[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] RM11708 and the Future

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] RM11708 and the Future
From: Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2016 14:16:03 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Winlink (which to me is not even ham radio - more like VOIP or SKYPE).

There are a lot of things in ham radio that don't particularly float my boat but I am willing to consider the use of our allocations by licensed amateurs to be "ham radio." I don't want to start off an argument about hybrid network-RF operating - it's something we do via ham radio and that is sufficient for me. I happen to think it's pretty cool that hams have created a world-wide network to exchange messages using sophisticated digital protocols that in some cases, such as WINMOR, were developed non-commercially. You are entitled to your preferences, of course.

> What is gonna happen in an emergency when the Winlink's are all down.

Tom, I think you should educate yourself about the *current* Winlink system and its ability to handle traffic without any Internet connectivity. There have been a number of advances in the last decade to make the system a lot more robust and enable individual RMS stations to operate in a standalone mode.

> I participated for years in traffic nets and the fun was always in the proficiency of these guys to pass traffic on CW with great efficiency. A > LOT of these guys are now the ones I now work in the CW contests. Think most of the good ones came from traffic nets.

Yes, it was and yes, we did.  Thanks :-)

73, Ward N0AX
CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>