About a month ago, I opined about why more than half of licensed radio amateurs never get more than a Technician Class license. I then combined that with a related post about discussions within the ARRL about a possible new entry-level license and sent this article to subscribers who then publish it in their club newsletter.
This morning, I got a reply from someone who read this latest column. He writes:
Your article on why there are so many Technicians was very informative. The comment about not finding an Elmer was dead on. I was very happy being “just a tech” until some Elmers started nudging me to become a General and enjoy HF.
I am so grateful to them. They were there to push me to get to the next level. But more importantly they worked with me on becoming a very good radio operator. And boy do some of the new hams need to learn this is not “upgraded CB” land we are in.
Lastly I will add one more addition to your list. The study questions to move up each level are so obsolete its almost embarrassing. With the technology in today’s radios most, and I mean most, will NEVER, EVER take it apart. There is no need to. Yet most of the questions are focused on what makes a radio work the way it does. Do we really need to know about resistors and capacitors to make us good operators? I don’t think so.
Sadly I think that is why I won’t become an extra any time soon. Too much information to learn that will be of little to no use as I grow in the hobby.
There is a huge thought difference between the old stogies (sic) of ham radio and the new people like me. And as long as the old stogies stand put in their ideas and ideals then yes you will not see as much growth in this hobby as there very well could be.
Thanks again for the great article.
I was very happy that he found Elmers that encouraged him and helped him along the way. I almost couldn’t believe it, however, when I read that he found no value in learning about resistors and capacitors. I replied:
Thanks for taking the time to reply.
I was with you right up until you said, “ The study questions to move up each level are so obsolete its almost embarrassing….Do we really need to know about resistors and capacitors to make us good operators?” The answer to that specific question is no, but radio amateurs—especially Amateur Extra Class licensees are supposed to be more than just operators.
Part 97.1 of the rules lists five “purposes” for amateur radio. Part 97.1(b) reads, “Continuation and extension of the amateur’s proven ability to contribute to the advancement of the radio art.” I take that to mean that radio amateurs should not only know about resistors and capacitors, but a heck of a lot more as well. While the question pool certainly needs updating, removing the questions that are “focused on what makes a radio work” is truly not the way to go.
It may not seem like it to you at this point, but knowing about resistors and capacitors, and how radios work, will make you a better amateur radio operator. Even if you never do take your radio apart, this knowledge will give you a better appreciation of what your equipment is doing and how to get the best out of it. And, of course, it will help you troubleshoot problems when (not if) they arise.
I really am very sorry to hear you say that you’re not going to pursue the Extra Class license. It’s not the piece of paper that’s important, but the knowledge that you’d gain by doing so. Operating is fun, but that’s only part of amateur radio. Understanding the technology that drives amateur radio makes it even more fun.
If sticking to the idea that a radio amateur should understand how radios work makes me an old fogey, then I guess I’m an old fogey.
Mike Grace says
Understanding how it works and what all the different pieces are does take the experience to the next level.
Rob W4ZNG says
Understanding basic DC circuits is essential to safely constructing a Tech-class shack. It is difficult to see how the Tech testing requirements could be stripped down any more than they are without becoming essentially a GMRS-like license. Similarly, some knowledge of basic resonant circuits and a smattering of EM theory are key to a general understanding of radio. Without that background, General-level HF communication would be an overall mystery, leaving a lot of new hams lost on where to dig in and really start learning.
Ham is built on this solid engineering background. It’s not too much to ask that, before being licensed to send RF all over the planet, some minimal technical competence and underlying knowledge be shown. The Tech and General exams are not that that difficult, and they provide just enough knowledge that a new operator is reasonably safe and doesn’t make a mess of the shared RF spectrum. After that, it’s no shame to stop at General and just enjoy the field.
Brian Murrey KB9BVN says
I guess I’m and old stogie. And I don’t even smoke…well, sometimes I smoke a resistor or two…but learning by burning is a valuable tool.
I got my Novice in 1988. Upgraded to Technican in 1989. My boys and I did the Scouting thing for the next 10 years and amateur radio got put on the shelf. In 1998 a friend stopped by and was telling me he got his ticket, and was all excited and he knew I had a call sign so he had a lot of questions I could not answer. His excitement got me interested in the hobby again, and as luck or fate would have it my sons had both gotten their Eagles by then and I was kind of off the hook for scouts…or at least down to just one hour a week.
So, I bought a CW transceiver kit from Wilderness Radio called the NORCAL 40A. I had never built a kit like this in my life, and I connected to the QRP-L reflector and all of a sudden I had 25 Elmers waiting to help me. Took me about a week of evenings to build that radio, and I was never so happy to see that it was putting out one watt. QRP Bob and Mac AF4PS encouraged me through the build, and on Sept 7, 1998 I had my very first solo CW QSO. I was hooked. Indy to Mississippi with a watt and two hunks of cross connect wire thrown over the roof of my home.
I immediately started reading of ways to improve my situation, and installed a half wave 40m dipole in my attic. I was told that would never work and in 1999 I earned WAS with it. The things I learned about radio in the year were immense. It would not have been possible without access to QRP-L and the various QRP web sites. The internet turned out to be my best QRP Elmer. I upgraded to General in Jan 1999, and Extra a couple years later. General required 13 wpm back then…then they did away with the code for Extra so I never took the 20 wpm test. I do OK.
Since then I have built a Elecraft K1 and so many monoband transmitters and receivers that I can’t count them. With every build I learned something new. Immerse yourself in the hobby and you WILL learn.
Dave New, N8SBE says
So far, everyone has missed the mark. A ham radio license is not just a license to operate, but also a license to build, calibrate, and repair you own radio transmitting/receiving equipment.
If not, then we might just as well have FCC type-approved radios that no one is allowed to repair or calibrate, unless they have a commercial license. No building any home brew gear or kits, either. Period.
Now, there may be a lot of Techs out there that are happy buying and operating a cheap HT and be blissfully unaware that it may be putting out spurious in excess of FCC regulations. Type-approved commercial radios don’t even let the operator program frequencies into the front panel. As a ham radio operator, would you be happy to be required to take your radio to a commercial shop to get its frequencies programmed (and pay for it)?
If you want to be strictly an operator, then there are plenty of commercial services available for that, with appropriate pricing. CB, FRS and GMRS are considered relatively inexpensive, and your family can join you with no licensing barrier. I personally own five FRS handheld radios, and have used them many times on fishing trips (for boat-to-boat communications) and photographic workshops (for car-to-car and person-to-person communications in areas that have zero cellphone coverage). FRS range is about a mile, but it is great for the purposes it was used for.
If you want more range and power, you can lease time on a commercial repeater system, and have a local radio shop install, program, and maintain appropriate mobile and handheld radios. These radios can cost $500-$1000 a piece, plus the air access fees and time and materials provided by the shop.
There are good reasons for the existence of various radio services. They serve different purposes, and different audiences.
Please don’t try to ‘jam to fit’ ham radio into your concept of what you want to use radio for. You may just be in the wrong service.
John Jieriy says
Sometimes I feel the ARRL is simply self-serving. It’s currently promoting an even simpler license exam. Why? To continue to grow its membership ($$$). It promoted doing away with the Morse code requirement long ago. The current license exams have been dumbed down in contrast to the exams of the 60s or 70s. Our phone bands are covered with CBers. It’s terrible. Our hobby is going downhill. I prefer to hang out on CW is the Extra portion of the HF bands…just my way of getting away from today’s nonsense on our bands.
Todd KD0TLS says
The “advancement of the radio art” line gets tossed around so much, and way too much is read into it.
Face it: amateur radio hasn’t been on the cutting edge for decades. Things like PSK31 were new about 20 years ago, for example. And the more that the hobby moves away from 1950’s tech, the more it’s decried as “not real ham radio”. And the technical advancements being made are not taking place on HF, anyway. We are essentially blacksmiths tinkering with alloys to make a better horse-shoe.
Over the years, I’ve heard from several people in the electronics field that amateur radio was really created to provide trained radio operators for the military and maritime shipping industry. Obviously, the FCC would never publicly state this as the purpose of the Service. The technology in those fields is now so advanced (or automated) that this need no longer exists. How old is the “radio art” statement from part 97, anyway? It was re-written in 2008, but amateur radio obviously existed prior to that.
I’m not trying to demean the hobby, but we seem to have an extremely inflated sense of our importance and relevance in the the current technological context.
Dan KB6NU says
I think you’re being a little too cynical about this, Todd. I don’t think that statement was meant to imply that all radio amateurs are supposed to advance the state of the radio art. Obviously that’s outside the ken of most hams. There are some amateur radio operators who are advancing the state of the radio art, though, and at the very least, there are those that got started in science and engineering via amateur radio.
And, as for your assertion that amateur radio was created to provide trained radio operators for the military and merchant marine, you’re absolutely correct about that. Part 97.1(d) reads, “Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts.” While it doesn’t explicitly say trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts for the military, I’m sure that was part of the intent.
Todd KD0TLS says
Once again, you call me cynical. I guess it’s better than implying that I’m stupid, which is the most common response to deviations from the Party line.
It’s obvious to me that a lot of hams seem to feel that they’re part of some technological elite. There are comments in this very post that seem to imply that, and other forums make that case with clarity (QRZ). They even take it further and state that anyone that doesn’t want to engage in this group delusion should get out of the hobby. It’s very common to invoke the “radio art” phrase to justify this position.
I don’t think that it’s “cynical” to point this out.
The electronics field has changed dramatically in the past 50 years, and the tech that ham radio embraces is only tangentially related to what that field now needs.
I believe that amateur radio is open to whatever people want to make of it. Others feel it should be some kind of society for RF engineers, and they are quite happy to alienate anyone with a different vision. I don’t see you calling those people cynical, though.
The real purpose of a licence is to ensure that competent people are involved in whatever activity is being licensed. Drivers licences are not issued in an attempt to create mechanical engineers. Anyone who decried the average driver’s lack of engineering skills would be dismissed. Yet, in the parallel situation in amateur radio, we embrace this odd critique and call anyone who questions it “cynical”.
Dan KB6NU says
You’re defintely not stupid, Todd, and I value your opinion. I do think you’re taking the criticism of the so-called “technological elite” a little too personally. The majority of the amateur radio community obviously disagrees with them. If they did agree, the tests would be a lot harder than they are now.
As for drivers not having to be automotive engineers, that’s true, but I think we should expect a little (not a lot) more from amateur radio operators, I look at it this way. Drivers who just get in the car and drive are more akin to FMRS or GMRS operators. They grab a radio, push the button and talk.
Amateur radio operators are more akin to automotive enthusiasts. Automotive enthusiasts don’t just drive. They’re capable of performing at least simple maintenance on their vehicles, such as changing the oil, replacing headlights and tail lights, and perhaps even servicing the brakes. Those who are even more technically adept may even know how to rebuild an engine. They’re more in control of their automotive life than are people who simply drive because they know about automotive technology.
I don’t think it’s asking too much of amateur radio licensees to have that level of knowledge. They may not be able to troubleshoot their rig to the component level, but they should be able to troubleshoot common problems in the shack and resolve simple RFI problems. Being able to do this makes them more effective communicators, and I think, will help them have more fun with amateur radio.
Walter Underwood K6WRU says
I separate “advancement of the radio art” from “knowing how your radio works”. I’m worried about operators who can’t figure out whether the ATU goes on the input or the output of the RF amp. Or those who are confused about amp-hours vs watt-hours for batteries.
Amateurs have made some useful advances in small, low cost satellites, receiver performance, and weak signal work.
But most amateur operation is SSB, FM, or Morse, and we control everything with RS-232. What has happened in the last 50+ years?
1962: Bell System puts T-carrier digital telephony into service.
1970: Viterbi decoder invented, makes low-delay error correction practical in digital modes.
1981: Digital voice comms for the Space Shuttle. Also, I graduate from Rice and start working on digital communications.
1995: USB invented.
And that is just a sprinkling of tech. So yes, in many ways, amateurs are making titanium alloy horseshoes. Except you can make a living as a farrier, but not as a Morse operator.
If you want to see what it looks like to advance the art, follow Dave Rowe’s work on digital voice (http://www.rowetel.com/). It is possible that military work is better than what he is doing, but probably not by a lot.