RadioBanter - View Single Post

Steve Bonine · March 17th 07, 03:25 PM posted to rec.radio.amateur.moderated

wrote:
On Mar 17, 2:19�am, "Dee Flint" wrote:

My question on this is why would we be sending large amounts of data on
amateur radio?

I can think of a couple uses for it, Dee.

First there's emergency/public service comms. The served agencies
are used to being able to send emails with sizable attachments through
the usual networks. A mode that would let them do that via amateur
radio
when the usual networks are not available would be a really good tool
in the emcomm toolbox. IMHO it's the thinking pushing WinLink.

Yes, I agree that this is exactly what's pushing WinLink.

This is one of those areas in which I have very strong opinions both pro
and con. It's almost like the devil on one shoulder and an angel on the
other, each speaking into one ear.

On the pro side, it really makes a lot of sense in theory. If we hams
could offer this kind of capability to emergency agencies, it would
provide a much-needed communications capability in times of disaster.
But it would need to be stand-alone and not depend upon repeaters that
might be out of service, which to me implies HF.

On the con side, a real disaster is the worst possible scenario for
trying to get this technology to work reliably. You're potentially in a
high-noise low-signal poor-antenna situation. The equipment required is
fairly complex, and you need a fair amount of technical knowledge to set
it up. When I build a mental image of someone at a shelter trying to
set up this gear, it's hard for me to see success. Finally there's the
issue of what data gets sent; some of it probably is not appropriate for
transmission using amateur radio.

Second, there are plenty of times in an ordinary QSO when it
would be good to be able to send a picture, station description,
article, a sound clip, etc. directly by radio, and have it in digital
format at the other end. In the past, such modes as SSTV have
gained limited acceptance because they required lots of extra
apparatus, but with the widespread acceptance of PCs today
the big limitation is software, not hardware.

This one I find intriguing. I do think that if the capability existed,
and did not require purchase of hardware in addition to a PC, that it
would be interesting to enough hams to create a critical mass. It
provides an alternative playground for hams who prefer to experiment
using the keyboard of their PC rather than their soldering iron.

73, Steve KB9X