Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Charles Brabham wrote: wrote in message groups.com... It seems to me that one of the limitations of amateur packet radio is that it hasn't evolved much past the 1200 baud/BBS mindset of 20+ years ago. Heck, even trailingedge computer types like me have been running 56k dialup modems for almost a decade! Does your 56kb dialup modem work pretty good with your 2-meter rig? Wow! - Why didn't we BBS operators think of this YEARS ago! Ya missed the point, Charles. 1200 baud packet is a make-do, chosen to be quick and cheap. All you have to do is interface to an FM voice radio. Getting a significant improvement in bandwidth would mean actually *building radios* designed for the purpose. Which simply hasn't happened in large numbers. Arrgh. I havn't thought much about it, but yes, you are right. A rig with both fetures could be designed without too much trouble. One of the things that has been repeatedly promised and predicted for the various license test changes was that we'd get more 'technically inclined' new hams, who would revolutionize ham radio with 'new modes and modulations' and other neat stuff. Yet when it comes to actually *building radios*, we see even the self-proclaimed 'professionals in radio' buying them ready-made. And ginving those who *do* build their own rigs a raft of $&!# about doing so. Kinda makes ya wonder.... Kind of a sad commentary. When SSB became popular in amateur radio, hams built entire transmitters, receivers and transceivers for the mode. Once its popularity was established, manufacturers followed. When VHF/UHF FM voice became popular in amateur radio, there was a mix of homebrew and converted-land-mobile equipment used by hams. Once its popularity was established, manufacturers followed. But from what I can see, the packet folks aren't much interested in *building radios* from scratch. That's why the old standards are still in use. Bingo! I recall reading some *years* back about how TAPR was developing a UHF SS radio for packet. Don't recall that it ever got finished. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Cmd Buzz Corey wrote:
wrote: One of the things that has been repeatedly promised and predicted for the various license test changes was that we'd get more 'technically inclined' new hams, who would revolutionize ham radio with 'new modes and modulations' and other neat stuff. Yet when it comes to actually *building radios*, we see even the self-proclaimed 'professionals in radio' buying them ready-made. And ginving those who *do* build their own rigs a raft of $&!# about doing so. Kinda makes ya wonder.... You can forget about hams becoming more technical, that is a thing of the past. Todays hams are strictly plug and play appliance operators, the most technical they get now is how many push buttons are on the front panel and how many memories in the radio. The best we can hope for is that the test be geared such that they learn the rules and proper operating procedures. Some are, some aren't. I build everything I can, and a first class techno-weenie. Rumors of the demise of the technical ham are greatly exxagerated! - Mike KB3EIA - |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1415 Â September 24, 2004 | Broadcasting | |||
Amateur Radio Newslineâ„¢ Report 1400 Â June 11, 2004 | General | |||
209 English-language HF Broadcasts audible in NE US (04-APR-04) | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | Shortwave | |||
Amateur Radio Newsline™ Report 1379 – January 16, 2004 | Dx |