'm sorry there is no way to honestly soft peddle this. To do so is to throw sop.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 26, 2009, 01:54:05 PM
I know i seem outspoken but i just see things in a real light. I am a realist. We are all equal in te lords eyes. We all get up in the am put our clothes and shoes on the same way and eat sleep and dream just like everyone else. People who act like the are better than someone else are shallow. I see right throgh these types of people. This is especially bad on ham radio. Someone may think they are better than someone else because of the mode they choose to favor, the lisense they hold, and the way they passed to get the license. Im not that way. We all are in this hobby for one thing, because we have a passion and love fr radio and electronics! Am i right? Sure i am! Because this is true! Myself, I enjoy ALL aspects of radio from SWL, CB, FRS, to broadcast radio and ham radio. To me its all good! Yeah sure, there are some knuckel heads on CB but there just as many on ham radio and no, they are NOT all new no coders. The ones I hear are older 20 WPM Extras, 13 WPM Advances and Generals, all higher ranking hams than I. i love this hobby but i just dont tolerate some of the tripe that comes with it. I know this is like fighting a battle with one hand behind my back but thats how it is.

Oh and yes, I use a straight CW key as well as a "vibrokeyer" and sometims a computer to send and receive code.

73


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K9FON on November 26, 2009, 01:58:00 PM
Oh, and yes ham radio is BETTER than CB. There are a lot more things to do with our hobby than the 40 channel of CB!  Thats like comparing a single speed bicycle to a Mercedees Benz!!!! :^P


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 26, 2009, 02:06:00 PM
"Nobody is better than someone else."

So FDR and Churchill weren't better than Hitler and Tojo?

Mother Teresa wasn't better than Saddam Hussein?

The folks who designed and built the Twin Towers weren't better than the folks who flew airplanes full of innocent people into them?

Interesting...

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 26, 2009, 02:19:36 PM
Sometimes those who act better are better. Sometimes they are not. I don't think we can generalize here. Might they be realists? They need not be falsely humble.  

What is a realist? A definition I will make up now is that a realist is one who looks at things objectively, from all angles, dispassionately, who can back up his claims (if any) through logic. He does not default to dogma whether that be political, religious, or otherwise. He can debate his point of view politely and when compelling contrary evidence is presented he is able to discard his previous view. He is open minded.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K5END on November 26, 2009, 09:19:40 PM
"Better" people can only be judged in terms of acts, behavior or performance.

Picasso was a better painter than Warhol (even Warhol would have agreed with that) and W. A. Mozart was a better musical composer than Ray Stevens.

The behavior of Mother Teresa was better than that of Saddam Hussein, but we cannot elevate ourselves to sit in judgment of a person's humanity. We can judge a person's actions and nothing more.

I think the other poster is making the same point as this, but whether a ham is better according to "CW" is not a good question. (I assume that means whether the ham knows Morse code.) A person can know code quite well but still know nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans. So "CW" or code skill in itself is neither necessary nor a sufficient condition to qualify as a "better" ham.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 27, 2009, 04:52:51 AM
K5END writes: ""Better" people can only be judged in terms of acts, behavior or performance."

Exactly. But what else is there?

K5END: "Picasso was a better painter than Warhol (even Warhol would have agreed with that) and W. A. Mozart was a better musical composer than Ray Stevens.

The behavior of Mother Teresa was better than that of Saddam Hussein, but we cannot elevate ourselves to sit in judgment of a person's humanity. We can judge a person's actions and nothing more."

But what does it mean to "judge a person's humanity"?

One person does horrific things to others for no reason, resulting in death, suffering and destruction. What sort of humanity could such a person have?
 
K5END: "I think the other poster is making the same point as this, but whether a ham is better according to "CW" is not a good question. (I assume that means whether the ham knows Morse code.) A person can know code quite well but still know nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans. So "CW" or code skill in itself is neither necessary nor a sufficient condition to qualify as a "better" ham."

I've never met an amateur who knew code quite well but knew nothing of electronics, antennas or band plans.  

Knowledge isn't a zero-sum game, where knowing something like Morse Code automatically means a person won't know something else, like Smith Charts. If anything, knowledge is one of those things where the result is greater than the sum of the parts. A symbiotic relationship, so to speak, and Morse Code knowledge is part of it.

For example, consider how many hams you know who have built rigs from scratch. I'm not talking about kits or accessories, nor conversion of surplus or restoration of old rigs. I mean complete working stations from parts.

I think you'll find that most of those folks know Morse Code. Knowing code let them start with simple designs and build up their knowledge and experience to more-complex designs. I mean, how many folks would build an HF SSB transceiver as a first project?

Or consider the ham with limited cash to spend on amateur radio, but who wants to get on HF. Which mode will give the most results for the least money spent?

One more point: Consider the title of this thread. The original author is complaining about the on-air behavior he's hearing on 160. What mode are those folks using?

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K5END on November 27, 2009, 05:05:40 AM
Jim,

Your points are good. However I think we are arguing apples and oranges, pardon the cliche.

My point is, a single aspect is not sufficient to make an evaluation--good or bad.

The SSB BS we hear sometimes on the air is behavior. That is something we can judge as appropriate or not.

OTOH, I know of some proficient Morse code/CW ops who don't fall into the category of what I would call good hams.

Knowing code does not prevent someone from being a jerk. Code is not a baptism into the good-Ham category. Look at some of the posts here on eham for example.



73


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: N2EY on November 27, 2009, 06:27:44 AM
K5END writes: "My point is, a single aspect is not sufficient to make an evaluation--good or bad."

I think it depends on the aspect. For example:

K5END: "The SSB BS we hear sometimes on the air is behavior. That is something we can judge as appropriate or not."

Someone who intentionally behaves inappropriately on the air is a bad ham - by definition. We can make that evaluation based on that single aspect.

I'm not talking about the person who goes 10 minutes and 3 seconds without IDing, the one who sometimes forgets to push the SPLIT button or the occasional heck or darn that slips in. I mean the stuff that clearly way over the line, and which is obviously deliberate.

K5END: "OTOH, I know of some proficient Morse code/CW ops who don't fall into the category of what I would call good hams."

In 42 years as a ham, I can only think of one: W9WNV, Dr. Don Miller. Skilled operator, even more skilled con artist. Except he got a little sloppy and his DX con game was discovered. Fascinating story; I remember it well. But Don Miller was the exception that proved the rule.

K5END: "Knowing code does not prevent someone from being a jerk. Code is not a baptism into the good-Ham category. Look at some of the posts here on eham for example."

There is no one test that will absolutely guarantee that everyone who passes it is a Good Ham. Same for any other qualification, such as electronics knowledge, professional experience, educational background, military service, political affiliation, etc. Particularly when the test is a one-time thing that may have been done decades ago.

There are bad apples in every human endeavor, regardless of the tests, qualifications, etc.

But the fact that something isn't a 100% perfect filter/predictor/qualifier doesn't mean it's useless.

I'd put it this way: "All else being equal, the ham who knows _____ is a better ham than the one who doesn't know ______."

Put the same amateur-radio-related knowledge in both blanks (as long as it's a positive thing) and the statement works. It can be anything from "how to solder a PL-259" to "Part 97" to "standard phonetics" to "Morse Code".

---

What I and many others object to is the idea that Morse Code skill makes no difference in Amateur Radio. And the idea that the same person cannot be both skilled in Morse Code and knowledgeable in theory, regulations, etc.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 27, 2009, 08:37:55 AM
Let's restate the CODE/NO CODE thing more narrowly.

All things being equal is a CODE ham superior to a NO CODE ham? To answer this without wandering off into endless anecdotal accounts we must define what we mean by 'superior.' As it sits that is one w-i-d-e word.

If we define 'superior' to mean more effort has been expended, we find that CODE is superior to NO CODE. Notice that we can pick a definition or definitions for 'superior' that will give us NO CODE is superior to CODE. Have we (I) created a straw man who is easily knocked down?


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: KH6AQ on November 27, 2009, 08:39:53 AM
A new ham song:

"have noticed lately that 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters" sung to the tune of "it's starting to sound a lot like Christmas..."


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: K1LEM on December 18, 2009, 08:48:58 PM
What you are experiencing is the qualification less
amateur radio service.
Its a cancer and its spread to all bands. It used to be largely confined to two meter repeaters, but now with cheese doodle exams and no code, this type of low lifer is everywhere on all bands.

Its sad.


Title: RE: 160 meters is starting to sound like 75 meters
Post by: WZ9O on December 19, 2009, 02:57:38 AM
It gets tougher everyday as more and more mental midget newbie’s arrive and drag it futher into the sewer.