Kevin asked: "how did we (I) manage before e-mail, particularly with
respect to radio, our interest and hobby ?", then goes on to suggest:
"- Articles were obviously written in magazines (QST, CQ, etc.).
- People must of had more in-depth technical discussions on the air.
- And there sure must have been more local knowledge.
That is all I can think of. OR was there not much really known or
shared then as now?"
With the risk of being labeled an "OT", here are some of my thoughts.
I grew up on a farm in Illinois, without any contact with electronic
knowledgable people (yes, I did go to a one room school, but I didn't
have to slog through waist-deep snow to go to school in the winter!).
My father went to a chiropractor who , when he discovered I was an avid
reader, would send copies of Mechanix Illustrated, Popular Mechanics,
and other publications home for me. These publications began my interest
in science and engineering. The first radio I built was a 2 tube
regenerative bc band receiver from one of the articles. Surprisingly,
it worked! Later, I found another article about a short wave regen
receiver, so I replaced the loop antenna ("loop", not "loopstick") of my
bc receiver with coils according to the second article, and began hearing
swbc stations, and HAMS. Although I didn't get my ticket for 35 years, I
did go on to building Heathkits, Knightkits, etc, and got an EE degree
along the way.
The current crop of publications are failing the younger generation by
fostering "instant gratification" and neglecting to explain the basics
of how something works. "Just plug these ic's into this prefabbed pcb
(available for $29.95), and it works immediately!" Don't get me wrong,
I'm not "anti-technology", I just think there's more to our hobby than
"plug-n-play", and contests.
I know I'm not alone with these beliefs; witness the response to NORCAL's
38 Special kits! The technical questions (and answers) posted on this
list prove that the desire for knowledge still runs rampant. The media
for communication has changed with the times, and this list (and other
information available on the Internet) is filling some of the void.
I can't close my tirade without some comments on "standardization". In
my opinion, when too many standards are set, progress and innovation die.
Yes, we want our rigs to be safe and reliable, with clean output signals
but they should reflect our individuality and imagination! For example,
Ori and company gave us a basic 30 meter rig, but left it up to us to
determine how we wanted the completed unit to look. Those of us with
junk boxes have built ours using what we had available, supplemented with
Radio Shack parts, according to our own desires. The power connector
discussion is a good subject, but it's not important that everyone use the
same one, with pin A being (+), and pin (B) being (-). The important
thing is to know what constitutes good connectors, and how to apply them.
We don't want a 50 Amp connector on a 1 Amp rig, and we certainly don't a
1 Amp connector on a 50 Amp load! Personally, I'm not a fan of Molex
connectors in applications where they will be connected and disconnected
frequently. Tin plated, sheet metal pins and sockets simply don't have
the mechanical characteristics needed for this application.
After all, it's a hobby - enjoy it!
72/73 Bill wb0cld
Bill Launer
St. Charles, MO
launerb@crl.com
wb0cld@wb0cld.ampr.org [44.46.66.25]
qrp-l #279 qrp arci #3551
Grid Square EM48RT
[
QRP-L Archive |
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997 |
1998 |
1999 |
2000
]