Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#52
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#53
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , Dick Carroll
writes: My mileage does not vary in the least, Hans. And this is a large part of what separates the......... Oh well, probably enough has already been written on the subject. Dick: Then allow me to say it. It separates the Real Hams from the unmotivated, disinterested 2-meter FM jockeys who wouldn't know a challenging and satisfactory radio operating experience if it landed on their big toe. --------------------------------------------------------- BTW, I think the last time I turned on my linear amp was when I worked that etherial signal from the other side of the planet, VK0IR, on a near-dead 20 meter CW band. Their response to my 100 watt calls was "didi dum dum didi", and "QRZ?" Running 1400 watts out, the recognition was immediate. Dick I'll bet. It would have been interesting to see if 250 watts would have made the trip. 73 de Larry, K3LT |
#54
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#55
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "N2EY" wrote in message ... In article , (K0HB) writes: (N2EY) wrote Would you enjoy it as much if your QSOs went through a series of automated digital systems that would insure perfect copy at both ends with no operator skill required? Because I'm a 'tinkerer' sort, with a strong sense of curiousity, certainly yes, at least the first handful of times, just to see what made it work. Wouldn't you? Like you, it would be interesting *the first handful of times*. But after that? You guys have managed to precisely describe what happened to packet radio, when packet/internet gateways were intoduced into the network, to "speed things up", and make it more "reliable". Hams using HF to route messages over long distances would find that they could no longer send those messages because they were already there, forwarded over the Internet in order to "speed things up" and make packet more "reliable"... As a direct result of this misuse of packet/internet gateways in order to "route around" hams using radio, an organized, global HF digital network, one of the most impressive accomplishments ever by hams around the world, was undermined and eventually destroyed. Dozens of digital HF stations around the world had to shut down, deprived of traffic while others were overloaded by tons of inappropriate overseas traffic shovelled into our VHF/UHF networks through the packet/internet gateways. And, as you noted in your post, U.S. hams found the new non-ham network intrusion to be interesting *the first handful of times*, then they lost interest in packet altogether. It was no longer ham radio. The packet/Internet gateways speeded things up as advertised, but in view of the fact that they undercut and eventually destroyed the network, they could hardly be said to have made the network more reliable on anything but a short-term, short-sighted basis. In Europe, where it was illegal to impose non-ham networking into an amateur radio network, the packet network continued to advance and grow all the time that ours was dying away from lack of interest. Interest in the Internet is often put forward as a cause for the setback in the U.S. digital network, but it should be noted that European hams had Internet access during this time as well, and it did not have that affect upon them, despite the fact that they had cable access to the Internet long before it was common here in the U.S.. The difference was that the Europeans stuck with ham radio in their digital ham radio network, and we didn't. It's that simple. The "series of automated digital systems that would insure perfect copy at both ends with no operator skill required" took the fun out of packet radio, here in the U.S., and that is why USPN considers non-ham networking to be off-topic, irrelevant to the business of rebuilding a digital amateur radio network here in the U.S., where the misuse and abuse of packet/internet gateways has already caused us so much damage, and has set us back so far. Besides, there is the simple, no-brainer fact that you cannot provide emergency backup for a network that you are dependant upon. - Like a special number to dial when the phones go dead, systems such as EchoLink and packet/Internet gateways are inherently useless for emergency communications and do nothing to advance our understanding and use of radio, and so are ultimately irrelevant to our purpose as hams. In the area of packet radio, we are making some great progress in eliminating this problem here in the U.S... Sad to say, the repeater folks may have to go through the same crippling slump and lack of interest before they too begin to clean up their act and get back to ham radio. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPN http://www.uspacket.net |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
PL-259 loss rate? | Antenna | |||
Why do monitors flicker on TV? | Antenna | |||
Single Sideband FM | Homebrew | |||
Latest News - Morse Code Test May Not "Die" at ITU Conference. | Policy |