ARRL Board Discusses Issues, Strategic Plan, and Stuff

[w3jn]

I've yet to see a ham radio with P25 or trunking capability.  Mebbe they exist, but as you know I don't peruse the ads in QST anymore.

I forgive you Pete - even if you don't want it - but the ARRL's premise is still invalid 

[ka3zlr]

Change takes time...but it is coming....for some just not soon enough..


73
Jack.

[Opcom]

I've yet to see a ham radio with P25 or trunking capability.  Mebbe they exist, but as you know I don't peruse the ads in QST anymore.

I forgive you Pete - even if you don't want it - but the ARRL's premise is still invalid 

Instead they have "D-star".. Somewhat costly but people are experimenting with its features.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I've yet to see a ham radio with P25 or trunking capability.  Mebbe they exist, but as you know I don't peruse the ads in QST anymore.

I don't know of any amateur rig currently on the market that has trunking capability.

- but the ARRL's premise is still invalid 

You said this twice but you have yet to provide a reason.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Instead they have "D-star".. Somewhat costly but people are experimenting with its features.

In the overall realm of amateur pricing, it's not that costly.
D-STAR is fast growing in popularity. The current D-STAR Repeater Directory: http://www.dstarusers.org/repeaters.php Watch it grow in real time: http://www.dstarusers.org/dsm_growth.html We announced the E-Z Guide to D-STAR Operation publication at this past Dayton. These things keep flying off the shelf as fast as I lay them down.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

John Carson applied for a patent on single sideband in 1915. The patent was granted in 1923.

From the patent:

In a signaling system, an alternating current source of constant frequency, a modulating current comprising a band of frequencies, a modulator, means to impress said constant frequency current and said modulating current upon said modulator to produce a current having two side band components and an unmodulated component corresponding to said constant frequency current, said modulator comprising two elements so balanced with respect to each other as to balance out said unmodulated component, and means for selecting one of  said side band components to the exclusion of the other.


Read the entire patent in the attached file.

[w3jn]

I've yet to see a ham radio with P25 or trunking capability.  Mebbe they exist, but as you know I don't peruse the ads in QST anymore.

I don't know of any amateur rig currently on the market that has trunking capability.

My point exactly.

To spell it out, one of the ARRL's justifications for this narrow BW FM nonsense is that the ham manufacturers follow the commerical radios.  Not true.  Hence, faulty premise.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

I've yet to see a ham radio with P25 or trunking capability.  Mebbe they exist, but as you know I don't peruse the ads in QST anymore.

I don't know of any amateur rig currently on the market that has trunking capability.

My point exactly.

To spell it out, one of the ARRL's justifications for this narrow BW FM nonsense is that the ham manufacturers follow the commerical radios.  Not true.  Hence, faulty premise.

If you read the 2nd "WHEREAS" in Item 29:
"WHEREAS, the FCC has mandated that by 2013 commercial radio move to narrowband channels and Amateur Radio manufacturers normally follow commercial practices"

"normally follow" and "always follow" are two different things. Trunking implementation is mainly designed around software, i.e. handshaking, programming station personalities, probably some type of system key or protocol, etc. At present, I know of no VHF/UHF band where trunking would be necessary at this time. I would suspect that many of the current VHF/UHF mobile/HT rigs have the necessary hardware and firmware chips available that could possibly implement some type of trunking function. However, some amateur "group" would have to define the requirements and features as they relate to the various amateur bands where trunking would be considered, and then someone(manufacturer) or some group, would have to implement it all in writing the software.

However, given that in some areas of the country under the current bandwidth spacing, repeater pairs are not even available on certain bands. Narrow banding would allow more repeaters to occupy an existing frequency segment. As the ARRL has indicated, "with the increasing use of narrowband across the country amateurs are placing and using narrowband equipment outside the repeater subband because there is no real place to fit the narrowband pairs" within the present repeater subband. If they're moving outside the present repeater subband, they're moving into other parts of the band where generally other modes are used. If repeater narrowbanding fizzles out, a possible solution, at least in heavy populated repeater areas, would be to consider the trunking application.

[WA3VJB]

Actually there are a number of faulty premises put forth by the people who for now are running the group in Newington.

This one tickled me:

WHEREAS, for ARRL to remain a respected leader in technology, we must be actively involved in innovative solutions to problems by bringing about a productive discussion on a technical paradigm shift; now

The first reason this is funny is obvious. But to lay it out for those blinded by loyalty to their subscriptions, there is no significant basis for an assumption the ARRL is a leader in any technological field.  Perhaps such leadership exists and is accorded to certain active licensees, but not to the club as a whole.

I am more troubled by the assumption that the ARRL's managers have correctly identified a problem, and that those people have assessed that it actually needs a solution. I'm then skeptical about having their version of a "solution" thus promoted by their group. 

They should have learned from past misguided campaigns that it's not nice to leave out the people who could be affected by ARRL "solutions."  I see nothing in their WHEREASes to suggest they plan to poll the broader community of radio hobbyists to make sure the League knows what it's supposed to do, if anything.

As for "moving forward" in the radio hobby, that's become the latest hackneyed phrase to hide reality with wishful thinking. The other one that the ARRL's people adopted was "we are committed," which invariably means "we don't give a szht."

WHEREAS: The second part of this sentence need not be connected with the first. (divided by the word and)

you can look forward to keeping it vibrant, exciting, interesting, and moving forward with technologies.

[Jim KF2SY]

Is SSB even used anymore by the military or commercial industrys?
I mean, aside from a few fisherman?

Looks like AM won out afterall, by it's continued innovation for AM broadcast
and it's unique abilities for aircraft traffic in the aviation world....

[Tom WA3KLR]

Just what we need, more unused repeaters.

[W3SLK]

Tom said:

Just what we need, more unused repeaters.

Touche' Tom!

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Actually there are a number of faulty premises put forth by the people who for now are running the group in Newington.

This one tickled me:

WHEREAS, for ARRL to remain a respected leader in technology, we must be actively involved in innovative solutions to problems by bringing about a productive discussion on a technical paradigm shift; now

The first reason this is funny is obvious. But to lay it out for those blinded by loyalty to their subscriptions, there is no significant basis for an assumption the ARRL is a leader in any technological field.  Perhaps such leadership exists and is accorded to certain active licensees, but not to the club as a whole.

I agree. Looks like a bad choice of words in that phrase. Maybe, promoter of..., or leadership role..., etc., rather then "respected leader"

I am more troubled by the assumption that the ARRL's managers have correctly identified a problem, and that those people have assessed that it actually needs a solution. I'm then skeptical about having their version of a "solution" thus promoted by their group. 

They should have learned from past misguided campaigns that it's not nice to leave out the people who could be affected by ARRL "solutions."  I see nothing in their WHEREASes to suggest they plan to poll the broader community of radio hobbyists to make sure the League knows what it's supposed to do, if anything.

As for "moving forward" in the radio hobby, that's become the latest hackneyed phrase to hide reality with wishful thinking. The other one that the ARRL's people adopted was "we are committed," which invariably means "we don't give a szht."

WHEREAS: The second part of this sentence need not be connected with the first. (divided by the word and)

you can look forward to keeping it vibrant, exciting, interesting, and moving forward with technologies.

The move to narrowband repeater splits in the VHF/UHF FM part of the bands is already underway. In heavily populated repeater areas, new repeater pairs, based on the traditional 15 or 20 kHz bandwidth, are nearly exhausted, if not already. This is causing new repeaters (digital, D-STAR or equivalent) to migrate out of the current repeater subband under the current band plan. This is a problem.

Whether they plan to socialize the issue with the entire amateur community remains to be seen. However, the meeting minutes are a matter of record for member and nonmember review. As is indicated in the meeting minutes, "THEREFORE, the President shall appoint a study committee for the purpose of research and to consider developing a plan" The "research" definitely needs to include input and discussion with all repeater owners and concerned users since they will be most affected by a switch to narrowband repeater use. Of course, doing nothing in this problem area (leaving current repeaters as they are), may then require a review and possible revised VHF/UHF band plan to manage these new narrowband FM repeater pairs from over running other parts bands where non FM modes would be affected. It's not clear to me that if you're just an HF user on AM, SSB, or CW, there would much interest in how the VHF/UHF FM subbands might be massaged into something more efficient.

[k4kyv]

WHEREAS, for ARRL to remain a respected leader in technology, we must be actively involved in innovative solutions to problems by bringing about a productive discussion on a technical paradigm shift; now

If the League really wanted to remain a respected leader in amateur radio technology, they would not have removed the technical and construction articles from their regular membership publication.

Even if those articles were of limited interest to the majority of readers, the fact that the articles would be there for all to see would have inevitably enticed some interest in the technical aspects of radio on the part of members who otherwise would never have any reason or occasion to be exposed to this type of material.  ...And this would have been in keeping with the League's expressed motives for promoting Incentive Licensing.

When QEX was first started, it was touted to primarily contain esoteric, in-depth, highly technical material of interest more to engineering types than to radio amateurs, the type of material you would more likely expect to see in IRE/IEEE Proceedings and similar publications, than in QST.  But as years progressed, gradually, more and more of the technical articles were taken out of QST and put into QEX, to the point that now, QST strongly resembles the old Ham Radio Horizons with a highly watered down technical section, and now nearly all serious technical and construction articles, even those aimed primarily at the general amateur community, are published in QEX.

[Steve - WB3HUZ]

The Dear Leader, Kim Jong-il.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Please somebody, send Don a QEX magazine
Wow, Don, twice in less then 30 days - QEX and incentive licensing in the same breathe.
I think the stylus is stuck in the groove of amateur radio past life.

[K5UJ]

WHEREAS, for ARRL to remain a respected leader in technology, we must be actively involved in innovative solutions to problems by bringing about a productive discussion on a technical paradigm shift; now

If the League really wanted to remain a respected leader in amateur radio technology, they would not have removed the technical and construction articles from their regular membership publication.

Even if those articles were of limited interest to the majority of readers, the fact that the articles would be there for all to see would have inevitably enticed some interest in the technical aspects of radio on the part of members who otherwise would never have any reason or occasion to be exposed to this type of material.  ...And this would have been in keeping with the League's expressed motives for promoting Incentive Licensing.

Another mistake along these lines (i.e. limiting exposure to something) was made years ago by eliminating the Novice license.  The entry license became the Technician and before the Tech. Plus I think the lowest band they could operate on was a limited part of 10 meters.  For a long time new hams mostly bought and operated 2 meter FM shack-on-a-belt rigs, got bored with it quickly, and dropped out, never finding out that the real fun of radio was stringing up a wire and working someone 2000 miles away on HF.   I see now the Tech.+ can operate phone on 10 meters but interestingly (I never noticed this before), phone is specifically given as SSB phone.     

Regardless of the details, getting rid of the Novice license in my opinion was a big mistake.  It was a simple test, allowed some privileges on HF and a new ham immediately got his feet wet setting up and operating a HF station and hearing all the skywave QSOs, and experiencing the core culture of ham radio instead of timing out the repeater.

[Pete, WA2CWA]

Another mistake along these lines (i.e. limiting exposure to something) was made years ago by eliminating the Novice license.  The entry license became the Technician and before the Tech. Plus I think the lowest band they could operate on was a limited part of 10 meters.  For a long time new hams mostly bought and operated 2 meter FM shack-on-a-belt rigs, got bored with it quickly, and dropped out, never finding out that the real fun of radio was stringing up a wire and working someone 2000 miles away on HF.   I see now the Tech.+ can operate phone on 10 meters but interestingly (I never noticed this before), phone is specifically given as SSB phone. 

I've known hams who have held a Tech license for the last 40 years because, for them, the real fun of amateur radio is 50 mHz and above. Stringing up a wire is probably not their idea of fun. How about throwing up a 4 by 4 array, 16 elements per antenna, for 432 mHz. For many, that's their idea of fun. 2000 miles is a piece of cake if you're doing EME, sporadic E, or even Tropo. Don't underestimate the Tech or Tech+. Techs have had 10 meter SSB for a number of years.

Regardless of the details, getting rid of the Novice license in my opinion was a big mistake.  It was a simple test, allowed some privileges on HF and a new ham immediately got his feet wet setting up and operating a HF station and hearing all the skywave QSOs, and experiencing the core culture of ham radio instead of timing out the repeater.

Ah, "experiencing the core culture" of 75 meters, and even some of the other bands, might make a new ham wipe their wet feet, put on their shoes, and run the heck out of there.

FYI: The ARRL tried to bring the Novice/Beginner license back in a proposal to the FCC several years ago but the FCC shot them down.

[ka3zlr]

About that Core Culture...LOL..Yea man Pete, Listen to Old Vic and the Liberty Net...LOLOL........I couldn't resist..

is he still around.?

73
Jack.

[WA3VJB]

The way this "stuff" is worded is part of the problem Pete, and its easier to solve than a problem such as a lack of slots in coordinated repeater pairs.

Anyone here remember how Radio Moscow and Radio Peking used to write their "newscasts" ?  It was a fascinating, clever style of delivery where the main purpose was affirmation of the government, NOT the delivery of a clear position or reasoned proposal.

As time goes on, I see the same theme emerging in ARRL Board Minutes, their Executive Reports, and even their damn newsletter that gets posted weekly on QRZ.com.

It not only distracts from any point they might wish to make, but it does little to curry favor with those they're trying to influence.

[k4kyv]

Another mistake along these lines (i.e. limiting exposure to something) was made years ago by eliminating the Novice license.  The entry license became the Technician and before the Tech. Plus I think the lowest band they could operate on was a limited part of 10 meters.  For a long time new hams mostly bought and operated 2 meter FM shack-on-a-belt rigs, got bored with it quickly, and dropped out, never finding out that the real fun of radio was stringing up a wire and working someone 2000 miles away on HF.   I see now the Tech.+ can operate phone on 10 meters but interestingly (I never noticed this before), phone is specifically given as SSB phone.     

Regardless of the details, getting rid of the Novice license in my opinion was a big mistake.  It was a simple test, allowed some privileges on HF and a new ham immediately got his feet wet setting up and operating a HF station and hearing all the skywave QSOs, and experiencing the core culture of ham radio instead of timing out the repeater.

Since the most recent "restructuring" the Tech can also work CW on 80, 40 and 15 in the CW bands everywhere except in the Extra class portions.  So in a way, the Tech has replaced the old renewable Novice, but with more privileges, no longer confined to narrow "novice" bands.  So, by taking a slightly more difficult (?) test, the candidate can still have something like the old CW novice priveliges with more generous frequency assignments, plus slopbucket phone on 10, and all amateur privileges at 50 mHz and above.

But a change in the name of the Technician class is long over due.  "Communicator" might be a better term, since "Novice" is already assigned to the remnant of the old Novice  class licence.  With the advent of the HF cw privileges, perhaps "Entry" would be appropriate.

They should get rid of the slopbucket-only restriction for 10m.  It serves no purpose whatever.  This is a holdover from the old "Novice Enhancement" docket that ARRL promoted, but they were paranoid that if AM phone were allowed in the "enhanced" Novice segment, CB'ers would get a Novice or Tech licence, modify their good buddy rigs, and turn the new Novice phone band into an extension of 11m.  A bogus argument from the outset.  New hams should be encouraged to homebrew simple AM phone rigs for 10m, or modify old AM CB rigs to the band.