Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?
Steve- Thanks for another copy of PART 97.1. Forgive me if I don't print it and add it to the other copies I already have. My problem is that I object to stopping at the end of Part 97.1(a). I agree that it is given elevated status by virtue of position (ie, being first) but that does not mean that all activity must comply with, and add to, that need to the exclusion of the rest of 97.1. Believe me, if you take the pleasure parts of amateur radio out and leave only the duty parts, amateur radio will diminish to the point where our frequencies will be subject to auction, also. I would hate for Amateur radio to be killed by this trend. I also object to the implication from you and Bonnie , and some others that the application of ALE to amateur radio is an advance in the "State of the Art", and any who don't agree are Luddites ( a favorite word of one of the other ALE pushers). ALE is fine, in its place, but other services are FAR ahead, with reason, and in response to their own needs. They pay a price that I don't think is appropriate for us. Bill-W4BSG At 09:24 AM 8/27/2006 -0400, you wrote: >Hi Bill, > >I just want to make one observation regarding the >Amateur Radio Service (ARS) from a strictly U.S. >Amateur perspective as you to are U.S. based. >That observation is with respect to FCC Part 97.1 >below, in the order of priority listed, I pretty >much think it sums it all up pretty well, don't you? > >Now, anyone for some "Digital Radio" technical >exchanges in the spirit of Part 97.1 and the >similar basis and purpose for the Amateur Radio >Service that bond Amateurs around the world? > >/s/ Steve, N2CKH > > >§97.1 Basis and purpose. > >The rules and regulations in this Part are >designed to provide an amateur radio service >having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles: > >(a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of >the amateur service to the public as a voluntary >noncommercial communication service, particularly >with respect to providing emergency communications. > >(b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's >proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. > >(c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur >service through rules which provide for advancing >skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art. > >(d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within >the amateur radio service of trained operators, >technicians, and electronics experts. > >(e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's >unique ability to enhance international goodwill. > > >At 10:16 AM 8/27/2006, you wrote: > > >Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really > >needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word "Random many times and > >uses loaded words and phrases, like "Hobby pursuit", "Playful pastime", > >"Curiosity", to "put-down" the things that don't agree with her view. And, > >again she insists on the use of "channel" instead of "frequency" > > > >She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the word"Only" in her > >subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white, > >and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead > >of "only" on either side. > > > >One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an > >advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], > too). > > > >Bill-W4BSG > > >[Non-text portions of this message have been removed] > > > >Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > >Other areas of interest: > >The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ >DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Bill Aycock - W4BSG Woodville, Alabama Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications? ...NOT
Bonnie, Ham radio is not only for random communications. You know that. In fact, we all know that. You asked earlier and I gave you many examples of being able to contact other hams on VHF repeaters, UHF simplex, HF "local frequencies," and at one time with packet messaging. Your entire premise of something being "lost" is complete nonsense. We continue to do today what we have always done. Most of it on HF is going to be a CQ call. You then go on to contradict your very premise with pointing out the many ways that those who wish to do non-random contacts may do so by having skeds or nets. An honest appraisal would show that we now have more ... not less ... ways to set up non-random contacts. Primarily with the big one: the internet. This includes skeds via the special internet sites for MS, EME, digital modes, DX clusters and other special interests. Contrast that with, HP Maxim's time where radio only went a few dozen miles at best. It was by necessity that the ARRL was set up if any reasonable distance was to be covered to send a message. Today that is rarely needed due to the amazing advances in equipment and knowlege of propagation. 73, Rick, KV9U expeditionradio wrote: >For communication between two ham radio stations to exist, >some type of starting point is required. > >In ham radio, the importance of this fundamental initial >starting point has gradually been lost, while heavy emphasis >has been placed upon the body of the communication or the >technique of the radio medium itself. > >This has resulted in an entire ham radio culture built upon >varying degrees of random communication. A random >communication has great value as a hobby pursuit, a playful pastime, >an exploration, or a curiosity. Many hams have never known >anything but this randomness and are therefore content with it >or have accepted it as status quo. > >Hams are by and large, traditionally most familiar with the starting >points of random communications, characterized by the most famous >starting point, the CQ. The operator can turn on the radio, call >CQ, and possibly start up a random communication if another ham >happens to be randomly listening on the same channel or dialing >the VFO. The longer the CQ, the better the chance of the random QSO. > >A non-random or less-random communication however, requires a >more definite and intentional starting point. Many hams are >interested in non-random communication. There is a need to >further the state of the art for initiating communication >between specific hams and groups of hams. > >Hams traditionally have employed some less-random techniques to >generate a more intentional or controllable starting point for >less-random communications. Most of the common techniques use >manual monitoring of some kind: > >1. Dial up a specific frequency or channel or repeater, and roll the >dice that the other ham is manually listening to the radio speaker >at that moment on that channel for your call. > >2. Regularly scheduled QSOs: Get on the air at a pre-determined >channel and pre-arranged time every day. Call and monitor it. > >3. Regularly scheduled nets: A larger group of hams gets on the >air at a pre-determined channel and pre-arranged time every day. > >The ARRL was founded upon a relay network of hams using >some of the above techniques. For the ARRL network, Maxim placed a >good deal of importance on inititating non-random communications >through regimentation of operators and standardizing techniques. > >There are other techniques that some hams have been using to >achieve non-random communication starting points. We can explore >these in future postings and discussion on this group. > >Bonnie KQ6XA > > > >. > > > > > > > >Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > >Other areas of interest: > >The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ >DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?
Hi Bill, I just want to make one observation regarding the Amateur Radio Service (ARS) from a strictly U.S. Amateur perspective as you to are U.S. based. That observation is with respect to FCC Part 97.1 below, in the order of priority listed, I pretty much think it sums it all up pretty well, don't you? Now, anyone for some "Digital Radio" technical exchanges in the spirit of Part 97.1 and the similar basis and purpose for the Amateur Radio Service that bond Amateurs around the world? /s/ Steve, N2CKH §97.1 Basis and purpose. The rules and regulations in this Part are designed to provide an amateur radio service having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles: (a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications. (b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. (c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communications and technical phases of the art. (d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts. (e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's unique ability to enhance international goodwill. At 10:16 AM 8/27/2006, you wrote: >Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really >needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word "Random many times and >uses loaded words and phrases, like "Hobby pursuit", "Playful pastime", >"Curiosity", to "put-down" the things that don't agree with her view. And, >again she insists on the use of "channel" instead of "frequency" > >She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the word"Only" in her >subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white, >and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead >of "only" on either side. > >One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an >advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], too). > >Bill-W4BSG [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Is Ham Radio Only for Random Communications?
Again, Bonnie is using loaded words to bolster an argument that really needs help to be heard. Here, she repeats the word "Random many times and uses loaded words and phrases, like "Hobby pursuit", "Playful pastime", "Curiosity", to "put-down" the things that don't agree with her view. And, again she insists on the use of "channel" instead of "frequency" She also tends to be an absolutist, as when she uses the word"Only" in her subject line. Just as there are shades of gray instead of black and white, and maybe in place of yes and no, there is room for co-existance, instead of "only" on either side. One needs to read here arguments carefully; they tend to be crafted as an advertising flack writes his stuff. (See, I can use loaded words[flack], too). Bill-W4BSG At 02:38 AM 8/27/2006 +, you wrote: >For communication between two ham radio stations to exist, >some type of starting point is required. > >In ham radio, the importance of this fundamental initial >starting point has gradually been lost, while heavy emphasis >has been placed upon the body of the communication or the >technique of the radio medium itself. > >This has resulted in an entire ham radio culture built upon >varying degrees of random communication. A random >communication has great value as a hobby pursuit, a playful pastime, >an exploration, or a curiosity. Many hams have never known >anything but this randomness and are therefore content with it >or have accepted it as status quo. > >Hams are by and large, traditionally most familiar with the starting >points of random communications, characterized by the most famous >starting point, the CQ. The operator can turn on the radio, call >CQ, and possibly start up a random communication if another ham >happens to be randomly listening on the same channel or dialing >the VFO. The longer the CQ, the better the chance of the random QSO. > >A non-random or less-random communication however, requires a >more definite and intentional starting point. Many hams are >interested in non-random communication. There is a need to >further the state of the art for initiating communication >between specific hams and groups of hams. > >Hams traditionally have employed some less-random techniques to >generate a more intentional or controllable starting point for >less-random communications. Most of the common techniques use >manual monitoring of some kind: > >1. Dial up a specific frequency or channel or repeater, and roll the >dice that the other ham is manually listening to the radio speaker >at that moment on that channel for your call. > >2. Regularly scheduled QSOs: Get on the air at a pre-determined >channel and pre-arranged time every day. Call and monitor it. > >3. Regularly scheduled nets: A larger group of hams gets on the >air at a pre-determined channel and pre-arranged time every day. > >The ARRL was founded upon a relay network of hams using >some of the above techniques. For the ARRL network, Maxim placed a >good deal of importance on inititating non-random communications >through regimentation of operators and standardizing techniques. > >There are other techniques that some hams have been using to >achieve non-random communication starting points. We can explore >these in future postings and discussion on this group. > >Bonnie KQ6XA > > > >. > > > > > > > >Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > >Other areas of interest: > >The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ >DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > Bill Aycock - W4BSG Woodville, Alabama Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
