[Qcwa] The Blackout of 2003

[Robert Cumming]

Its amazing how quickly we "Bad mouth" our hobby.  Bear in mind that some=20
of the regulatory folks might be subscribed to this (and other)=20
reflectors.  I, for one usually let my emotions cool off before answering=20
threads of this type.

There has been coverage on this subject even in the NY Times - see:=20
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/technology/AP-Blackout-Ham-Radio.html?ex=3D1=
062320598&ei=3D1&en=3D4c7170bb40c57333

Also the ARRL in its Bulletin:  ARRL Bulletin 54  ARLB054

Being an Ex- NYer,  I hate to see people say how little the Amateur Radio=20
Community does for the public.   Don't complain, get involved - ask your=20
local Radio club or the local ARRL SEC what you can do to help!

As to getting new hams involved, ask yourself when was the last time you=20
invited local hams, (Old and new) to your shack during a high energy event=
=20
like a contest or took the time during Field Day to explain the hobby to=20
new hams (or non hams).

Spread knowledge, not flames.

VRY 73

Bob Cumming
W2BZY
Ex President, Chapter 45, QCWA
President, Orlando Amateur Radio Club
QRV 160M-13CM
 From EL98hr



>Frankly, I=92m surprised my tongue-in-cheek posting about the blackout=
 elicited
>the meager response it did.  I wonder if that is because we=92re finally
>getting the message or that the message is no longer relevant.  I=92ll=
 explain.
>
>I am deeply concerned for the future of Amateur Radio in this new=
 environment
>where the proliferation of low-power wireless services is so rapid and=
 where
>worldwide communication is now available at the click of a computer mouse.
>What reason can I possibly give to a youngster to persuade him to invest=
 vast
>amounts of time studying for a ticket and building a station and vast=
 amounts
>of money on decent equipment =AD when a five hundred dollar computer and 20
>bucks a month puts him on the Internet?  Heck, how can I convince an=
 inactive
>ham to log off the Internet and get back on the air?  Much more important,
>what arguments can we proffer to the public and public officials to give
>Amateur Radio priority and protection from incursions by wireless devices=
 and
>technologies such as BPL?  Can our governmental leaders really be expected=
 to
>protect Amateur Radio at the expense of new technologies that offer=
 services
>to millions and that will nurture new industries?
>
>Look at the age-old TVI/RFI problem =AD have we been able to convince the
>Government to require manufacturers of home entertainment equipment to make
>them less prone to our signals?  Given our =93success=94 with TVI, does=
 anyone
>really think that a technology like BPL will be denied to the public to=
 keep
>a bunch of CB=92ers from having their chatter interfered with?
>
>Yes, I mean CB=92ers.  It is an undeniable fact that the vast majority of=
 the
>American public refers to Radio Amateurs as =93CB=92ers=94 and has no=
 concept of
>what the Amateur Radio Service actually is.  That was the reason I made my
>blackout posting.
>
>I received only one answer to my posting and it contained the same old=
 clich=E9
>answers about =93service=94.   How will the future of Amateur Radio be=
 guaranteed
>by our public service when that service is largely unknown and=
 unacknowledged
>by the very public we profess to serve?  Furthermore, have we taken a hard
>look at exactly what our =93Public Service=94 is actually accomplishing for
>others outside the hobby.   Is there in fact, a genuine need for what we=
 can
>provide in this wireless phone and Internet age?
>
>In the first half of my thirty years of being a Ham, I volunteered for just
>about every type of event that needed communications assistance.  (I only
>regret that family and work took precedence in the second 15 years, I hope
>that when I retire, I can return to full enjoyment of the hobby.)  The
>important fact to note is that in the 70=92s, telephones that used radio as=
 a
>link were rare commercially, and such a service was mostly the domain of
>Radio Amateurs through Autopatch and HF Phone patches.  Thus our
>contributions were necessary and clearly justified our existence.  When I=
 was
>deployed during the 1991 Gulf War, I sure didn=92t need MARS to get a=
 message
>home, the troops had banks of phones set up for them to call home and if a
>landline wasn=92t available, I grabbed an INMARSAT terminal and got through
>that way.
>
>Perhaps even more important, after all the events I volunteered for, I=
 always
>checked the nightly news afterward for coverage.  Rarely did I ever see any
>coverage for our efforts.  If any was given it seldom amounted to a few
>seconds buried amongst all the =93important=94 news.   The only coverage I=
 heard
>about hams in the NYC blackout was a short piece on AM radio about =93Amate=
ur
>Radio operators using World War I technology to help people whose cell=
 phones
>didn=92t work=94.   A few days ago, the ARRL sent out its letter about=
 Amateur
>Radio=92s =93service=94 during the blackout.   Will anyone outside of the=
 Amateur
>community even see that letter?   And what if they do?  Do you know what
>handling 500 pieces of traffic means to the public?  Absolutely nothing! =
 The
>only lesson the public learned from Blackout 2003 was that our cellular
>networks need to be made more robust and more spectrum needs to be taken=
 away
>from the =93CB=92ers=94 to make sure there is enough wireless bandwidth for
>subscribers.
>
>You=92ll notice that this posting contains many questions and very few
>answers.  That=92s because I don=92t have the answers.  I=92m an ordinary=
 rank-and-
>file ham who=92s always looked to the leadership of such organizations as=
 the
>QCWA and the ARRL for these answers.  You=92ve had more experience as hams=
 and
>more experience at life than I have but I believe that you are starting to
>lose sight of serious problems that are on the horizon.  I think you=92re
>beginning to believe your own =93hype=94.  Instead of wasting time debating=
 the
>utility of CW and such irrelevant issues, we must pose and debate the basic
>question, is Amateur Radio still relevant and will it survive.
>
>You and I both know the answer to that question, but can we make our case
>outside the Amateur community?  Unless we can prove our relevance to the
>public and their elected officials whose laws control our future, I do not
>believe that we have a chance of competing against encroachment and=
 eventual
>extinction by other wireless services.  Amateur Radio spawned the age of
>electronic communications and later, spawned the original computer=
 hobbyists
>like myself who built the information age =AD God help us.  I don=92t know=
 what
>future technologies will arise or from where they will come.  I=92m just=
 hoping
>that the Amateur Radio Service and Amateur Radio Operators will still be
>around toward the end of the decade when I can finally retire, get that HF
>antenna up and get back to my favorite Ham Radio activity =AD Rag Chewing.
>
>73.
>
>
>--
>Mike Sturm, KA2E
>http://home.att.net/~ka2e
>_______________________________________________
>QCWA mailing list
>QCWA@mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/qcwa


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---