[Elecraft] K3/0

Mon Jan 16 21:24:56 EST 2012

Don,

 > I support and applaud your position.
 > There are those who will support "contacts at any cost", and that is
 > just not ham radio to me - if you can buy contacts for dollars (or
 > pounds or pesos), then it is no longer ham radio.

Thank you.  However, my concern is not as much for the "contacts at any
cost" aspect of remote operation (that happened long ago with the major
multi-multi other multi-op contest stations) as it is the migration of 
amateur radio from a "wireless" to a "wired" communication model.

I can accept a remote transmitter/receiver (even one with better
antennas than might be possible at the operator's licensed location) if
the station is located in the same community (same zip code, county,
precinct, etc. - a very limited geographic difference) and everything
- controls and communication - was done entirely via RF (microwave,
high UHF, etc.).  It is when the control and communication moves from
the RF domain (what might be considered wireless microphone/headphones
on steroids) to the wired domain (telephone, internet, private fiber,
common carrier etc.) that I draw the line.

It's the wired infrastructure that makes remote operation across time
zones and in different countries possible.  Not withstanding questions
of legality (a US licensed operator - controlling a transmitter in a
country where they have no license), "wired" remote turns amateur radio
into some strange and perverted video game imitation of the real thing.

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV

On 1/16/2012 8:51 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
> Joe,
>
> I support and applaud your position.
> There are those who will support "contacts at any cost", and that is
> just not ham radio to me - if you can buy contacts for dollars (or
> pounds or pesos), then it is no longer ham radio.
> One of the main rules of ham radio for me is the "no pecuniary interest"
> rule. That says to me that ham radio is all about sharing, and not for
> personal gain. When we begin to talk about "stations for hire", that is
> when my interest wanes. Many of us take pride in our stations and our
> operating skills, and strive to improve on our previous 'score' in the
> same contest from last year. We do not all have to be "top dogs" in
> order to have satisfaction.
> This is a hobby, enjoy it in what ever way you are able - there are
> many, many facets, and you do not have to excel in all of them - pick
> what appeals to you and 'just do it'.
>
> If HOAs restrict you to attic antennas, so be it, you can still work
> DXCC with that attic antenna, and be rightfully proud of your
> accomplishment. Sure, you will not do it in a weekend like those with
> monster antennas and 1.5kW transmitters, but you can still do it and
> stand proud of your accomplishment.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 1/16/2012 8:33 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
>> > 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
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>