The first real debate about local spotting network with one club winning
over the other club was in 1946 in DC area.
I think the other club was PVRC or PVRC predecessor.
CQ WW was not yet called CQ WW.
I forget who wrote me about it. Shame on me.
The story was extremely fascinating.
N2AA might know at least a part of it all.
The spot QSP traffic was on some band that does not exist anymore.
Maybe 56MHz if I am not mistaken.
The other club was monitoring the traffic and I reckon they won.
I got a good explanation of it all but I have lost it during some change of
my email system.
If anyone knows what it was and who were the two clubs that had the really
vocal debate, I would appreciate to re-learn that part of contesting
history.
73,
Jukka OH6LI
2016-12-22 8:36 GMT+02:00 <donovanf@starpower.net>:
> Hi Jack,
>
>
> There were many more phases of spotting network development
> than you're aware of.
>
>
> It began with voice networks in the 1960s (maybe before). Soon
> adjacent clubs discovered that they could listen to each other's
> voice spotting networks, especially those voice spotting
> networks that started to use higher power and well sited repeaters
> during the 1970s and 1980s...
>
>
> The next revolutionary step was AK1A's Packet Cluster software
> in 1985, initially operated as individual packet nodes, then soon
> "clustered" together via relatively short distance RF packet
> backbones. Some of the RF links started to be operated at higher
> data rates.
>
>
> Those of us who had contacts in the telecommunications industry
> were able to "borrow" unused bandwidth to link more distant
> Packetcluster nodes.
>
>
> Soon those of us who had access to the internet primarily through
> universities started to use it to interconnect distant nodes, before
> long it started to interconnect to nodes in Europe and Asia. This
> much broader DX cluster interconnectivity placed severe loads
> on the typical 1200 packet RF backbones and user connections.
>
>
> When the public internet began to be widely available in the early
> to mid 1990s, end users started to connect to PacketCluster nodes
> via the internet. Direct user connections via the internet caused the
> bandwidth requirements to explode again and the RF backbones and
> user connections started to fade away. VE7CC and the DX Summit
> soon appeared providing direct internet access to hundreds of users.
> Very few RF user links are in use today and essentially all of the
> RF packet backbones are gone.
>
>
> The next revolution was VE3NEA's CW Skimmer. Before long
> N4ZR and his team developed the Reverse Beacon Network
> of interconnected CW and RTTY Skimmers. The bandwidth
> requirements exploded again (and again, and again) which lead to
> the development of much faster "DX Cluster" software such as
> AR-Cluster Version 5 and many major reliability and storage
> upgrades to the Reverse Beacon network servers.
>
>
> I'm sure we've not come to the end of this 30+ year development
> of DX spotting technology.
>
>
> 73
> Frank
> W3LPL
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: "Jack Haverty" <k3fiv@arrl.net>
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Sent: Wednesday, December 21, 2016 11:02:06 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] SO(Team) and SO(A)
>
> The recent NAQP conversations got me thinking...
>
> On 12/16/2016 10:03 AM, Steve London wrote:
> > the original rules, in the Jan/Feb 1986 NCJ:
> >
> > Entry Classification: Single-operator and multi-operator unlimited.
> > Multi-operator stations may be multi-transmitter but are limited to one
> > signal per amateur band. Use of helpers or spotting nets by single
> > operators is not permitted.
>
> Just an observation...on the way that the term "spotting nets" has
> evolved over 30 years, and some ideas:
>
> Thirty years ago, "spotting nets" involved amateur operators
> communicating over amateur radio to exchange spotting information.
> IIRC, these were mostly local voice networks using 2, 6, or maybe 10
> meters to exchange spots within a groundwave/line-of-sight region.
>
> Phase 2 was the advent of amateur packet on 2 meters, and similar
> "spotting nets" followed as computers appeared in ham stations.
>
> All of that involved communications by amateur radio, with computers
> getting involved as a new technology used both in spotting nets, logging
> programs, etc.
>
> Phase 3 was the advent of the Internet, and the movement of "spotting
> networks" to utilize other forms of communication and operate over a
> much larger region, even global.
>
> Perhaps a reasonable "next step" for contest organizers to consider
> would be to look back to Phase 2 - e.g., allowing an SO(A) category to
> use "spotting networks" if, and only if, they are implemented using only
> amateur radio communications.
>
> It might also be interesting to permit SO(Team) entrants, instead of
> being just a collection of uncoordinated SO operators, to use such
> "Phase 2" spotting networks, just amongst themselves, and explore how a
> Team can actually cooperate to better scores - e.g., finding mults,
> moving them, etc. This might also generate some of the "social
> networking" aspects and competitive environment of Team rivalries to
> attract younger hams?
>
> Parts of the Internet can be, and have been, implemented over amateur
> radio. The technology exists, but there's still quite a few challenges
> to using such an "Amateur Internet" for spotting during contests. Our
> communications just isn't as fast or widespread as the Internet's fiber
> infrastructure. But these challenges are all technical and don't
> require lots of money, land, or aluminum. Can today's advantages of
> spotting networks in contests be achieved using only amateur radio for
> communications?
>
> Just a thought...
> 73,
> /Jack de K3FIV
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|