[Elecraft] K3/0

Mon Jan 16 20:33:16 EST 2012

 > Joe said it "smells" and I'm just really curious why.

You misquote me ... I said that argument that remote operation was a
necessary answer to HOAs/other antenna restrictions and the only way
to get on the air did not pass the smell test.

As far as I am concerned, remote operation changes the character of
amateur radio from over the air "amateur radio" to "landline based
commercial communication" at least in part.  When the operator is not
present at the station (transmitting/receiving site) the "radio" part
of the communications path can become infinitesimal - nothing more
than a hand-held link to the nearest access point.

That eliminates everything that makes amateur radio unique.  Taking
that one step further ... if the mode is digital, one might as well
be using keyboard chat on the internet.

In my career as an amateur I've seen repeaters go from something
built in the garage/shack to multi-site, statewide linked, trunked
communications systems.  I have watched packet radio go from a random 
network of individual stations to nothing more than the equivalent of 
wireless access points linked by commercial wired networks (internet).

I don't want to see HF devolve to the point that "amateurs" will need
to pay for membership in and access to a series of "mega stations" in
northeast Maine, southern Florida, northwest Washington and southern
California to have the best shot at DX ... or even worse Radio Arcla
class facilities all over the world just to be able to "chat" with
any amateur, anywhere without regard to propagation, local conditions
and time of day.

I've already seen evidence of individuals working a DX contest from
KP2 or other locations in the Caribbean while setting at home in New
York or Boston or San Francisco, etc.  I'd rather *never* work a P5
than "work" someone operating a multi-band remote transmitter located
on the roof of a PyongYang hotel (or cell-phone factory) with operators
in Oakland, Atlanta, London, Berlin and Helsinki.

Is remote technology "fun"?  Is it an engineering challenge?  Yes.
Is it appropriate for amateur radio?  Not in my book (even though
that opinion may be contrary to my own bank account before long)!

Remote operation/remote technology offers a huge opportunity for
regulators and those commercial interests (primarily messaging
and remote sensing companies) who would like to acquire amateur
spectrum to argue that "amateur radio" can be accommodated entirely
on-line rather than continue to occupy more than 15% of the spectrum
below 30 MHz.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV

On 1/16/2012 7:11 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>
> Although I've never had to deal with an HOA, I lived for thirty years in
> a neighborhood that "frowned" upon any kind of tower, and the lot was
> small enough that I didn't want one to dominate everything anyway.  I
> worked over 300 countries with simple homebrew verticals and had lots of
> fun doing so, but for you or anyone else to tell me that I should just
> be content to live with those restrictions is beyond your pay grade.
>
> Antenna restrictions are not the only limitation some folks have to live
> with.  Local QRN can be a real issue for some, and trust me ... it is a
> LOT more fun to be able to hear stations than it is not to hear them.
> Ask any contester how much fun it is to endlessly call stations only to
> have most of your RF end up as heat loss in the ground or a nearby building.
>
> I now have a tower with excellent antennas on a nice hillside lot.  Very
> few people get to enjoy what I experience during a contest, where I can
> run a frequency for hours and not have to rely solely on S&P.   Remote
> operation potentially gives some folks that opportunity and I can't see
> a thing wrong with it.   Joe said it "smells" and I'm just really
> curious why.
>
> Dave   AB7E
>
>
>
>
> On 1/16/2012 4:27 PM, Phil Hystad wrote:
>> I will guess that Joe is suggesting that remote operation should not be needed to enjoy ham radio from any location.  Maybe, I am just guessing.
>>
>>
>> On Jan 16, 2012, at 3:25 PM, David Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>> So ... what exactly about that "smells"?  You figure they're trying to
>>> cheat in some way?  What else would you have against somebody doing that?
>>>
>>> Dave   AB7E
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 1/16/2012 2:09 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>>>>> I have thought for many years that it would be a great feature if a
>>>>> radio club could set up a super station and offer remote access to its
>>>>> apartment-bound members.
>>>> I keep hearing this - and the "HOA limitation" - as justification for
>>>> remote operation.  As far as I'm concerned both just don't "pass the
>>>> smell test."
>>> ______________________________________________________________
>>> Elecraft mailing list
>>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>>> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>>>
>>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>