It doesn't have a clue about "emergency and public service communications" because the role of amateur radio is changing and the powers that be still think it's 1959. Here's a clue, hams aren't as important in these scenarios as they think and are becoming less and less important.
NO, NO, NO. "Dropping the code" is NOT responsible for the "downward spiral" in amateur radio any more than it is responsible for the downward spiral in society and civilization in general. The code proficiency requirement was dropped WORLDWIDE by international treaty. Reinstating a code requirement would require ALL countries to agree. GET OVER IT, the code requirement isn't coming back, and it wouldn't improve the behavior of childish minds if it did return. Requiring all amateur licensees to possess a PhD in RF engineering would not improve the behavior on the ham bands either. Bad behavior on the air makes ALL hams look bad in the eyes of those who are being persuaded by big money that amateur radio doesn't deserve any protection. Behave like mature adults on the air and ham radio may survive as a hobby. Behave like uneducated selfish idiots and we will surely disappear.
No. The WRC-2003 decision just made the Morse requirement optional to the Administrations. "25.5 § 3 1) Administrations shall determine whether or not a person seeking a licence to operate an amateur station shall demonstrate the ability to send and receive texts in Morse code signals. (WRC-03)" Nothing stops a country from keeping or re-instating the code tests if they decide so. In my opinion, a re-instating of Morse testing and much tougher tests in general would help the reputation of amateur radio a lot. Remember, we are supposed to form an elite among radio hobbyists. 73/ Karl-Arne SM0AOM
MARIA told a different story, in Puerto Rico. In the first week post-hurricane there was NO substitute for ham radio. Nada.
I stand corrected on the treaty. But NO country requires a CW test, even though they are free to do so. I disagree that "a re-instating of Morse testing and much tougher tests in general would help the reputation of amateur radio a lot". It may help the "reputation" of amateur radio among hams, but in today's dumbed-down world, it would result in far fewer newly licensed operators. A dwindling ham population would only serve to strengthen the argument against us. Requiring a CW test would make ham radio look like an ancient relic to a perspective newcomer.
Why is it, that a non-profit organization such as ARRL is not obligated, if not legally bound by law to provide the members or contributors access to the records of the Board of Directors meetings? We should be have the ability to see what takes place at these Board meetings, and have input into same. Bruce Love WB5NOQ
PR was a very rare occurrence and in the first week post-hurricane exactly how much information flowed out via ham radio? There were cell hot spots that people managed to get to and have outside contact rather than hunt up a local ham operator to get messages out. How many of the local hams in that first week were in survival mode like everyone else and not operational? Remember the Force of 50, reduced to 22 and some of them were basically useless to the mission, didn't arrive until later. I still say hams are less important than they used to be for communications, those that fail to admit the landscape is changing are delusional at best.
The minutes of the board meetings are published on the ARRL website. ( You don’t need to be a member to view them.) To give input, just look up what division you are in by location, see who your director is and contact him or her.
Not correct. The working cell sites were extremely few in number and were saturated by people driving to them to try to place calls, mostly around San Juan. In-place hams did a fantastic job. A great example is KK4DCX in San German who passed 4000+ health and welfare messages over the first 5 days. The satcoms came in a few days later. Ham radio was VITAL the first few days after the storm. So the reality is very different from your supposition.
Not to diminish the efforts of the locals in PR but I'll bet more H&W traffic went out over the working cell sites. As I said PR was total devastation and ham radio had some value under those circumstances but how many recent disasters on the mainland have seen ham radio provide a vital service? I really hope you don't fall in the camp that claims amateur radio will die without emcomm, it's only a small part of the equation. There are problems with the ARRL promoting 'emergency communicator' classes furthering the notion that emcomm is everything in the hobby and the image of hams as first responders. A quick look at the stats from HQ, 140k members and 40k subscribers to the ARES e-letter should tell you something about the way membership is going.
Or satellite phones. A storm like that comes with several days of warning, and any relief agency worth their salt would have had people in place with satellite comms well before the power went down. Indeed. Hams are not first-responders, and Part 97 Subpart E makes that clear. There are other communications services that now fill that role in the eyes of the Commission.
Again, I doubt that is correct. Angel WP3R said he had to wait hours to get a cell connect because of the overload. You are not speaking from knowledge on this, so I understand the assumptions you made. I, too, felt that we, as hams, really are victims of our post 9/11 truism of 'When All Else Hails...Ham Radio'. I was more cynical than you are. But after hearing about the hams-in-place post Maria, in PR, I have to say that we really DO serve that slogan, and the more we understand how to make it work in our own individual communities, the more we meet our mission in emergencies. When ALL else Fails, it IS ham radio. 73 Chip W1YW
USA's present HF narrowband and content-based (phone/cw/data subbands) ham radio rules set by FCC are too antiqued to be technologically workable with such a receiver-side RFI-mitigation paradigm. The RF technology jail will be even more severely confined if "data mode" content is limited to 2.8kHz bandwidth on HF, as ARRL and others have recently proposed in the symbol rate rulemaking presently before the FCC. American hams have painted themselves into a corner. In order to fully benefit on HF and VHF from receiver-side RFI-mitigation, the FCC must legalize the transmission of very-wideband digital techniques (previously called Spread Spectrum in an earlier era). Some of the following HF and VHF transmitting modes would be suitable for receiver-side RFI-mitigation. 20kHz to 100kHz bandwidth OFDM 20kS/s to 100kS/s (symbol-per-second) wideband PSK 50kHz to 100kHz bandwidth 128-ary FSK Note to FCC: please let us know when you have authorized the above modes and bandwidths on HF, then we shall produce receivers that are capable of useful receiver-side RFI-mitigation. In the mean time, please continue to use transmit-side RFI-mitigation
USA Ham Radio is locked in a Technology Jail for HF innovation. FCC holds the key. ARRL is the prisoner trustee. Other countries with modern rules have passed America by. Ham Radio Technology Jail
