On 12/30/2012 10:56 AM, Mark wrote:

>  If the people chatting on '52 readily give up the
> frequency, how do they impede the process of making a contact? In
> actuality, they may even be able to assist people in their attempts to
> make contacts.?

--------------------------------------------------------------

	 Since you ask...

	 Because others want to monitor the calling
	 frequency on their radios, and make contact
	 when someone else calls in.  But if two or three
	 fellers monopolize the frequency for a 3 hour
	 rag chew, other operators have to lock that
	 frequency out and stop scanning it, or else their
	 scanners would stick on that one frequency and
	 play the three hour rag chew - it won't scan if
	 there is a signal, and if they talk for 3 hours that
	 is all I would ever hear, and my rig won't scan any
	 other channel until they stop.  Totally defeats
	 my ability to listen for OTHER operators, such as
	 those who might be cruising through town and
	 look for a brief conversation or for directions to
	 find gas, a restaurant, or the like.  I have simply
	 had to lock out the calling frequency and no longer
	 monitor it - because they will tie up my rig for
	 hours every day with pretty much the same
	 old schtick - which they are entitled to talk about,
	 but I cannot make contact with anyone else
	 who might cruise through town until they get off.

	 I know many hams who have simply given up
	 monitoring the calling frequency, because it
	 does not work as it could.

	 This is a hot topic, so I don't wanna do any
	 more than answer your question as to how it
	 matters to other operators.  Not illegal... just
	 defeats the calling frequency idea.

	 Sorry, Tom...  I  live by the highway and when I
	 got into ham radio, I was sorta looking forward to
	 talking to people on the radio, but have had to
	 give up on the calling freq concept.   Since everybody
	 wants to be PC and not rock the boat, it just goes
	 on as you say.

---------------------------- K8JHR  --------------------

OK... we all know Tim is a stand up guy and not the
type to snipe or hide who he is.   Thanks for the clarification.

-------------------------- JHR  -----------------------

On 12/30/2012 9:53 AM, Mark wrote:
>
> That wasn't an anonymous post.  He just didn't sign it.

_____________________________________

This raises interesting and important questions, Art.

I wonder how it would actually play out, if there really
is such a wide reaching, large scale disaster, and every
ham in town wanted to get on the air for all the various
reasons they would have to do so.

Personally, I envision chaos would be a good result, but
I fear it could be far worse without some coordination and
a lot of patient courtesy among the entire flock.

But that is the point - it would be helpful to find out
before a disaster occurs what might go down, and see
whether or not there is a workable plan for avoiding
chaos and rendering it useful.

I agree the plan to include all hams was a good idea.

I suspect it might have been more useful, and more
widely "attended" had it been explained more fully,
and  announced more in advance.  Nevertheless, it
raises important questions, and serves as a starting
point for further work.

Happy trails.

--------------------  K8JHR  ----------------------------



On 12/30/2012 2:39 PM, a_snapper wrote:
>
>
>
> Here is some background on the net.
>
> This event was constructed to generate thought about the day that you became
aware there was a disaster, and were unable to communicate via normal means.
>
> I.E. when you emerged from a shelter and realized communications
infrastructure (including ham) was disabled, and government agencies were
rendered ineffective.
>
> Recent examples are Hurricane Katrina, and the Indonesian tsunami.
>
> West Michigan is relatively disaster-benign, but you never know.
>
> Some situations so dire, that amateur communications could have more value
than merely a supplement to the ARES/RACES disaster response responsibilities.
(i.e.damage assessment, ARC support)
>
> At this point, the radio operator could become a unique, autonomous
communicator. Establishing a communications circuit,(2 or more hams)  would
benefit both the individuals and the community.
>
> Our plans for such a worse case scenario are in my opinion - weak. It seems to
me that our network needs to be operational at the local level before we focus
attention on restoring regional communications.
>
> An exception to this might be when calling in mutual aid resources. Of course,
then the question becomes, where to put them.
>
> Since amateur radio is interoperable by nature, we are given an advantage over
other communication services.
>
> When communications infrastructure is down, and lacking other plans, it
logically follows to use a simplex calling frequency. Thus the use of .52
simplex for this net.
>
> An invitation was sent to over 500 amateur radio operators, and I was careful
to extend it to all hams, not just ARES/RACES people.
>
>
>
> Thanks and 73,
> Art Snapper NK8X
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>

-----Original Message-----
From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Richards
Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2012 5:20 PM
To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Reminder: Armageddon Net Exercise Dec. 29th (Saturday) 10:00 am.

 

On 12/30/2012 10:56 AM, Mark wrote:

> If the people chatting on '52 readily give up the
> frequency, how do they impede the process of making a contact? In
> actuality, they may even be able to assist people in their attempts to
> make contacts.?

----------------------------------------------------------

Since you ask...

Because others want to monitor the calling
frequency on their radios, and make contact
when someone else calls in. But if two or three
fellers monopolize the frequency for a 3 hour
rag chew, other operators have to lock that
frequency out and stop scanning it, or else their
scanners would stick on that one frequency and
play the three hour rag chew - it won't scan if
there is a signal, and if they talk for 3 hours that
is all I would ever hear, and my rig won't scan any
other channel until they stop. Totally defeats
my ability to listen for OTHER operators, such as
those who might be cruising through town and
look for a brief conversation or for directions to
find gas, a restaurant, or the like. I have simply
had to lock out the calling frequency and no longer
monitor it - because they will tie up my rig for
hours every day with pretty much the same
old schtick - which they are entitled to talk about,
but I cannot make contact with anyone else
who might cruise through town until they get off.

I know many hams who have simply given up
monitoring the calling frequency, because it
does not work as it could.

This is a hot topic, so I don't wanna do any
more than answer your question as to how it
matters to other operators. Not illegal... just
defeats the calling frequency idea.

Sorry, Tom... I live by the highway and when I
got into ham radio, I was sorta looking forward to
talking to people on the radio, but have had to
give up on the calling freq concept. Since everybody
wants to be PC and not rock the boat, it just goes
on as you say.

---------------------------- K8JHR --------------------

> The conversational users of the '52 can't give directions and/or other
> local information?


		 Sure... but that cuts me and everybody
		 else out.   They continue to monopolize
		 the channel.



> it's your ability to listen, not your ability to make a call that is
> 'defeated', correct?


		 Both... but you are getting it.




> Does your rig not change channels because the '52 ops aren't allowing a
> second or two between exchanges, or is it because your scanning feature
> is set to delay? Or just delays and has no 'instantaneous' feature?
> Some radios also have features for a time limit, like 2 seconds for
> stopping on scan.


		 Good questions.    Let's put it into perspective
		 with an example -  the guys on 53 pause a bit
		 to catch their breath, as is usual in any conversation,
		 so the rig releases the channel and scans.  Then
		 it scans for another busy channel.

		 Finding none busy, it catches 52 when they start
		 up again - and instead of my listening for a contact,
		 I end up listening to them rag chew.

		 Or, let's assume the rig finds another busy channel,
		 say, the Lowell repeater, then it holds that until
		 they take a break, and then the guys on 52 catch
		 the attention of the scanner, and we are back to
		 them until they catch their breath again.

		 But... in any case, all the while 52 continues their
		 local rag chew session, I cannot monitor 52 and
		 make my own contacts.   If a traveler does cut
		 into their conversation, THEY get the contact
		 and handle the questions... in any case, they
		 cut me out.

		 But wait... there's more:

		 Meanwhile, nobody can call ME on 52 and ask
		 ME  to QSY to a simplex channel.  I cannot call
		 YOU to make contact, and QSY with you to another
		 channel.   I cannot call you - even if I interrupt
		 them - because you and the rest of the ham
		 community quit monitoring the channel long ago.

		 I should not have to beg permission from the
		 other guys to use 52 to make a new contact.
		 The whole idea is that it is always open for that
		 sort of thing.    But you cannot call me on 52, either,
		 because I blocked that frequency on the scanner
		 so I don't have to listen to their rag chew session
		 every afternoon.

		 And this actually matters, because none of my
		 ham friends monitor 52 any more - because they
		 don't want to listen to those guys every day, hoping
		 somebody else will cut in -  but, again, if they are on
		 they will deal with the new contact, I will have to
		 barge in and steal the contact to get involved, and
		 nobody is going to work that hard.

		 Unfortunately, it seems this way in a lot of places
		 across the country, so many traveling hams don't
		 even try 52 any more.   But, maybe they would if
		 it worked the way it might.




> So, why can't you break in and make a contact?


		 Because I should not have to.  It is supposed
		 to be open so anyone can call and make
		 contact and then leave it open to the
		 rest of the community to do so.

		 Besides, none of my friends monitor 52 any
		 more, so they are not listening for me to
		 call them there.   They don't wanna listen to
		 the rag chew guys all afternoon, either, so they
		 simply don't monitor 52 any more... again,
		 defeating the whole idea of an open calling
		 frequency for everybody.  That effectively
		 converts it into their personal, private channel,
		 and defeats the notion of an open, free for all
		 calling frequency.



> Truthfully, what do you think makes the most people not monitor '52, a
> few guys chatting for 3 out of 24 hours, or no traffic at all, for days,
> weeks and even months on end?

		 Good question.   I doubt we can say for sure
		 either way, but I think it is most likely that
		 there is no traffic on 52 because so many
		 hams have killed it off in this manner.   This
		 has been discussed on many nationwide internet
		 ham discussion groups, so it seems to be a problem
		 in many places, and it is possible the majority of
		 hams have has simply given up on 52 - so nobody
		 uses it much in this way any more.

		 That means a few has changed it for the  many,
		 and considering I am one of the many, I lament
		 the loss of something good.





> It is also a topic in which rational discussion may lead to some long
> term improvements.


	 Yes... so far it has been plenty civil here.




It wasn't until maybe 20
> years ago that someone, the ARRL perhaps, came up with the idea that
> once the contact was made to clear the frequency.  That practice was
> swiped from the marine radio service, Ch. 16 VHF.
> Learning a little about the history of calling frequencies shows that
> the way they have been used throughout history has changed.  Maybe it's
> time to once again reconsider the methodology behind the use of '52.



		 Perhaps you are right.   Perhaps it is changing
		 on its own, in an organic way, as opposed to
		 any intentional plan promulgated from above.




> Why does the boat have to be rocked?  Is it all that tough to discuss
> uses and possible changes of a single frequency without getting
> emotional about it?    As for talking to people, aren't the number of
> people on '52 simplex a minutia compared to the number of folks on the
> repeaters, especially the linked system?


		 You may be right about the statistics.

		 Unfortunately, no matter how civil and how
		 rational the debate is HERE... and it has been,
		 it is impossible to discuss the matter with the
		 crowd on 52.   They say it is "legal" and have
		 no patience or interest in discussing the impact
		 or significance of any general understandings,
		 or gentlemens' agreements, and the conversation
		 is over.  I negotiated the resolution of hundreds
		 of heated disputes, including a fair number of
		 heated divorces, but diplomacy has not chance
		 for success.   I mentioned this to an ARRL Section
		 Manager - and he told me to simply give up and
		 let them go.    It is this sort of "tolerance" that
		 allows a minority to overtake the majority.




> To be honest, and Tim N8NET can vouch for this, I was first totally
> against rag chewing on '52.   So I decided to check the 'culprits' out.

> 1)  Would they let me break in with no problem? --  Yep.
> 2)  Would they stop chatting long enough for me to make a call?  -- Yep.
> 3)  Would they let me join the QSO?  -- Yep.
> 4)  Would any one of them QSY with me because I didn't want to tie up
> the '52 -- Yep.




		 Yes... but they should do this as
		 a matter of courtesy to others.


> Hmmm.....they aren't breaking any rules, they all seemed to be
> accommodating and polite.  So I reconsidered.  I also found out that this
> issue is going on all over the US, and not just on 2 meters.  People are
> actually rag chewing on the 6 m SSB calling frequency, too.



		 OK... then I suppose we will have to give up
		 the whole notion of a calling frequency.

		 While they might have yield easily... the
		 whole point is that no one should have to
		 ask for it.

		 They don't violate any rules, per se... but they
		 unilaterally void a useful common practice.


		 We are now sliding down the old slippery slope.
		 How far are you willing to go... should we also
		 abandon the band plans ?   After all, those are not
		 mandated by the Rules, either.   How many long
		 established practices should yield to a few guys
		 who don't wanna play ball?   Should my friends
		 and I set conduct our 6 hour nightly net on the
		 MidCars frequency, or the one used by the ARRL
		 for code practice bulletins?  That would be legal,
		 and not violate any rules.  Should we move our
		 SSB net into the CW portion of the band, because,
		 after all, it gets kinda crowded in the phone
		 portion of the band ?  How many of the long
		 established gentlemens' agreements are we
		 willing to void in this way?




>   I also found out that one of Rileys career highlights was erroneously
> citing some hams for rag chewing on the '52.  Riley was big time wrong
> and had to rescind the citations. I guess that's part of the calling frequency
history, too.


		 Yes.   No doubt no one is operating illegally...
		 just operating so as to defeat notion of a calling
		 frequency.  The fact they call it such gives it
		 meaning.  Otherwise it is just another simplex
		 channel.

		 Perhaps there are not enough hams willing
		 to stand by the practice to support and
		 maintain it.   Like so many things in our
		 socio-political environment, few are willing
		 to stand up and speak out  - they just go
		 with the flow, and while that is their choice,
		 it is not mine.  Silly me... I speak my mind!
		 ;-)      The XYL thinks I will get shot for that
		 someday ...    ;-)


	 GOOD QUESTIONS-- GOOD DISCUSSION HERE.

	 I APPEARS I MAY BE OUT-VOTED ON THE ISSUE...  ;-)


HAPPY DAYS AND HAPPY HOLIDAY, MARK.

________________JHR___________________

test...

2 attempts to reply to Hank crashed my Outlook.

-----Original Message-----
From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Hank Greeb
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 1:08 PM
To: West Michigan Hams Reflector
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] There's something broke on the web site

 

I tried "responding to the herein quoted message on the web site, but, after writing my response, a message came back "cannot retried message 7028." So, I gave up.

The whole subject of "is 146.52 a calling frequency" and "if so, should casual conversations be allowed" is missing the point.

If memory serves correct, this concern was in existence back when I first arrove in the area back in late 2005.  That's 7+ years ago.   If a "concern" has not be addressed nor resolved within 7+ years, it must NOT be a concern, or else it's a symptom of lack of leadership amongst the ham radio community in this area.

A confidant told me that the current "offenders" who "monopolize 146.52 for hours on end" consists of 3 hams.  I don't know if they're newcomers or if they're old f**ts.  However, for much of the 61 years I've been in ham radio, the "newcomers" were "taken under the wing of the old f**rts" and "shown the ropes, the acceptable operating practices, and generally welcome them into the fraternity."

Why not welcome these three offenders, invite (or take, if they're incapable of driving) them to Schnitz South for a Friday conclave of the Lunche Bunche (and ACTUALLY talk with them, show interest in the newcomer, instead of ignoring them as is often the case.)  Or, invite them to the ubiquitous "Open Radio Room" gatherings" (and ACTUALLY talk with them, show interest in the newcomer, instead of ignoring them as is often the case.)  Or invite them to a club meeting? (but be sure there will be something other than the usual "club business drivel" which is the primary activity during many (most?) local club meetings in this area.)

Overwhelm them with kindness, show them what you consider "real ham radio", and tactfully (anyone know what 'tactfully' means?) explain the "raison d'etre" of a calling frequency.  It may take a while, but it usually will sink in.

Now, I'll get off my soapbox and wish everyone a Happy New Year!!!!!!!

72/73 de n8xx Hg
QRP >99.44% of the time


--- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, "Mark" <k8mhz@...> wrote:

Happy New Year, Jim!

 

Most advice about ham radio practice centers around the 'just spin the knob' paradigm.  Or, basically ignore it.

 

The Internet allows us to do both, spin the knob when we don't like what is going on, and also voice our concerns to other hams off the air.

 

There is a problem with that.  People get brave behind the keyboard and many of them simply toss etiquette out the window.  We have to remember to remain as emotionally neutral as possible, but still keep the opinion intact. 

 

Many times, it's not what people say, but how they say it.

<snip>

Can you try again?  I had problems responding to you.  I didn't see any bounce messages on the board.

 

Mark

 

I tried "responding to the herein quoted message on the web site, but, after writing my response, a message came back "cannot retried message 7028." So, I gave up.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of n8xxham
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 4:23 PM
To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: test message

 

Well, now it worketh.  Probably just a glitch by yahoo groups.  similar things have happened int he past.

computers, like people, ain't purr-feckt, or sew it seams.

Happy New Year.

72/73 de n8xx Hg
QRP >99.44% of the time
--- In WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com, "n8xxham" wrote:
>
> here 'tis - my repl;y.
> <snip>

Good Post, Mark -- a lot of buckshot in that one little shell!

Happy days.

-----------------------  JHR  ------------------------------------

-----Original Message-----
From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Richards
Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 6:12 PM
To: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [WestMichiganHams] Reminder: Armageddon Net Exercise Dec. 29th (Saturday) 10:00 am.

 

Good Post, Mark -- a lot of buckshot in that one little shell!

Happy days.

----------------------- JHR ------------------------------------

All:

With heavy heart I report the depressing news of Pix's demise.  Here is the
abbreviated obit:

Mr. Lloyd R. Pixley, age 77, died Friday, December 28, 2012 at home. Services
will be announced. Arrangements by: The Sytsema Chapel Sytsema Funeral Homes,
Inc. 737 Apple Avenue 231-726-5210


I do not have any information regarding arrangements.

73 OM we will miss you immensely.

Bill, NA8M
Pres. MAARC

Hamfests, hamfests, hamfests are starting, even here in Michigan in January

01/20/2013 | Hazel Park ARC's 47th Annual Hamfest
Hazel Park High School - 23400 Hughes - Hazel Park, Michigan 48030
Sponsored by Hazel Park Amateur Radio Club
Website: http://www.hparc.org
Flyer at http://hparc.org/wp-content/Swap/Flyer_2013.pdf

and, in February:

02/02/2013 | HARA Swap and Shop
Location: VFW Post 1079 42 Highway M-35 Negaunee, MI 49866
Sponsored by Hiawatha Amateur Radio Association
Learn More at http://www.arrl.org/hamfests/hara-swap-and-shop-2


02/17/2013 | Livonia ARC's 42nd Annual Swap & Shop
Location: Livonia Civic Park Seniors Center 15218 Farmington Road
Livonia, MI 48150
Sponsored by Livonia Amateur Radio Club
Website (under construction): http://www.livoniaarc.com/swap.htm
Learn More at
http://www.arrl.org/hamfests/livonia-arc-s-42nd-annual-swap-shop

With the start of the new year it time to check the expiration on your Ham
License.  Also, update your mailing address if you have moved, and not changed
it with the FCC yet.

73's

Jim, K8COP

All:

I have just confirmed the death of Dick, W8KID.  Arrangements are still pending
and his obituary will be published this weekend.  A funeral service will be
Tuesday at eleven o'clock.  Unfortunately, I cannot confirm the location of the
service.  I will keep you all informed as the details are finalized.

Let us all keep Dick's family in our thoughts and prayers as they go through
this difficult time.

Bill, NA8M
Pres. MAARC

Details can be found if you follow this link:

http://obits.dignitymemorial.com/dignity-memorial/obituary.aspx?n=Richard-Hathaw\
ay&lc=4030&pid=162131377&mid=5367748&locale=en-US


It is a sad day for our hobby.  We pray for Patricia and her family.  Peace be
with you.

Bill, NA8M

1. Time to check your Amateur License Expiration Date?
Posted by: "k8cop" jimk8cop@... k8cop
Date: Sat Jan 5, 2013 9:27 am ((PST))
With the start of the new year it time to check the expiration on your Ham License. Also, update your mailing address if you have moved, and not changed it with the FCC yet. 73's
Jim, K8COP

-----Original Message-----
From: WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com [mailto:WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Hank Greeb
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2013 5:42 PM
To: westmichiganhams@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [WestMichiganHams] Re: Time to Check your License Expiration Date

 

Or, join the ARRL, advise them of the expiration date.   HQ will inform you of the impending demise of your operating privileges, and even file with the Friendly Candy Company for you.   If you move, HQ will take care of this kind of paper work for you also, for no cost.

Yep, you CAN do all this yourself, and it's easy, but all too many folks let things like this slip through the cracks.

Now, Lettuce hear from the ubiquitous naysayers who infest this newsgroup, frequently making negative comments about the League.

72/73 de n8xx Hg
QRP >99.44% of the time
Charter Life Member, American Radio Relay League, Inc.

On 1/5/2013 1:54 PM, WestMichiganHams@yahoogroups.com wrote:

1. Time to check your Amateur License Expiration Date?
Posted by: "k8cop" jimk8cop@... k8cop
Date: Sat Jan 5, 2013 9:27 am ((PST))
With the start of the new year it time to check the expiration on your Ham License. Also, update your mailing address if you have moved, and not changed it with the FCC yet. 73's
Jim, K8COP

From :
Sindee Maxwell
OC CERT Coordinator

COMMUNITY EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (CERT) TRAINING FOR OTTAWA COUNTY RESIDENTS.

The CERT Training Consists of 8 Topics:

1. Disaster Preparedness
2. Fire Safety
3. Disaster Medical Operations
4. Light Search and Rescue
5. CERT Organization
6. Disaster Psychology
7. Terrorism and CERT
8. Disaster Simulation

WHEN:

There will be two classes:

    Daytime Classes:
    Monday and Wednesday mornings from 9:00 AM to Noon
    February 11, 2013 through February 27, 2013
    Participants must attend all classes to receive their certificate of completion.

    These daytime classes will be held at the Grand Haven Public Safety Department,
    525 Washington Ave., Grand Haven, MI 49417

    For more information on the daytime classes contact:

    Sgt. Glenn Bo or Sindee Maxwell
    E-mail: boglenn@... or smaxwell26@...
    (616)842-3460 ext 1135
    Grand Haven Public Safety by January 21, 2013   

    Nighttime Classes:
    Wednesday evenings from 6:00PM to 9:00 PM
    February 6, 2013 through March 27, 2013
    Participants must attend all classes to receive their certificate of completion.

    These evening classes will be at the the Ottawa County Fillmore Complex,
    Administrative Building
    12220 Fillmore St
    West Olive, MI. 49460

 A complete PDF brochure is online at:

 http://www.ottawaskywarn.org/uploads/CERT2013.pdf