4 ms·

I find the general lack of interest in exploring new things in ham radio sad. I'm really happy that SDRs are cheap now and that's making things somewhat better.

I find the general lack of interest in exploring new things in ham radio sad. I'm really happy that SDRs are cheap now and that's making things somewhat better. It seems that most (or at least very many) hams just do contesting, where there is no innovation or even just learning something new at all and doing well is just a matter of good antenna placement, high power (except for QRP), training and perseverance in repeating the same letters for hours on end. For decades! Antenna and transmitter characteristics (the equipment is off-the-shelve anyway) and propagation conditions (in contests, all signals are 59 anyway) are really well-researched by now, so why are we wasting time and bands on contests? Unfortunately most hams don't take the suggestion to stop contesting too well.

intrasight 11y ago
Your statements demonstrate a misunderstanding of the fundamental purpose of ham radio and contesting. Ham radio is civilization's backup when the shit hits the fan. Contesting is how they maintain the backup network.
- Ao7bei3s 11y ago
  Communication in case of disasters is not the fundamental purpose of ham radio, it's one purpose. The others are research, education and exchange between peoples and just as important. Contests don't serve any of these well. Stations are being used outside of contests too, and DX QSOs are being done outside of contests too (besides, DX capability isn't that important in case of disaster. also the DX bands 'need' unwieldy antennas and the skywave unreliability and the ground/skywave gap doesn't help. the local 2m/70cm repeater would be much more useful -- portable 2m/70cm HTs are cheap+common.). There are hams that do care about disaster communication and prepare for it. These are good to have. It involves more than contesting though (e.g. actually transmitting information instead of skipping even trivial things like proper signal reports just to be faster, advance coordination with civil services, independence of power grid...).
  - intrasight 11y ago
    I agree that there are other purposes, but from society's standpoint "backup" is the fundamental purpose. If the existing contest rules are not well geared towards that objective, then they should tweak the rules.
    - Ao7bei3s 11y ago
      No, it really isn't. And this is not really up for discussion: it's on the test (question VA102 in .de). So don't take my word for it, read the ITU definition at http://life.itu.int/radioclub/rr/art01.htm http://life.itu.int/radioclub/rr/art01.htm: """amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations[...]""" Emergency communication is important, but ham radios other purposes are at least equally important. Society profits just as much from people getting into and experimenting with RF, or from communication between peoples. Also, it is generally understood that amateur radios role in disaster scenarios is to support official emergency responders, not itself be "societies backup". It's not about being independent of the state (I'm not implying you said that); quite the opposite. Contest rules are made by whoever organized the contest - typically the International Amateur Radio Union or a national or regional group. These are democratic and composed of hams. Besides, it isn't just a matter of rules, it's a matter of physics too. Contests are mostly about long-range (DX) communication. Disaster recovery needs reliable short- and mid-range communication. Different bands and/or different antennas.
grandalf 11y ago
Engineering as a discipline is about solving problems with constraints. Hams build communications systems (stations) that are intended to establish a communications channel with certain constraints. Contests let you test your engineering and are also a video-game-like flow experience. It's hard to find any activity that is more engaging and fun. It's an amazing sport. Most of the contesters I know are deeply interested in station building and in leveraging the technology as much as possible. Many have innovated lots of the computer systems, switching systems, and antennas that they are using. It's really sad to see someone (on HN no less) so negative about one of the more exhilarating aspects of the hobby. There is plenty of spectrum for everyone, and surely you can find areas that are interesting to you without casting a negative shadow on things that are interesting to other.
- Ao7bei3s 11y ago
  I'll have to think about your comment for a bit. I'd like to retract the "lack of interest in exploring new things" part. Firstly, because I was really wrong: plenty of new things are being worked on. Secondly, because not everyone can have a strong EE/CS background and push the state of the art. And ham radio is quite a technical hobby even at a basic level. Also, sorry for sounding so negative. I do recognize that ham radio is a hobby and people find contesting fun. I don't find contesting useful, but I know that's not the entire point and I see yours. However: engineering is also about solving problems right, whereas much of ham radio is about doing what seems to work. And contests let you use your station, not test it well.
  - grandalf 11y ago
    > contests let you use your station, not test it well. There are different dimensions to station testing. Contesters usually attempt to maximize the communications path with a wide geographical area. Since other stations are often using fairly poor antennas and low power, a contest station usually has high gain antennas and legal limit amplifiers... Asymmetric communications channels are just part of the game. A contest station that is S9 to you might be barely copyable somewhere else in the world. So there is antenna strategy (gain, rotatability, radiation angle, polarization). Not to mention tower placement, tower loading, inter-station interference, etc. There is also operator strategy... things like rate maximization, multiplier maximization (moving multipliers, being aware of band openings and propagation conditions, etc.). Not to mention fatigue, sleep strategy, when to eat, use the restroom, etc. The ergonomics of radio and computer interfaces (screens, knobs, CW paddles, antenna switches, headphones, etc.) are all areas for optimization. When you look at the composition of the team who wrote N1MM logger, it's a bunch of people who have had all sorts of high caliber software careers, including NASA. There are so many brilliant people who for the sake of fun and competitive spirit advance the state of the art. So yes, contesting serves no purpose (though it's conceivable that if something happened the mainstream communications grid we'd be glad such stations existed). But no sport serves a purpose, nor does any art. Contesting is both.

intrasight 11y ago

Your statements demonstrate a misunderstanding of the fundamental purpose of ham radio and contesting. Ham radio is civilization's backup when the shit hits the fan. Contesting is how they maintain the backup network.

Ao7bei3s 11y ago
Communication in case of disasters is not the fundamental purpose of ham radio, it's one purpose. The others are research, education and exchange between peoples and just as important. Contests don't serve any of these well. Stations are being used outside of contests too, and DX QSOs are being done outside of contests too (besides, DX capability isn't that important in case of disaster. also the DX bands 'need' unwieldy antennas and the skywave unreliability and the ground/skywave gap doesn't help. the local 2m/70cm repeater would be much more useful -- portable 2m/70cm HTs are cheap+common.). There are hams that do care about disaster communication and prepare for it. These are good to have. It involves more than contesting though (e.g. actually transmitting information instead of skipping even trivial things like proper signal reports just to be faster, advance coordination with civil services, independence of power grid...).
- intrasight 11y ago
  I agree that there are other purposes, but from society's standpoint "backup" is the fundamental purpose. If the existing contest rules are not well geared towards that objective, then they should tweak the rules.
  - Ao7bei3s 11y ago
    No, it really isn't. And this is not really up for discussion: it's on the test (question VA102 in .de). So don't take my word for it, read the ITU definition at http://life.itu.int/radioclub/rr/art01.htm http://life.itu.int/radioclub/rr/art01.htm: """amateur service: A radiocommunication service for the purpose of self-training, intercommunication and technical investigations[...]""" Emergency communication is important, but ham radios other purposes are at least equally important. Society profits just as much from people getting into and experimenting with RF, or from communication between peoples. Also, it is generally understood that amateur radios role in disaster scenarios is to support official emergency responders, not itself be "societies backup". It's not about being independent of the state (I'm not implying you said that); quite the opposite. Contest rules are made by whoever organized the contest - typically the International Amateur Radio Union or a national or regional group. These are democratic and composed of hams. Besides, it isn't just a matter of rules, it's a matter of physics too. Contests are mostly about long-range (DX) communication. Disaster recovery needs reliable short- and mid-range communication. Different bands and/or different antennas.

grandalf 11y ago

Engineering as a discipline is about solving problems with constraints. Hams build communications systems (stations) that are intended to establish a communications channel with certain constraints. Contests let you test your engineering and are also a video-game-like flow experience. It's hard to find any activity that is more engaging and fun. It's an amazing sport. Most of the contesters I know are deeply interested in station building and in leveraging the technology as much as possible. Many have innovated lots of the computer systems, switching systems, and antennas that they are using. It's really sad to see someone (on HN no less) so negative about one of the more exhilarating aspects of the hobby. There is plenty of spectrum for everyone, and surely you can find areas that are interesting to you without casting a negative shadow on things that are interesting to other.

Ao7bei3s 11y ago
I'll have to think about your comment for a bit. I'd like to retract the "lack of interest in exploring new things" part. Firstly, because I was really wrong: plenty of new things are being worked on. Secondly, because not everyone can have a strong EE/CS background and push the state of the art. And ham radio is quite a technical hobby even at a basic level. Also, sorry for sounding so negative. I do recognize that ham radio is a hobby and people find contesting fun. I don't find contesting useful, but I know that's not the entire point and I see yours. However: engineering is also about solving problems right, whereas much of ham radio is about doing what seems to work. And contests let you use your station, not test it well.
- grandalf 11y ago
  > contests let you use your station, not test it well. There are different dimensions to station testing. Contesters usually attempt to maximize the communications path with a wide geographical area. Since other stations are often using fairly poor antennas and low power, a contest station usually has high gain antennas and legal limit amplifiers... Asymmetric communications channels are just part of the game. A contest station that is S9 to you might be barely copyable somewhere else in the world. So there is antenna strategy (gain, rotatability, radiation angle, polarization). Not to mention tower placement, tower loading, inter-station interference, etc. There is also operator strategy... things like rate maximization, multiplier maximization (moving multipliers, being aware of band openings and propagation conditions, etc.). Not to mention fatigue, sleep strategy, when to eat, use the restroom, etc. The ergonomics of radio and computer interfaces (screens, knobs, CW paddles, antenna switches, headphones, etc.) are all areas for optimization. When you look at the composition of the team who wrote N1MM logger, it's a bunch of people who have had all sorts of high caliber software careers, including NASA. There are so many brilliant people who for the sake of fun and competitive spirit advance the state of the art. So yes, contesting serves no purpose (though it's conceivable that if something happened the mainstream communications grid we'd be glad such stations existed). But no sport serves a purpose, nor does any art. Contesting is both.