Is Ham Radio Doomed?

[N4GIX]

Ham radio is the means that is used as the entry point, and exit point of an internet communications system. It's like using the telephone or a cable system to do the same thing, but that doesn't mean that a telephone or the cable system is ham radio. Only that ham radio is another way of entering an internet communications system. Do you see the distinction?

No one ever even hinted that the internet was "ham radio". You and others are arguing a distinction without a difference. It is an utterly irrelevant point.

 

[W5lz]

... Really? That's one of the implications I got from the question and how it's been treated here. Glad to know I was incorrect. Boy! That's a relief!

 

[golftango]

For the record, I have no immediate plans to jump off of a bridge.

Is ham radio doomed? No, I don't think so. It may shrink and some aspects of amateur radio may not look like they do today, but I think it will always be here.

For instance, I think hot spots are killing interest in digital voice repeaters. Why be tied to a fixed service that is run by someone else when you can run your own connection to the outside world (as long as you have Internet)?

For that matter, I think repeaters are doomed. I think it will be more and more difficult to get access to high profile repeater sites at the prices amateur radio operators are willing to pay (i.e. for free). "Garage" repeaters will proliferate which may put pressure on repeater coordinators to allow close spacing of repeaters. These garage repeaters, if they stay analog, will also have to connect to other repeaters which takes us back to hot spots or AllStar/Echolink/IRLP.

I think traffic nets are doomed. The older hams who are into traffic nets will slowly die off and so will their nets. I'm not sure traffic nets serve any real purpose any more and the "traffic" I hear on them seems to be mostly self-generated.

I think SSB DXing and contesting and ragchewing is doomed. As more and more people move into areas where they can't put up very good antennas, they will find it more and more difficult to communicate using SSB and 100 watts. Weak signal sound card digital modes, like FT8 will proliferate. Note that this would be a prime opportunity for CW to increase in prominence, but it won't because folks will go for the computer-based modes. As a result, CW DXing and contesting and ragchewing is also doomed.

I think ARES/RACES/SATERN/Skywarn are doomed. The served agencies will have less and less use for amateur radio as they become more and more reliant on infrastructure-based communications systems and social media.

The prepper aspect of amateur radio will flourish. As folks figure out that their cell phones and Internet access could disappear in a heartbeat, they will take greater interest in amateur radio. Sadly, without some training and familiarity in how to use their radios, these preppers will find that they still can't communicate. Note, this is a prime opportunity for the ARRL and every local amateur radio club to start addressing this aspect of amateur radio. These organizations need to start catering to the prepper crowd. I take the recent QST article about stockpiling water and food as a positive sign that maybe one person at the ARRL gets it.

So, chew on those topics for a while.

remarkably positive--you're much more optimistic than i am. and i guess i'm too old, but i don't see much of ham radio in operating through an openspot--i only use mine because the bright red light tells me when my internet is out.

oh, and your comment about ssb and 100w is spot on. i lived next to the huge airport in dfw for 25 years in a tiny apartment and was completely unable to practice ham radio in any form due to all the qrm/qrn from cells and pagers and air comms. although i do admit i could monitor the airport and air traffic fivers.

/guy (73 de kg5gt | wqpz784)

 

[N4GIX]

... Really? That's one of the implications I got from the question and how it's been treated here. Glad to know I was incorrect. Boy! That's a relief!

When out of town on a vacation I can use the remote control software on my laptop to control and operate my HF rig via the internet. Am I not using ham radio?

The new K4 shown at Hamvention this year allows a second KX4 HF station to operate a remote K4 HF station via the internet. Does this not constitute ham radio?

 

[Firekite]

Suppose I were to use 20m SSB to connect with a remote transceiver that cross-linked to a DMR radio, which in turn transmitted to a 'hotspot' linked to the internet, and contacted an amateur operator in Italy via his local repeater with his DMR HT, would that not count as "ham?"

Whether it meets requirements for card swapping is a different question, but sure, establishing remote radio communications involves ham radio.

We see the distinction, but someone using a DMR hotspot doesn't take anything away from you nor prevent you from enjoying the hobby in the ways you want to enjoy

Who said it did? I’ve found Zello to be very useful for certain applications, and I have no intention of discouraging anyone from using it, including the use of ham radios as mics for that purpose. I say go for it! Just don’t confuse it with ham radio.

When out of town on a vacation I can use the remote control software on my laptop to control and operate my HF rig via the internet. Am I not using ham radio?

The control of your rig is not ham radio, no, not any more than me using remote control software on my laptop to control and operate my home security cameras via the Internet. Using your HF rig to make radio contacts, on the other hand, certainly is.

 

[bill4long]

This thread is doomed.

Everything is doomed in that sense.

 

[N4GIX]

The control of your rig is not ham radio, no, not any more than me using remote control software on my laptop to control and operate my home security cameras via the Internet. Using your HF rig to make radio contacts, on the other hand, certainly is.

I apologize, I must be writing in Klingon to be so misunderstood. I said nothing about the method of remote control being "ham radio."

I'm making contacts on my home HF rig and antenna, but by remote control via the internet. *THAT* is certainly "ham radio."

And with that, I done with this non-productive endeavor.

 

[bill4long]

If you’re connecting a DMR hotspot, you’ve just made a very complex and costly alternative to Zello, with a radio being reduced to a simply microphone for WiFi voice chats.

It still requires a ham license to use the DMR radio, hotspot, and the frequencies employed, not to mention that very often the hotspot is linked up to repeaters as well as other hotspots. Also, hotspots need not be 20mw transceivers. I have a simplex hotspot that transmits 25 watts with a radius range of more than 5 miles. Not real ham radio? Moreover, repeater owners have been using the internet to link repeaters as well for some time. Is that also "not real ham radio"? Don't bother to answer because your opinion is your own, some will agree and and others will disagree. Bottom line, do what you want. Others will do what they want.

 

[bill4long]

-GIX-
You just shot yourself in the foot with that last statement. Those hot-spots do use the internet, which is basically the same as 'Zello'. There's no great harm in using the internet for a 'link', but don't confuse that with 'radio', it isn't. Which I think is the basis for that argument.

The only thing in common that Zello has with ham DMR hotspots is the internet. Ham radio application using the hotspot requires a ham radio license because of the radios utilized and the frequencies utilized. Moreover, hotspots are not always very low power. I have a 25 watt hotspot with a range of five miles. Also, most hotspots are linked to DMR amateur radio repeaters on the network. Try doing that with Zello without some sort of radio license.

 

[bill4long]

You can try to play FCC rule semantics to your heart’s content. When your “transceiver” is just a substitute for a Bluetooth headset for internet chat, it’s great, just difficult to count as radio.

Show me a bluetooth device that will go a city block. Show me one that will go five miles. Show me one that can network with 1000 other hotspots and repeaters.

 

[bill4long]

Yeah, just like Zello. When you reduce your transceiver to just a mic for an internet chat, you get to take advantage of all that it offers. Just don’t confuse it with radio any more than when I use my wireless headset to talk to customers in a GoToMeeting session. Technically it is wireless, sure, but it’s not ham radio. When I Skype or FaceTime someone, technically radio waves are involved, but it’s a license-free and far simpler and cheaper way to accomplish the same internet chat result. Great technology, just don’t confuse it with amateur radio.

There's no reason why anyone should confuse it with ham radio, because what you're describing isn't ham radio, and it isn't a DMR hotspot situation.

 

[Firekite]

Don't bother to answer

No? We have someone facetiously asking if working his HF rig is ham radio if it’s under remote control, so confused is he. And you’re demanding to know why high-powered DMR transceivers/repeaters aren’t ham radio, so confused are you.

When you’re operating a ham radio to communicate with remote stations, that’s ham radio. If you could substitute a Bluetooth headset and accomplish the same result (like how so many use an inexpensive low power hotspot), it’s hard to defend as ham radio.

 

[N4GIX]

Neither I nor [U]bill4long[/U] are the least bit confused or "facetious." Whenever I have a QSO with another ham operator and we are both using ham radios, it matters not one bit what other infrastructure lies between my radio and his radio. It *IS* "ham radio" regardless of what you think.

Florida has a fully linked system of ham repeaters that are linked via dedicated microwave links owned by Florida Department of Transportation. Does such linking make the system "not ham radio?" <sigh>

 

[Firekite]

It *IS* "ham radio" regardless of what you think.

Cool.

Florida has a fully linked system of ham repeaters that are linked via dedicated microwave links owned by Florida Department of Transportation. Does such linking make the system "not ham radio?" <sigh>

No one ever said anything that could possibly lead you to believe it wouldn’t be ham radio. I can’t tell if you’re sincere and legitimately confused or if you’re intentionally and knowingly throwing out random straw men or red herrings or whatever it is you’re doing.

 

[Lauri-CoyoteFrostbite]

".........Show me a bluetooth device that will go a city block. Show me one that will go five miles. Show me one that can network with 1000 other hotspots and repeaters.........."
bill4long




BlueTooth is a lot more powerful than many give it credit. It is, after all, low power 2.45 GHz RF energy that is assumed to be short ranged... but is it ?

Things You Should Know About Bluetooth Range

Many factors affect the range of Bluetooth Low Energy and Bluetooth 5. Learn about the distance limiting factors and get all the relevant numbers here.

blog.nordicsemi.com

And of course lets not leave out its big sister, WiFi.....
Here is some extraordinary things that were done with low power, license free routers-

http://www.cisar.it/images/2016/27HighCapacityLong.pdf

Lauri

_________________________________________________________________________________________


(........I credit these references to my Smart Aleck friend who read this as a challenge, said "wait just a minute here !"..... and took it )

 

[N4GIX]

And of course lets not leave out its big sister, WiFi.....
Here is some extraordinary things that were done with low power, license free routers-

http://www.cisar.it/images/2016/27HighCapacityLong.pdf

Thanks for the link Lauri. I read some months ago about a group in California who've set up a mesh network using flat panel antennas and Ubiquiti WiFi transceivers. They are experimenting with them to establish a "private internet" complete with email and browser support they can use in emergency situations where the "real internet" is unavailable for whatever reason.

If I remember correctly they have thirteen such links established already mountaintop to mountantop. It is a fascinating setup.

 

[N4GIX]

No one ever said anything that could possibly lead you to believe it wouldn’t be ham radio. I can’t tell if you’re sincere and legitimately confused or if you’re intentionally and knowingly throwing out random straw men or red herrings or whatever it is you’re doing.

You are the one who insisted that any non-ham intermediate medium between two ham radios made the entire enterprise "not ham."
I'm simply providing real-world examples that disproves your premise as mere "argumentum ad absurdum."

 

[Firekite]

You are the one who insisted that any non-ham intermediate medium between two ham radios made the entire enterprise "not ham."

Not at all. You misunderstand, hopefully sincerely. See below.

When you’re operating a ham radio to communicate with remote stations, that’s ham radio. If you could substitute a Bluetooth headset and accomplish the same result (like how so many use an inexpensive low power hotspot), it’s hard to defend as ham radio.

 

[bill4long]

Consider:

Two licensed hams each own Tytera MD-380 radios which require a license to operate on 443.000.
These hams live a few blocks away from each other and like to ragchew on 433.000 every night with said radios.
This can be diagrammed simply:

Ham1 <-> Tytera <-> RF 443mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham2

Is this ham radio?

Now let's say these two hams decide to extend their range using the Internet:

Ham1 <-> Tytera <-> RF 443mhz <-> Hotspot <-> Internet <-> Server <-> Internet <-> Hotspot <-> 443mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham2

Is this now suddenly not ham radio since they have introduced network linking to extend their range?

Now, we extend the network so that other licensed hams, including using repeaters, can participate with their licensed operation:

Ham1 <-> Tytera <-> RF 443mhz <-> Hotspot <-> Internet <-> Server <-> Internet <-> Hotspot <-> 443mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham2
______________________________________________________________________ + <-> Internet <-> Hotspot <-> 443mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham3
______________________________________________________________________ + <-> Internet <-> Hotspot <-> 443mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham4
______________________________________________________________________ + <-> Internet <-> Repeater1 <-> 444/449mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham5
______________________________________________________________________ + <-> Internet <-> Repeater2 <-> 444/449mhz <-> Tytera <-> Ham6

Is this now suddenly not ham radio since they have introduced network linking between three or more nodes?

This seems to be what Firekite seems to be saying.

And we laugh and we laugh.

 

[Firekite]

Is this now suddenly not ham radio since they have introduced network linking between three or more nodes?

You can pretend to laugh as much as you like. At this point, you can’t claim you’re sincerely confused instead of outright trolling.