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 > ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
