AmateurRadio.com

My first QSO (and, yeah, it was with Morse code) was petrifying and…

What’s your story of your first QSO?

73 de NW7US

This is my reply to many responses that I have been receiving on my original blog entry, located at this AmateurRadio.com website,(my shortened URL: https://g.nw7us.us/arrl2fccR2) as well as to the original video, posted in that blog entry.

I wish to reply to all of those who are against the idea of expanding the privileges of the Technician-class licensee, the expansions including the ability to operate Voice and Digital in limited slices in a subset of lower-than-Ten-Meter amateur radio shortwave allocations.

It seems to me, that…

…the issue is not one of Technician-class licensees wanting more privileges, as a whole. What the ARRL is addressing is the *lack* of desire by most current Techs to upgrade.

The logic behind the idea of expanding privileges concludes that if you give them a taste of lower-shortwave propagation and excitement (by moving past the CW-only restriction on the lower tech allocations), then they *will* want to upgrade.

This logic is already proven as applicable by the fact that the General class exists! All that this proposal will do is allow the Tech to experience what could be very attractive–just like for the General.  If it worked in the past with Novice, Technician, General, Advanced, and Amateur Extra (exposing to all of HF, even if by way of a CW-only requirement), then it will work, now.  The difference is that the CW-only requirement on lower HF bands is highly restrictive because the mode is no longer needed to operate on any frequency, and, most will not take the time to learn it just to see if they WANT to explore the lower HF bands, or ever upgrade.

The bottom line is that we should make the Tech ticket more relevant. The expansion is not dumbing down, nor does it give away the farm.

I discuss this original point in the two videos that were lower down in the original post:

[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty9HINa3nAg[/embedyt]

and,

[embedyt] https://youtu.be/83I3EEQxfZA[/embedyt]

Thanks for reading, watching the videos, and having a useful dialog about this very important change to the amateur radio regulations in the USA.

P.S., 

That aside: This may, in the long term, reveal one of two possible truths:

1. There is no real need for three license classes. Two would suffice. General and Amateur Extra, or Technician (merged with General) and Amateur Extra.

2. There is no real need for three license classes. One would suffice. Make the test hard enough to cover the Extra-class material, and all material under that class, and merge everyone into one tested class. I believe that this has been tried in other countries, and it appears to work well.

I’ll be crucified for stating those ideas, but, hey, this is just a hobby.

73 de NW7US dit dit

Ham Radio Deluxe can log your WSJT-X FT8, JT65A, and JT9 QSOs, via the JT-Alert software. This is a demonstration of my use of HRD and Logbook, during an FT8 QSO,today.

As some of you know, I have had some differences of opinion regarding the selection of frequencies chosen by the FT8 creators and advocates. Regardless, I do still use the mode. Here is proof:

Go ahead and share, if you would. And, please subscribe to my YouTube channel, as I will be creating many how-to videos in the near future.

Thanks and 73 … de NW7US

In this video, I expound on another point of view regarding the ARRL petition to the FCC. The petition requests an expansion of operating privileges of Technician-class operators in the USA. The ARRL believes that giving broader shortwave access, using digital communications, to Technicians, will better entice the Techs to upgrade to General or Amateur Extra. In this video, I discuss this a bit.

If you are wondering why I’ve made a few videos about this topic, when the topic has been the hot item on many forums already, I believe that the drama will not cease until well after the FCC makes a decision, because this is a relevant topic, and one that has a significant impact on the amateur radio community at large. It is not a trivial conversation about which type of coax is best suited for Arctic field activity.

After some replies came from various viewers, I clarify my point. I stand corrected.

I failed to mention that there are a limited few slices of VOICE (SSB) spectrum on HF that the petition seeks for the Tech licensee. The ARRL states, “ARRL has asked the FCC to expand HF privileges for Technician licensees to include limited phone privileges on 75, 40, and 15 meters, plus RTTY and digital mode privileges on 80, 40, 15, and 10 meters.”

More specifically, “ARRL proposes to provide Technician licensees, present and future, with phone privileges at 3.900 to 4.000 MHz, 7.225 to 7.300 MHz, and 21.350 to 21.450 MHz, plus RTTY and digital privileges in current Technician allocations on 80, 40, 15, and 10 meters. The ARRL petition points out the explosion in popularity of various digital modes over the past 2 decades. Under the ARRL plan, the maximum HF power level for Technician operators would remain at 200 W PEP. The few remaining Novice licensees would gain no new privileges under the League’s proposal.” Reference: http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-requests-expanded-hf-privileges-for-technician-licensees

My point holds: give some reason to desire to upgrade to a higher class. Do this by granting HF operations on lower bands (lower in frequency than 10 Meters), with more than a CW-only privilege.

If a tech can only use CW on 80m, but doesn’t know CW, then it is likely she won’t ever try making contacts on 80m. Hence, no exposure to the magic of 80-meter DX. If, however, the Tech can dabble with digital or limited SSB, on 80m, then she gets a real, practical exposure to the magic, and may well upgrade. Why do you think a General, who has limits, would ever upgrade? What am I missing here?

The following video expands this idea:
[embedyt] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=83I3EEQxfZA[/embedyt]

The truth is, I see a strong argument for just ONE license, permanent. Or a temporary entry-level training ticket, then the permanent. But, that would make us like some other countries. That can’t be good.

The original video to which this new video continues is here:
[embedyt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BWSAvDWE3Js[/embedyt]

Some viewers are asking me why I am making a video while driving. They try to convince me that talking while driving is too distracting. My answer is here:
[embedyt]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyNHKViyCGE[/embedyt]

73 de NW7US

Some of you wanted to see the complete version, uncut, of this video in which I discuss the differences between CB and the Amateur Radio Service.  This is in response to the recent episode in which the NCIS writers missed a great opportunity to discover the vibrant reality of the current amateur radio service in the United States of America.

The previous version of the video was prematurely cut short by just over three minutes.  This version includes that ending.  I also remove some of the low-end rumblings from the vehicle.  This version should sound a little bit less annoying.  Hopefully, the quality of the video is sharper, as well.  This version was edited by Adobe Premiere CC 2017.

I appreciate the many comments, views, and shares.  Please subscribe, too!

73 from Omaha!

EDIT: Please view the NEW article, in which the FULL VERSION of this video exists.

I’ve been reading some of the chatter regarding the NCIS episode in which they incorrectly portray the amateur radio service. I thought I would make a video (vlog) and express my thoughts.

I use my new headset mic to make the video. If you have a few moments, please check it out, and let me know how the mic sounds.

Of course, share your thoughts on the NCIS thing… thanks!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rv5TsoE0AZQ

Yes, the video gets prematurely cut off.  The editing software on my cell phone chopped off the ending, and I did not realize it until after it posted the video.  I’ll record a follow-up video that includes the ending thoughts, but in a new vlog edition.

Cheers and 73 de NW7US

..

Great film about a great radio manufacturer and radio set.

In 1944, this short subject film was produced by the Jam Handy Organization and sponsored by the Hallicrafters Company. It shows the construction of the SCR-299 and dramatizes its use during World War II. This is a B&W documentary presenting a look at the manufacturing and use of the (now defunct) Hallicrafters Company’s SCR-299 “mobile communications unit.” This 1944 film, produced with help from the US Army Signal Corps, and by the Hallicrafters Company, explains how, using radio gear such as this Hallicrafters shortwave radio transmitter and receiver technology, the US Forces and Allies were better equipped to win World War II.

The SCR-299 “mobile communications unit” was developed to provide long-range communications during World War II. The US Military sought improvements of range, flexibility and durability over its existing SCR-197 and SCR-597 transmitters. In 1942, Hallicrafters Standard HT-4 was selected as the SCR-299’s transmitter, known subsequently by its military designation as the BC-610. The SCR-299 was first used on November 8, 1942, during Operation TORCH involving companies of the 829th Signal Service Battalion establishing a radio net that could exchange messages between beach-landed forces and bases in Gibraltar. Despite initial problems unloading the sets from convoy ships, the SCR-299s served until the installation of permanent Army Command and Administrative Network stations. According to US Army military historians, “General Dwight Eisenhower credited the SCR-299 in his successful reorganization of the American forces and final defeat of the Nazis at Kasserine Pass.”

The SCR-299 was a “self-contained” receiving and transmitting mobile high-frequency (HF; or, shortwave) station capable of operating from 2 MHz to 8 MHz. Using conversion kits, it could operate from 1 MHz to 18 MHz. The transmitter output reached 350 watts.

The entire unit came in a K-51 truck except for Power Unit PE-95 which was in a K-52 trailer. Power could either be supplied by the Power Unit and a 12-volt storage battery or 115-volt 60-cycle AC commercial power and two spare 6-volt storage batteries. The power requirement was 2000 watts, plus 1500 watts for heater and lights.

The system could be remotely controlled up to a distance of one mile (1.6 km) using two EE-8 field telephones and W-110-B Wire kit. Remote equipment was provided for remotely keying or voice modulating the transmitter, remotely listening to the receiver, and for communicating with the operator of the station.

Read more details here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SCR-299

Public domain film from the Library of Congress Prelinger Archive.

..
73 de NW7US

..