|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
HAM RADIO - TRAINED OPERATORS AND ELECTRONICS EXPERTS? From commentary I made on QRZ.COM regarding memorization of ham radio tests "existing reservoir
within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts".
Ham radio is today a non-technical hobby. That phrase in the rules has not been applicable to ham
radio operators in general (though there are exceptions) for at least two decades if not three. The phrasing related to post World War II ham radio. It needs to be removed from the rules.
The idea then was we hams were the ones who, with minimal training, could be drafted into military service and placed in the military communications field. We were the ones who could not only operate a
radio but repair it in the field, and keep it going under difficult conditions. We knew radio theory (not computer theory!) because we had to in order to keep our own radios running. We knew
standard military communications procedures, and we knew Morse at military speeds, with the proper prosigns.
All that disappeared when the military began "specialists," that is, when
one person runs a keyboard, a different person installs an antenna, a third person works a transmitter and a fourth works a receiver. None of them know the others' jobs. The "jack of all
trades" ham radio operator was obsolete and unnecessary.
Today, based upon having passed a ham radio licensing exam, such as the one discussed here, we have hams walking around thinking
they are "electronics experts," when all they really know how to do is plug in a radio to a computer sound card. They are not trained operators, have no knowledge of any kind of standard
operating procedures, and certainly in no way resemble technicians. Yet they will tell you they are 'electronics experts.'
The fact is, we do not need that level of technical
skill. The most that the majority of hams do is buy a dipole and install it, and plug in a radio and get on the air. Calling them "electronics experts" is stretching reality to the
wildest point! And they don't need to be. No electronics knowledge is required to operate today's ham radio!! None! All a person needs to know is how to stay within the band limits, and a
bit of operating courtesy.
I disagree with the cram session testing. I used to see it in the First Phone classes, "get your First, guaranteed." And the majority of those
First Phone ticket holders hardly recognized a meter, let alone knew how to repair anything electronic.
But that is the way things are done today. It isn't likely to change.
The reality is, the graduates of this amateur radio school will move onto 2 meters for a while, and a few will go on HF when the rules are changed. Most will become bored and put the radio in the
closet. No challenge, no fun. It has happened to thousands of Techs who never really got into ham radio, but found themselves stuck on VHF CB, and became totally disillusioned. They
quit. While many of their licenses are still valid, and therefore work for "body count," they have zero interest in ham radio and haven't used a radio in several years. Of course, many
of them just got into ham radio for the cell phone aspect, and as cell phone plans became cheaper and more available, ham radio was no longer needed for the hubby-wife cell phone calls. They got 'real'
cell phones and left the repeaters in the past couple of years.
This kind of testing is really silly! The people walk out of the test session with a certificate of passing, but with zero
knowledge. I would rather see, to be totally honest, the testing reduced to 15 questions on how to avoid interference and how to remain within the rules regarding band limits, and perhaps a question on
antenna safety, rather than fooling ourselves and the students into thinking they achieved something. Especially when that something is no longer applicable in the first place!
Ed
|
|
|
|
|
WHY JUNIOR CAN'T SPELL ... Or WHY HAMS CAN'T LEARN CODE When I was in school it was referred to as "application."
"Applying oneself." As I have noted publicly on these forums before, there is a strong suggestion of direct correlation between the "I can't do code" attitude and the "I didn't
learn much else, either" attitude. In general, it appears, without scientific observation or real data, that those who are most vocal about not being able to learn code are the ones with the least
ability to communicate using the written word.
I think this is the result of our dumbing down of the schools, of social promotion, and the 'feel good' approach to education. "Honey,
if you can't do it, we'll just give you the grade anyway." Some of that, of course, has to do with civil rights. You can not 'fail' one child while passing another, despite the disparity in
their application to their studies, their desire to learn, or even their actual abilities. Very often we can see the proof that the equal rights movement was mishandled, and created a monster we can't
tame.
The result is a generation of adults who (a) can't spell, and (b) have been told that's fine, it's OK to "do it your own way, as long as you get the idea across." But the
reality of that is, as more and more people 'do it their own way,' no-one will understand what anyone else is trying to say.
This is self-perpetuating. When an Albuquerque teacher's
assistant handed out a class work sheet with a list of words on it, she put at the top, and this is exactly how she printed it: (quote) make a sintinse with this words
(unquote) When the teachers can't teach, there is nothing the students can learn.
So it goes with ham radio. Our Elmers, the teachers, the masters of the art, are no longer masters
of anything but the PTT switch. They can't teach, and there is no-one left to emulate. The experts are the beginners; the teachers are the students.
In both the real world and our
amateur radio world, the attitude is one of "I don't have to learn this." Why? Because the person can get by without learning it, because we have instilled in them the attitude that
learning is unimportant.
There seems to be some effort to change all this, but since it took us many years to dig the educational hole, it will certainly take us many more years to make any
noticeable progress toward climbing out of it. Making teachers and schools accountable would be a solution, but at the same time offering vouchers insures failing schools will continue to fail.
It insures also the mediocre will be renamed the best. Kinda like McDonald's - they don't make a "small" Coke anymore. They renamed it Medium, for that 'feel good feeling" to tell
you this is really worth your money. That's where we are with education. We have renamed poor to "medium," for the feel good feeling and to keep from offending. Mediocre is the
top of the ladder, in school and in ham radio.
The folks who can't write and can't read and can't spell and can't communicate in their native English find nothing wrong with that. They have been
told "it's a good thing."
Ed |
|
|
|
|
CB LINGO There are more and more complaints about the use of "CB lingo" on the ham bands, such as ten signals, 'on the side', 'on the flip side,'
'I'll modulate at ya' and a whole lot more. When these complaints surface, as they did recently in an article on eHam.net, the pro-CB crowd immediately attacks those against the CB lingo as being Old Farts,
unable to accept change. My concerns are several on this subject. First, CB does have its own 'language.' That language has been around now for nearly forty years and has become a CB
tradition. It is used by nearly everyone who has a CB radio, whether they are new to that hobby or old timers in it. Many adopt the fake southern drawl automatically when they pick up the
microphone, but even without the drawl, the language remains. What I find incongruous is as these CBers enter ham radio, their attitude appears to be ham radio should not have its own language, but should
adopt CB's. They become very angry when we try to point out to them that we, too, have our traditions, and they won't let us keep them. Why would this be fair? Why would they think it is OK
to corrupt ham radio? Why do they think we have to sound like CB in order to be enjoyable? Could be several reasons. The first is, as we have proved, they are not interested in learning
ham radio or its traditions anyway. They don't want to learn CW, they don't want to learn electronics. All they want, when you get right down to it, is more frequencies on which to talk, instead
of their forty channels and the freeband. We could suggest they are simply too lazy. Well, maybe. Or it is simply arrogance? Or they, perhaps, honestly believe talking like a CBer is the
correct way to talk, and will communicate better on the ham bands? Or is it more like something else in our world? Many Americans will not see this but those of us who live in the Southwest,
or in Florida, have seen a similar approach to immigration. They don't come to join; they come to convert. Here in the Southwest, we find we who were born here, speaking English, are now learning
the lingo of the land is Spanish. The Mexicans have come and, like the CBers on the ham bands, have converted this to Mexico. They don't want to adopt the ways of the new land to which they came;
they want to bring the old land's ways with them. So it appears to go with CB. They want to delete our ham radio traditions and make it feel like, taste like, sound like, CB radio. They are
too lazy or too arrogant to adopt a new lingo and a new style of operating. They can't join; they can only corrupt, only dilute. As they destroy our traditions, they get angry at us because we
are angry at them for doing so! |
|
|
|
|
ENGLISH AND CW Just listened to a QSO on 20 meters CW. One of the guys did fine. He not only sent good code but he apparently copied
what the other guy was trying to say. Yeah, trying. That guy was an excellent example of why we need to learn code on a straight key, rather than a bug. The RST he sent? R5T
55T9. His name: DA4E. His QTH? I have no idea. I did get the state as MT once but it could have been MTI, a state I am not familiar with. Over on eHam. net, there is a
thread "What's happening to us?" that includes comments about how it is OK to change the language and to spell the way you want. One comment starts of with "of coarse." Another says "to
loose" our language. Some say "if you where going to do this" WHAT THE HELL? What language are we speaking? Sure if we ALL spell Dog as "DAHG" then we will know what it
means. If we ALL use "coarse" instead of "course" yeah, we'll know what it means. But if one uses "corse" one uses "coarse" one uses "couse" and one uses "kouse" who the hell know what they are
saying? Words have SPELLINGS! If you spell it wrong, chances are it is the WRONG WORD! Like "your." "If your going to town...." Horse manure, folks! "Your"
is NOT a contraction of "you are." It is a word that means something totally different. It is a possessive pronoun. Anyone know what that is? No, probably not. If we all speak the
same language we communicate. But when each of us heads off into his or her own direction, communication ceases to exist. It is the same with CW. If we all just toss in some random number of
dits and dahs in letters, we are not communicating. The object of communication is to get a message across. But WHAT message? Those who can't spell, get highly defensive when they ARE
corrected. It's like telling them they have snot hanging from their nose. Pisses them off. They don't want to learn the language. They want to be lazy and have no idea what they just
said or wrote. And no one else will, either. So tell them they can't spell. They scream that is it their RIGHT not to spell correctly. They "dontwana." They will do it their
way. And up yours. Or "up you'res?" Or "up yurs?" What the hell is wrong with people who think it is their right to not be able to communicate? What the hell is wrong
with schools, that teach "that's OK, baby, you spell it your way?" We are going to the land of Babble, both in our nation's language and ham radio. Where in hell
are the teachers in this nation? What are they doing in school? They sure aren't teaching our language. |
|
|
|
|
OUR MONSTERS - WE CREATED THEMFirst of all, ham radio reflects society in general. We are part of the culture we have created. Sad as it may be, it is true. I see no hope at all for change, so I have decided
I must simply avoid the things I don't like, and try to find other places to roam. That includes the ham bands. There's a lot of good stuff on 75 meters, 40, 20, and other ham bands. I don't participate in the nets, except for one regional one here, and it has no
problems. (Of course, "problems" are in the eye of the beholder!) I rarely participate in any of the roundtables, but have occasionally done so. If they degenerate to
profanity, racial slurs, sexual innuendo (or outright sexual comments) or get beyond the very casual in politics, I simply QRT or go down to CW. I have learned I can't change the world, and despite the
new trend in ham radio to be a hero, I can't save the world. What you complain about is a combination
of the relaxed rules of society, and the relaxed rules of ham radio. They were separate for many long years. Despite the pervasion of profanity and confrontation into everyday conversation, it
did not invade ham radio for another decade. The reason was, ham radio licenses required some exertion of effort to obtain, so had a serious degree of respect. As the license became easier to obtain
(or, in the 1980s and 1990s here in the US, to buy from your buddies) the respect began to disappear. Those of us who miss the old, respected, ham radio, can only be thankful we can find places in it to operate properly, to continue the respect and the
traditions. Those places may disappear, too, but for now it is still possible to operate any of the ham bands and find good operators, good operating practices, and a lot of the old traditions and
honor. It hasn't all disappeared. Not yet. And that is what I do. Before attempting
to join a conversation in progress, I listen to bit to see if it is something I would be proud to be a part of, or would rather be apart from. If the later, I just move on. Is it CB? Well, no. But many thousands of people "trained" in CB entered ham radio,
most of them legitimately, with the new license structuring begun in 1991, and many illegitmately, with the bought licenses in the early days of the VE program here in the USA. And they brought with
them the 'trained' attitudes. Many did leave CB behind. Many did not. Some, quite a large percentage, in fact, continue to use CB. Many of those can tell the difference,
and respect the difference. They do "CB" on the CB band, and they do "ham" on the ham bands. But many do not respect the difference.
We are stuck with the monsters. Sorry. |
|
|
|
|
CLOSE ENOUGH IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH! So many hams of today are taking up CW and that is very encouraging, not just because
it means an interest in this traditional mode, but it shows both an interest in learning new things, and a desire not to be content to just get on the repeater and chat. One of the things noted,
though, is, since we gave up the Novice license as a means of getting into ham radio and learning 'the ropes,' people getting into CW tend to want to start near the top. That means they want to
immediately move to keyers and paddles. With the Novice ticket, the majority used a straight key, learned what Morse characters should sound like, and then improved their speed and ability.
Today it seems that step is being skipped more and more. Hams who have not mastered the code grab an iambic paddle and start sending. The result is we are hearing a lot of characters that really
don't match anything! Like a dash and five dits for a 6, for example. Or five dits for an "H". When told about it, they respond with "you know what I meant." And, yes, I do.
Most of the time. It is, though, my belief that when each of us does it his or her own way, we are headed toward the point where none of us understands the other. There is this feeling
among a lot of hams, and some of them not just recently licensed, that if we throw in an extra dit or two, or even an extra dah, it's "close enough." It isn't. It's like using "your" for
"you're." They are not the same word at all, and do not have even similar meanings. But over and over you see "If your wanting a good radio ..." Well, that doesn't make sense!
But it is being considered 'close enough.' And it isn't. A six is one dash and four dits. Dahdidididit. It is nothing else. I am also hearing NAG for "NAME." Why?
Because they combine that final "E" with the "M" and make it a single character. The idea of learning the code is to use it with the correct spacing and rhythm. In your mind you know what you
are saying. But if you send extra dits, or combine characters, you are the ONLY one who knows what you are saying! Please: Close enough is NOT good enough!
|
|
|
|
|
WHAT IS THIS HAM RADIO STUFF? Well, really, just what IS amateur radio? There's a bit of controversy in this. Many call it a hobby, many call it a
service. It is an activity one participates in for fun, for pleasure, and is therefore a hobby. It is, more and more, an activity one participates in to help the community, and therefore it is a
service. However, one can do all hobby, or all service, or any mixture of the two. It is regulated by the Federal Communication Commission and they call it a service. However, they call everything
in the communications field a 'service,' including things like the Broadcast Radio Service, the Citizens' Band Radio Service, the Amateur Radio Service, and quite a few more. This in itself does not
mandate that amateur radio "serve" anything. It is simply a term used to denote it is regulared or controlled by, the FCC. There are plenty of articles available everywhere on the history of amateur
radio, and I have no desire to restate those. I would encourage anyone interested in learning what amateur radio is, to visit the ARRL's web site, at arrl.org. Also visit the FCC's web site
(fcc.gov) and follow the link to Part 97 Rules and Regulations. It's dry reading, but it IS what governs amateur radio. Is it "ham radio?" Is it "HAM?" Yes, it is 'ham radio,' and no it
is not "HAM." All capitalized suggests an acronym and it isn't one. "Ham" is a word used to describe non-professionals, as in the early days of theater, even going back to Shakespearean days,
when some actors were called 'hams' because they were bad, or they overplayed their roles. In communications the term was adopted by early wire telegraph operators to refer to someone who was sloppy
on the code key, a non-professional. After radio became a reality, the term carried over to refer to non-professionals, and that is us! The name stuck and was no longer considered
derogatory. But it isn't HAM! For decades amateur radio was a largely technical activity, largely because to participate one had to know something about electronics since one often had to do his or
her own repairs, or even building his own equipment. Gradually, by the 1960s, the trend was more toward commercially purchased equipment, and by the 1980s equipment was becoming too sophisticated for
the home enthusiast to repair. Today most equipment is beyond the means, technically, of the average amateur, so it has become a hobby of 'users' rather than 'tinkerers.' |
|
|
