w0aew
10-10-2012, 02:12 PM
Ur 599 hr in Desperate, CO. Name Art. Hw cpy OM?
FB Art. Ur 559 hr in Depression, TX. Name Bill. Running 50w to a dipole.
You can probably predict the last few lines of such a "conversation" and maybe even lament the predictability of such a limited exchange. More prevalent on CW than with other modes, these dialogues can be even more abbreviated during contests in the voice and data sub-bands. You can hear true conversations with the voice and data modes on any given day, particularly the groups of three or more hams on 75 meters in the evenings when more participants can copy one another. You'll find their counterparts in the web conference modes and Echolink. However, do hams tinker with electronics for the social aspects of the hobby or the technical?
In the past few years I've become more interested in the technical than in the social facets of radio comms. From what I can gather, the first hams were intrigued with the idea of using radio waves to send signals wirelessly. Without the need for telephone or telegraph lines, it was possible to send and receive information through the air using designs published in popular journals and from parts found in mail-order catalogs and scrounged from around the home. Although primitive, it was possible to communicate with other hams hundreds or even thousands of miles away. You could impress non-ham friends and family with QSL cards...people who at that time were more likely to be astonished that you could even hear or "speak" with someone so far away than with whatever was actually communicated. These days, with instant communication anywhere on the planet only a few keystrokes away, and available to anyone with a few bucks to spend, the media used are less important than the message. Most hams no longer attempt to impress family or friends with their DX contacts. Instead, they generally are asked "what did you talk about?" You'll probably try to change the subject at that point. "Hey, no monthly fees!" Or, "See that little wire in the tree? I did it with only that!" (And a thousand bucks worth of radio.) However, I'm once again intrigued with the technical aspect of the hobby, and I'm only trying to impress myself. How can I establish a communications link over long distances with the least RF power?
I got back into the hobby around 1990 (after about 15 years QRT) with QRP CW rigs that I build from designs published mostly in 73 magazine. With just a few inexpensive, readily available parts I could assemble small radios capable of communicating thousands of miles. This was truly a challenge given that I lived in a townhome at the time: no yard, and talk about HOA restrictions. But with a couple watts and a loop nailed to the rafters in the attic, I easily worked stations on this continent and occasionally in Asia and Europe. With a two-meter HT, a computer, and a J-pole suspended by a string in the aforementioned attic, I even exchanged a packet message with the space station. Although I did enjoy occasionally chewing the rag with other hams, the prime motivator for me was hearing weak signals and deciphering enough information to understand where the other guy was and what gear he was using. I assume similar motivation for the other ham. What we had in common was that interest in the vagaries of RF propagation, simple equipment, and an understanding of how all that stuff worked (or didn't).
Over the years since, I've built on that interest with what various software geniuses have been doing with weak-signal HF communications. For example, Joe Taylor (K1JT) developed very robust software for EME and VHF/UHF experiments in weak-signal recovery. Variations of this software are now being used for weak-signal HF communications. A signal can be retrieved with strengths in the -27 dB range. In the WSPR system, a wholly automated exchange of low-power stations is globally mapped (http://wsprnet.org/drupal/node) with the information broken out by band, time-periods, station location, km/watt, etc. No conversations...just data regarding RF propagation and power (generally, how low can you go and still achieve basic contact?). This is not the sort of ham radio that appeals to those enjoy good ragchews. But even those folks can get into the act with other software.
Robust, soundcard-based data modes like Olivia, MFSK, MT-63, DominoEX and a host of others are cheap (or free), will run on the most basic home computer, require modest HF gear, and let you enjoy a good conversation and, at the same time, pique your curiosity about establishing communications that would be difficult, maybe impossible, using more familiar modes like CW or SSB. I've used Olivia to have conversations over half an hour with Australian or European hams when I wasn't sure if I was even hearing their signal or picking up a reasonably visible trace on the waterfall screen. That's why protocols are being established so that hams can "park" their rigs on a particular frequency to await a CQ that they can't see or hear.
Although I still have fun restoring and using old boat anchors, and CW is still my preferred mode when I just want to relax and listen to that rhythmical sound, I am intrigued by the ingenuity of those who develop these low-power and inexpensive means to recover intelligence from weak signals distorted by a mishmash of atmospheric hash and who provide these tools to the rest of us to experiment with. I'd like to think that I'm as fascinated as those hams of yesteryear with their spark-gap transmitters and coherers picking up a signal from far away.
So, what intrigues you most about the hobby?
FB Art. Ur 559 hr in Depression, TX. Name Bill. Running 50w to a dipole.
You can probably predict the last few lines of such a "conversation" and maybe even lament the predictability of such a limited exchange. More prevalent on CW than with other modes, these dialogues can be even more abbreviated during contests in the voice and data sub-bands. You can hear true conversations with the voice and data modes on any given day, particularly the groups of three or more hams on 75 meters in the evenings when more participants can copy one another. You'll find their counterparts in the web conference modes and Echolink. However, do hams tinker with electronics for the social aspects of the hobby or the technical?
In the past few years I've become more interested in the technical than in the social facets of radio comms. From what I can gather, the first hams were intrigued with the idea of using radio waves to send signals wirelessly. Without the need for telephone or telegraph lines, it was possible to send and receive information through the air using designs published in popular journals and from parts found in mail-order catalogs and scrounged from around the home. Although primitive, it was possible to communicate with other hams hundreds or even thousands of miles away. You could impress non-ham friends and family with QSL cards...people who at that time were more likely to be astonished that you could even hear or "speak" with someone so far away than with whatever was actually communicated. These days, with instant communication anywhere on the planet only a few keystrokes away, and available to anyone with a few bucks to spend, the media used are less important than the message. Most hams no longer attempt to impress family or friends with their DX contacts. Instead, they generally are asked "what did you talk about?" You'll probably try to change the subject at that point. "Hey, no monthly fees!" Or, "See that little wire in the tree? I did it with only that!" (And a thousand bucks worth of radio.) However, I'm once again intrigued with the technical aspect of the hobby, and I'm only trying to impress myself. How can I establish a communications link over long distances with the least RF power?
I got back into the hobby around 1990 (after about 15 years QRT) with QRP CW rigs that I build from designs published mostly in 73 magazine. With just a few inexpensive, readily available parts I could assemble small radios capable of communicating thousands of miles. This was truly a challenge given that I lived in a townhome at the time: no yard, and talk about HOA restrictions. But with a couple watts and a loop nailed to the rafters in the attic, I easily worked stations on this continent and occasionally in Asia and Europe. With a two-meter HT, a computer, and a J-pole suspended by a string in the aforementioned attic, I even exchanged a packet message with the space station. Although I did enjoy occasionally chewing the rag with other hams, the prime motivator for me was hearing weak signals and deciphering enough information to understand where the other guy was and what gear he was using. I assume similar motivation for the other ham. What we had in common was that interest in the vagaries of RF propagation, simple equipment, and an understanding of how all that stuff worked (or didn't).
Over the years since, I've built on that interest with what various software geniuses have been doing with weak-signal HF communications. For example, Joe Taylor (K1JT) developed very robust software for EME and VHF/UHF experiments in weak-signal recovery. Variations of this software are now being used for weak-signal HF communications. A signal can be retrieved with strengths in the -27 dB range. In the WSPR system, a wholly automated exchange of low-power stations is globally mapped (http://wsprnet.org/drupal/node) with the information broken out by band, time-periods, station location, km/watt, etc. No conversations...just data regarding RF propagation and power (generally, how low can you go and still achieve basic contact?). This is not the sort of ham radio that appeals to those enjoy good ragchews. But even those folks can get into the act with other software.
Robust, soundcard-based data modes like Olivia, MFSK, MT-63, DominoEX and a host of others are cheap (or free), will run on the most basic home computer, require modest HF gear, and let you enjoy a good conversation and, at the same time, pique your curiosity about establishing communications that would be difficult, maybe impossible, using more familiar modes like CW or SSB. I've used Olivia to have conversations over half an hour with Australian or European hams when I wasn't sure if I was even hearing their signal or picking up a reasonably visible trace on the waterfall screen. That's why protocols are being established so that hams can "park" their rigs on a particular frequency to await a CQ that they can't see or hear.
Although I still have fun restoring and using old boat anchors, and CW is still my preferred mode when I just want to relax and listen to that rhythmical sound, I am intrigued by the ingenuity of those who develop these low-power and inexpensive means to recover intelligence from weak signals distorted by a mishmash of atmospheric hash and who provide these tools to the rest of us to experiment with. I'd like to think that I'm as fascinated as those hams of yesteryear with their spark-gap transmitters and coherers picking up a signal from far away.
So, what intrigues you most about the hobby?