[Boatanchors] Upgrade question

[k0occ at comcast.net]

Well said.

In the 50's, we were the newbies who got licensed too easily, and didn't have to grow up with spark. It was not spoken openly, but there were undertones that we weren't real hams, because it was too easy for us to get on the air...compared to the spark days.

We see the same attitude now, but we are the one's who are proliferating it.  The new crop of hams may not know CW  or how to hook up a Q-Multiplier or a Q-5er,  make them work, and use them, or build a 6AG7 driving a 6146 transmitter. But they do know stuff we don't know. They can whiz through menus, set up memories, integrate computers into their stations, and utilize all  the modern rig features to best advantage. They do it in a blink of an eye, while we are struggling with the manual, and trying to figure out what the heck to do next. So what if I solder a few PL-259 connectors for a new Extra. In no time at all, he can clean a bunch of crap off my computer,  hook me up with PSK, download  logging programs or whatever software is out there... 

Just as knowledge of Spark became academic and irrelevant; knowledge of  CW,  AM plate modulation and vacuum tubes will become academic and irrelevant. The hams of the future will be using computers and all digital modes. Just as we felt we didn't have to be capable of spark technology,  the new generation of hams will see little reason to be capable of 50's, 60's technology.

--
Ernie, k0occ
Atlanta, GA

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Bill Paschall" <bill at willydog5.com>
> One thing this entire quiestion of CW, yes or no, upgrade ease and who has 
> the biggest johnson really proves is that we human beings are if anything 
> predictable. I guess by some standards I am a newbee, first licensed in 66 
> and now an advanced liscenee. Yes, I did get general before the FCC testers 
> but baring dishonesty on the part of a volunteer tester whom as I recall had 
> to be at least one grade higher than the level he was going to test, I doubt 
> that my test was any more difficult that those faced by conditional 
> applicants.   I can remember even then, there were groups of old timers  who 
> were rallying against conditional liscensees as a dumbing down effort since 
> they did not have to break in using spark gap or heliography.  It seems to 
> me that if those who are so upset by the removal of CW as a requiremet would 
> stop carping and break out the old key and actually use some CW we might 
> quit losing bandspace to other mediums. I was recently talking to an extra 
> at a hamfest who thought Amateur radio was doomed due to the CW issue, it 
> turned out he didn't even own a key for his ricebox but he had a heck of a 
> big amp. While I am on the stump, what about the argument that no one can or 
> does build anymore, Wrong! people do build , a lot of them, and not just 
> simple field strength meters and such. They build receivers , transmitters 
> and transceivers for all modes and complexities, that perform very well 
> indeed. Many of them are QRP enthusists but a lot of them are QRO guys as 
> well. They use tubes, transisters, ICs and some chips that weren't even 
> dreams back in the day. Don't believe me do a google on homebrewing ham 
> radio and see what you get.
> Now the question of entry requirements and general operating ability. Sure 
> some of the new guys use prowords incorrectly , so do I on occasion. True 
> some of them have along way to go before they are competent hams but they 
> have an excuse, they are learning, they met the federal requirements as we 
> all did. That said it doesn't excuse the oldtimer who is splattering 6 KCs 
> either side of zero beat and whose hearing is such that he thing he needs a 
> processor to make himself understood and gets upset when told he is not the 
> best sounding signal on the air.
> All in all, My money is on there not being much difference between now and 
> 1950 as far as hamming goes, same old story , different day.
> I relinquish the stump and don my asbestos cape.
> 73
> Bill,  WD5DZG
> 
> _______________________________________________