Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 200, Issue 16

To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 200, Issue 16
From: gary mankoff <garyjm88@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Aug 2019 11:19:47 -0700
List-post: <mailto:topband@contesting.com>
Jt65 is the way to go 

Sent from my iPad

> On Aug 6, 2019, at 9:00 AM, topband-request@contesting.com wrote:
> 
> Send Topband mailing list submissions to
>    topband@contesting.com
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>    http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>    topband-request@contesting.com
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>    topband-owner@contesting.com
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Topband digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
>   1. Re: 160 (Mark K3MSB)
>   2. Re: 160 (kolson@rcn.com)
>   3. History of DXing, was Re:  160 (kolson@rcn.com)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 17:56:34 -0400
> From: Mark K3MSB <mark.k3msb@gmail.com>
> To: kolson@rcn.com
> Cc: "topband@contesting.com" <topband@contesting.com>
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160
> Message-ID:
>    <CABdVoaCg3FQfuAPmzPEN=RMR+C1yK0iNzT=UHnm3cFnA45R4tg@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
> 
> Semi-Interesting post,  but not really applicable to the issue at hand.
> 
>>> To me, the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until
> the computer era
> 
> I have 4 patents in software engineering.    I've been doing software since
> about 1978 when I worked as a research assistant in my undergrad years.
> I'd be delighted to put my experience in software engineering and computers
> next to yours or anyone else's on this list,  but I'm pretty sure it's
> quite beyond the button-monkey level of knowledge required to use FT-8.
> 
>>> Hank Aaron didn't devalue Babe Ruth.
> 
> No he didn't, but I suspect he tried VERY hard to beat his record.   Both
> Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron used a bat, ball, and gloves.    That was a pretty
> level playing field.     Perhaps one day we'll have robot ball players
> mixed in with humans.    Do yo think that will fly?    Of course, closer to
> home,  we're now seeing where transgender issues are effecting competitive
> sports.     Competition needs to be equal,  and there's nothing to prevent
> different levels of competition,  but equality and fairness must exist
> within the same level.
> 
> As I mentioned in a related post while I was /HH6 in May,  my FT-8 oriented
> friend initiated an FT-8 sequence,  went to the bathroom,  and after coming
> out pointed out he made a QSO while in the bathroom.  He specifically did
> that to show me it could be done.     And FT-8 people want respect for
> that?    Sorry Charlie,  not from me.
> 
> Mark K3MSB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:36 AM <kolson@rcn.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> "The dogs bark, but the caravan rolls on" -ancient proverb
>> 
>> As I understand it, some of this discussion is based on the romantic idea
>> that we old timers had it tough but today it's all easy and without real
>> challenge. This charge is nothing new, so a little history might be in
>> order. The history of Ham Radio since the advent of the home computer has
>> been the gradual replacement of operator intervention with computer
>> initiatives in our operating activities. Let's look at some.
>> 
>> FT8:
>> Is ultimately just another digital mode, the only real difference is that
>> more of the automation is built in from the start. But, in principal, any
>> of the digital modes (indeed any mode at all) can be made as automated as
>> one desires these days. For those under 45 (hi hi), to operate RTTY back in
>> the day required a thing called a Terminal Unit to translate the mark/space
>> signals to voltage levels to feed a Teletype machine (which was basically a
>> big, noisy, heavy duty typewriter). But that hasn't been the reality for
>> RTTY for a long time. RTTY is now as easy as downloading a program, only
>> marginally more difficult than operating FT8. After all, the packet cluster
>> can give you the who and where and the program tunes your radio to the
>> proper frequency. You press "send" until you get a reply (if you are
>> working a rare DX counter operating split there can be some more to it) and
>> the computer logs it after you make the contact and can even send the
>> logging in to LOTW for credit.
>> 
>> DXing:
>> Originally required hours and hours in front of the radio, tuning and
>> looking for the DX. Now there were things like DX nets, and
>> newsletters/bulletins and the like to help a bit and DXpeditions were
>> publicised in magazines and word of mouth. But with the advent of the
>> computer and packet radio, all that changed. Decades ago, a friend of mine
>> developed a computer program to track your DX totals and generate mailing
>> labels for the QSL's. He interfaced that with the Packet and when a new
>> coun... err... entity came on the air, his computer would send "DX" (in CW,
>> of course) and he could walk back to the shack, work the counter and go
>> back to the ball game. Quite a culture shock for the guys still tuning
>> around on their National HRO's. Now the DX cluster is an entrenched reality
>> along with Skimmer etc. No sitting in front of the rig necessary. And
>> QSLing in the day was a royal PITA, now you just print out the labels and
>> download the LOTW credits.
>> 
>> Contesting:
>> There is a film (now video, produced by a NFL films dude!) from decades
>> ago on YouTube that shows the DX contest from the perspective of a bunch of
>> the Frankford Radio Club participants. Again, if you are not over 45 it may
>> be a bit of a mystery what's going on. There is no Packet cluster, so DX
>> callouts happened on 2m FM! And you will see lots of paper. They are Log
>> Sheets (where you wrote down your contacts) and Cross Check sheets (where
>> you kept track of you contacts by listing them alphabetically so you
>> wouldn't work too many duplicate contacts). After the contest, you would
>> have to "redupe" your log to try and catch dupes that got past in the heat
>> of battle, this would take a week or two of intermittent effort. And a
>> fabulous talent for a contester to have was a good level of call recall (hi
>> hi), the more guys you rememberd you worked the less you had to refer to
>> the Cross Check sheet. Of course, all this is gone, replaced by our
>> computer running a program like N1MM (or CT in th
>> e olden times).
>> 
>> I could go on (but mercifully won't), the point is that this is all part
>> of a natural progression, an inevitable part of human innovation. To me,
>> the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the
>> computer era. You could argue that we have devalued their accomplishments
>> (you can also argue they had more fun, but that's another post). But I
>> would argue that everyone's accomplishments stand on their own according to
>> their time, circumstances and operating preferences. Hank Aaron didn't
>> devalue Babe Ruth. I would also argue that the world keeps turning and the
>> caravan is inexorable...
>> 
>> 73, Kevin K3OX
>> 
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:30:09 -0400 (EDT)
> From: kolson@rcn.com
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160
> Message-ID: <1576779829.52191331.1565058609448.JavaMail.root@rcn.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> I was shooting for somewhat interesting, so it's nice to hear that I made it 
> all the way to semi-interesting!
> 
> Mark, I am not sure why you felt compelled to defend your software expertise, 
> but I don't think anyone intended to demean you in any way. If it came off 
> that way, I apologize.
> 
> Now I have worked new countries on RTTY with my IC-7300 untethered to a 
> computer. All it took was a) tune to the frequency of the DX cluster callout 
> b) push message buttons until I worked the station c) Log it. So someone with 
> your level of expertise surely would agree that that process with todays 
> technology could be reduced to one button push. 
> 
> Further, since our computers can tune our radios, access DX cluster callouts, 
> operate skimmer for more stations, decode any digital mode (and for that 
> matter, CW and through voice recognition, SSB), switch our antennas, turn our 
> rotors, access our DXCC records, interface with propagation software and real 
> time solar indices, log the contacts, send the results to LOTW and print 
> labels for QSL's, in principal, the station can be automated to any degree 
> the software designer desires and has the chops to implement. 
> 
> Not to say that would be more fun. In fact, when computer contest logging 
> came along I wasn't a big fan. But the world went on and now hardly anyone 
> would (gulp) PAPER LOG! I would rather work CW, but I will work SSB and FT8 
> when it suits me.
> 
> Now regarding your baseball comment I feel on more solid ground. The game of 
> baseball in Ruth's and Aaron's day was almost night and day different. In 
> fact, Ruth had to play most of his games in the daytime summer heat, Aaron 
> played most of his games at night for most of his career. And Ruth didn't 
> have to face any Afro-American pitchers no matter how good they were (for 
> obvious reasons). In Aaron's day, the balls were tighter and more 
> consistently manufactured, the gloves larger (improving defensive efficiency) 
> and the bats had thinner handles (allowing higher bat speeds). In addition, 
> the fields were better maintained (and in some cases, had artificial turf) 
> and the era of dedicated relief pitchers had arrived (in Ruth's day, relief 
> pitchers were generally washed up starters only used in desperation). I could 
> go on, but no one seriously interested thinks you can directly compare the 
> records of players in different eras. And a large contributor to this was 
> technology, like the cha
 ng
> es in Ham Radio are.
> 
> As far as your Bathroom comment, I have known guys who could do that while 
> working a CW contest with the addition of a low-tech cup, hi hi.
> 
> 73, Kevin K3OX
> 
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mark K3MSB <mark.k3msb@gmail.com>
> To: kolson@rcn.com
> Cc: topband@contesting.com
> Sent: Mon, 05 Aug 2019 17:56:34 -0400 (EDT)
> Subject: Re: Topband: 160
> 
> Semi-Interesting post,  but not really applicable to the issue at hand.
>>> 
> To me, the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the 
> computer era 
> 
> I have 4 patents in software engineering.    I've been doing software since 
> about 1978 when I worked as a research assistant in my undergrad years.   I'd 
> be delighted to put my experience in software engineering and computers next 
> to yours or anyone else's on this list,  but I'm pretty sure it's quite 
> beyond the button-monkey level of knowledge required to use FT-8.
>>> 
> Hank Aaron didn't devalue Babe Ruth.
> No he didn't, but I suspect he tried VERY hard to beat his record.   Both 
> Babe Ruth and Hank Aaron used a bat, ball, and gloves.    That was a pretty 
> level playing field.     Perhaps one day we'll have robot ball players mixed 
> in with humans.    Do yo think that will fly?    Of course, closer to home,  
> we're now seeing where transgender issues are effecting competitive sports.   
>   Competition needs to be equal,  and there's nothing to prevent different 
> levels of competition,  but equality and fairness must exist within the same 
> level.
> As I mentioned in a related post while I was /HH6 in May,  my FT-8 oriented 
> friend initiated an FT-8 sequence,  went to the bathroom,  and after coming 
> out pointed out he made a QSO while in the bathroom.  He specifically did 
> that to show me it could be done.     And FT-8 people want respect for that?  
>   Sorry Charlie,  not from me.  
> 
> Mark K3MSB
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2019 at 11:36 AM <kolson@rcn.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> "The dogs bark, but the caravan rolls on" -ancient proverb
> 
> 
> As I understand it, some of this discussion is based on the romantic idea 
> that we old timers had it tough but today it's all easy and without real 
> challenge. This charge is nothing new, so a little history might be in order. 
> The history of Ham Radio since the advent of the home computer has been the 
> gradual replacement of operator intervention with computer initiatives in our 
> operating activities. Let's look at some.
> 
> 
> FT8: 
> 
> Is ultimately just another digital mode, the only real difference is that 
> more of the automation is built in from the start. But, in principal, any of 
> the digital modes (indeed any mode at all) can be made as automated as one 
> desires these days. For those under 45 (hi hi), to operate RTTY back in the 
> day required a thing called a Terminal Unit to translate the mark/space 
> signals to voltage levels to feed a Teletype machine (which was basically a 
> big, noisy, heavy duty typewriter). But that hasn't been the reality for RTTY 
> for a long time. RTTY is now as easy as downloading a program, only 
> marginally more difficult than operating FT8. After all, the packet cluster 
> can give you the who and where and the program tunes your radio to the proper 
> frequency. You press "send" until you get a reply (if you are working a rare 
> DX counter operating split there can be some more to it) and the computer 
> logs it after you make the contact and can even send the logging in to LOTW 
> for credit.
> 
> 
> DXing: 
> 
> Originally required hours and hours in front of the radio, tuning and looking 
> for the DX. Now there were things like DX nets, and newsletters/bulletins and 
> the like to help a bit and DXpeditions were publicised in magazines and word 
> of mouth. But with the advent of the computer and packet radio, all that 
> changed. Decades ago, a friend of mine developed a computer program to track 
> your DX totals and generate mailing labels for the QSL's. He interfaced that 
> with the Packet and when a new coun... err... entity came on the air, his 
> computer would send "DX" (in CW, of course) and he could walk back to the 
> shack, work the counter and go back to the ball game. Quite a culture shock 
> for the guys still tuning around on their National HRO's. Now the DX cluster 
> is an entrenched reality along with Skimmer etc. No sitting in front of the 
> rig necessary. And QSLing in the day was a royal PITA, now you just print out 
> the labels and download the LOTW credits.
> 
> 
> Contesting:
> 
> There is a film (now video, produced by a NFL films dude!) from decades ago 
> on YouTube that shows the DX contest from the perspective of a bunch of the 
> Frankford Radio Club participants. Again, if you are not over 45 it may be a 
> bit of a mystery what's going on. There is no Packet cluster, so DX callouts 
> happened on 2m FM! And you will see lots of paper. They are Log Sheets (where 
> you wrote down your contacts) and Cross Check sheets (where you kept track of 
> you contacts by listing them alphabetically so you wouldn't work too many 
> duplicate contacts). After the contest, you would have to "redupe" your log 
> to try and catch dupes that got past in the heat of battle, this would take a 
> week or two of intermittent effort. And a fabulous talent for a contester to 
> have was a good level of call recall (hi hi), the more guys you rememberd you 
> worked the less you had to refer to the Cross Check sheet. Of course, all 
> this is gone, replaced by our computer running a program like N1MM (or CT in 
 th
> 
> e olden times). 
> 
> 
> I could go on (but mercifully won't), the point is that this is all part of a 
> natural progression, an inevitable part of human innovation. To me, the guys 
> who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the computer era. 
> You could argue that we have devalued their accomplishments (you can also 
> argue they had more fun, but that's another post). But I would argue that 
> everyone's accomplishments stand on their own according to their time, 
> circumstances and operating preferences. Hank Aaron didn't devalue Babe Ruth. 
> I would also argue that the world keeps turning and the caravan is 
> inexorable...
> 
> 
> 73, Kevin K3OX  
> 
> 
> _________________
> 
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2019 22:55:38 -0400 (EDT)
> From: kolson@rcn.com
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: History of DXing, was Re:  160
> Message-ID: <1644487673.52284198.1565060138546.JavaMail.root@rcn.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
> 
> To me, the guys who really have a beef are the guys from after WW2 until the 
> computer era.
> 
> BTW, to give you an idea what I mean, I can most highly recommend the book 
> W6AM, Amateur Radio's Pioneer. It's a fascinating book about an interesting 
> and determined man and a legend in the annals of DXing, Don Wallace, who died 
> in 1985. If you are interested in DXing and history (or the history of 
> DXing), this is a must read.
> 
> 73, Kevin K3OX
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Subject: Digest Footer
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Topband mailing list
> Topband@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/topband
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> End of Topband Digest, Vol 200, Issue 16
> ****************************************
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: Topband: Topband Digest, Vol 200, Issue 16, gary mankoff <=