[UK-CONTEST] CQ-100 et al

[Don Field]

I agree with Dave G4BUO that PLT/PLA is a real threat to our hobby. However,
I don’t believe that it is helpful to use that as an argument against
CQ-100.



Amateur radio is a house of many rooms. Unfortunately, the occupants of the
various rooms too often bicker with each other rather than presenting a
common front to the world at large.



Yes, CQ-100 is an application where no RF is to be seen. But there is
nothing new in that. Contesters have long enjoyed contest simulators where
they can practice off-air. Morse Runner will even simulate QRM and QSB, so
we can’t even argue that the unique aspect of going on air is that you have
propagation issues to deal with.



IARU have always supported, both morally and financially, the High Speed CW
championships, even though, again, there is no RF to be seen and many of the
leading contenders are not radio amateurs (unlike with CQ-100).



Yet, conversely, as Bob 5B4AGN points out, radio is everywhere – those who
say “why do you need radios these days” tend to forget their RF key fobs,
Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, GSM, etc.



In one “room” of our house are those who believe that if you haven’t built
it yourself it’s not amateur radio.



In another room are those who believe that if there’s a connection to
commercial telecomms links (Internet, etc.) it’s not amateur radio, I
suspect this is a peculiarly British phenomenon, deriving from the old Post
Office monopoly which prevented such links. I seem to recall that even back
in the 1960’s, the external speaker of Collins gear included phot-patch
facilities. Around 30 years ago I sat in a restaurant in Boston with top HF
ops K1MM and the late K1MEM and Bill phoned the restaurant using his 220MHz
handheld via the local repeater’s phonepatch to ask for another jug of beer
at our table! D-Star, Echolink, etc. are philosophically no different; only
the technology has changed (from analogue to digital).



In another room are the datamodes guys. I know quite a few DXers and
contesters who believe datamodes are anathema, but many other contesters and
DXers were among the first adopters of AX.25, for PacketCluster use (and,
incidentally, within a year or so of PacketCluster coming along, it was
linked between countries and continents by commercial landline circuits).
And, incidentally, I would rate people like K1JT, G3PLX and VE3NEA as some
of the great innovators and leading lights of our hobby, but they were
resposible for software including WSJT, PSK31, WSPR and Skimmer.



I could go (Oh, no, you cry!) but you get the idea. Personally, I think
pretty much any activity that reminds people that radio amateurs are still
alive and kicking is worth supporting, especially if it is a potential
recruiting ground. Many radio amateurs were vociferous against CB when it
was in vogue, yet is became one of our most fertile recruting grounds. Many
of today’s leading lights started in CB.



But it does all make the job of people like the editors of QST and RadCom a
tough one. Where do they draw the line? Whereas the editors of the CDXC
Digest, UKSMG or BARTG journals are praised because, inevitably, they can
target a very specific audience. And how do RSGB or ARRL define their
“marketplace”? As part of a recent RSGB strategy exercise, I asked some of
my bright young amateur radio friends how they saw “a day in the life” of a
young radio amateur in, say, 5 years’ time. Some aspects would leave many of
us cold, but these youngsters are the future of our hobby.



Let’s not dismantle too many rooms of the house, or we’ll only have a couple
left – just a shack (alebeit a “radio shack”).



Don G3XTT


2009/9/26 Bob Henderson <bob.5b4agn at gmail.com>

> Oddly enough Gerry...what you describe is in fact a radio.
>
> Isn't it a confusing world we live in.
>
> 73
>
> Bob, 5B4AGN
>
>