BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Colin McDonald <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 29 Apr 2013 15:08:22 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (72 lines)
That is why I always laugh when some old time ham operator hears about 
14.313 and goes on and on at great length about the state of ham radio today 
etc etc.
It's been the same since the beginning lol...nothing changes really as far 
as people being people.
No kids, no lids, no space cadets.
I hear an awful lot of whining that the FCC and industry Canada aren't doing 
anything about the 14.313 crue...again, this is nothing new and for the most 
part they are left to their own devices because they're not really bothering 
anyone except themselves.
If they cracked down on the 14.313 gang, they'd have to crack down on 
hundreds, maybe thousands of others on 75 and 80 who are just as bad.
The thing is that those yahoos on 20M can be heard over a much bigger area 
than anyone doing the same on 75...so the low band yahoos don't get the 
notariety that the ve6kfm's of this world get lol.
It's like this, if you go to a restaurant, and you don't like the food, or 
you think it's just awful, it doesn't mean all restaurants are awful, and it 
won't effect or somehow impact your favorite restaurant.
If you don't like it, don't go there.  It's not like the bad restaurant's 
food is going to somehow make it's way into your favorite dish at your 
favorite restaurant.
The 14.313ers stay there and you never ever hear those guys on any other 
frequencies...and if you do, they're behaving themselves.


73
Colin, V A6BKX

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin G. McCormick" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, April 29, 2013 2:54 PM
Subject: Re: The Sideband War


> I was still a SWL in the sixties and remember the
> sideband war vividly. It was going on as late as 1968 and 1969
> and had all the same trappings as what you hear on 14.313 today.
>
> There is a subset of amateur operators who think this is
> somehow okay. Back then, they were jamming and cursing each
> other over sideband versus AM and today, it is the same behavior
> over Heaven knows what. It's hard to tell because it just kind
> of goes on and on for no particularly good reason.
>
> The only thing I can say is that when they are all on
> 14.313 or 3.850 making fools of themselves, they are off all the
> other frequencies and life is more civilized there. Think of it
> as kind of a dummy load. Many of them like to use big amplifiers
> and, if they would all aim at the same patch of ionosphere, they
> could possibly heat it up enough to open up ten meters or maybe
> even 6.
>
> Anyway, the sideband war was just the excuse for rotten
> behavior for that day. The same personality types really don't
> need an excuse to be idiots so there will always be scoff-laws
> who don't really understand what amateur radio is all about.
>
> Thanks for a good bit of history.
>
> 73, Martin
> "Ronald E. Milliman" writes:
>> Re the Sideband war
>>
>> When sideband was first introduced, it was double sideband; that is, both
>> sidebands were transmitted, but the carrier was suppressed. Thus, the
>> signal still took up about the same bandwidth, but all of the 
>> transmitting
>> energy was put in the audio component of the signal and not wasting power
>> in the production and transmission of an unnecessary carrier.
> 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2