Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by WF4W, May 21, 2019.
...numbers, cards, whatever.
And look what happened - auto digital qsos. Maybe ‘they’ were right.
Some of those have used other means in the past to achieve their goals. Automation is only the latest 'tool'.
I just dont get it.
Is WAS that important?
Is DXCC that important?
Once you achieve them is that it? Is there anything left in the hobby for you?
How is this in any way harming the mode or amateur radio?
Most humans are like water - the follow the easiest path (i.e path of least resistance). . .
the 'harm' is to other modes - so when 10m or 6m is open, for example, there is activity in the FT8 subband but no CW or Phone. . . there are times when I hear 10m CW beacons, can't find anyone on CW or SSB, but hear FT8. FOR ME, IN MY OPINION, this is the harm caused by FT8
I don’t think we can harm the mode. The debate is rather the harm it causes the hobby as a whole.
You described "remote control" which is not the same as "automatic control". When a station is remotely controlled a licensed operator must be at the Control Point and must directly monitor operations in progress to insure compliance with rules.
As described in 97,.109 (d) an automatically controlled station still has to have a control point (which can be a direct hands on point, or a remotely controlled point) but a control operator does NOT have to be a the control point during operation.
There are 4 key definitions involved in this issue:
97.3 (6) Automatic Control
97.3 (13) Control Operator
97.3 (14) Control Point
97.3 (39) Remote Control
Automatically controlled digital amateur radio communications have been occurring on HF for years. Packet station on 14.105 exchange messages using automatic control and have been doing so on a daily basis for years.
You don't see much flap over the automatic packet operations , in my opinion, because of the differences between these automatically controlled packet stations and the WSJT and Winlink modes, which are:
1. The automatically controlled packet station occupy basically one frequency per band, allowing multiple users at the same time.
2. There is no automatic logging and no expectation of awards credit by the users when there is not a control operator present on both ends of the QSO.
Awards credit should not be given, in my opinion, for any contact where an automatically controlled station is involved in either end of the QSO. Software designers could help this along and show good will by not programming automatic logging as part of automatic control operation. Another way to do the same thing is to create an ADIF propagation mode for Automatic Control contacts that would be included in the log record. Awards programs then could exclude Automatic Control QSOs from awards credited contacts.
Awards programs could also help the issue by a clear policy statement disallowing awards credit for contacts that involve automatic control on either end of the QSL, in the same manner that repeater involved contacts are not entitled to awards credit. Cheaters can always find ways around this, but it would be a good start.
You can't do anything on this mode other than give a quick report and log it. If there are no SSB rag chewers, isn't that a consequence of something else?
Once you consider the basic DXCC level as just the first step, there is lots left.