[K3CAL] Did Joe Taylor K1JT Destroy Amateur Radio?

[Dave]

Just for your information.  Might make for an interesting club meeting discussion.




                   This article originally appeared in the February 2018 issue ofThe Spectrum Monitor.Reprinted with permission of the author.           
           
           
           Amateur Radio Insights
                                 By Kirk Kleinschmidt NT0Z - nt0z at stealthamateur.com           
           
           
           Did Joe Taylor K1JT Destroy Amateur Radio?           
Did Joe Taylor K1JT, Nobel Laureate and noted friendof hams everywhere, accidentally destroy amateurradio?
Having just returned from a trip in my time machine,I can unequivocally say that history attributes thedeath of amateur radio to Joe Taylor in the year 2017.So, yes, he did. In fact, 2018 AD marks the beginningof the "hampocalypse," and becomes known among formerham operators as 1 AT (the first year "After Taylor").
The distinguished scientist had some help, of course,but just like the "flu" epidemic of 2027 (you'll see),in which an attenuated pathogen that was only supposedto be experimental in nature escaped into the populationat large and quickly replicated itself, Taylor's FT8digital mode grew exponentially, suffocating other modesas it mushroomed beyond any practical limits.
By the time FT9 and FT10 were released - modes thatallowed a small amount of real-time interaction(formerly known as conversation) - it was too late.Hams, the few who remained, refused to exchange personalpleasantries, focusing instead on machine-verified signalreports and grid square exchanges.
In 2 AT, non-machine QSOs were outlawed and rulesprohibiting unattended operations at HF were rescindedworldwide. Amateur allocations were reduced to 5kHz-wideslices every 2 MHz (from dc to daylight) so computerizedstations could map optimized frequency-hopping and ALEschemes in real-time. With machine-only modes, additionalbandwidth was simply wasted. The CQWW contest (renamedthe CQJTWW contest) was the first major outing to offercertificates to operators who didn't even know that theircomputer-controlled stations had participated in thecontest and had turned in noteworthy scores - the ultimatein unattended operation!
By 3 AT, AI-driven networks saw that humans werecompletely unnecessary for contesting and propagationmapping operations, so amateur services were disbandedworldwide. An AI from Italy, rumored to be running anillegally "high-powered" FT11 beta processor, workedDXCC in 478 milliseconds, the fastest to date. Also ofnote, once occupying 48 hours, the CQJTWW contest, nowworked only by competing AI participants, has beenreduced to 8.5 seconds, freeing the contestant AIs tomap additional ionospheric sub-modalities.
In an attempt to recreate a "freeband-like" clandestineradio system that allowed human-ham interaction on apersonal level, some former amateurs began experimentingwith gravity-gradient modulation and quantum entanglementtransceivers - technologies that don't require, or evenbenefit from, FT8, FT9, or FT10 style restrictions (well,maybe FT10).
I'd like to share more, but my time in the future waslimited by the power constraints of my device. If you haveaccess to a more powerful time machine, please tell us whathappened next.
Irreverent, but Not Necessarily Irrelevant
Yes, my fictional narrative is sassy and irreverent but,unfortunately, it's probably not irrelevant. The number ofglobal QSOs using Joe's FT8 "machines only" digital modehave exploded, and these effects can clearly be felt on thebands.
Although I didn't know exactly why at the time, my firstexposure to the JTxx/FTxx effect was during last summer'sE-skip season on 6 and 2 meters (or lack thereof).The two previous years saw plenty of SSB and CW QSOs, witha nice increase in the typical number of non-contest CW QSOs.I was working on my VUCC totals and things were lookingup.
In 2017, however, traditional activity tanked. There wasnobody home. I didn't know it at the time, but everyone wasJTing and FTing when I was looking the other way. The lackof SSB and CW signals wasn't simply noticeable, it wasincredible. And just last week I went looking for PSK31signals, as I had been "away" from that mode for quite awhile. In short, there were none. Yikes!
Several months ago columnists in CQ and QST began detailingthe magnitude of the paradigm shift. I was somewhat skepticalat first, but no longer.
What Hath Joe Wrought?
In a recent ARRL Letter, expert observers note theexplosive growth of FT8 QSOs and the commensurate declineof just about everything else. So far, K1JT has publiclyexpressed surprise about how quickly his new digi-modeshave taken off. But, perhaps like Robert Oppenheimer, whogrew to feel quite despondent about creating the atom bombafter the devastation in Japan, I wonder how K1JT might feelif his creations become "apocalyptic?"
Most coverage of K1JT's software creations and contributionsto amateur radio's technical art have focused on thetechnical merits alone - which is a no-brainer. Joe's WSJT-Xsoftware suite is a bona-fide technical masterpiece.
But I'dlike to take brief look at the potentially broaderimplications of what might happen to amateur radio as awhole in the wake of a globally disruptive event like FT8.My apologies to Mr. Taylor, as I find that equal measures ofsass, exaggeration, and irreverence are good tools to highlightlatent issues and spark debate!
I don't really think that FT8 will supplant all otheraspects of ham radio, but the downsides of machine-onlyQSO technologies such as JTxx and FTxx may dramaticallyintersect with other issues facing amateur radio as a whole.So, let's pick off the scab a bit and dig in (in no particularorder).
Hams Aren't Talking Anyway
Our individual experience of amateur radio - and mosteverything else - is built upon our accumulated experiences,and often seems to "stand still" or "remain the same," ormostly so. But nothing really stays the same, and everythingis constantly changing. The "change delta" - the apparentspeed of change - is noticeable mostly when we experiencejarring, disruptive change, such as 2017's "JT explosion."
With the benefit of hindsight I can see that I have been apart of the problem. As a teenage ham in the '70s who didn'thave a Callbook or even a CW filter (let alone an Internet ora packet cluster), I happily sent my full name and address viaslow CW to the other ops during most CW QSOs. We all did,because if we didn't, we couldn't collect QSL cards, whichwere required for all of the operating achievements we wereall so diligently working toward! No eQSL. No LoTW. JustUSPS-QSL!
Now, ragchews are still ragchews, if you can find them,but back in the day our casual, quickie QSOs, even with DXops, always contained pleasant, friendly remarks, and operatornames and locations, even if they involved Q-signals andMorse abbreviations. Casual SSB QSOs were even "wordier"with pleasantries. Whether 73, 88, HPE CU AGN, TNXQSO, GUD DX, FB SIGS, DSW, TU, GL GD, etc, outsideof established contests we didn't just grind out contest-styleQSOs.
But we do today, and it's a blessing and a curse. Yes,more contacts can be made (perhaps a necessity now thatmachine-gun-style QSOs are driven by global packet spottingnetworks and year-long operating incentives such as theARRL's grid-square thingy and CQ magazine's DX Marathonthingy), but a large measure of camaraderie and personaltouches are lost.
Unlike my early years, until recently I didn't have manyvoice-mode QSOs because I was living (13 years) in a condoand operating with stealthy antennas at QRP power levels.I didn't want my voice to be heard coming from someone'sclock radio, but I was OK with Morse dits and PSK31warbles, as those would likely be indecipherable by meremortals.
It's tough to successfully, consistently ragchew via SSBwhile running low power to compromised antennas, and Idiscovered soon after my teenage years that I didn't reallyenjoy ragchewing via CW. Contest-style operating, yes. Conversingat length, no. I don't use any repeaters, and if I needto ragchew with my local ham buddies I will call them on thephone or chat in person at Saturday morning ham breakfasts.I did do a bit of ragchewing via PSK31 a few yearsback, but even then I was met with an endless series of"brag files" and surprisingly little conversation! Even if theinformation in the brag file is interesting, it's still essentiallyautomated if nobody's "talking." Now, PSK31 is a somewhatscarce, treasured memory...
Now that I have no practical antenna restrictions andcan run power outputs up to the legal limit, I look forwardto chatting via SSB - just as soon as I find a 100-W rig thatI like as much as my Elecraft KX3 (or build an amplifier)!Even when I don't have to, I'm still running QRP. Howmany other excuses can I think of? We are slipping toward anon-conversational ham radio future, and I seem to be partof the problem!
Do Kids Just Wanna WSPR?
These days, everything's about "the kids." Think of thekids who have to be driven to suburban schools in armoredSUVs, who have no opportunity to play with sticks alongthe way (walking) or splash around a bit in a mud puddle!The poor little buggers have to deal with "Nintendo thumbsyndrome" and, because of it, many couldn't hold a stick intheir cramped-up little hands anyway!
I'm going to step down from this soapbox before I getcarried away (actually and literally), but someone is thinkinga lot about kids, and that someone is the ARRL. The Leaguehas a massive "think about the kids" initiative underway, andit's ostensibly all about making amateur radio more accessibleto the smartphone generation.
We can't properly address this issue here for a varietyof reasons, but I think it's interesting how FT8-style operationfits in nicely with generations - new and old - of introvertedhams who ostensibly joined a communications hobby,but don't want to actually communicate! Let me explain.Newfangled digital modes such as JTxx and FTxx usespace age encoding, modulation, and DSP/decoding techniquesto eke out fantastic improvements in signal-to-noiseratios that allow radio communication over propagationpaths that won't support SSB or CW contacts. That's thecool part!
The downside is, taking advantage of these techniquesrequires long "integration" times that preclude real-timecommunication. Most JTxx and FTxx QSOs require accuratetime syncing and back and forth transmission windows from15 seconds to several minutes. Limited bits of informationcan be transmitted back and forth, but there's no chattingallowed. That's perfect for sending data back to earth fromdeep space, which is where the techniques originated, but notso good for real-time communication.
The only thing that keeps the entire process from beingcompletely automated is the often-ignored FCC rule that limitsunattended operation on most HF frequencies and the factthat the software has a "send" button that has to be clicked inreal time every now and then by the control operator (if thatoption has been selected in the setup menu).
K1JT's WSPR software (weak signal propagation reporter)is similar. Many ops run their WSPR stations unattended24/7 whether it's legal or not. Because many WSPRstations run milliwatts instead of kilowatts, the effects areminimized, but the rules are the rules, right? I would ratherbe shot with a BB gun instead of a .44 magnum - but I'drather not be shot at all.
WSPR, when done right, is an amazing tool that hasalready added to our understanding of global propagationscience and practice. It's like a public, hi-tech chirp-soundernetwork that can map existing propagation modes andpaths in real time, while uncovering details we hadn't evenimagined. But WSPR isn't really a QSO mode becausethe integration periods are even longer than those for JTxxand FTxx, which allow for "limited" data exchanges. Still,among hams who don't really want to "talk" anyway - thesenew modes may be just what the doctor ordered!
I can imagine a youngster asking a parent about joiningthe local after-school "ham radio WSPR club."
"Mom, mom!" the excited child exclaims, "rememberwhen we talked about ham radio, and you were concernedabout me having to talk to strangers? Well, I just learnedthat I can now join the WSPR club and get on the air like wetalked about - and I'll never have to talk to anyone, ever!"
"Well," says mom, with a bit of a wrinkled brow, "whatabout interfering with the neighbors, interfering with yourschoolwork - and what about those big, ugly ham antennaswe looked at?"
"That's the best part, mom," says the excited child,"WSPR uses tiny power, so it won't bother anyone. And becauseit uses super new technology, I won't even really needan antenna! Schoolwork will still be my main focus - afteronline gaming - because my WSPR box talks to my gamesystem - and it tells me where my signals have been heardand posts them on the Internet!"
Mom, now starting to smile, says, "Wow, you've reallydone your homework, haven't you? But, what about gettingyour FCC license? Won't that be difficult?"
"No way, mom!" says the still excited child, "Myteacher says that, thanks to a new program by some organizationcalled the ARRL, I can simply go to a class for threeafternoons to get my WSPR license. There isn't even a testanymore. Cool!"
Far-fetched? I don't think so. If you look at historicaltrends, something like this seems almost inevitable. TheARRL, which seems to be switching to a kids first, "lowestcommon denominator" approach to everything it does,is pushing hard for increased HF privileges for Technician-class hams, for example, so they can take better advantageof digimodes and, hopefully, want to get further into thehobby by upgrading.
My sarcasm aside, a test-free WSPR-class license mightactually make perfect sense (especially in middle schoolscience classes), as long as we restrict WSPR operation (andpower levels) to tiny slivers of little-used parts of existingbands (and there are plenty of them).
Is the drive to "save" amateur radio at all costs worthwhile?Does everything have to be saved and/or packaged soit's accessible to every kid, everywhere? By my standards,amateur radio license tests are already so easy to pass thatthey pose no barrier for the vast majority of potential applicants.I recently prepped one of my friends over a casualtwo-hour lunch, after which he went from civilian to General-classoperator with no additional study. All without everowning or using a radio or even keying a mic.
Taken to its logical conclusion, before long there mayonly be one license class - just like before incentive licensing!It took me years to fully understand that, for mostthings, we only truly appreciate things that require effort,time or money - or all of the above.
Modern kids are still investing time, effort, and moneyinto the things that interest them. Video games. Coding. Softwaredevelopment. Hardware hacking. Dating. Boys. Girls.Bikes. Cars. Ham radio. What do you think?
Antenna Here is 6-Foot Loaded Dipole
Because of deed restrictions, etc, entire generations ofhams have come up without knowing what it's like to operatewith "real" antennas. I can no longer count the number oftimes newbies have asked me whether the small, expensive,portable antenna systems designed to be used by backpackersfrom mountaintops, are "good" for use at home in theirbackyards. Heck no, they're not good. They're horrible!
As highlighted later in this column, our antennas defineour experience of amateur radio. Crap antennas equal crappyexperiences overall. And while hams from my generation aredreaming about tall towers with stacks of big Yagis (alreadyhaving real outdoor dipoles and loops), many newbies aredreaming about a too-low wire dipoles hidden in their backyardtrees, or outdoor antennas of any type. And while theydream they're messing with what are essentially expensivenon-antennas, and they're wondering why ham radio isn't sonifty.
These new hams are often surprised when I tell themthat, if I could have a stack of killer antennas on top of akiller-high tower, I'd gladly trade my fancy new transceiver- any fancy new transceiver-for a 1970s Kenwood,Heathkit or Yaesu rig, which they view as anachronistic andcompletely useless. No questions asked. You can make upfor a compromised radio, but you can't make up for a compromisedantenna. Or can you?
Actually, if the machine-only aspects of emerging digitalhamming can be addressed, the crappy antenna scenariocan be somewhat mitigated by emerging digital technology.Technologies such as JTxx and FTxx offer 20-30 dB improvementsover SSB and CW - and that's huge. Unlikethe keyboard-to-keyboard digimodes such as PSKxx andMFSKxx, however, which allow conversations to take placewith a 10-20 dB advantage over SSB and CW, you're stillmostly in the WSPR club.
Teeny Bands Are All We Need
The ARRL and other groups fight tooth and nail to preservespectrum space, but if everything migrates to JTxx andFTxx style operation, ham bands can be tiny slivers of theirformer glory. Lots of digimode QSOs fit inside the spaceof a single SSB QSO, and because you often can't hear thesignals with your ears, you have to hover around a callingfrequency anyway, so who needs all that empty space?
No Need to Call CQ on Big Bands
Even if the ham bands "stay big," we wouldn't need tocluster around calling frequencies if we simply have our PCscoordinate our QSOs on the Internet before automaticallyswitching our radios to the agreed-upon frequency so ourPCs can work each other and tell us all about it.
By doing so we could easily limit our QSOs to a groupof "whitelisted" friends, members of a certain ham club (rifleassociation, sports team, political party), or hams who havesent us "greenbacks" (Bitcoins?) for our rare virtual "QSLcards." DXpeditions might be quite profitable that way, andwhile your robo-transceivers are churning out QSOs, youcan be fishing, swimming or surfing!
Between global spotting networks, the reverse beaconnetwork, the WSPR net, IFTTT, and PSK Reporter, etc, wecan already do most of these things with existing technology,so although I'm being somewhat speculative (and more thana little sarcastic), bringing amateur radio into the "digitaldigital age" isn't as easy as it once looked.
Toward an Uncertain Future
The future - where ham radio is going and what it'sbecoming - is a product of what exists now and what hasalready come before. Today's amateurs exist on the leadingedge of a continuum that started (very slowly) a few hundredyears ago with basic explorations of electricity and magnetism,but is rushing forward at an exponential pace.
This rapid evolution of technology in general isn't radioexclusive, of course, but it's still amazing to simply stepback and take it all in. It's easy to "miss the magic" becausewe're surrounded by it every minute of every day. But evenif we don't usually notice it, the technology train is barrelingdown the tracks at an ever-increasing pace. Ham radio isalso streaking forward and, in some ways, is approaching apoint of no return - an event horizon from which there's noturning back.
Unlike the equestrian arts, for example, in which ridinga horse under an English saddle is substantially the same todayas it was 100 or even 500 years ago, ham radio isn't thesame. Spark-gap transmitters have been duly outlawed and,save for a relatively small cadre of enthusiasts, plate-modulatedAM isn't heard much anymore, either. Regenerativereceivers are all home-brew these days, lovingly craftedby a few caretakers who still safeguard the Major's gift.The elegant mechanical designs that made earlier radios sospecial - and frustrating - with ganged capacitors, cleversynchronized cam-and-lever assemblies and robust mechanicaldials, have all been replaced with software and programmablelogic arrays.
For better or worse, amateur radio is firmly embeddedin the digital domain, and if you think that emerging futuresystems won't supplant what we now think of as amateurradio, evolution will certainly prove you wrong!
Ham radio's first hundred years witnessed dramaticchange, and in another hundred years we probably won'teven recognize what ham radio has become - if ham radioexists at all. In "geologic time," ham radio will likely havecome and gone in a finite, and rather small, window of evolution.
With what we know about the evolutionary progressionof other technologies, species, etc, and all of the evidencewe've collected to date, there's a good chance that the phenomenonwe call amateur radio will have been born, matured,evolved and "died," in a 150-250 year period. Period!
And as if this isn't unsettling enough, let's not forgetto marvel at the quirks of solar and planetary physics thatenable radio at the fundamental level. Electricity and magnetism- still largely unfathomable even though we take themfor granted on a practical level - comprise radio on a locallevel, but "global radio" requires an ionosphere, which isitself powered by the sun, whose output varies in mysteriouscycles, etc. The list of dependencies and "coincidences" isreally starting to add up! And if you take away even one partof the whole interdependent system - poof! - no radio.
Therefore, if you love amateur radio as it's practicedtoday, you'd better get busy enjoying it - today! - becauseour entire hobby likely exists in a precious, precarious evolutionarybubble, never experienced before and probably neverto be experienced again.
Whether it's an inflection point or the point of no return,when you woke up today (or any day in the past few years),amateur radio was different. There's no wondering aboutwhether it will someday be different - that day is today andamateur radio is different. Joe Taylor "caused" the present,local disturbance, but if he hadn't, someone else would have.
In the present moment, though, even if we have crossedthe event horizon, amateur radio is still alive and well, andour far-off future - albeit closer than ever as evidenced byJTxx and FTxx digital technology - is yet to be determined.
The full breadth of past and present radio is availablefor exploring (spark gaps excepted!). We can build a classicregenerative receiver or buy a state-of-the-art synthesizedradio. We can use Morse code or the most advanced computerizeddigital signal modulation. Or we can use a primitiveregen to copy the most advanced digital signals (perhapsstabilizing the oscillating detector via GPS?). But it won'tstay that way - guaranteed!
NT0Z's Quest for 160-meter QRP WAS
Last month, I updated everyone about the fate of mynewly redeemed 160-meter inverted-L (a modest 25-footerover a decent set of ground radials) and my winter quest forworking 160-meter QRP WAS. Actually, I tried twice, sofar, to qualify in a single contest weekend. I got close-soclose-each time, and this month's main column discussionturns out to be rather relevant.
Having used low, horizontally polarized dipoles andsuch on 160 over the years, I was stunned by how well theinverted-L worked and wished that I had figured that tidbitout a few decades ago.
My first attempt to work every US state with 5 W ofRF on 160 meters took place in December during the ARRL160-meter contest. Everything was good, including bandconditions, but I came up a bit short, working 45 states (andsome DX), including Alaska (one of the two "killers," theother of which is Hawaii).
I didn't hear a peep out of the Pacific, and my AlaskaQSO was made at "psychic intuition" signal levels. The restwere relatively easy, but some key players were missing,including CQers from Wyoming, North Dakota, Utah, andSouth Carolina. Yes, South Carolina! As has been my habit, Irarely called CQ during contests in which I'm working QRP.That has been a mistake.
Still, 45 states and a bunch of Caribbean DX in oneshot was a success worth celebrating. I'd use the Stew Perrycontest, I thought, to finish everything off. Well, propagationfor the Big Stew was less than awesome, so I only managedto fill in my missing Utah QSO. Four to go, with plenty ofwinter remaining.
The CQ 160-meter contest in late January offered afresh start and fantastic propagation. As before, I was workingthe contest not to make the biggest possible score, but towork as many (all?) states as possible.
I managed to work 47 states this time, filling in all ofthe previously missing lower-48 states now that K0IDX wason from North Dakota, but missing Hawaii, Alaska, andNebraska! Yes, Nebraska! Nobody was CQing from thatstate and, according to after-action reports, many contest opshad missed it too, unless they were calling CQ and someonefrom Nebraska had replied. That was the missing piece.
As mentioned, over the years I hadn't really called CQwhen working QRP, but because of the Nebraska debacle,and because I heard W1VT calling CQ near the top of thecontest window, I decided to give it a try.
Zack W1VT was the ARRL's senior RF engineer in myQST days and, in addition to being the go-to guy for anythingRF, he is also a noted QRP practitioner. I heard Zack'sCQ, and it was weak. But from past experience I figuredW1VT was running half a watt to some low wire antenna.He heard my single-call reply to his CQ (QRP experts havegreat ears, too), said hello, and handed me Connecticut.
With several hours to go, needing only Alaska, Hawaiiand Nebraska, I was running out of stations to work, so Ifigured I'd follow Zack's lead and call CQ. I didn't expectAK or HI stations to hear my CQs, but I figured a NE stationmight, as signals between our respective regions had beenstrong throughout the contest and it was looking like thatwould be the only way for me to find one, anyway.
So, I programmed my logging software to call CQvia an old-fashion serial port on my PC and a home-brewopto-isolator, with me handling the paddles for everythingelse. On my second call, a station called me! When all wassaid and done I had made 350 QSOs in the contest, about ahundred of which came from my own CQs. Nebraska, unfortunately,wasn't among them.
In addition to racking up QSOs and scoring contestpoints, ops from two Canadian multipliers called me, VE7and VY2, which was nice. My "20-minute adjusted hourlyQSO rate" peaked at 57, which I thought was awesome forrunning QRP on 160 meters.
I would often call CQ five or six times between takers,but a few times, several stations were calling at once, causinga small pileup. But this time I was the "DX." It's alwaysgood to be the DX!
As it stands, assuming I can get QSLs or LoTWsfrom all of the stations, I need only Hawaii to complete my160-meter WAS QRP adventure. I learned a lot along theway, but I also learned that signal levels between HI andMN are almost always puny-weak. Probably too weak forQRP CW unless the planets really align. (I thought that aboutworking HI on 80-meter QRP, too, until I did it several timeswith my previous attic antenna. As with Roger Bannister'ssub-4-minute mile, it's only difficult until you do it!)
I will soldier forward for the rest of the season tryingto work Hawaii on CW or PSK31. But if summer static isapproaching and nothing's in the log, I know what I mustdo - work 'em via FT8 until I can fill in that state with a"full conversation" mode.
Ouch. I suppose I will have to make a deal with theradio gods to do 10 hours of ragchewing for every state orDXCC entity I work exclusively via FT8. That sounds fair,doesn't it? Mr. Marconi? Mr. Maxim? Mr. Fessenden? Anyone?




        Stealth Amateur Radio - by NT0Z 
        stealthamateur.com



David Hardy      
davehardy0101 at aol.com
    
KB3RAN
CARA President

 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/k3cal/attachments/20180512/cfd01b96/attachment-0001.html>