[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] ARRL and QST (and CW Relevance)

To: <>
Subject: [AMPS] ARRL and QST (and CW Relevance)
From: (Michael Tope)
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 1999 07:53:35 -0000

If you do a histogram of the "check" numbers in the 
Sweepstakes contest, you will see the that the numbers
are solid up through the early 1980's, at which point
the they start to decline. I suspect that it's no coincidence
that this was the beginning of the personal computer 
revolution (more avenues for technically minded people 
to chose from). 

If I am not mistaken, the bulk of amateur radios recent growth 
(number of licensees) has been due almost entirely to the 
creation of the no-code technician license. The rest of the 
ranks have actually been on the decline. 

73 de Mike, W4EF........................................

P.S. As you suggested, there is probably a "seasonal" effect
due to sunspots superimposed over the long term trend. 

From:   Jon Ogden[]
Sent:   Saturday, January 30, 1999 8:20 PM
To:     Andy Wallace
Cc:;; Amps Reflector
Subject:        Re: [AMPS] ARRL and QST   (and  CW  Relevance)

>Maybe we can agree to disagree. I respect your opinions but have different 
>myself. My biggest fear is that we will open up the HF bands and nobody 
>will come
>to our party--then, sooner or later, the largely Japanese HF equipment
>manufacturers will lose interest as the old farts (myself included) die 
>off.  BTW,
>packet--which makes this communication possible-- was invented by hams ( 
>as well
>as many other truly high speed and robust data modes).

Andy, I agree with your points.  No question about it.  Do I favor more 
priviledges for the Tech+ on HF?  Yes, certainly.  In fact, I do think 
that the ARRL's proposal to give morse code allocations to the node code 
license is pretty funny.  It is true that you can't use the spectrum if 
you can't copy the code!

I feel our declining numbers are certainly a problem.  However, yes, 
let's agree to disagree on wether a "no code" license on HF will save our 
hobby.  You think it will, I think it won't.  I feel we need to improve 
other areas such as our image and the amount of "evangelism" we do about 
our hobby.

I have a theory about license numbers.  I would like to trace back in 
history, the rise and fall in the number of hams according to the rise 
and fall in the number of sunspots.  My guess is that they match.  I 
wouldn't be surprised to see numbers start increasing again soon.  
However, this time, we do have cell phones and computers which have never 
before competed with us for people.

The amount of new equipment I see coming on the market gives me hope for 
the future.  We now have 2 companies that make HTs for 220 MHz, almost 
everyone is now making HTs with 6m capability and 6m mobiles are becoming 
popular.  Last sunspot cycle it was all 10m stuff.  Interesting.  So I 
have hope.

I think some of the Jap companies like Yaesu have to have their amateur 
market to survive.  Yes, Yaesu does commercial FM equipment but has a 
tiny percentage of the market share compared to Motorola and others.

Andy, it's been a good debate.  Neither of us has resorted to nasties or 
name calling.  And that goes for everyone that has participated.  Way to 
go guys!  It's been a good one.  And by the way, I am no CW ace.  I just 
wish I were! :-)  I would benefit from the rule change eliminating 20 wpm 
CW.  But I am afraid that w/o that requirement, I never will get my code 
up to a good speed! 



Jon Ogden
KE9NA    <--- CHECK IT OUT!  It's been updated!!!!!

"A life lived in fear is a life half lived."

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • [AMPS] ARRL and QST (and CW Relevance), Michael Tope <=