Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Technical Advances That Have Killed Amateur Radio by Making It Too Easy  (Read 3317 times)
AE5GT
Member

Posts: 409




Ignore
« Reply #30 on: February 13, 2019, 12:10:56 PM »

1. Amplitude Modulation (AM): 1900

2. Semi-automatic CW Keys (Bugs): 1902

3. Vacuum Tubes: 1906

4. Single Sideband (SSB): 1915

5. Radio Teletype (RTTY): 1922

6. Repeaters: 1935

7. Electronic CW Keyers: 1945

8. Transistors: 1948

9. Electronic digital programmable computers: 1948

10. Antenna Rotators: 1950

11. Integrated Circuits: 1958

12. Digital Signal Processing: 1960

13. Microprocessors: 1971

14. the Internet: 1972

15. CW Decoding Software: 1975

16. Packet Radio: 1980

17. DX Clusters: 1989

18. Pactor: 1991

19. PSK: 1998

20: FT8: 2017


You can engineer yourself out of existence , Auto Racing tried to to back in the 67 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STP-Paxton_Turbocar 
And if you get rid of the tires and wheels it would go even faster. They basicly outlawed them ,
You have to deal with the fundamental question , when does it cease to be a car

Recent "advances" in amatuer radio have the same consequences , Is an Operator an operator if he doesn't do anything ? Should you receive a DXCC for doing nothing ? Because thats where we are headed. If we are not there now we'll be there soon.

If one has been around for while , you only have to listen to the bands to know that activity is down . You can argue over the reasons . Most of those listed have had little or no effect. Fiber optic and cellphones are probably the biggest reason ...cheap long distance and personal communications.  The internet is really just a result of cheap long distance.

To me using FT8 in the RTTY Roundup , is like allowing a moped in the Tour De France  but only if you use the peddles , it makes no sense.
 


Logged
W1VT
Member

Posts: 3394




Ignore
« Reply #31 on: February 13, 2019, 02:29:09 PM »

My eQSL country totals are nearly identical--112 on FT8 and 114 on RTTY!
Logged
AA6YQ
Member

Posts: 3277


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #32 on: February 13, 2019, 06:45:41 PM »


You can engineer yourself out of existence , Auto Racing tried to to back in the 67 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STP-Paxton_Turbocar 
And if you get rid of the tires and wheels it would go even faster. They basicly outlawed them ,
You have to deal with the fundamental question , when does it cease to be a car

Recent "advances" in amatuer radio have the same consequences , Is an Operator an operator if he doesn't do anything ? Should you receive a DXCC for doing nothing ? Because thats where we are headed. If we are not there now we'll be there soon.

For at least the past 30 years, it has been possible to build a fully automated "DX station" that makes CW or RTTY QSOs 7x24; digital modes like PSK and FT8 have made it even easier to construct an automated station. No one has bothered because it would eliminate the exciting part of DXing, leaving only the dreaded paperwork.

If one has been around for while, you only have to listen to the bands to know that activity is down . You can argue over the reasons . Most of those listed have had little or no effect. Fiber optic and cellphones are probably the biggest reason ...cheap long distance and personal communications.  The internet is really just a result of cheap long distance.

You have that backwards: cheap long distance is the result of the internet; phone companies can't charge much for long distance when free internet-based alternatives are available. The internet is the result of research funded by DARPA back in the 1960s and 1970s.

To me using FT8 in the RTTY Roundup , is like allowing a moped in the Tour De France  but only if you use the peddles , it makes no sense.

RTTY using a macro-providing application like FLDigi or MMTTY is not much different than FT8.
 
Logged

#1 DXCC Honor Roll, DXCC Challenge 3000
W9FIB
Member

Posts: 2529




Ignore
« Reply #33 on: February 14, 2019, 12:48:57 AM »

Recent "advances" in amatuer radio have the same consequences , Is an Operator an operator if he doesn't do anything ? Should you receive a DXCC for doing nothing ? Because thats where we are headed. If we are not there now we'll be there soon.
Advances in HR are just that...steps forward with new technologies. But the key ingredient that remains is radio. You still need to be able to transmit and receive. You still need antennas and feedlines. You still need to know propagation. You still need skills to operate the equipment.

You can't just hand a computer geek a software package and expect him to have an operating station. Somewhere along the line you need to know radio skills to accomplish a QSO.

Easier? I would argue that all advances have made HR easier in their own way. Otherwise we would all still be using spark gap transmitters yet. Or we would still have big boxes of tubes instead of SDR transceivers. Or we would look for DX only with our ears instead of a waterfall display.

Do nothing for DXCC? Totally impossible without radio skills. Just that things like FT8 and other digital modes take the place of a CW key or a mic. But the computer still needs to be plugged into that magic box that sends and receives those modes from around the world and even the moon. And no matter what you run through that magic box, you still need to be a HR OP to make things work. And that's not nothing.
Logged

73, Stan
Wisdom is knowledge you gain after you know it all.
N0YXB
Member

Posts: 1558




Ignore
« Reply #34 on: February 14, 2019, 12:09:31 PM »

Easier? I would argue that all advances have made HR easier in their own way. Otherwise we would all still be using spark gap transmitters yet. Or we would still have big boxes of tubes instead of SDR transceivers. Or we would look for DX only with our ears instead of a waterfall display.

Do nothing for DXCC? Totally impossible without radio skills. Just that things like FT8 and other digital modes take the place of a CW key or a mic. But the computer still needs to be plugged into that magic box that sends and receives those modes from around the world and even the moon. And no matter what you run through that magic box, you still need to be a HR OP to make things work. And that's not nothing.

Indeed! To me this boils down to a silly argument about protocols or modulation methods. If someone likes CW, that's great, have fun. Rather operate FT8, or RTTY, or SSB, or AM? Well that's great too, have fun.
Logged
K7KB
Member

Posts: 797




Ignore
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2019, 10:22:11 PM »

Recent "advances" in amatuer radio have the same consequences , Is an Operator an operator if he doesn't do anything ? Should you receive a DXCC for doing nothing ? Because thats where we are headed. If we are not there now we'll be there soon.
Advances in HR are just that...steps forward with new technologies. But the key ingredient that remains is radio. You still need to be able to transmit and receive. You still need antennas and feedlines. You still need to know propagation. You still need skills to operate the equipment.

You can't just hand a computer geek a software package and expect him to have an operating station. Somewhere along the line you need to know radio skills to accomplish a QSO.

Easier? I would argue that all advances have made HR easier in their own way. Otherwise we would all still be using spark gap transmitters yet. Or we would still have big boxes of tubes instead of SDR transceivers. Or we would look for DX only with our ears instead of a waterfall display.

Do nothing for DXCC? Totally impossible without radio skills. Just that things like FT8 and other digital modes take the place of a CW key or a mic. But the computer still needs to be plugged into that magic box that sends and receives those modes from around the world and even the moon. And no matter what you run through that magic box, you still need to be a HR OP to make things work. And that's not nothing.

+1 You nailed it Stan.
Logged
K0UA
Member

Posts: 4786




Ignore
« Reply #36 on: February 19, 2019, 02:00:10 PM »

Easier? I would argue that all advances have made HR easier in their own way. Otherwise we would all still be using spark gap transmitters yet. Or we would still have big boxes of tubes instead of SDR transceivers. Or we would look for DX only with our ears instead of a waterfall display.

Do nothing for DXCC? Totally impossible without radio skills. Just that things like FT8 and other digital modes take the place of a CW key or a mic. But the computer still needs to be plugged into that magic box that sends and receives those modes from around the world and even the moon. And no matter what you run through that magic box, you still need to be a HR OP to make things work. And that's not nothing.

Indeed! To me this boils down to a silly argument about protocols or modulation methods. If someone likes CW, that's great, have fun. Rather operate FT8, or RTTY, or SSB, or AM? Well that's great too, have fun.

Amen x2
Logged

73  James K0UA
ARRL Missouri Technical Specialist
Pages: Prev 1 2 [3]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!