Hi Roger,
Alan G3NYK and myself often debate this (being 'ole fogeys').
Personally I would align this with the failure of our education system
to engage students in the sciences and mathematics in our schools.
When I was at school you could go along to any of our science masters
and get involved in a discussion about crystal sets, aerials etc. even
though I cannot remember any one of them being licensed. We had a school
radio club that was effectively run by ourselves with the encouragement
of the school. A lab tech taught me to solder. He didn't have any
interest in electronics or radio but he could sure use a "bolt" and a
bunsen burner!
Also, in those days, kids (especially boys) had HOBBIES not HOODIES! We
built model aircraft, boats, carts, radios. We could even attach a bike
dynamo to a Mamod steam engine! You could learn about tearing the wings
off a Keil-Kraft model glider by fitting a Jetex engine. You could
almost blow yourself up making rockets from cigar tubes and "flash"
powder. There was even a magazine called "Hobbies Magazine". The "EAGLE"
had a centre spread that never ever featured a "boob" as far as I can
remember but oh those cut-away drawings of the "Flying Scotsman"!
We were excited by all that stuff. Now, today, I see on the TV news that
vast numbers of the population are becoming addicted to "Smartphones".
I remember a few years ago when describing a 'mobile phone' as a "radio
transceiver that connects to a telephone network" to some friends in the
pub, that eyes glazed over! "Technology" these days tends to mean
"Meeedja studies" doesn't it?
I agree that "sumpn needs to be done" but what? I think we are fighting
a change that is as much cultural as technical.
Discuss. :>))
73
On Thu, 2011-08-04 at 14:03 +0100, Roger Lapthorn wrote:
> Chris (et al)
>
> In the last few years I've given talks at 5 different radio clubs in
> East Anglia. Some were well attended and thriving, others small but in
> good shape and one was clearly in trouble. A common thread throughout
> was a distinct lack of younger members.
>
> Although this is not a subject for further discussion on the
> LF-reflector it is something that should concern us all. We need to
> find more ways of making the hobby inviting to younger people without
> "dumbing it down". How? As a teenager I was fascinated by short-wave,
> communicating by string, radio, light beams and earth currents. Today,
> the advances in technology make what we do appear far from
> marvellous.
>
> Not sure of the answers but amateur radio in 2020 may be just a
> handful of pensioners talking about how good it was in the old days.
> No doubt Mal will be one of them.
>
> Did I also note in the RSGB's survey that LF was an interest mainly of
> the older members?
>
> 73s
> Roger G3XBM
>
>
>
>
> On 4 August 2011 09:48, Chris <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Mal and LF,
> Mal says:
> "If one is plagued with environmental noise and poor signal
> quality on LF/MF then maybe this is not the band for You."
> You might be right, but it's fun trying! I have very much
> enjoyed the last couple of years on 136/7 despite the
> difficulties.
> Well, I'm not sure the QSY is a solution either. When I rotate
> my 2m beam and watch the noise level on the s-meter, the noise
> goes up by about 18db as the beam points down the line of the
> houses in my street. Not surprising I have trouble on LF.
> All you can do is the best with the circumstances you're
> presented with.
> Lack of activity is as much due to us (radio amateurs) in
> general getting older and dropping out of the hobby, with few
> youngsters following on, as anything else.
> Thanks to those who commented about SNR, I agree with others
> observations.
> Vy 73,
> Chris, G4AYT, Whitstable, Kent.
>
>
>
> --
> http://g3xbm-qrp.blogspot.com/
> http://www.g3xbm.co.uk
> http://www.youtube.com/user/g3xbm
> https://sites.google.com/site/sub9khz/
>
--
73 es gd dx de pat g4gvw
qth nr felixstowe uk
(east coast, county of suffolk)
|
