[Elecraft] K3/0

[Mike]

I like what you said, and how you said it!

73, Mike NF4L

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
>