Nice try. No, neither arrogant nor nasty. Everyone else reading my comments knows that you interpreted them exactly the opposite of how they were posed. No, hams in Canada are hardly stupid. In fact I know a brilliant one who didn't go to college and is responsible for at least some of the stuff you have in your home. Ham radio set him on his electronics path. BTW, he has the best ham radio setup in Canada. Heck, one of the very best anywhere! So go read my comments again in the way they were posed. Ham radio has a foundation of electronic knowledge, and encourages further exploration, on your own terms. If you can't accept that , consider yourself the exception. Here in the US, the tests invoke a certain basic physics knowledge on antennas and propagation. And the 'corporate culture' invites you to explore further. We have other services that are 'hobby type' almost exclusively--FRS and CB, for example. There, you don't have to know a darned thing and can bask in ignorance if one wishes. But not ham radio. 73 Chip W1YW
It's fine to have pride in passing an amateur radio exam and becoming licensed. It's not fine to have pride, as a tested and licensed amateur radio operator, to have no working knowledge of electronics or the physics of antennas.
In the "Amateur's Code", written by Paul M. Segal, W9EEA, in 1928; amateur radio is referred to as a hobby. I have said this before, "Chimp does not speak for us all". Enjoy our hobby, Sir.
Didn't say I was "proud", did I? I have great respect for those who are more knowledgeable than I am on matters radio-related. I am, though, a little "proud" about having learned CW at the age of 60 and, a year later, being able to head copy at over 20 WPM. But I don't put down people who can't or aren't interested in doing the same.
Curious to know how you know what "everyone else" reading your comments thinks! I think your best course of action would be to get yourself appointed head of the radio regulatory bodies in all countries of the world so that you could change licensing requirements to get rid of "stupid" hams like me.
You are being unfriendly and presumptuous. Please do not pose me as what I am not, and please read with greater care so that the words, meaning and intent of other posts register properly with you. I don't know any "stupid" hams, Here is the mission statement of ham radio in the US. Note red sections--- § 97.1 Basis and purpose. The rules and regulations in this part are designed to provide an amateur radio service having a fundamental purpose as expressed in the following principles: (a) Recognition and enhancement of the value of the amateur service to the public as a voluntary noncommercial communication service, particularly with respect to providing emergency communications. (b) Continuation and extension of the amateur's proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art. (c) Encouragement and improvement of the amateur service through rules which provide for advancing skills in both the communication and technical phases of the art. (d) Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts. (e) Continuation and extension of the amateur's unique ability to enhance international goodwill. If you find any of my statements at error with Part 97, or in error at all, kindly correct me. We all enjoy hobby style use, but in the US, we are obligated to be aware and execute our mission for the privilege of use. Thank you.
I don't know anyone named Chimp. Please see the above post as a reminder of the mission of Part 97. This is up to date, and not written in 1928. But here's a key excerpt you missed from the 1928 Code--- "PROGRESSIVE with knowledge abreast of science, a well built and efficient station, and operation beyond reproach." Notice that the OP statement of: "Without going into the physics of how and why" is in contradiction to Part 97, AND the 1928 Amateur's Code. Thank you.
Thanks for the additional info. I will now genuflect to the overwhelming superiority of American hams and the peerless wisdom of the FCC/ARRL. You win! Congrats.
I think the misconception is that "hobby" means "stupid or unwilling to learn". That is not the case. People take up a hobby because they enjoy it. Most hams enjoy radio, and recognize it for what it is, a hobby where you can learn more about something you are interested in, and find pleasurable. People that take up FRS and CB often do not do it as a hobby, it is strictly utilitarian to their desire to communicate with another party, for some reason. Often, it is to support another hobby, like biking, hiking, or off roading. The only "real" radio hobby is amateur radio. An "amateur" is, by definition, a "hobbyist". Since FRS, GMRS, or CB can be used for business purposes, or to assist in making a buck, they can never exclusively be a hobby. On the other hand, all amateur communications must be devoid of pecuniary interest (save a few small exceptions). Some people don't want ham radio to be considered a hobby, but that doesn't make it any less of a hobby. It has always been a hobby, for over 100 years. If you want it to be a professional thing, then you get into another radio service where your are paid for your time, such as broadcasting, public safety, fire dispatch, or maritime services. Ham radio is always a hobby, by definition, even when performing valuable disaster relief or providing communications for a public event.
No, you didn't - nor did I say you were. Read my post again if that's unclear. I genuinely applaud you for not only learning CW, but also for progressing with that skill!
CB sure looked/looks like a hobby to everyone else.... "Everybody's doin' it!" Perhaps the young lady in the bikini is checking the blockchain on CB? Nah. These images connote a pleasurable activity outside of ones vocation. Some evidence---
I really wish we could all agree that amateur radio is a lot of things: service, hobby, avocation, pastime, interest, pursuit, etc...and simply let it slide when someone says their "amateur radio ________" instead of "amateur radio service". It would sure lower the noise floor and reduce the sometimes contentious pissing matches around here. Oh yeah, I nearly forgot - marriage destroyer.
He wasn't saying that you shouldn't address the physics, just that HE wasn't going to get into the technical details for what amounts to a 5-minute podcast. The physics of antennas comprises a daunting collection of books, articles, and other works, and can't be explained simply or quickly while doing the subject justice. So he set that aside for the purposes of his blog and podcast and just hit the high points. Let's not be obtuse here. Just because someone doesn't want to bring up a complex topic doesn't mean he wants you to avoid the subject completely. He just doesn't have the time, energy, or space to address it adequately at that particular moment. Enjoy the article for what it is-- a suggestion that there are other considerations that can be examined quickly and easily, and if THOSE considerations say you either need or don't need a better antenna, then by all means, investigate according to your needs. But if you can't put up an outdoor antenna because of laws or other restrictions, then you can take that off your list and move on. You can, of course, look into indoor antennas or stealth antennas, but that may not actually BE a "better antenna" than what you currently have. It may only be just as good or worse than what you've already got. When I was an apartment dweller, the old tried-and-true copper J-pole seemed like the "best" antenna in that circumstance. I was wrong. It worked GREAT...but interfered with my downstairs neighbor's electronics, and he was not nice about it. I had to investigate, within the limits of my circumstance, what options I had. I figured out how to make a 2-meter Moxon I could disguise with a garden privacy screen on my balcony. It still gave me great performance, but didn't radiate as much into the building and didn't inject my signals into the neighbor's clock radio anymore. A "better antenna"? Not in terms of getting into repeaters -- that was pretty much the same. But it was "better" in that I didn't have the neighbor banging on his ceiling with a hammer and threatening to sic the management office on me. So yeah, definitely better. Not trying to argue with you, just saying that he wasn't telling YOU not to "go into the physics" if you feel like it. Just that HE wasn't going to "get into the physics" in his blog post.
Notice I said it was often not a hobby. I recognize that it can be a hobby for some, or even many. But others use CB etc as a means to an end of some other goal. Even The Bandit wasn't using CB as a hobby, he was making money off of his transmissions, by diverting the police from the real target, a beer running semi. For all we know, the young lady pictured may have been coordinating a dive team being paid by tourists, again not using radio as a "hobby" like we do. Granted, the top picture does look like a radio hobbyist, and other than the radio set itself, could represent a large contingent of amateur operators. Kind of like the Star Trek episode:
