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

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Age? Is ham radio slowly dieing?  (Read 5241 times)
K1QQQ
Member

Posts: 282




Ignore
« Reply #60 on: March 25, 2019, 02:15:56 PM »

At least the last 2 posts seemed to understand me.


O-is VHF a mode ?? I thought about buying another Ranger 6 meter radio used if the price was low enough. I believe it does SSB/CW. (yes...I have another stored away..the older versions were only 10 watts...The Ranger company is sort of in limbo. What happened to it ? Some say now in Viet-Nam.  ps..that rig has no tones for a repeater unless you got one of their special tone boards but good luck...



Otherwise there are always the message-board 'trolls' (is that what you call it ?). Say anything somebody has different views on and they freak out. Even try to investigate forever the person with a differing opinion. Exciting ?   ooops..that a negative comment ?


I enjoy EHAM and other places as an interesting place to review what others are doing and 'help' at maybe the most simple or complex things.


On the negative when 99% is TECHNICIAN where do all the non-technician amateur frequencies go ? Up for auction.
Logged
K1FBI
Member

Posts: 209




Ignore
« Reply #61 on: March 25, 2019, 06:53:42 PM »




O-is VHF a mode ??

OH is a word; O is a letter. I have no idea what O-is means or represents. VHF is an acronym and it stands for Very High Frequency. This is in the Technician Question Pool. Maybe you can get a local Tech to help you with the things you forgot over the years.

Logged
K5TED
Member

Posts: 229




Ignore
« Reply #62 on: March 26, 2019, 06:52:06 PM »

Ham radio is being killed off by instant gratification, not cellphones and iPads.

When new hams stop at a Baofeng and wonder why the hobby isn't satisfying.

When new hams attempt to equate the wonder of HF comms around the world with internet comms dependent on their PC or mobile device.

When new hams don't grasp the intent of ham radio, and instead treat it as just another social app.


Logged
WO7R
Member

Posts: 4018




Ignore
« Reply #63 on: April 02, 2019, 10:32:13 AM »

When I look at actual evidence, I see nothing that indicates the hobby is dying.

I have been assured that it is dying since I first got licensed in the late '80s.  One of Wayne Green's legacies perhaps.

The change seems to be demographic.  Not many kids are being licensed as teenagers.

But, so what?  The VE program has ended up as a smashing success; people find their way to us in the '30s and '40s when they have money and maybe, more time.

The FCC data base (posted up earlier in this thread) shows there are as many or more with licenses as there ever has been.  So, no "death" there.

What about HF?

Well, that's harder to measure.  The CQ WW contest folks used to publish a nice graph of "logs submitted".  Unfortunately, I don't see it anymore.  But, if you want to work at it, most of the data is there.

Here's some "logs submitted" over the last decade for SSB:

2018   8033   (from https://www.cqww.com/publiclogs/2018ph/)
2017   8161
2016   7266
2015   7904
2014   7920
2013   8104
2012   7847
2011   7098
2010   6175
2009   5703
2008   4728
2007   4867
2006   4243
2005   4205

CW has these numbers:

2018   7668
2017   7967
2016   7697
2015   7203   (from https://www.cqww.com/publiclogs/2015cw/)
...
2007   4576
2006   4259
2005   3866

This is all they publish now (and all I bothered to look up -- you can do 2008 to 2014 for CW yourself).  However, when they did publish that nice graph, it went way back at least as far back to the '60s.  On the whole, the submitted log count grew over the years.

Maybe these numbers represent other trends.  But the one thing they do not support is the thesis that "ham radio is dying" either in terms of total licensure or HF activity.

You can also look at data from LOTW and from Clublog.  None show any sort of drop-off.  The magnitudes from those sources are in the 10s of million of QSOs per year.  It is unlikely that either LOTW or Clublog contain a great fraction of VHF, though surely there is some.  None of it is local 2m net repeater activity however.

We seem to be panicking largely because people don't get licensed before they are 20.  AFAICT, that's it.
« Last Edit: April 02, 2019, 10:44:03 AM by WO7R » Logged
N0YXB
Member

Posts: 1545




Ignore
« Reply #64 on: April 02, 2019, 11:19:46 AM »


We seem to be panicking largely because people don't get licensed before they are 20.  AFAICT, that's it.

Yes! I concur.
Logged
KG7FIU
Member

Posts: 37




Ignore
« Reply #65 on: April 07, 2019, 10:27:51 PM »

"slowly dying"... Huh


source: ARRL

Uh, I take issue with your graph.  It's a subtle misrepresentation of data.  A more accurate depiction of the number of hams would show a nearly flat line -- with a very slightly increasing slope.  A graph that accurately reflects the relatively low increase in hams "percentage-wise".   Perhaps something like this:

« Last Edit: April 07, 2019, 10:31:19 PM by KG7FIU » Logged
K1FBI
Member

Posts: 209




Ignore
« Reply #66 on: April 08, 2019, 05:35:41 AM »

"slowly dying"... Huh


source: ARRL

Uh, I take issue with your graph.  It's a subtle misrepresentation of data.  A more accurate depiction of the number of hams would show a nearly flat line -- with a very slightly increasing slope.  A graph that accurately reflects the relatively low increase in hams "percentage-wise".   Perhaps something like this:



It reminds me of over enthusiastic stock market graphing. The first year is in reality, only an increase of slightly less than 1.3%. Although if the 9,130 new hams got on the air at the same time that year, we would probably all be complaining about that.
Logged
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2498




Ignore
« Reply #67 on: April 08, 2019, 05:44:41 AM »

Actually if they are made to scale, either graph is accurate. The top graph shows the data in a range while the lower shows from 100,000 axis. But in reality they do show the same thing. If you want a flatter line yet, set the x axis to say 0 - 5,000,000. Then your data will be even more a straight horizontal line. But yet it would still show the same data.

To say showing the same data in a narrow range vs. a wide range is a misrepresentation is incorrect. Even if you try to interpret percentage, you need to pick a starting point. Do you use 0, or do you use the 2014 number. Even then using the same starting point to calculate percentage still would have the same numbers. The numbers are the same in either graph. They mean the same thing in either graph. The main difference is the amount of useless space you want to show vs. better visual detail.

The lower graph would have more meaning if it were spread out over a much longer y axis timeline. Like going back to 1969 and show a 50 year trend. Or 1919 for a 100 year trend. Then the bottom portion of the lower graph would actually contain data, and be more historically relevant. As over time, the numbers would fall out of the range of the top graph.

Simply put, don't try to blow smoke visually when the data and the math says the same thing in either graph.
Logged

73, Stan
Wisdom is knowledge you gain after you know it all.
K1FBI
Member

Posts: 209




Ignore
« Reply #68 on: April 08, 2019, 07:05:35 AM »

Don't kid yourself. Everyone from Politicians and Bankers to gun control advocates plot graphs to make the data "appear" more significant than what it is. This is done with an intent, regardless if the total numbers and percentages are still the same.

Data is skewed by:
Omitting the baseline
Manipulation of the Y-Axis
Data Cherry Picking
Using the wrong graph
Going against tradition with shading

You are smart enough to know what the other Ops point was, even if he could have articulated it better.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2019, 07:17:40 AM by K1FBI » Logged
K5NOK
Member

Posts: 96




Ignore
« Reply #69 on: April 08, 2019, 09:55:00 AM »

Yes. Yes.
Ham Radio is dying. We all know it is true.
What with that new mode that everyone is doing now.

I mean, I can't even fire up my spark gap transmitter without someone complaining...Sigh.
Logged
K1FBI
Member

Posts: 209




Ignore
« Reply #70 on: April 08, 2019, 11:50:58 AM »

Yes. Yes.
Ham Radio is dying. We all know it is true.
What with that new mode that everyone is doing now.

I mean, I can't even fire up my spark gap transmitter without someone complaining...Sigh.

7.074 and 14.074 are two great places to fire up your spark gap!
Logged
N9FB
Member

Posts: 2363




Ignore
« Reply #71 on: April 08, 2019, 04:13:22 PM »


Quote from: N9KX
"slowly dying"... Huh


source: ARRL

Quote from: KG7FIU
Uh, I take issue with your graph.  It's a subtle misrepresentation of data.  A more accurate depiction of the number of hams would show a nearly flat line -- with a very slightly increasing slope.  A graph that accurately reflects the relatively low increase in hams "percentage-wise".   Perhaps something like this:



1. it is not my graph -- it is the ARRL's
2. obviously they have chosen to graph the data in a way that emphasizes the incline of growth in the hobby over the last 5 years
3. because it overemphasizes the rate of growth it serves as the perfect foil to the ridiculous question that is the  pretext of this thread: "is ham radio slowly dying?"  Cheesy
4. the graph you posted as a better representation of ham radio's growth is a bad link
Logged
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2498




Ignore
« Reply #72 on: April 08, 2019, 07:24:16 PM »

Don't kid yourself. Everyone from Politicians and Bankers to gun control advocates plot graphs to make the data "appear" more significant than what it is. This is done with an intent, regardless if the total numbers and percentages are still the same.

Data is skewed by:
Omitting the baseline
Manipulation of the Y-Axis
Data Cherry Picking
Using the wrong graph
Going against tradition with shading

You are smart enough to know what the other Ops point was, even if he could have articulated it better.

You should be the one not to kid. No matter which graph you use, the numbers are the same. An intelligent person understands the meaning of data no matter what kind of graph is used. Especially when it is the same numbers.
Logged

73, Stan
Wisdom is knowledge you gain after you know it all.
AK4YH
Member

Posts: 107


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #73 on: April 08, 2019, 11:50:41 PM »

The title should be "amateur radio is dying and it's our fault."

Our hobby is a bit solitary. Yes, we communicate, although even that is debatable, but we are not seen... When have you last seen a Ham operator using a radio outside of a planned event? Me, never. Most people don't even know our hobby exists. There is very little effort being made to popularise amateur radio. And let's not talk about the Emcomm wankers, nobody wants to be that guy (yes, emcomm is important, no, they're not all wankers).

We need to get out of the shack! Operate in public parcs, where there are people around. I always get lots of questions when I do so... Instead, we hide... We are worried of what people might say, maybe even call the cops on us, don't! And of course home is so much more comfortable... This is probably why many Ham operators are so fat... Few people are going to join our ranks if they don't see Ham radio in operation. The younger ones don't want to talk to old guys (their loss).

Get out of the shack!

Gil.
Logged

KC8KTN
Member

Posts: 1892


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #74 on: April 09, 2019, 12:18:05 AM »

Seems like a troll question. No ham radio is not dying. Whats wrong with everyone. Nuff said. Keeping it Real. 73s to all. The proof that ham radio is not dying is look how AWESOME Eham.net is. Nuff said...... Wow.  Everyone please be safe and Enjoy the hobby..
P.S. Dayton Ham fest will be here soon getting larger and larger every year.  
P.S#2. I got a feeling that the arrl and fcc will be opening coverage to all the bands for the General class liscence coming soon...
« Last Edit: April 09, 2019, 12:25:02 AM by KC8KTN » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 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!