Steve,
Thanks for the kind words. A least we can feel good about standing
up and being counted. Otherwise, I have to admit that this whole debate,
and the related issue of CW requirements at the WRC has me kind of down.
There are undoubtedly major forces actively engaged in trying to get our
small allotment of frequencies on the auction block, and I have no faith
that our political and administrative "representatives" have the character
or will to withstand the economic and political pressure of the commercial
interests. This, coupled with the general apathy I see around me, doesn't
give me a lot of hope for the future.
This apathetic attitude on the part of the unaffiliated amateurs
was really brought home to me this Field Day. I have been a licensed
amateur only a little over two years, and this was my third Field Day. My
first exposure to amateur radio was in my early teens in the mid-sixties.
The so-called "Old School" of hamming. Our next door neighbor in Virginia
was a ham, had a large vertical on his roof, with radials tacked down
symmetrically over every square foot of roof surface, and every tree in his
yard supported wires and coax. He converted military surplus gear to ham
use, and he very gently Elmered me in the direction of getting my license.
He gave me a mountain of CQ's, 73's and QST's (the QST's I was cautioned
were to be returned!), and he even permanently "loaned" me a huge
Hallicrafters receiver--it weighed more than I did! He spent time teaching
me about ham radio, the mystery and excitment of DX HF, and the ethics and
responsibilities of being a licensed amateur. Unfortunately, he was a
little too subtle in his urging me to learn CW, and before I really got
serious about amateur radio his job transferred him away. Soon after, I
discovered the opposite sex, got my driver's license, became involved with
some friends who had a rock and roll band and need someone with some
electronics "expertise" (I had the good fortune of attending a high school
that offered electrical and electronics shop classes). One thing led to
another and college, several hitches in the Navy, a couple of relocations
after returning to the civilian job force all intervened before I ended up
as a power plant operator at The Dalles Dam. There my interest in ham radio
was reawaken by several of my fellow operators who had their licenses and
were members of an active radio club. The Mid-Columbia Amateur Radio Club
is a general interest/service-oriented club, with no contesters that I was
ever aware of, but with an annual Field Day effort of some size and
enthusiasm, and in-depth involvement with the Emergency Services people of
Klickitat and Wasco counties. My wife and I enjoyed the fellowship, the
public service, and especially the Field Day, and I immediately set to work
learning the code so that I could legitimately operate HF on my own. I have
to admit that I viewed CW as a necessary evil to be overcome in order to be
allowed my coveted HF privileges, and to this day I am far from proficient
or comfortable with CW. But I was (and am) very proud of perservering and
earning my Advanced class ticket. All the lessons of my first Elmer were
remembered, and I find I still believe in the ethics and responsibilities
implicit in the privileges granted with ANY amateur radio license. Anyway,
to get to the point of what is becoming a very long story, when we moved to
Libby last spring, it was with a great deal of enthusiasm that I started
looking for the hams in Lincoln County. To my dismay, I was greeted with
the story from several amateurs that "Yeah, we had a club, but it fell
apart. . . People were fighting about the club repeater. . . There were a
couple of guys that wanted to run everything. . .". I was a little taken
aback at some of the bitterness and back-biting, and by some of the very
narrow viewpoints I was presented with. I don't discourage easily, and so I
decided to get these folks together by offering them an invitation they
couldn't refuse. I got permission to have Field Day on top of Libby Dam, in
the Treaty Tower, a sort of large walled parapet with a roof above suitable
for antennas and a generator or two, about 150' above Lake Koocanusa on the
north side and 470' above the Kootenai River valley on the south, and a
commanding view of the country all around. I sent out e-mail, talked to the
hams I had met, contacted the very nice Extra Class lady that spends about
20 hours a day on the local packet link. What do you think? A couple of
them smiled and nodded and said it sounded real nice, a couple (wistfully)
said they hadn't operated Field Day in years, some told me why it wasn't
any good ("We had a club but it fell apart. . . people were fighting about
the club repeater. . . a couple of people always want to run the show. .
."). No one would commit to do anything to support the effort, most were
evasive about even getting together to discuss it as a group. I don't mind
being a leader, and I take pride in always doing my share and a little
more, but frankly, these folks gave me a royal pain in the rear, and since
I was working the 1830-0630 shift at the Dam right up through the morning
of Field Day (which just so happened to be my wife's birthday this year), I
cancelled the whole mess before it had a chance to embarrass Amateur Radio
anymore that it has been already in these parts. Instead, I operated about
six hours total, off and on, from home as 1E, and devoted the rest of the
time to treating my wife to a nice birthday. I got a chance to really learn
about the finer points of operating my new (used) Omni VI, and my computer
logging program, and how much I have GOT to get some beams up instead of
this 80M horizontal loop, and I kept the peace in the family besides.
Perhaps next year I will try to involve these amateurs again, perhaps not.
What is unfortunate is that after listening to the threads that ran through
their complaints and excuses I realized that I hear the same laments on the
air and see them on the reflector:
"We used to have a <club, a contest, a hobby> but it fell apart. . . people
were fighting about <CW, no codes, the ARRL>. . . some <people, the
government, the ARRL> always want to run everything. . ."
I just have to shake my head, is this what getting older does to people? If
I was a young person, I'd have to think twice about ever getting involved
with such negative old farts.
Well, thanks for putting up with MY laments, and acting as a sounding board
(or crying towel). I'm really not as negative as I sound, just a little
frustrated right now.
Thanks for your encouraging e-mail, and for fighting the good fight.
73,
Steve KJ7CH
______________________________ Forward Header __________________________________
Subject: Yes!
Author: zettel@homer.libby.org at Internet
--- begin forwarded text
>From steve.steltzer@paonline.com Tue Jun 25 11:44:07 1996
X-Sender: steve.steltzer@paonline.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
To: kj7ch@libby.org
From: WF3T <steve.steltzer@paonline.com>
Subject: Yes!
Status: R
Hi Steve,
Congrats, another zinger, as I expected! Very well done, thanks for
the copy. I wonder if we're doing any good? Sorry it took me so long to
reply, busy with FD stuff etc. What Amateur Radio really needs is more good
publicity like FD. I operated with 2 different groups - 1 composed of
experienced contesters doing a semi serious effort. We had 1 of the local TV
stations do a nice piece on the 11pm news. (Of course, I would have liked to
have been a total part of that effort, but responsabilty to the good of the
hobby comes first!) The other was with one of the general interest clubs I
belong to. (With a lot of young, potential contesters if someone just gets
em excited.) There we had a great 1 and 1/2 hour interview with a reporter
from the major local paper. Hope you had a great time at FD.
73, Steve
*\* steve.steltzer@paonline.com (WF3T) *\*
*\* Harley Davidson Inc. *\*
--- end forwarded text
>From syam@Glue.umd.edu (De Syam) Wed Jun 26 21:50:59 1996
From: syam@Glue.umd.edu (De Syam) (De Syam)
Subject: The CW Requirement, ITU and IARU
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960626164619.6930A-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, Dan Robbins wrote:
> Yes, but I have worked both JA and US pileups on 6 meters and the Japanese
> VHFers are far superior than their US counterparts when it comes to CW.
> This despite a no-code entry license. Why? Isn't it true that CW knowledge
> is required to move up from the QRP level in Japan?
Yes it is.
> Here the CW plum is HF,
> over there its mo' power.
Correct.
> While I don't know if it is the intended result,
> CW knowledge is still a filter to separate the passing fancy from the
> dedicated interest, even in Japan. Also, the score fattening JA QRPers have
> been on a diet - you just can't run them like you used to.
This is true of all JA's, not just the no-code QRP'ers
> Maybe the grand
> codeless HF experiment isn't so grand after all. Of course, the USA has had
> a codeless non-licensed HF quagmire for years - 11 meter CB, a real radio
> ghetto, which has unfortunately spread through much of the world. I think
> that is a much better example of what relaxing standards will yield. Let's
> face it, some third-world Obi-wan is not going to hook up a reverb and a
> laughbox to his rig and park it on 14195 - they will do it here, however,
> (and in some other countries) with worldwide implications.
>
> To keep the trash out of your radio, you should have good filtering as early
> in the signal chain as possible.
So what is your solution, while still encouraging that there be native hams
in countries where there aren't any now?
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
>From syam@Glue.umd.edu (De Syam) Wed Jun 26 22:35:05 1996
From: syam@Glue.umd.edu (De Syam) (De Syam)
Subject: The CW Requirement, ITU and IARU
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.960626171144.6930G-100000@z.glue.umd.edu>
On Wed, 26 Jun 1996, SM7PKK wrote:
>=20
> Well if this already had been accepted I know that in Sweden Ham radio as=
=20
> we know it would already have seased to exist. All government agencies ar=
e
> not as understanding of the problems as FCC is. In Sweden Ham radio licen=
se
> is just a big pain for them and they would be happy if there where no tes=
ts
> and they could just issue the license and get their money for the
> transmitting permissions. That=B4s what they are aiming for. It is totall=
y up
> to the ITU regualtions and CEPT regulations that has saved our hobby in o=
ur
> country!
Too bad, Mats. Sorry to hear it. If your SSA were to volunteer to take=20
over the examination process, as has been done in the states, would that=20
help? Could it be that Swedish hams are not willing as a group to take=20
the time to handle the examination process?=20
>=20
> The ham bands are an international resource and needs international
> regulations. Without them
> or having them to slack will give all nations an opportunity to lower all
> demands to non existant
> as all governments in the end will try to minimise all costs and thus ham
> radio is a small and=20
> unimportant issue for them that should require nothing for them to do!
This cuts both ways, of course. If ham radio is indeed such a pain for=20
governments, as you say, then maybe they will just try to do away with=20
ham radio altogether. Is this what we want? Why not be flexible enough=20
to be willing to change the system so Governments don't find it so=20
burdensome to administer?
>=20
> Well What I have heard from several JA=B4s is that for example 40M SSB
> is almost dead in Japan for DX since the whole band is crowded with Lowpo=
wer
> JA=B4s=20
> chatting within JA day aswell as night time. What a disaster!
>=20
Nonetheless I have made many SSB QSOs with Japan from HS0ZAR in the=20
7050-7100 frequency range. At least in Thailand, the big problem on 40=20
meters is the Indonesian loggers, who are all over the CW end of the band=
=20
with their SSB.
>=20
> The above mentioned case only show how an ignorant government or examiner
> can misstreat the rules and ideas of Ham radio.
My point is that the Colombian case illustrates a completely LEGAL=20
interpretation of the PRESENT ITU regulations.
> In some countries you can=20
> even bribe people to get a license without taking any tests as long as yo=
u
> pay good money. The medicine to cure this is not to lower our standards =
to=20
> nothing but to rather try to help the government issue real tests and rul=
es!
And if they say no, then what?
> Well this is quite ok but there are many hams or could be hams in Africa=
=20
> who are not so well of and the facts still is that CW is the Only mode th=
at
> can overcome the barriers of language difference.
> I think it is an important part or the IARU to work for getting ham radio
> introduced=20
> in a proper way.
Of course, IARU Region I has had the STARS program run by ON6WQ for=20
years. If this method is the solution, then why is there still a big=20
problem?
>=20
> Look instead at ZA1A. Why not do it the proper way. 10 or so hams in 6 we=
eks
> in a country that was a real black hole. This was a new thing by why not =
do
> it again. It is possible!
Agreed. Why isn't it being done by STARS? Why do so many European hams=20
go to Africa for expeditions and do nothing to help get local ham radio=20
started? What have you, as a well-known DX-peditioner, done to get the=20
locals on in a big way in the countries you have visited? Are all of the=
=20
countries you have visited going to vote in favor of ham radio in=20
WRC-99? If you don't know the answer, why not?
>=20
> A big responsability is for IARU to actively work to look into and help
> educate these third world countries about what ham radio is. This has
> nothing to do with CW or not. If they don=B4t know the basics about us ha=
ms
> why should they care at all!
>=20
True, Mats, but IARU is, in the end, individual hams. Where are the=20
volunteers who are willing to do this? Where are the people who are=20
willing to go to a country and train the locals instead of just getting=20
on the air and working a bunch of people themselves?=20
> >Wake up, folks! What good is CW to you if you don't have any bands
> >you can use it on? Let's cut the ARRL and IARU a little slack so
> >they can maneuver in this complicated world without having the
> >house dogs nipping at their heels.
> >=20
>=20
> Well Fred I don=B4t agree with this view. If having the bands but withit
> having all the CB'ers=20
> of the world included might no be having anything at all. The QRG will no=
t
> last for this!
Personally I would rather continue to have access to the amateur bands=20
rather than to have them put off limits to me altogether. =20
>=20
> OK about giving ARRL and IARU some slack but I think it is important to l=
et
> them know that we care and not only letting the NON CW, NON TEST AT ALL
> people spilling their guts allover our hobby. If they can do this for to=
o
> long then ofcourse the governments will listen to them more than the peop=
le
> who are the basis of ham radio.
>=20
> Reactions to the FASC paper was what the IARU wanted!=20
Absolutely, so get busy and make your comments to them!
Very 73,
Fred Laun, K3ZO
=20
>From jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid) Wed Jun 26 22:36:19 1996
From: jreid@aloha.net (Jim Reid) (Jim Reid)
Subject: Apology to Steve Mendelsohn
Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19960626213619.0068c7a0@aloha.net>
Aloha to all,
Yesterday, I sent an e-mail of apology to Steve. My
post of a few days ago (excerpts of which are still appearing
today on the reflector) contained many non-true remarks. I
have rev'd correcting info from many of you, and directrly
from Steve, himself. The most clear error was my presumptions of
his license class as Advanced, when, in fact he has been an
Extra since Sept. of '92 (the month of hurricane Iniki out here!);
second, his memo to the ARRL Board I posted is old -- dating back to
January at the time he was elected by the Board to become
First Vice President. As Brad Wyatt, Pacific Division Director
brought to my attention, because they had respect for Steve's
leadership on the Baord, and his obvious leadership qualities.
I told both Brad and Steve in my e-mails back to them, that I
take it that Steve is similar to Snr. VP's or CEO's I used
to work for in the silicon semi world: tough as nails, demanding
a Type A personality, but a leader, and nearly alway fair to
those from whom he was expecting/demanding results. And yes,
many around were always critical about "why him" and "boy,
I wish I worked for somebody/somewhere else", and even
mistrusted he top guys methods. So, I am certainly
willing to express my apology for my non-factual statements,
and to trust the Board and Steve for leadership into
the Future of the Amateur Radio Service in the 21st
Century.
Here are excerpts from my letter to Steve:
""Yes, Steve, I really am sorry for my actions, and offer
to you my apology. As I explained to Brad Wyatt earlier today,
I took your letter/memo as a current (June) planning document
for a Board retreat or something going on later this
summer. So I fired off my thoughts on the FASC issue, and
posted your memo to the Contest reflector to get others also
to comment.
"Then I started receiving all sorts of stuff from people who
were not kind in their remarks, ............I have
also gotten several responses very supportive of your comments,
and would be happy to forward them on to you should you want them.
[Steve has NOT asked for copies of any of messages, of either type]
"I don't know the timing or what the alleged "out of the
Advanced band segment" operating was.... [That is, no
first person, singular information, only hear-say].
"I probably should never even have copied your memo to the reflecor,
as it has not really resulted in positive help to you or the
Board, I am afraid.
"Brad had requested I send on to him a copy of the memo
text, [as he had no copy, or remembered knowledge about
it, at the time; he did recall it as an earlier discussion
topic paper from last Winter, its true origin dating.]
"I have been very fired up on getting folks to get comments in
to both the ARRL FASC committee and IARU FASC committee, as the
time they will accept comments, as I understood the April
IARU FASC document on the ARRL web page, was the end of June.
I took your memo as part of all that discussion regarding the
future of amateur radio, and quickly reponded and acted
rapidly. Then when all the "political" stuff
began pouring in, I was clearly swept along. -- You know
the line, I am sure: "All the ARRL is, is a publishing firm
needing more customers, etc, etc, so you know they are out to
dilute the entrance req's to licensing, especially to the HF
bands, so more books, magazines, and HF equipment can be sold
to them, etc.,etc." Seems easy for guys to forget all the
good things the ARRL has done over the decades for the
Amateur Service, including the good work in Washington.
" And, I am sure your point that the no-code VHF
types will be the clear majority soon, has a lot of [us] "old
timers" hyperventilating about protecting their band chunks
and frequencies. [My first license is dated 1950, doesn't seem
that long ago to me, but I do belong to the Old Old Timers
Club as well as QCWA, so guess I was hyperventilating, even
if no one else was, one private e-mail post called me
a "CW Snob"]
"Well, anyway, Steve, I am truly sorry. As I told Brad
this morning, from what I have been told about you, you are a
very assertive guy, probably Type A. The sort, that were I
the owner of a company, I would want you as the CEO to keep
me very rich!! You might make a lot of the employees uncomfortable,
perhaps even suspicious of motives, but the right results
would surely occur. During my 37 years in the Silicon
Valley electronics industry [first electronics job, Varian Assoc. 1954],
I worked for at least a couple
like that! Tough, and demanding, but, in the end, very fair.
I know the US Amateur Radio community will receive the same
results through your leadership, Steve. And I do support,
strongly, your DX2000 study/ evaluation program!
"Aloha and 73, Jim, AH6NB
" (Will be happy in a few months to
be rid of the AH prefix!!Gate 2 Will probably go for a KH7x1
though there are some neat 2x2 and 2x3 KH6 calls available
that sure would go well on CW, and be easy for contestors
to copy in the heat of competition; but a new KH7x1 seems
to be such a neat idea!)""[But I am about 1100 miles East of Kure.]
End of quotations from letter to Steve Mendelsohn
Now lets stop berating Steve's "talking" paper to the board, and continue
to help by submitting well reasoned ideas on to both the ARRL and the
the IARU committees. Many of the posts to this reflector ought to be
forwarded on by the authors to those committees.
Again, 73 and Aloha, Jim, AH6NB
Happily Retired on the Garden Island of Kauai
|