Login  Register

My "Attitude"

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
37 messages Options Options
Embed post
Permalink
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: dBi dBd correction

Guy, K2AV
The way the regulation reads, hams are being told they can put 50 watts PEP on an antenna, up to the gain of a dipole, and call that 50 watts ERP.  Higher gain must be referenced to the dipole and the 50 watts reduced accordingly.

For mobile stations there is no mention of the idea that a LESSER antenna may have the 50 watts increased. 100 watts appears to be in excess of regulation.  Stated another way, 50 watts max regardless, unless the antenna has more gain than a dipole in which case power must be reduced by a factor representing the gain of that antenna over a dipole.

The whole thing is really interesting since there are really precise definitions of ERP elsewhere in FCC referencia.  By the regular definition of ERP 50 watts into a dipole for 5.3 MHz at 108 feet over medium ground will have an ERP of 328 watts.  At 50 feet the ERP is roughly 200 watts.

We had best be very careful with our privileges on 60m, because all FCC would have to do is enforce regular definition of ERP and the same dipole at 108' would take seven and a half watts to obtain 50 ERP at pattern max.

73, Guy

It may also be that whoever wrote the reg was having a brain f**t at the time, and they just haven't discovered it yet.

The max pattern gain and takeoff angle on a dipole


Joe Subich, W4TV-4 wrote

> If my recollection is correct, 0 dBd is 2.15 dB greater than
> 0 dBi in the dipole's favored directions (perpendicular to the
> radiator).

Only in free space ... when a horizontal dipole is placed
above ground all of the radiated power is concentrated in
one hemisphere.  Since both the E and H fields are confined
to the single hemisphere, the resulting "gain" is 6 dB more
than the free space gain or 8.17 dBi (1.25 + 6.02).  

73,

   ... Joe, W4TV
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: elecraft-bounces@mailman.qth.net
> [mailto:elecraft-bounces@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ron
> D'Eau Claire
> Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 5:32 PM
> To: don@w3fpr.com
> Cc: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
> Subject: [Elecraft] dBi dBd correction
>
>
> Yeah, I misread the rule. I thought the rule was saying a
> dipole was 0 dbi, not 0 dBd! Didn't make sense to me.
>
> Gus, KB0YH also caught my mistake.  
>
> Tnx for un-kinking my brain Guys!
>
> 73,
>
> Ron
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> Ron,
>
> The FCC regulations for 60 meter power is referenced to the
> maximum lobe
> of a dipole.  Sooo --
> That should be "0 dBd" (gain/loss relative to a dipole)
> rather than "0
> dBi" (gain relative to an isotropic radiator).
> If my recollection is correct, 0 dBd is 2.15 dB greater than 0 dBi in
> the dipole's favored directions (perpendicular to the
> radiator). For those not familiar with an isotropic radiator,
> it is a point
> construct in free-space that radiates equally in all directions.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: dBi dBd correction

Augie "Gus" Hansen
Guy, K2AV wrote:

> The way the regulation reads, hams are being told they can put 50 watts PEP
> on an antenna, up to the gain of a dipole, and call that 50 watts ERP.
> Higher gain must be referenced to the dipole and the 50 watts reduced
> accordingly.
>
> For mobile stations there is no mention of the idea that a LESSER antenna
> may have the 50 watts increased. 100 watts appears to be in excess of
> regulation.  Stated another way, 50 watts max regardless, unless the antenna
> has more gain than a dipole in which case power must be reduced by a factor
> representing the gain of that antenna over a dipole.
>  

Where did you get that interpretation? The ARRL Q&A, based on the FCC
rules, says the following:

<quote>
The "best" antenna configurations are those with a proven track record
on the lower bands, keeping in mind that using a loop or an array of
some kind will require you to "do the math" to ensure you are not
radiating more than 50 W ERP /in any direction/. The math is fairly
straightforward. You must reduce your power by the number of decibels
your antenna gain exceeds 0 dBd (0 dB relative to a half-wave dipole).
Conversely, you can increase your transmitter power if your antenna
exhibits loss compared to a dipole. Be prepared to document these
situations in your station records, however.
<endquote>

Gus Hansen
KB0YH

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: [Elecraft] dBi dBd correction

Guy, K2AV
ARRL ain't the FCC.  And the ARRL's opinion is no mitigation whatsoever if I get an FCC pink slip. The reg is the reg, and it's a strange brew for the FCC, where ERP normally has nothing to do with dBd.
 
73, Guy.
 
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 5:14 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] dBi dBd correction

Guy, K2AV wrote:

> The way the regulation reads, hams are being told they can put 50 watts PEP
> on an antenna, up to the gain of a dipole, and call that 50 watts ERP.
> Higher gain must be referenced to the dipole and the 50 watts reduced
> accordingly.
>
> For mobile stations there is no mention of the idea that a LESSER antenna
> may have the 50 watts increased. 100 watts appears to be in excess of
> regulation.  Stated another way, 50 watts max regardless, unless the antenna
> has more gain than a dipole in which case power must be reduced by a factor
> representing the gain of that antenna over a dipole.
>  
Where did you get that interpretation? The ARRL Q&A, based on the FCC
rules, says the following:

<quote>
The "best" antenna configurations are those with a proven track record
on the lower bands, keeping in mind that using a loop or an array of
some kind will require you to "do the math" to ensure you are not
radiating more than 50 W ERP /in any direction/. The math is fairly
straightforward. You must reduce your power by the number of decibels
your antenna gain exceeds 0 dBd (0 dB relative to a half-wave dipole).
Conversely, you can increase your transmitter power if your antenna
exhibits loss compared to a dipole. Be prepared to document these
situations in your station records, however.
<endquote>

Gus Hansen
KB0YH

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:Elecraft@...

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



This email is a reply to your post @ http://n2.nabble.com/My-%22Attitude%22-tp2789182p2837840.html
You can reply by email or by visting the link above.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: dBi dBd correction

Carl Clawson
>  The reg is the reg,

Absolutely! So let's read the reg and see what it says. Most arguments about
the rules can be resolved quickly by doing this. When reading regulations,
contracts, or other legalese, it's important not to read between the lines
or "interpret." Read exactly what the words say, no more, no less. The
relevant subpart is printed below and apart from the precise definition of
"half wave dipole" is quite clear. It says nothing about a 50 W max
transmitter power, only 50 W max ERP. Bear in mind that when they say
"multiply" the transmitter power by antenna gain, it could mean multiplying
by a number less than one (< 0 dBd) or greater than one (> 0 dBd).

73 and thanks for listening,
Carl WS7L


>From http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/octqtr/47cfr97.303.htm
97.303(s):

...Transmissions shall not exceed an effective radiated power (e.r.p) of 50
W PEP. For the purpose of computing e.r.p. the transmitter PEP will be
multiplied with the antenna gain relative to a dipole or the equivalent
calculation in decibels. A half wave dipole antenna will be presumed to have
a gain of 0 dBd. Licensees using other antennas must maintain in their
station records either manufacturer data on the antenna gain or calculations
of the antenna gain...




______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: dBi dBd correction

n7ws
In reply to this post by AC7AC

Why are you trying to make this so complicated?  It's a straightforward calculation.  A half-wave dipole is assumed to have 0 dBd gain (what a surprise) or a multiplier of 1. (There is no mention of ground, takeoff angle, blah, blah, it's zero dBd, period.)

You model the antenna you want to use and get its gain (usually in dBi) and convert to dBd if necessary. Convert this number to a ratio and divide it into 50.  That equals the allowable power input to the antenna.

Using the example I offered earlier, I model a short whip over an assumed 20 ohm of ground loss.  EZNEC reports -9.7 dBi or ~ -11.8 dBd. As a ratio this = 0.065.  Dividing 50 by 0.065 we find that the allowable input power is ~765 W.

You write this stuff down in your station engineering notes justifying your assumptions and operate in good faith.

Wes Stewart,  N7WS


--- On Thu, 5/7/09, Guy, K2AV <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Guy, K2AV <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] dBi dBd correction
> To: [hidden email]
> Date: Thursday, May 7, 2009, 7:30 PM
> ARRL ain't the FCC.  And the ARRL's opinion is no
> mitigation whatsoever if I get an FCC pink slip. The reg is
> the reg, and it's a strange brew for the FCC, where ERP
> normally has nothing to do with dBd.
>
> 73, Guy.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Augie Hansen (via Nabble)
> To: Guy, K2AV
> Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 5:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] dBi dBd correction
>
>
> Guy, K2AV wrote:
>
> > The way the regulation reads, hams are being told they
> can put 50 watts PEP
> > on an antenna, up to the gain of a dipole, and call
> that 50 watts ERP.
> > Higher gain must be referenced to the dipole and the
> 50 watts reduced
> > accordingly.
> >
> > For mobile stations there is no mention of the idea
> that a LESSER antenna
> > may have the 50 watts increased. 100 watts appears to
> be in excess of
> > regulation.  Stated another way, 50 watts max
> regardless, unless the antenna
> > has more gain than a dipole in which case power must
> be reduced by a factor
> > representing the gain of that antenna over a dipole.
> >  
>
> Where did you get that interpretation? The ARRL Q&A,
> based on the FCC
> rules, says the following:
>
> <quote>
> The "best" antenna configurations are those with
> a proven track record
> on the lower bands, keeping in mind that using a loop or an
> array of
> some kind will require you to "do the math" to
> ensure you are not
> radiating more than 50 W ERP /in any direction/. The math
> is fairly
> straightforward. You must reduce your power by the number
> of decibels
> your antenna gain exceeds 0 dBd (0 dB relative to a
> half-wave dipole).
> Conversely, you can increase your transmitter power if your
> antenna
> exhibits loss compared to a dipole. Be prepared to document
> these
> situations in your station records, however.
> <endquote>
>
> Gus Hansen
> KB0YH
>
> ______________________________________________________________
>
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft@...
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> This email is a reply to your post @
> http://n2.nabble.com/My-%22Attitude%22-tp2789182p2837840.html
> You can reply by email or by visting the link above.
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://n2.nabble.com/My-%22Attitude%22-tp2789182p2843062.html
> Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html



     
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

David Pratt
In reply to this post by JIM DAVIS-11
In a recent message, JIM DAVIS <[hidden email]> wrote ...

>  If you've ever heard alot of the newer guys on the air their
>electrical knowledge and operating
>practices are rather lacking (even lacking the knowledge
>of something as BASIC as "Ohm's Laws"), now that's BAD!!!
>  At least the vast majority of guys who were licensed before the 1980s
>really did have to
>understand
>the electrical theory to pass the exams.  Memorization just would not
>work then as it seems to
>now!

That is very true for newer radio amateurs in the UK also. One only has
to look at some of the old exam papers.  UK Radio Amateurs' Examination
Papers back to 1946 can be seen at http://www.g4dmp.co.uk/rae

73
--
David G4DMP
Leeds, England, UK
------


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

Carl Smithson
What in the world does this have to do with Elecraft radio?
Sonny...NN8K




-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Pratt
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 2:42 AM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"

In a recent message, JIM DAVIS <[hidden email]> wrote ...

>  If you've ever heard alot of the newer guys on the air their
>electrical knowledge and operating
>practices are rather lacking (even lacking the knowledge
>of something as BASIC as "Ohm's Laws"), now that's BAD!!!
>  At least the vast majority of guys who were licensed before the 1980s
>really did have to
>understand
>the electrical theory to pass the exams.  Memorization just would not
>work then as it seems to
>now!

That is very true for newer radio amateurs in the UK also. One only has
to look at some of the old exam papers.  UK Radio Amateurs' Examination
Papers back to 1946 can be seen at http://www.g4dmp.co.uk/rae

73
--
David G4DMP
Leeds, England, UK
------


______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

Brendan Minish
In reply to this post by JIM DAVIS-11
JIM DAVIS wrote:

> There's nothing wrong with your "attitude" !  In fact I agree with it completely, as it seems
> that the people that are getting into the hobby recently really don't know how to fully utilize
> their equipment nor their antenna arrays.

What amateur radio needs is more people who have been in the hobby a
while to freely share their knowledge with others. we all started in
radio with limited knowledge and learned along the way.

Regardless of any thoughts some may have on current exams standards we
owe it to ourselves and the hobby we get so much pleasure from to help
newcomers to gain a better understanding of Amateur radio.

73
Brendan EI6IZ
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

WA2SI
In reply to this post by Carl Smithson
Elecraft is an Amateur Radio equipment manufacturer. This is an Elecraft
reflector/forum where Amateur Radio equipment, primarily but not always
Elecraft, related issues are discussed. A poster asked what might be
construed as a overly elementary question with regard to said poster's
license class. One of the responses was construed as mildly abrasive
eliciting further comments re. said "attitude." The 'offending party' then
explained his point of view with regard to his perceived "attitude."

Very much related to Amateur Radio and, albeit to a lesser degree, Elecraft.
It's just a discussion, interesting to some, not so much to others. Live and
let live.

Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Smithson" <[hidden email]>
To: "'David Pratt'" <[hidden email]>; "'Elecraft Reflector'"
<[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 8:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"


> What in the world does this have to do with Elecraft radio?
> Sonny...NN8K
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Pratt
> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 2:42 AM
> To: Elecraft Reflector
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"
>
> In a recent message, JIM DAVIS <[hidden email]> wrote ...
>>  If you've ever heard alot of the newer guys on the air their
>>electrical knowledge and operating
>>practices are rather lacking (even lacking the knowledge
>>of something as BASIC as "Ohm's Laws"), now that's BAD!!!
>>  At least the vast majority of guys who were licensed before the 1980s
>>really did have to
>>understand
>>the electrical theory to pass the exams.  Memorization just would not
>>work then as it seems to
>>now!
>
> That is very true for newer radio amateurs in the UK also. One only has
> to look at some of the old exam papers.  UK Radio Amateurs' Examination
> Papers back to 1946 can be seen at http://www.g4dmp.co.uk/rae
>
> 73
> --
> David G4DMP
> Leeds, England, UK
> ------
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

k0zu
In reply to this post by Brendan Minish
I think some of you "old timers" are missing the point of generational
changes. I agree that there is no excuse for laziness however, times have
changed in the world of technologies. You "old timers" were able to make a
respectable livelihood at circuit/component level designing, testing and
repairing. This is what the electronic/consumer market was all about. When
software started coming into the picture you labeled it firmware, left it
alone and gave it to the dork stuck in the corner to deal with because it
wasn't hardware. And, you stated that his firmware was pointless because it
couldn't do anything without your hardware. Well...if you haven't figured it
out yet...times have changed.

Now how many of you "old timers" could successfully write a line of software
code (outside of "hello world") let alone a full-on application? How many of
you "old timers" could derive a filtering algorithm and translate it into a
software routine? Do I call you lazy or dumb because most of you can't?
No...I wouldn't dream of it because that technology wasn't from your era.

I agree with Brendan's last comment that the answer here is to help. But
help is a two way street as well. Many "old timers" label some of the
digital modes mainly PSK as "No Code Extra mode". Is it really? Can any of
you old timers really explain how it works? Or do you just dismiss it
because it isn't CW or write it off because you don't see any RLC networks?
If you do your homework...these digital modes are far more complex to derive
than CW ever was.

So we have a clash of generational changes in both technology and people.
Can we say one is better than the other? Nope, I don't think we can. Can we
be happy that new members are joining the ranks? Well I am very happy. Do we
owe it to ourselves to provide mentoring? I think we do. And just
maybe...that idiot that couldn't explain what inductance is because all he
has to do is push a button labeled "tune" will be the guy to fix a
computing, networking problem on that new radio 10 years from now that is
pure software defined because that isn't your cup of tea.

K0ZU/Doug



-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brendan Minish
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 8:56 AM
To: JIM DAVIS
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"

JIM DAVIS wrote:

> There's nothing wrong with your "attitude" !  In fact I agree with it
completely, as it seems
> that the people that are getting into the hobby recently really don't know
how to fully utilize
> their equipment nor their antenna arrays.

What amateur radio needs is more people who have been in the hobby a
while to freely share their knowledge with others. we all started in
radio with limited knowledge and learned along the way.

Regardless of any thoughts some may have on current exams standards we
owe it to ourselves and the hobby we get so much pleasure from to help
newcomers to gain a better understanding of Amateur radio.

73
Brendan EI6IZ
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

WILLIS COOKE
In reply to this post by Brendan Minish

I certainly agree with you Brendan.  If we are going to keep this avocation healthy we must share knowledge whenever we can.  I was one of the ones attacked by this accusation of being recently licensed and never learning anything again.  I hope that this ridiculous thread will die soon because I am confident that the accusers are not as educated as the accused.

Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ, first licensed as KN5EWJ, 1956
Extra Class at the FCC, 1976
Air Force Navigator, 1962
Air Force Electronic Warfare Officer, 1963
BS Physics, Cum Laude, Sam Houston State, 1972
Professional Electrical Engineer, Texas 52999
Control Systems Engineer for 30 years.


Willis 'Cookie' Cooke
K5EWJ


--- On Sat, 5/9/09, Brendan Minish <[hidden email]> wrote:

> From: Brendan Minish <[hidden email]>
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"
> To: "JIM DAVIS" <[hidden email]>
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Date: Saturday, May 9, 2009, 7:55 AM
> JIM DAVIS wrote:
>
> > There's nothing wrong with your
> "attitude" !  In fact I agree with it completely,
> as it seems
> > that the people that are getting into the hobby
> recently really don't know how to fully utilize
> > their equipment nor their antenna arrays.
>
> What amateur radio needs is more people who have been in
> the hobby a
> while to freely share their knowledge with others. we all
> started in
> radio with limited knowledge and learned along the way.
>
> Regardless of any thoughts some may have on current exams
> standards we
> owe it to ourselves and the hobby we get so much pleasure
> from to help
> newcomers to gain a better understanding of Amateur radio.
>
> 73
> Brendan EI6IZ
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list:
> http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

Don Wilhelm-4
In reply to this post by Brendan Minish
Brendan,

You are perfectly correct we need to freely share the information we
have with newcomers to the hobby.
OTOH, since we are all supposed to have passed an exam which indicates
we have at least some understanding of the fundamentals of radio and
electronics.  So I do believe we should be rightly disturbed if a fellow
licensed ham does not know a resistor from an inductor, or a capacitor
from a quarter wavelength, or a bit from a packet.  Yet we see questions
from time to time that indicate individuals who do not possess even that
basic knowledge.  It is then that we can know that person simply
memorized the answers and gained no understanding when studying for the
exam.  While I would like to help, there are times I have to indicate
that it is better to "hit the books" and learn at least the basic terms
we use so we can communicate effectively.  There are times when the best
answer is to tell the person asking where to find the answers that they
seek, and I will do that when I sense that the person asking the
question wants to be spoon-fed with no effort toward learning.

Yes, I expect those who have acquired gear new to them to read the
manual, and I don't believe that is too much of an expectation on my part.

:RANT OFF
73,
Don W3FPR

Brendan Minish wrote:

> JIM DAVIS wrote:
>
>  
>> There's nothing wrong with your "attitude" !  In fact I agree with it completely, as it seems
>> that the people that are getting into the hobby recently really don't know how to fully utilize
>> their equipment nor their antenna arrays.
>>    
>
> What amateur radio needs is more people who have been in the hobby a
> while to freely share their knowledge with others. we all started in
> radio with limited knowledge and learned along the way.
>
> Regardless of any thoughts some may have on current exams standards we
> owe it to ourselves and the hobby we get so much pleasure from to help
> newcomers to gain a better understanding of Amateur radio.
>
> 73
> Brendan EI6IZ
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.23/2106 - Release Date: 05/09/09 06:54:00
>
>  
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

dave.wilburn
In reply to this post by k0zu
Agreed.  It is funny.  If you go back and look at very old articles in
QST, you will find that each generation of hams states how much easier
the ones that came behind have it.  Its human nature.

The other piece of the puzzle is the difference between book learning,
and applying something that has been learned.  It is all well and good
to understand ohm's law, but quite different to apply that.

Which is why it is a, "License to Learn".

This is where Elmering, and sharing make all the difference.  Many
aspects of society have changed that impacts this.  But clubs,
reflectors, newsletters and websites help share experience.  Hopefully
those trying to learn have someone near by to help, to show how it
works, and explain things.

That is one of the greatest parts of this reflector.  Wandering off
topic and learning from someone else's experience.  Thanks to all for
sharing and helping.  73 and have a good weekend.

Dave Wilburn
NM4M

Doug wrote:

> I think some of you "old timers" are missing the point of generational
> changes. I agree that there is no excuse for laziness however, times have
> changed in the world of technologies. You "old timers" were able to make a
> respectable livelihood at circuit/component level designing, testing and
> repairing. This is what the electronic/consumer market was all about. When
> software started coming into the picture you labeled it firmware, left it
> alone and gave it to the dork stuck in the corner to deal with because it
> wasn't hardware. And, you stated that his firmware was pointless because it
> couldn't do anything without your hardware. Well...if you haven't figured it
> out yet...times have changed.
>
> Now how many of you "old timers" could successfully write a line of software
> code (outside of "hello world") let alone a full-on application? How many of
> you "old timers" could derive a filtering algorithm and translate it into a
> software routine? Do I call you lazy or dumb because most of you can't?
> No...I wouldn't dream of it because that technology wasn't from your era.
>
> I agree with Brendan's last comment that the answer here is to help. But
> help is a two way street as well. Many "old timers" label some of the
> digital modes mainly PSK as "No Code Extra mode". Is it really? Can any of
> you old timers really explain how it works? Or do you just dismiss it
> because it isn't CW or write it off because you don't see any RLC networks?
> If you do your homework...these digital modes are far more complex to derive
> than CW ever was.
>
> So we have a clash of generational changes in both technology and people.
> Can we say one is better than the other? Nope, I don't think we can. Can we
> be happy that new members are joining the ranks? Well I am very happy. Do we
> owe it to ourselves to provide mentoring? I think we do. And just
> maybe...that idiot that couldn't explain what inductance is because all he
> has to do is push a button labeled "tune" will be the guy to fix a
> computing, networking problem on that new radio 10 years from now that is
> pure software defined because that isn't your cup of tea.
>
> K0ZU/Doug
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Brendan Minish
> Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 8:56 AM
> To: JIM DAVIS
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"
>
> JIM DAVIS wrote:
>
>> There's nothing wrong with your "attitude" !  In fact I agree with it
> completely, as it seems
>> that the people that are getting into the hobby recently really don't know
> how to fully utilize
>> their equipment nor their antenna arrays.
>
> What amateur radio needs is more people who have been in the hobby a
> while to freely share their knowledge with others. we all started in
> radio with limited knowledge and learned along the way.
>
> Regardless of any thoughts some may have on current exams standards we
> owe it to ourselves and the hobby we get so much pleasure from to help
> newcomers to gain a better understanding of Amateur radio.
>
> 73
> Brendan EI6IZ
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

AC7AC
CONTENTS DELETED
The author has deleted this message.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

w5tvw
You're right Ron.  Most of us are "appliance operators" now.  I still like
playiung with my small homebrew rigs and the TCS.

Only regret is I wished they'd kept at LEAST the 5 WPM requirement for
Amateur Extra.  I got mine back in the early 60's when you had to do the 20
WPM test at the FCC's office.  Actually, I took three codes tests that day:
16 WPM groups, 20 WPM plain text for 2nd Class Radiotelegraph, and 20 wpm
for Amateur Extra.  This was followed by the elements for 2nd Class Ship
Telegraph.  Was a long day!

73,

Sandy W5TVW

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron D'Eau Claire" <[hidden email]>
To: "'Elecraft Discussion List'" <[hidden email]>
Sent: Saturday, May 09, 2009 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] My "Attitude"


> Dave, NM4M wrote:
>
> QST, you will find that each generation of hams states how much easier
> the ones that came behind have it.  Its human nature.
>
> -------------------------
>
> What a Ham needs to know to put a rig on the air today requires only a
> tiny
> part of the technical knowledge that past generations needed to know.
>
> Installing and repairing equipment also has grown more complex, just as
> all
> the various modes and procedures has made operating it more complex. Some
> people do it all. Others specialize. Most Hams do a little of both.
>
> Even commercial licenses reflect this. Today a shipboard Communications
> Officer may be licensed to operate the critical communications equipment,
> but he/she is not allowed to repair or tinker with it in any way. In the
> past, of course, "Sparky" was expected to do it all.
>
> If a modern Communications Officer wants to do repairs, he/she needs two
> difference licenses from the FCC. Many ships find it more practical to
> simply carry spares and let defective equipment be handled by specialists
> in
> port.
>
>
> Ron AC7AC
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.23/2106 - Release Date: 05/09/09
06:54:00

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude"

WA2SI

> Only regret is I wished they'd kept at LEAST the 5 WPM requirement for
> Amateur Extra.

Soundly seconded. I do believe that some must be "prodded" into giving CW a
try. Many would then discover how pleasurable it can be. Without even a
minimal requirement, many will never discover this.

Vy 73 de Bert
WA2SI

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
| More
Print post
Permalink

Re: My "Attitude" [END of thread]

Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ
Administrator
In reply to this post by Don Wilhelm-4
Guys - We're drifting a little far afield.  (Sort of like the recurring
no-code etc. threads..  ;-)

 Lets end this thread for now.

73, Eric   WA6HHQ
Elecraft List Moderator

Don Wilhelm wrote:
> Brendan,
>
> You are perfectly correct we need to freely share the information we
> have with newcomers to the hobby.
> OTOH, since we are all supposed to have passed an exam which indicates
> we have at least some understanding of the fundamentals of radio and
> electronics.
_..._

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
12