Let's see, you're really saying, in addition to CW, there is also not need
for SSB below 20 meters in order to obtain a lower price rig, and because no
one can put antennas up for those bands. Yep, that makes since; those folks
hamming would be very limited in the evening hours. Why don't we just ban
all bands below 10 meters because antenna space is becoming restricted,
especially when they are banned in communities.
If you put SSB Bands in radios below 20 meters, how much more cost is added
putting CW in....think about which mode is really the expense driver (of
course leave out all that fancy CW filter stuff, which can be or already is,
optional filters??????????)
There are hams up here in New England who held back getting a license
because of CW. However, some of those same hams are learning and doing CW
because of low cost the mode offers. Some of these folks are buying
affordable radio kits (super regens) in those lower bands and learning CW
because of (the need for) lower costs to get on the air and operate. They
have learned that they do not need much power on CW to work the world. Most
of these folks can only get on the air at night during the work week.
I have a better idea, get rid of voice modes below 20 meters.......We all
know that there isn't much real hamming on voice below 20 meters....
Over all, ham radio will die, because radios are getting sooooo expensive
(yep inflation is a factor, but unfortunately many folks salaries haven't
kept up). Also, many hams are not allowed to put antennas up regardless of
their size.
Ron/NU1U (I operate mostly SSB, with more CW than voice below 20)
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
On Behalf Of Geoffrey S. Mendelson
Sent: April 17, 2008 03:49
To: ken.d.brown@hawaiiantel.net; Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Ten-Tec Transceiver Survey
On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 09:22:53PM -1000, Ken Brown wrote:
> In the questions regarding how important is 6 meters, 2 meters, 70 cm,
> I was thinking about a home station transceiver, and I answered
> accordingly. For a home station, I don't really want DC to daylight in
> one box.
Just to stir things up a bit, I really wonder if anything below 20m and CW
is really needed in a low end radio these days. With many new or at least
new to HF hams out there, there is IMHO a demand for a low priced radio.
Anything longer in wavelength than 20m is difficult to place an antenna in a
small or apartment, and making someone pay for something they think they may
never use is bad business.
IMHO the lower bands and CW should be cheap options, so that most people are
encouraged to buy them anyway, but if someone does not know how to copy or
send morse code, they would feel better if they did not have to pay for it.
Nor would they want to buy bands they could not use.
I'm not trying to start a code/no code debate, I'm only discussing it in
relation to specifying a minimal cost/feature radio that will sell well.
I often read comments by hams who are not on the air because they can't
afford a radio, and I think there would be a demand for a small, low power
radio, 20m-10m, USB only, with a digital readout for under $300.
Many of them have never copied a single dit over the air. So they don't see
the need for CW, and I'd rather they buy a radio and get on the air than try
to convince them.
If I had the money to buy one and could get a general coverage receiver, AM
reception, the lower bands and CW, I would probably buy one with the
options, but if making those optional allows the radio to sell for $100-$200
less, it's worth it, IMHO.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel gsm@mendelson.com N3OWJ/4X1GM
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|