On Fri, 21 Feb 1997 10:19:32 -0500, someone sent me e-mail that
said, in part:
>>I also submitted an op-ed piece about a month ago,
>
>Would you post this to the list? It sounds interesting and
>might get some support for your ideas.
I have discarded the original piece, but can re-create it. It will
be "briefer", which is probably not a bad thing :)
The current discussion on the Internet and various Ham Magazines,
including QST, on the code proficiency requirement is troubling to
me in one important aspect. I think by using Morse/CW as a barrier
to entry into amateur radio HF operation, we do a disservice to the
mode.
To this day, I hate broccoli. What does that have to do with this
discussion? Well, if it weren't forced on me, I might have learned
to like it. You don't tell an individual "it's good for you" and
expect them to eat it. We treat Morse/CW much in the same manner.
It is good for you, so "shut up and learn the code."
Rather, I think those of us dedicated to preserving CW need to look
at other analogies. We have to recognize that CW is outmoded,
ineffective (regardless of the ability to copy CW under difficult
circumstances -- PACTOR and AMTOR have us licked, even in
weak-signal conditions), and all the other arguments used against
the code proficiency requirements of Element 1(a, b, or c) are in
fact valid.
But, then again, so is sailing. Why, in the era of supersonic jet
transport, would sailing still be popular? Or ballooning?
Frankly, the reason these "outmoded" forms of transportation are
still around is for a simple reason: their beauty, their style, and
their grace and elegance. Much of their utility comes from a basic
recognition that the means/method is as important, if not more
important, to some of us than the end objective (i.e.,
effectiveness).
In other words, those of us dedicated to CW/Morse need to drop it as
an entry barrier. We need to talk about the beauty of the means;
the simplicity of the radios used. We need to draw people into the
mode, rather than forcing it on others. How many teens like
learning some sort of code that their parents don't understand?
CW/Morse, with its related abbreviations and Q-signals, fits the
bill nicely.
When we examine the barriers to entry into amateur radio, the code
proficiency is perhaps the least effective. Examine any amateur
band, particularly HF, in the presence of your children or
grandchildren, and explain to them how the code proficiency
requirement helps create courteous amateurs who practice "good
amateur radio." I am appalled to allow a youngster on HF, because
of the profanity and lack of respect for our fellow amateur.
No, the code proficiency requirement needs to go.
Why do I keep saying code proficiency? Because knowing the code is
very, very different than proficiency. And our exams test
proficiency, not knowledge. It is a skills-based rather than a
knowledge-based test. Rather, I think it simple to include 10
questions on every exam covering recognition. What does the Morse
Code combination "didahdidit" represent?
In this respect, we can examine for Morse/CW recognition as we test
the aspects of other modes, like RTTY (shifts and encoding methods)
and Packet, or SSTV, or even satellite.
What other barriers do we need to drop to increase our ranks?
After a five year absence from the hobby, I was amazed that cost had
not changed much. A new HF rig still costs between $1,000 and
$1,500 for a baseline all-HF-band, all-mode radio. Yet how many
14-year-olds, given the option, would opt to spend their entire
summer savings on an HF rig over, say, a Pentium 120 with 6 months
of internet access?
One of the objectives of amateur radio is the "advancement of the
radio art." Cost makes that a barrier. Even I am loathe to do
something as simple as change the finals on a commercial HF rig,
much less to attempt to improve the AGC circuit, or add a more
effective receive filter.
To me, part of that "advancement" involves the reduction (or
simplicity) of circuit design without degrading performance, and at
a lower cost. Component cost is certainly part of it.
But when will someone invent a "non-etching" PC board? Foolproof
methods for winding toroids? An all-band, no-tuner required compact
HF antenna, easily operated from an apartment? What about
inexpensive test equipment? Without low-cost entry level rigs, how
will we improve the radio art?
And what resources are we dedicating to this aspect of the hobby?
Sure, there are wonderful QRP kits out there, inexpensive and easily
"tinkered-with". Yet it is important to not restrict the entry to
the hobby to QRP operation. The demise of Heathkit in the Amateur
Business removed the last opportunity a "typical" ham had to build a
full-featured, QRO, HF radio. Even when they were available, they
were expensive.
I issue a challenge, to develop and kit a full-featured QRO radio
kit, multi-band, easy to build, for less than $100. Overly
ambitious? Probably. But part of the problem we have is lack of
ambition, and lack of carefully-articulated goals.
Speaking of challenges, the ARRL purports to represent amateur radio
in the United States. Yet, according to an editorial in CQ VHF
(March 1997), League membership represents only 23% of licensed
American amateur operators. If we are serious about representing
the amateur community, we need a no-cost membership. Voting
membership.
No other services would be available -- no QSL bureau, no QST, no
free help in fighting antenna ordinances. Rather, just the
opportunity to elect section managers, division directors, and
others, and voice opinions that (for the moment) are neglected. And
not charge $36 per year for that right.
So, you may (correctly) ask, just what is the answer? How do we
attract those amateurs we want, while keeping the unsavories out?
It is certainly not an easy question. Radio no longer has the
facination it once had. Technologically, while modes have perhaps
advanced some, methods have advanced practically nil. We must focus
on the means as the "container of joy" to be found in amateur radio.
The idea of the means being as important as the communication
itself.
In addition, we must, must bring back the lost art of elmering.
Elmers became unnecessary when commercially available equipment
became available, not when licensing standards changed. The decline
began with the onset of the "plug and play" mentality, long before
Microsoft.
A few years back, a friend of mine and I were having a conversation
about an ad we saw in one of the ham magazines. Not to belittle the
advertiser, but the advertisement was for an "antenna, wire, that
worked all bands with low SWR, perfect for solid-state rigs." In
the fine print, it read "with a tuner." Priced at an "amazingly low
$150", the kit consisted of $5 worth of wire and three ceramic
insulators, with instructions on how to "cut" the antenna (meaning,
place it around the ceramic insulator, twist the wire, solder if
necessary).
This ad suggested to me that the advancement of the radio art had
indeed ceased.
We must return to kits and homebrew, with guides to help the
inexperienced, as a very, very low cost method of entering the
hobby. We are not here to provide a return on investment of the
commercial rig manufacturers on the back of teenagers.
Ten-Tec, for one, has always provided, in my humble opinion, an
excellent balance between homebrew and commercially built radios.
MFJ is moving in that direction. But the availability of such
materials is no substitute for elmers helping those on the air to
improve their skills, and discover the joy of learning.
Why is it that every school has at least a stated goal of internet
connection, and not an amateur radio station? Why is it that there
are debate, math, language, and other "academic" teams in our high
schools and colleges, but no radio teams? It would be a simple task
indeed to create radio clubs in every school, and have an annual
competition, crowning champions in every state, region, and
national. How much positive press would we get out of crowning a
national high school radio champion? Particularly one that built
everything from scratch?
I'm not convinced that ham radio is gasping its last, at least not
yet. But until we redefine ourselves as something other, something
more, than simple communicators, we will continue to suffer. And
until we find a way to express the joy of the methods, rather than
the ends, we can expect our ranks to diminish technically. And
until we begin helping those amoungst us to enter and progress in
the hobby, we can continue to expect the self-centered garbage that
currently populates our HF (and none to infrequently, VHF) bands.
72 es 73 de
Marty, KM7W
____________________________________________________________________
Jackson, Tennessee e-mail: mdwatt@usit.net
http://www.public.usit.net/mdwatt
"The Curmudgeon's Corner"
ARRL VE - QRP ARCI #7514 - QRP-L #953 - AK/QRP #098 - Grid Sq EM55oq
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]