hen are,"CQ" and the League going to award certificates to PC,s, often it is they who do most of the work, so they should be awarded, contest prizes,DXCC, WAZ,WAS,IOTA,etc.
Consider, however, what a top HF contest/DX station looked like just 50 years ago:
- Receiver with a couple of hardware filters, readout to 1 kc. and not much else. No memories, no DSP, no noise blanker, etc.
- Transmitter that required tuneup and spotting.
The pair could not transceive, and changing bands or even frequency within a band could require significant time and adjustments.
- Paper logging and duping
- Bug or basic electronic keyer
And that's about it, except for antennas, which haven't really changed all that much. Some folks might have a CQ wheel, a second receiver, etc., but the basics were pretty limited.
Such a station cost a small fortune if really good equipment was used (a Collins 75A-4, the standard of comparison for many years, cost $700 back then - without extra filters or the reduction knob. $700 doesn't sound like much until you realize that $5000/year gross was considered a good middle-class income). It also took up a lot of space in the house and required a considerable amount of skill to use and keep running.
Since those days, we've seen:
- Rigs that require no tuneup
- Memories, dual VFOs, noise blankers, DSP, greatly improved filters
- Readout almost to the Hz, excellent dynamic range, small size
- PCs that can log, send, dupe, and directly interface to the rig.
- Greatly reduced size, weight and cost (of rigs - antennas and the house to put them on/in is another story).
Seems like progress to me.
So where do we draw the line? Computer logging? Transceiving? No-tuneup rigs?
Seems to me the line is drawn where there's outside help. And the rules already deal with that; if a packet cluster or spotting net is used, you're in a different class than the isolated station.
The great thing is that today we have so many more choices.
73 de Jim, N2EY