[HBR] Cost Of Homebrewing?

[hbr@mailman.qth.net]

I should have waited until Jim responded to this post and then I could 
just have said "Me too!"

However I want to expand on one point:

> ... homebrewing became a niche activity. And there's a regenerative
> effect - fewer hams building meant fewer parts houses stocking stuff
> to build with. 

A national organization -- the ARRL or RSGB -- must of course 
reflect the interests of its members.   However one expects its 
management to have a view of where those interests lie and to 
actively promote developments favoring those interests.  

It has been clear for at least thirty years that the most visible and 
immediate public policy justifications for the existance of ham radio 
are pinching out, as radio communication has steadily been de-
skilled.   A sheriff's deputy with a handheld or a teenage girl with a 
cell phone can now provide emergency communications ... right?
    
What remains if we don't seem to need skilled operators is the 
development of a pool of hands-on experienced technical talent -- 
people who know 'how it works,' can make things work even in 
adverse conditions, and so on.  Appliance operator hams with some 
traffic net experience have much to offer, no doubt, but the ham who 
can imagine a dozen ways to use even an unfamiliar pile of junk to 
gain long-distance communication, has a critical place in the picture.

Second to that, in a computer aided world there's day to day value in 
having people who have taken *any* technical hardware product from 
inception to use.   If you pick out the knob, locate the knob on the 
panel, make the holes for the knob, correct the misalignment and 
worry about interfering parts, and finally twist the knob a few 
thousand times as part of your hobby, you know things that can't be 
learned from a CAD program -- things that have a value to society.

If there's an awareness of any of this in Newington, it has been kept 
close.   Our Radio Amateur's Handbook -- which ought to be a  
beacon of technical interest and activity -- has been coasting now for 
forty years, its vision having evaporated about the time VHF got 
going.   The price is too steep ($40, right?), the material foolishly over-
technical, and frankly the thing is borrrr-ing.   It serves no valid ham 
radio purpose and except that it makes money, should have been 
discontinued twenty years ago.

The 1948 handbook fired my imagination when (as a 9 year old) I 
found it on the shelves of a public library.   This was stuff I could *do* 
-- stuff I could connect with, *interesting* stuff.   If a 9 year old today 
could lift the current book (and if the library had a copy) what he find 
that was of interest?

A total loss of direction, a systematic lack of concern for the purpose 
... our handbook has indeed been coasting.   The projects stink 
because there's been an ongoing lack of interest in good projects.   
The ARRL lab seems to have been handed over to earnest 
youngsters with zilch experience and a budget of up to $500/year for 
all projects.  (And BTW, don't say anything negative about advertiser 
products.)

But the *handbook* is a symptom, not the disease.   The disease is 
the lack of recognition within our only powerful organization that *skill 
matters*, that promoting skill (from homebrewing to CW to traffic 
handling, emergency preparedness ...) is one of the two or three 
most important things the ARRL should be doing, and that 
encouraging skill-building deserves serious effort.   Yes, even 
increasing the number of licensees and bringing in more young 
people is less important than the development of skill within the ham 
community.  And homebrewing is one of the small number of critical 
skills.

How long has it been since you've heard an on-the-air technical 
discussion that went beyond: (1) How this mic sounds with this  
transceiver; (2) How this dipole is getting out; or, (3) How this linear 
amp sounds/is getting out?   We have all kinds of contests and 
awards for 'DX' -- have you listened to a 'century club' net lately, as 
they 'hone their skills'? 

Our handbook had 'no surplus' and 'no sweep tube amp' policies for 
years.   How could it have been allowed to have policies that 
discouraged hams from *building stuff*?

The RSGB handbooks are better and more interesting because  the 
RSGB and the authors think they ought to be interesting.   The 
projects are better than ours because they believe that good projects 
matter.   Ask yourself this:  with W6TC's excellent work all over QST, 
why didn't it make to our handbook?   Why was it not *improved* in 
the ARRL lab and published in the handbook?  Why not a  
modular/progressive version of the receiver?   Why is the best 
homebrew receiver ever designed found in an RSGB publication and 
nothing even close in our own?   Maybe Americans are too dumb?   
Bull ... baloney.  G2DAF's design could have been simplified *and* 
improved -- why was that not done and published in our book?  Why 
not a matching transmitter?  Why not sponsored homebrew 
activities?  Why not contests and awards for the construction and 
operation of homebrew equipment?   

The main reason it's not exactly crowded here in this niche is that 
nobody on the nationwide ham scene has his thumb on the scale to 
expand it beyond the niche.   Indeed, by steadily encouraging the 
most 'technologically advanced' modes (available to the non-degreed 
engineer only as manufactured equipment) the ARRL has 
discouraged homebrewing.  It doesn't have to be that way: Even with 
all the competing activities now, building radios is unique and would 
appeal to many, if there were a serious effort to promote it.   And the 
regenerative effect would reverse, giving us more sources of parts and 
projects ...

That would be good for everyone ... Diatribe mode OFF.

Walt 
KJ4KV