Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
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

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 22 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: DUMP Pre Published Answers for the Extra  (Read 32681 times)
K6LHA
Member

Posts: 349




Ignore
« Reply #195 on: March 12, 2010, 03:06:30 PM »

KE7RTV posted on 11 March 2010:

"Keith, my concerns about amateur radio turning into CB may very well be baseless, I don't know..."

Class D Citizens Band allocation was made in 1958...that was FIFTY-TWO YEARS AGO. Roughly two and a half generations.

I certainly cannot see any "dispute" in here about CB one way or another in regards to some of the (now) ANCIENT practices of very early "radio" to most of the (few) radio amateurs in this forum. I classify most of the "CB" discussion (more cussing of it) in here as simple MISDIRECTION AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT OF *FUTURE* USA amateur radio regulations.

Note: This is an AMATEUR RADIO LICENSING FORUM, not some cry-baby forum to boo-hoo the evil FCC for "taking away" some kind of cherished amateur radio band. Before and after the reallocation of the miniscule 11m band, the TEN METER BAND was/is sitting there with SEVENTEEN HUNDRED KILOHERTZ (that's 1700 KHz for the reading-challenged old-timers) of band space.
.........................
KE7RTV: "CB has become somewhat of a synonym for crude behavior and given the cultural nosedive in which we find our-selves, I don't think the concern about the rot working its way into amateur radio should be brushed off as simple bigotry."

"A synonym for crude behavior...?" What, after FIFTY-TWO YEARS of "CB" existance? Hmphhh...if it takes THAT long to "develop crude behavior" then it is no wonder that USA hams can't come up with much of anything new in radio!

I don't see anything at all to do with EITHER amateur radio or CB that concerns some alleged "cultural nosedive" that "we" are (supposedly) "IN." That is SO bogus. It would only apply to the old, old morseites who inhabit the "lower ends" of bands doing EXACTLY the SAME things that were done (according to instructions from the ARRL published for decades) 50 to 60 years ago, executed faithfully in EXACT protocol (abbreviations, Q-codes, jargon) of "the service," punishable by ex-communication if EXACTNESS was "disobeyed."

I have YET to see a specific regulations that absolutely DEFINES this EXACT PROTOCOL in FCC regulations. I am in NO "cultural nosedive" fearing of losing my amateur radio license because I did not execute the EXACT on-air phrase/wording as IMAGINED by all these old-folks-of-the-air in this "job" of playing at being "professional operators." I'm not in any "cultural nosedive" because of NOT having to take any singular "test" (only one-way) for the ancient art of telegraphy.

"Simple bigotry" isn't worthy of a rationalized "excuse." Ask any former slave (mostly black but a few white folks also) if one can EXCUSE their treatment for centuries as "simple bigotry." It took FEDERAL LAW to put a damper on "simple bigotry" in regards to slavery in the USA...like in the 1960s that was beginning to "enjoy" the USA "incentive license plan." Slavery to radiotelegraphy was kept a lot longer in the USA. It is also worth noting that - by conspicuious photographic evidence - most USA licensed radio amateurs are WHITE MALES. See any resemblance to RACIAL segregation there?

73, Len K6LHA
Logged
KE7RTV
Member

Posts: 35




Ignore
« Reply #196 on: March 12, 2010, 06:28:20 PM »

Len...... I just want the hobby to stay pure. I thought you'd be with me on that.
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3833




Ignore
« Reply #197 on: March 12, 2010, 08:10:25 PM »

my concerns about amateur radio turning into CB
may very well be baseless, I don't know... but, neither do you. I'm only suggesting that we understand
what we're doing before we make changes because it's certainly a cat which can't be put back into the bag.

CB has become somewhat of a synonym for crude behavior
and given the cultural nosedive in which we find our-
selves, I don't think the concern about the rot working its way into amateur radio should be brushed
off as simple bigotry.

I share those same concerns.

11 meter CB was pretty well behaved for the first couple of years, but by the late 1960s the FCC rules governing that service were largely ignored. By the early 1970s it was out of control.

Amateur radio, OTOH, has been pretty well behaved for a much longer time. While we have violators, they're the exception, not the rule.

So why did cb go downhill so fast, yet amateur radio did not?

It can't be enforcement - FCC expended more resources trying to control cb, but failed.

It can't be licensing itself - cb used to require a license, but people simply ignored the rules and eventually stopped getting licenses at all.

It can't be technological failure - cb sets were pretty foolproof unless messed with.

It can't be loopholes in the regulations - the cb rules were clear as could be about what was allowed and what wasn't. People just began ignoring the rules.

So what was it?

One factor is that a cb "license" required no test, which meant a cb user didn't have to invest any effort in learning about the rules, technology, or operating practices and courtesy.

Amateur radio, OTOH, requires most newcomers to invest some time and effort to learn about it.

It is a fact of human nature that people tend to value more that which they have worked to earn.

Another factor is that amateur radio has a strong national organization that promotes good operating practices, technical advancement and following FCC rules - even the ones we don't like. CB never had such an organization.

---

We know how many US hams there are because of the license totals. While they may include a certain percentage of inactive and SK hams, they're an indicator.

But nobody really knows how many CB folks there are, because for decades there has been no licensing. All the indications I've seen are that CB is now only a tiny fraction of what it was in the boom days of the 1970s.


---

I've said it before, but I submit this for your consideration again: There are some folks who want Amateur Radio to become more like CB in every way. That's why they want to minimize license testing, eliminate license classes, and oppose the use of modes that require learning skills.

And as you said, if mistakes are made, that cat won't be put back in the bag. It's been at least 40 years since FCC lost control of CB, and there's no sign they'll ever get it back. Amateur radio, OTOH, keeps asking for more enforcement!

73 de Jim, N2EY 
Logged
K6LHA
Member

Posts: 349




Ignore
« Reply #198 on: March 13, 2010, 12:06:00 PM »

KE7RTV posted on 13 March 2010:

"Len...... I just want the hobby to stay pure. I thought you'd be with me on that."

I don't understand what you mean by this "PURE" word.

Shall this "PURITY" be forever and ever be just like it was in the 1950s and 1960s?

Shall this "PURITY" just like what the ARRL says it always MUST be?

Shall this "PURITY" be solely on HF ham bands?

Shall this "PURITY" to be nothing more than celibacy of one single mode and/or band operation?

Shall this "PURITY" to be whatever some self-defined singular licensee who demands that THEIR way of doing things is the ONLY "pure" way to engage in amateur radio?

As far as I'm concerned, the "PURITY" is obeyance of using USA amateur radio grant regulations as given in LAW. Nothing more, nothing less. The FCC regulations on USA amateur radio are ALL OPTIONAL within the LAW and all those OPTIONS available to all are CONSIDERABLE. WE can ALL enjoy what WE want to enjoy. There is absolutely NO "purity" in doing ONLY what someone else insists on all doing in some fantasy of pretending to be a "professional" in an AMATEUR radio activity.

Whatever I care to do using my USA amateur radio license grant WITHIN THE LAW is up to ME, not some control-freak who wants to DICTATE what I am supposed to "DO." I am NOT required by any LAW to use, operate, or not operate anything that I care for or don't care for. Neither am I required to PRETEND BEING a professional in amateurism when I've been a REAL professional since 1952.

If you don't like my "PURENESS" then feel free to disagree. However, if you want to call me "IMPURE" than you will guarantee yourself to an open fight. Now provide some UNambiguous definition of "PURE" amateur radio...and prepare to PROVE your point (whatever that was).

K6LHA
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3833




Ignore
« Reply #199 on: March 13, 2010, 01:37:42 PM »

I just want the hobby to stay pure.

First you've gotta define what you mean.

Here's how I'd define it:

- Amateur Radio is law-abiding. Hams follow the rules & regs - all of them. Even the ones they don't like.

- Hams follow "good amateur practice" even if something isn't specifically required by regulations. Bandplans and other gentleman's agreements are respected and followed.

- Amateur Radio is "G-rated" - meaning its content and behavior are suitable for all ages, genders, cultures, etc. at any time, on any frequency and mode. Regardless of what "the media" does.

- Hams value, respect and develop both technical knowledge and operating skills

- Amateur Radio is more than "a hobby", and includes things like public service, education, technical development, and more. That doesn't mean every ham is involved in all of those things, or even in any of them. But it does mean that those things are recognized as important parts of Amateur Radio, and supported.

Amateur Radio is about Quality as much as quantity. Hams have standards, traditions and practices all their own.

Amateur Radio includes a wide range of modes, bands, technologies, activities, etc. All of them have a place - as long as they are about "radio for its own sake" on the amateur bands.

Keeping to the above principles, and those of The Amateur's Code, is vitally important to keeping Amateur Radio from going downhill.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
KE7RTV
Member

Posts: 35




Ignore
« Reply #200 on: March 13, 2010, 02:51:46 PM »

pure as in safe from the interlopers who want to screw
things up for the rest of us.
Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 917




Ignore
« Reply #201 on: March 13, 2010, 06:21:52 PM »

CW is alive and well the world over.  Thank goodness the removal of the code requirement has done little to quell CW operation amongst old and new Hams alike!  

And just in case I be accused of being stuck in the past -- I just purchased a keyer and plan to learn to use it.  :-)  Still going to keep the straight key too of course.  It's really not that difficult sending 25wpm with my Nye Viking Straight Key.  

Ease and convenience are not always preferable to less 'modern' methods.  Example: even K6LHA appreciates a manual can opener.
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3833




Ignore
« Reply #202 on: March 14, 2010, 06:40:43 AM »

Ease and convenience are not always preferable to less 'modern' methods.  

In fact, sometimes "less modern" methods may be easier and more convenient.

For example, consider the electric can opener example you mentioned. In a small kitchen, counter space is always at a premium, and the space saved by a manual opener may make it easier and more convenient than an electric one. The manual costs less, too.

There's also the fact that if electricity is unavailable the electric opener is useless.

OTOH, if someone has a large number of cans to open on a regular basis, the electric opener is definitely to be preferred!

It all depends on the situation.

I have found CW to be easier and more convenient in many cases. Of course it requires learning some new skills, but so do many other things such as riding a bike, driving a manual-transmission car, etc. What matters is what you can do with the skills. In ham radio, one can do an enormous number and variety of things with CW.

73 de Jim, N2EY


Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 917




Ignore
« Reply #203 on: March 14, 2010, 07:03:37 AM »

Well put Jim.  I just joined the SKCC club today (Straight Key Century Club) and was issued #6586.

That is 6500+ members worldwide since its creation in 2004!  FB, is it not?

73 de K9AIM
Logged
K6LHA
Member

Posts: 349




Ignore
« Reply #204 on: March 14, 2010, 11:25:51 AM »

KE7RTV posted on 13 March 2010:

"pure as in safe from the interlopers who want to screw things up for the rest of us."

Oh, my, veiled paranoia? "For the rest of you?" In what way?

You mean like NOT having the SAME regulations as existed back in the 1960s?

You mean like having (evil) things like CHANGE happening?

You mean CHANGE has "screwed up things" for the rest of you Kabuki dancers slowly and formally going through your motions of doing the same thing over and over for decades?

Of course! Why "the whole world knows" that the FCC *MUST* keep things absolutely the SAME "for the rest of you." You are "owed" that, you're thinking. Yes, once you were awarded (that knighthood and/or royal title) you were SAFE from "being screwed up," right?

No, I don't think so. None of US "OWNS" anything nor do we "OWE" something. We are simply granted a permission to radiate RF according to regulations for ONE radio service. That is NO royal title, only some strange manifestation of ones own ego that they can all strut around and act "important" when they are no such thing...just hobbyists involved in radio.

Go with the future flow. There WILL be change coming to USA amateur radio regulations in the future. Either ACCEPT that possibility or leave "the (radio) service."

73, Len K6LHA
Logged
K6LHA
Member

Posts: 349




Ignore
« Reply #205 on: March 14, 2010, 11:42:44 AM »

K9AIM posted on March 13, 2010:
 
"CW is alive and well the world over."

So are horseshoes (on horses).
.................
K9AIM: "Thank goodness the removal of the code requirement has done little to quell CW operation amongst old and new Hams alike!"

There was NOT any "removal of the code requirement" in USA amateur radio. What was removed was the CODE TEST for any USA amateur radio license application.
...................
K9AIM: "Ease and convenience are not always preferable to less 'modern' methods. Example: even K6LHA appreciates a manual can opener."

Who said that? I do not "appreciate" a manual can operner. I can open a can with a knife or bayonet... and have done both. A manual can opener is slow, hard to use, takes more effort than an easy-to-use modern electric can opener.

You can feel free to solder a joint with a book of matches if you like the OLD things. I've done that in an emergency (with only three matches) but it is IDIOCY to do so willingly for hours on end.

You are free to vent your personal opinions but you are NOT FREE to spin tales about what others "say they perfer."
Logged
N2EY
Member

Posts: 3833




Ignore
« Reply #206 on: March 14, 2010, 02:18:10 PM »

K9AIM writes: "Well put Jim."

TNX

K9AIM: "I just joined the SKCC club today (Straight Key Century Club) and was issued #6586."

Congrats! I'm #307

K9AIM: "That is 6500+ members worldwide since its creation in 2004! FB, is it not?"

Yup - and that's with no real publicity.

Of course being a member doesn't limit someone to only straight keys or only CW.

73 de Jim, N2EY
Logged
KE7RTV
Member

Posts: 35




Ignore
« Reply #207 on: March 14, 2010, 02:27:13 PM »

Len,

This is too easy! Lighten up, It's a JOKE...

and the reason you fell for it is because you're so
full of yourself.

Steve KE7RTV
Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 917




Ignore
« Reply #208 on: March 14, 2010, 04:39:58 PM »

K6LHA writes: "Who said that? I do not "appreciate" a manual can operner. I can open a can with a knife or bayonet... and have done both. A manual can opener is slow, hard to use, takes more effort than an easy-to-use modern electric can opener.
You are free to vent your personal opinions but you are NOT FREE to spin tales about what others 'say they perfer.'"

Here is what you -- K6LHA -- wrote on page 8 of this very thread: http://www.eham.net/forums/Licensing/5409?page=8

K6LHA: "You could TRY to imply that "I am against manual can openers" but that would be your own idiotic assumption. "Hand carpentry tools" is something I'm "against?" RIDICULOUS, STUPID charge. Yes, I've learned to handle "hand tools" very well before you were born and a lot more besides. This isn't 1900 and the beginnings of electric power distribution in urban areas. Why oh WHY expend TIME and energy doing things MANUALLY when small power-assisted tools can accomplish the SAME things in LESS time, thus leaving MORE TIME to do OTHER tasks?
By the way, my wife and I have two can openers in the kitchen, one manual, the other electrically powered. Do you expect me to open cans with OTHER tools for food preparation? I know how but it is STUPID to do when there are specific low-cost tools to do it better."

So -- you can quibble with my saying you 'appreciate' a manual can-opener if you want, but you are already on record as saying you and your wife have two of them.  why you do not see the double-standard you are promoting when you denigrate CW enthusiasts is beyond me...
Logged
K9AIM
Member

Posts: 917




Ignore
« Reply #209 on: March 14, 2010, 04:49:13 PM »

That's good.  Note the irony: I joined the SKCC Club today and used a keyer for the first time last night.  Not for a QSO yet, but just tested the one I picked up on Ebay out.  Looks like it will be fun, not that my straight key is gonna gather dust, mind you. ;-)

I use a mic occasionally too, but with only 20 watts, it is sometimes is a challenge.  Anyone know of any affordable amps to bump me up to about 50 or even a 100?  Or maybe an affordable home-brew project?  I am a little rusty on theory, but amps are rather simple -- are they not? What is the minimum drive power most amps require, and is there (or were there) any amps made with a low power rig like the Argonaut V in mind?
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 ... 22 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!