This morning I talked to a guy in Colorado for over half an hour via
shortwave (40 meter ham radio). A bit later I talked to a VK station
(Australia). I live in Michigan. I can imagine what it would cost to
make a phone call to those places. But for the price of a small amount
of electricity (and a radio of course) I was able to talk to them (via
efficient SSB). Do I think shortwave has a future? Yes I do.

Jim

On 6 Jun 2005 22:42:35 GMT, "Mike Terry"
wrote:

I am interested in the latest views on this topic.

What do you think - has shortwave got a future?

Views/links to articles would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

Mike

"R.F. Collins" wrote:

This morning I talked to a guy in Colorado for over half an hour via
shortwave (40 meter ham radio). A bit later I talked to a VK station
(Australia). I live in Michigan. I can imagine what it would cost to
make a phone call to those places. But for the price of a small amount
of electricity (and a radio of course) I was able to talk to them (via
efficient SSB). Do I think shortwave has a future? Yes I do.

In deference to Mr. Terry I believe he was addressing the issue of shortwave
broadcasting rather than amateur radio. It goes without saying that the 'use' of
shortwave, in general, will continue for some time.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Besides my obvious plug for ham radio, I was also implying that I
don't believe "AM" can continue to be the standard for shortwave
transmission (due to power costs). I don't really think DRM is the
solution either. SSB is more efficient and can be decoded without the
added costs associated wth a proprietary system.

My point is that for shortwave broadcasting to continue, cost of
transmission and reception will be the top priority. Content is
unfortunately not as important.

Just my carefully disguised opinion. Not so much now.

Jim

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:33:50 -0400, dxAce
wrote:



"R.F. Collins" wrote:

This morning I talked to a guy in Colorado for over half an hour via
shortwave (40 meter ham radio). A bit later I talked to a VK station
(Australia). I live in Michigan. I can imagine what it would cost to
make a phone call to those places. But for the price of a small amount
of electricity (and a radio of course) I was able to talk to them (via
efficient SSB). Do I think shortwave has a future? Yes I do.

In deference to Mr. Terry I believe he was addressing the issue of shortwave
broadcasting rather than amateur radio. It goes without saying that the 'use' of
shortwave, in general, will continue for some time.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

"R.F. Collins" wrote:

Besides my obvious plug for ham radio, I was also implying that I
don't believe "AM" can continue to be the standard for shortwave
transmission (due to power costs). I don't really think DRM is the
solution either. SSB is more efficient and can be decoded without the
added costs associated wth a proprietary system.

My point is that for shortwave broadcasting to continue, cost of
transmission and reception will be the top priority. Content is
unfortunately not as important.

Just my carefully disguised opinion. Not so much now.

Well, it was indeed carefully disguised. :-)

dxAce
Michigan
USA

On Mon, 06 Jun 2005 19:32:03 -0400, R.F. Collins wrote:

This morning I talked to a guy in Colorado for over half an hour via
shortwave (40 meter ham radio). A bit later I talked to a VK station
(Australia). I live in Michigan. I can imagine what it would cost to
make a phone call to those places.

Five cents a minute on Callvantage (which I happened to check). that's only
$3 an hour (and falling).......


But for the price of a small amount
of electricity (and a radio of course) I was able to talk to them (via
efficient SSB). Do I think shortwave has a future? Yes I do.

Jim

On 6 Jun 2005 22:42:35 GMT, "Mike Terry"
wrote:

I am interested in the latest views on this topic.

What do you think - has shortwave got a future?

Views/links to articles would be very much appreciated.

Thanks

Mike