Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Here is a hypothetical situation:
Let's say that for one reason or another that Hams never got back their access to the airwaves after WW1. Fast forward to January 1, 2004. In 2003, amateur radio was reborn, with testing and privileges to commence on this first day of 2004. What should the testing regimen be? - Mike KB3EIA - |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Mike Coslo
writes: Let's say that for one reason or another that Hams never got back their access to the airwaves after WW1. Could have very well happened, if not for the ARRL. Or, amateur radio could have been legislated out of existence at one of the radio conferences in the early 1920s. But fortunately it didn't happen. Fast forward to January 1, 2004. In 2003, amateur radio was reborn, with testing and privileges to commence on this first day of 2004. Whoa there! How could that happen? And if it somehow did, what spectrum, power and modes would be allowed? What services would give up spectrum? What should the testing regimen be? Depends entire on what the "new" service in this alternate-history line is like, don;t you think? 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes: Let's say that for one reason or another that Hams never got back their access to the airwaves after WW1. Could have very well happened, if not for the ARRL. Or, amateur radio could have been legislated out of existence at one of the radio conferences in the early 1920s. But fortunately it didn't happen. Fast forward to January 1, 2004. In 2003, amateur radio was reborn, with testing and privileges to commence on this first day of 2004. Whoa there! How could that happen? And if it somehow did, what spectrum, power and modes would be allowed? What services would give up spectrum? Aww, don't make me define too much Jim! Okay, lets say that in the rebirth, fueled by concerns for homeland security, that a a loosely organized group of non-professional communication savvy people that might be able to respond to disasters or the is made. Assume that it is decided that this group should have some technical abilities, so that if need be, they might stand a chance of getting a station operational under adverse conditions. The philosophy is that these people would pursue the service as a hobby, working for enjoyment while honing operational skills. Let's say that amateurs are allocated some frequencies. I'll assume that the bands I not will be similar in width to what we have now: 2 meters 10 meters 20 meters 40 meters - or nearby, away from broadcasting frequencies 80 meters The various frequencies are chosen to take advantage of propagation characteristics. No UHF or above, no 160 meters. What should the testing regimen be? Depends entire on what the "new" service in this alternate-history line is like, don;t you think? Work with me a little bit, Jim! This can be a fun exercise. See what you can come up with based on what I gave you so far. - Mike KB3EIA - |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Mike Coslo" wrote Here is a hypothetical situation: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 97.1 To get an Amateur Radio license, you are required to pass a technical test to show that you understand how to build simple equipment which meets spectral purity specifications of (.....blah, blah, blah). You will be issued a license and callsign when you pass the test. Transmit your call sign once every 10 minutes when on the air. 97.2 Your power limit is 1.5KW to the antenna. 97.3 Here are your bands. Stay inside of them. 97.4 Your are encouraged to tinker and experiment and communicate and do public service and talk to strangers in far away lands and launch communications satellites into space and any other cool technical "radio stuff" you may think up. The government doesn't care what mode you use for any of this, except that 10 years from today, all non-digitized modes will be retired. 97.5 Play nice. We'll try to keep the CBers out of your hair. Deliberate interference, unresolved dirty signals, or other asinine behavior on your part will cause Riley Hollingsworth to come and permanently kick your ass off the playground. Have fun. Love always, /signed/ FCC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just as the amateur service thrived on the challenge of being "banished" to the shortwaves back 80 years ago or so, I think another "challenge" is needed to revitalize the spirit of experimentation and invention. We need to be kicked out of our comfort zone. Give us the authority to freely tinker, explore, innovate, and generally be "hams" again. That's how we "colonized" the electromagnetic spectrum, "proved it in", and "made it safe for commerce". As long as we don't spill out of our assigned segments, let us play without technical micro-management. Who knows what we might develop! 73, de Hans, K0HB |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Coslo wrote in message t...
Here is a hypothetical situation: Let's say that for one reason or another that Hams never got back their access to the airwaves after WW1. Fast forward to January 1, 2004. In 2003, amateur radio was reborn, with testing and privileges to commence on this first day of 2004. What should the testing regimen be? - Mike KB3EIA - It wouldn't be amateur radio. Amateur radio derives from that time and place where radio began. It was there before there were rules, or most of the technology that came later. It also came before there was much clue about what the new technology could be used for, and before there were well defined radio services. Anateur radio exists because hams staked out the territory before most people knew about radio. Amateur radio did not see others making use of the technology and then claim they needed space; they put the technology to use, and helped push the technology and the applications that came later. For something to start now, one has to wonder what the purpose would be? It's certainly not about getting in on emerging technology. Without the history of radio behind it, then there is no way it would be the same sort of service. Even things like contesting derive from those early days, when being able to reach further and further was a reflection of the effort put into the equipment and antennas, and the contests were a means of testing it, or testing radio itself. Witness the TransAtlantic Tests in December of 1921; a form of contest yet the whole point was to see if those useless shortwave frequencies where hams had been relegated once rules were set in place could actually be used to span the Atlantic. People are forever saying that amateur radio can't compete with today's technology, when everyone can get a cellphone or an FRS transceiver, and use the internet. Put in those terms, there is no point to amateur radio. And anything created today would take that into consideration. A very important part of amateur radio is it's history, because it's an important history, not just to the hobby but to radio itself. Take that away, and it could not be anything close to what it is now. Michael VE2BVW |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 19:50:25 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote:
Work with me a little bit, Jim! This can be a fun exercise. See what you can come up with based on what I gave you so far. Based on what you gave so far, those volunteers would be sworn in as members of the Sheriff's Radio Reserve and given assigments to use commercial equipment and departmental procedures on those frequencies, similar in a lot of respects to CAP and MARS operation. The local Sheriff's Deparment tried to do that when we (AREC/RACES) approached them to be a "served agency". Because we were organized and operational before that, we could tell them to play another tune on their trombone because we report to the Emergency Management folks some of whom are hams anyhow. -- 73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane From a Clearing in the Silicon Forest Beaverton (Washington County) Oregon |
#8
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike,
I didn't get very far with this concept when I tried to introduce it a few months back either. I thought at the time that it might at least get some out-of-the-box thinking going, and remove the bonds of history and tradition which so often form the basis of reason for discussions in this forum -- but alas, it met a simlilar fate...... Ironicaly, one of the responses that you received was, with respect to the history of amateur radio, "Take that away, and it could not be anything close to what it is now". Say, wasn't that the whole point of the discussion? ![]() Good try, though! 73, Leo On Sat, 03 Jan 2004 18:08:49 GMT, Mike Coslo wrote: snip Okay, I give up. This was an attempt to get people to use their imaginations, but other than Hans, no one want to play. Let's get back to debating Morse code!! 8^) - Mike KB3EIA - |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1400  June 11, 2004 | Dx | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1398 Â May 28, 2004 | General | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | Dx | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1367 – October 24 2003 | Policy | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1366  October 17 2003 | Dx |