[UK-CONTEST] 80m CC's and the data leg

[G3SJJ]

No but yes but ... I agree, we weren't and still don't want to show how 
clever we were at decoding CW by ear. ( I also recall failing the 
numbers section of my morse test!) That isn't the point though. This 
thread is really about whether you listen to a station, or look at it. 
Some of us prefer to listen whilst others are content to look.

Understand what you mean about a contesting, a late well known UK 
contester once wouldn't submit an entry to Commonwealth Contest because 
he knew he had been beaten even though he had spent 24 hours operating. 
I also know of a living contester who will only enter if he wins. Watch 
my score in tomorrow's 160m contest and you'll know it isn't me!

BTW, ask GU4YOX, he played Pike in a GU adaptation, he'll probably say 
is was the Scottish guy who said that!

Chris G3SJJ



Don Field wrote:
> Chris
>
> I think you are missing my point. When I came into radio, it wasn't to show
> the world how clever I was at decoding CW by ear (just as well - I was
> rubbish!). I joined the hobby because I thought communicating via the ether
> had a certain magic. I still do. And, yes, I enjoy reading about amateur TV
> in the 50s, or even the 25th anniversary of CB (believe it or not!). I
> thinlk, for some, competition has become an end in itself (I won't enter a
> contest unless I can win it ..) and the enjoyment has somehow gone. I think
> amateur TV is a great branch of the hobby - if I ever find time I will have
> a play - and it's ALL on a screen! There's room for everyone (I hope, or
> we're DOOMED as Corporal Jones would say).
>
> Don G3XTT
>
> On 11/17/06, G3SJJ <g3sjj at btinternet.com> wrote:
>   
>> I can understand what you are implying Don, but what those of us who are
>> complaining are concerned about is the slow but quickening move from
>> actually listening to the station to its display on a screen. You
>> mention improvements in technology, TRF, Superhet etc. Yes, but all the
>> time the signal in the end had to be decoded by human ears. Whilst
>> typing this, I am listening to 5A7A on 160m, note not watching it on a
>> screen!
>>
>> I recall just five or so years ago helping a local group at SSB FD, they
>> were OK running States on 15m because the band was wide and very little
>> QRM, move to 20m and the rate dropped. 80 and 40 overnight, forget it.
>> They couldn't H E A R.
>>
>> I take your point though. I mean, even recently in Radcom we had an
>> article about TV cameras in the 1950 and 60s. State of the art, eh?
>>
>> (Again, not meant abusively)
>>
>> 73 Chris G3SJJ
>>
>>
>> Don Field wrote:
>>     
>>> "You send info and you H E A R information. That to us is what amateur
>>> radio is all about."
>>>
>>> Well, actually Chris, if you go back to the early days, amateur radio
>>>       
>> was
>>     
>>> all about RADIO (well, WIRELESS if you must). It was about technology.
>>> Moving from a straight receiver to a TRF, then a Superhet, etc. On-air
>>>       
>> QSOs
>>     
>>> were about validating that new bit of technology. While, emotionally, I
>>> sympathise with your view and that of G4BUO, at the logical level it is
>>> nonesense to try and draw an arbitrary line in the sand and say that
>>> technological developments stop at that point. Or, indeed, to apply a
>>>       
>> filter
>>     
>>> to which technological developments are allowed - "Roofing filters good,
>>>       
>> PSK
>>     
>>> software bad" or whatever. This simply doesn't make sense at all, and is
>>> guaranteed to put off those youngsters who find this stuff compelling.
>>> Surely amateur radio is a broad church of all who enjoy the magic of
>>> communicating without wires - I am just as much in awe of copy from the
>>>       
>> moon
>>     
>>> using WSJT (not that I have done it, but I have seen it done) as I ever
>>>       
>> was
>>     
>>> at working across town on 80m in my early days. There may be computers
>>>       
>> in
>>     
>>> the loop, but it's still magic (and, in that example, it opens
>>>       
>> moonbounce to
>>     
>>> a much larger group of participants than would otherwise be in a
>>>       
>> position to
>>     
>>> play)!
>>>
>>> Don G3XTT
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> UK-Contest mailing list
>>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> _______________________________________________
>> UK-Contest mailing list
>> UK-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>>
>>     
> _______________________________________________
> UK-Contest mailing list
> UK-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/uk-contest
>
>