Bill and All,
I believe that the most damaging aspect of the article is the reference to
"hobby". I see that term used by so many hams in all sorts of
correspondance, and that is very unfortunate. Yes, it IS a hobby to us as
individuals, but it is a SERVICE in the eyes of the FCC and non-technical
public. There is no other justification for the allocated spectrum in
today's bottom line thinking (whether we agree with that sort of thinking
or not). Sadly, the article makes no mention of 9-11 services by hams, or
the natural disaster assistance record over many decades.
Bill, you strike a mostly true note with your comment about the public
service providers within ham radio's ranks. To be fair, I do personally
know DXers and contesters who participate in public service events and
support work in association with various local radio clubs and RACES, ARES,
etc. However, many more do not. I have frequently seen where contesters
and DXers write letters to editors extoling the virtues of their activities
as "utilizing the amateur radio frequencies". Yes, that's true, but to
what or whose purpose? IMHO, it is exactly that sort of distorted thinking
that can lead to our HF spectrum getting trampled by the greedy (and well
heeled) power lobby and our VHF/UHF bands being parceled off to other
interests who offer more "public service", however it may be defined.
BPL should be treated strictly as an RFI issue on technical terms, but it
is not. It has severe economic and political side issues linked with it.
Hams have only one significant arguement: free public service to the
country and its citizens. In these days of terrible natural disasters and
the threat of even worse problems caused by terrorists, having the ability
to provide wide range emergency communications is where it's at and is all
that has a chance to grab the public's attention and any possible support
in our favor. Clear HF communications capability is very important to a
government or emergency organization official so that hams can talk across
the country support and disaster reflief issues that extend beyond the
local area (where VHF/UHF could do the job). If BPL messes up your chances
for DXCC or to be king of the CQ Worldwide, who (in the public or
government) really cares? Remember, amateur radio and private "general"
aviation are the only two hobbies that require federal licensing. There
are widely differing reasons for that, but the bottom line is we need to
hold up our "service" end of the "hobby" if we expect to have a chance of
drawing the kind of attention we need from the right people in order to win
this thing.
I hope that the fantastic efforts of hams in support of emergencies
continue to be written up in as many media outlets as possible, not just
the ham rags. Many excellent articles about preparing for and providing
public service continue to appear (as they have for many decades) in all of
the amateur radio publications, plus the training courses now offered by
ARRL. (It would be nice to point that out to the public and elected
officials.) One of the best sources for "nuts and bolts" of emergency
communications I have found is the long-running "Search and Rescue" column
written by W7SAR and appearing monthly in "World Radio". Check it out.
Finally, "cutting edge" was the norm for articles in "ham radio" and
"Communications Quarterly", and continues now primarily in the form of
"QEX". I don't have to think very long about why the first two
publications are no longer with us (I was a long-time subscriber to both).
The last time I checked, the exam for a US amateur radio license had
techncial questions on it. In my mind, that says our "hobby" is a
technically-based "service". Do any of you realize that major corporations
who dealt with RF technology actually had subscriptions to the major ham
radio magazines for their tech libraries because of the technical content?
Does anyone care to guess why the support for true cutting edge
communications technology information has dwindled within our ranks?
73, Dale
WA9ENA
Bill Turner
<wrt@dslextreme.c To: dj2001@mn.rr.com
om> cc: RFI@contesting.com
Sent by: Subject: Re: [RFI] Today's Wall
Stree Journal front page article on hams & BPL
rfi-bounces@conte
sting.com
03/24/2004 09:17
AM
Please respond to
wrt
On Tue, 23 Mar 2004 18:01:17 -0600, dj2001@mn.rr.com wrote:
>Not a very helpful article. Someone with good writing skills should
>reply to the WSJ and let the writer and their boss (The Editor) know
>that Amateur Radio is not just a "hobby", rather a public service and
>that we ARE on the cutting edge of technology, not just a bunch of
>old guys that built "crystal sets" in their youth.
_________________________________________________________
Like the blind men and the elephant, we all have our different
perceptions, but I thought the article was quite fair and correct. For
nearly all hams, it is indeed a hobby. Those who do perform a true
"public service" are so rare they get written up in QST. Most of us
either chase DX, contest or ragchew, none of which is a "public
service".
When you say "we ARE on the cutting edge of technology" I think of an
appliance operator with the latest from Kenwood, ICOM or Yaesu. To me,
the most exotic thing hams do now is probably EME, and even that is
decades old. Years ago I built my own gear, including a complete 40
meter transceiver which was my own design from the ground up, but those
days are gone.
Don't get me wrong; I love my hobby, but I would be embarrassed to tell
someone I was "cutting edge". What part of ham radio were you thinking
of?
--
Bill, W6WRT
QSLs via LoTW
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|