Author Archives: Bob K0NR

Paul Rinaldo’s Rule of Amateur Radio Progress

Posted on by

Recently on the AMSAT-BB email list, there was a discussion about some new satellites about to be launched. Some folks criticized the implementation of the satellite hardware (as in “they should have done this instead of that.“) Bob Bruninga, WB4APR, posted an excellent response that bears repeating:

Paul Rinaldo’s rule of Amateur Radio Progress:

Progress is made in Amateur Radio by letting energetic individuals move forward. Conversly, nothing in Amateur Radio is accomplished by complaining about other individual’s projects. Simple summary: If you don’t like their project, then go do or support your own choices. Get out of their way.

The service is where we are allowed to experiment as individuals. This means if you have an experiment, then do it. If someone else has an experiment you like, then contribute to it, support it, or get out of the way. It’s the individuals that move forward and do something that makes Ham radio progress.

Conversely, Its all the naysayers, thought police, kibitzers, complainers, arm chair lawyers and couch potatos that hold much progress back. Not one cloud of their hot air will move anything forward. The only thing it does is make us all look like old fuds and many of the would-be progressives just throw in the towel and instead of a great hobby, they go get a real job instead.

So, again, Ham radio is an unbelievably diverse collection of intersts, modes, techniques, applications, projects, missions, activities, directions, places, groups, frequencies, bands, devices, propagation, tests, events and experiments. Choose those you are interested in, jump in, contribute, move forward… Do not waste your time (and other’s) trying to hold others back from their interests.

NOTHING IS EVER ACCOMPLISHED PROGRESSIVELY BY TRYING TO FORCE
OTHERS INTO SPENDING THEIR TIME ON YOUR VIEW OF AMATEUR
RADIO.

The best you can do is find other people that actually do something and support them in a direction you want and hang on for the ride. I call this Paul Rinaldo’s rule of Amateur Radio, because I learned it back in the late 1970’s or so when I was on the board of directors and Paul was president of AMRAD which was working on the AX.25 spec, and trying to develop the early East Coast Packet System. We all met frequently, and everyone had ideas of which way to go. It’s the sentence that begins with “what they need to do is…” that Paul pointed out was pointless.

Or something like that. Over the years, in all the clubs and organizations of Amateur Radio, I find it the rule to live by. If you have an idea, do it. If someone else has an idea, either join it or support it. If it’s a dumb idea, it will die, don’t waste your time trying to assure its demise. But complaining about others people’s progress just makes no sense to me.

Bob, WB4APR

QSL Via the Buro

Posted on by

I was going through the Pile of Mail that had accumulated over the past few months. This is the non-urgent stuff that got pushed aside to be looked at later. I had two envelopes from the Zero QSL bureau, with about a dozen total QSL cards. Most of these cards were from my KB0CY/C6A Mini-DXpedition to The Bahamas.

So here it is January 2008 and I am just getting QSL cards from contacts made in December 2000. This is not really new news, as most hams are familiar with long delays for cards sent via the buro. But still, this is a really long time for our instant gratification society. In this case, I received these QSL cards 7 years after the contact.

How do you think this happens? I am not sure. I suspect that the typical ham might wait up to a year to send cards into their outgoing QSL bureau. Then the cards may sit there for a while….maybe another year? Then the cards get mailed to the US, ending up at the appropriate incoming QSL bureau…so add another year. Let’s say they sit there for another year and then get mailed to me. Add it up, it is 4 years, assuming long delays at each stage. It still doesn’t account for the full 7 years. Maybe the sending ham didn’t realize he needed the QSL card until he was scanning his log with an eye towards DXCC or some other award. This could cause an additional delay in when the card is initially sent.

Of course, I sent out cards in return, also via the Buro….wonder when they will arrive at the other end?
This points out the advantage electronic QSL systems such as eQSL and the ARRL Logbook of the World. Yes, I do appreciate the value of a well done QSL card that you can hold in your hand. But seven years is a long time to wait.

73, Bob K0NR

P.S. This is not a criticism of the volunteers that make the incoming QSL bureaus work…I appreciate their efforts.

Blame It on OPEC

Posted on by

I keep saying that I am not writing another word about the elimination of the Morse Code requirement for an FCC ham license. So this will be my last statement: I say blame it on OPEC.

At the start of 2007, I came across the Long Delayed Echoes blog, where Jeff KE9V made his 2007 New Years predictions, which included this:

Having thrown the gates wide open by eliminating the Morse code requirement for all amateur testing we learn that there’s nobody out there waiting to join the party. I predict no significant increase of new licensees in 2007.

Of course, Jeff’s prediction turned out to be correct (again!). The Morse Code requirement is irrelevant…which caused me to write this blog entry: Morse Code Testing: Irrelevant.

But yesterday, I see that Bruce Perens K6BP, founder of No Code International, says that “No Code Came Too Late to Help Ham Radio”. The Jeff KE9V response is here. Bruce is well-known in the Open Source, AMSAT and other techie communities, so I don’t dismiss his opinion lightly. Maybe he has a point…could it have happened differently? So that started me thinking again, which may or may not be a good thing and it often turns into another page on this blog.

So why did the Morse Code requirement emerge as the way to “keep the riff raff” out of ham radio? Well, that’s easy….it was because of those CBers (Citizens Band operators). The CB band was filled with a bunch of unlicensed, undisciplined fools that destroyed that radio service. It was obvious ham radio needed a barrier to keep them out. (Might have thought about an IQ test but that might be un-American.) Morse Code seemed to be the obvious tool.

Why was CB such a mess? Back in its early years, the CB folks were quite civilized and operated with both courtesy and call letters. But in 1974, the US Congress established a nationwide speed limit of 55 MPH. A large number of truck drivers decided that this was a really bad idea and adopted CB radios as the way to avoid speed traps on the interstate highways. The general public didn’t take long to catch on and suddenly every car is sporting a CB antenna, cruising down the highway giving out smokie reports and talking like a truck driver. The FCC Rules and call letters were quickly tossed aside. This really was a pop culture thing that just exploded. Even people that didn’t speed got caught up in the fun of watching for them smokies.
The 55 MPH speed limit was an emergency response to the 1973 Oil Crisis. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) decided to stop shipping oil to countries that supported Israel. The price of oil jumped to $12 per barrel. (Geez, that doesn’t sound all that bad this week.) The US Congress decided that if we all drove slower, we would use less fuel so they instituted the 55 MPH speed limit.

So if those dang OPEC guys had not raised the price of oil, we wouldn’t have had the 55 MPH speed limit in the 1970s. The CB boom would not have happened and there would have been no irrational fear of this “riff raff” getting into ham radio. This means that the issue of the Morse Code requirement might have been addressed with Logic and Thinking (instead of Fear and Religious Zeal). The Morse Code requirement might have been dropped a decade earlier.

Wait a minute! Maybe it was those guys in Newington trying to keep their favorite mode alive? Yeah, they probably used King Hussein of Jordan (JY1) as a means to influence OPEC and make the whole thing happen, all funded by my ARRL dues.

73, Bob K0NR

Ham Radio Ruckus on Digital Bandwidth

Posted on by

Things have been a little too quiet on the various ham radio email lists. That all changed when the FCC issued a Public Notice concerning RM-11392, a petition by Mark Miller N5RFX to modify the rules concerning digital emissions and automatic control. The petition is posted in two parts on the FCC web site: RM-11392 part 1, RM-11392 part 2. This is apparently the latest manifestation of the conflict around automatic digital messaging via the Winlink system. On the one hand, the Winlink folks are trying to implement an effective worldwide digital/email system that is valuable during emergency situations (read: Katrina). On the other hand, other users in the band are frustrated by spectrum used up by automated amateur radio stations, which may transmit on top of on-going amateur radio activity.

That is the short version of the story. I have tried to follow the deeper arguments about signal bandwidth, signal-to-noise ratio, the various forms of Pactor transmissions, the relative efficiency of various modes, etc. All I can conclude for sure is that this is another one of those religious debates that seem to be pop up from time to time. Dan KB6NU correctly points out that part of the problem is that people don’t understand the FCC rule making process. Email postings with titles like Will You Let FCC Kill Digital Radio Technology? certainly helps fuel the fire.

Mostly, I am just excited that we have moved beyond Code vs No Code to the next big thing to debate !!!

73, Bob K0NR

New Rover Rules for VHF Contests

Posted on by

Without much notice or fanfare, the ARRL posted a new set of general rules for VHF contests. The changes seem to be centered on the rover category, which has been the subject of much controversy over the last decade or so. See So You Want to Be A Rover for more information on the rover category.

The new rules impose a limit of 100 contacts between any two rovers, apparently to prevent the “grid circling” strategy. A grid circling strategy is when two or more rovers meet at the intersection of four grids and drive around the grid corner working each other on many bands over a short distance. This allows them to rack up a high score in a short period of time while making only short distance contacts. See the N6NB Rover Page for more on these grid-circling efforts.

It appears that the existing Rover category, is subdivided into three entry categories:

  • Rover: existing rover category, with one or two operators
  • Limited Rover: A rover that uses four bands or less, with power restrictions
  • Unlimited Rover: A rover that has few restrictions, including use of more than two operators and no limit on contacts with other rovers.

I think the intent of these changes are good. It allows for the extreme grid-circling guys to knock themselves out driving in circles but keeps them in a separate category. The Limited Rover is likely to appeal to some little pistol guys that aren’t equipped for more than 3 or 4 bands.

Unfortunately, the rules do seem a bit hacked together and are not that easy to understand. I am still reviewing them to understand the fine points.

73, Bob K0NR

Ham Radio in the News

Posted on by

Jeff KE9V picked up on a news item about the ham radio response in the recent Oregon floods. (The ARRL has a more detailed report here.) There is a news report from KPTV that has this great quote in it:

“One of the problems in this is always communication,” Gov. Ted Kulongoski said after a visit Tuesday to Vernonia and a fly-over there and other affected areas. “I’m going to tell you who the heroes were from the very beginning of this…the ham radio operators. These people just came in and actually provided a tremendous communication link to us.”

KE9V has some great comments in his blog about this. Basically, Jeff says he is glad that ham radio can once again come to the rescue in the face of a communications breakdown. But then he questions how our tax dollars are being spent on the public safety communication systems that seem to fail just when they are needed. He has a point here.

In my state (Colorado), the public safety agencies have migrated to a statewide 800 MHz system (based on APCO Project 25). This has really helped with interoperability issues but the system is known to be inadequate for high levels of radio traffic. This is not rocket science…you can evaluate the number of radio sites, the capacity of each site and how many radio transceivers and transmissions that need to be supported. The answer is when a wide scale emergency occurs, the 800 MHz system is likely to be overloaded.

It is great that ham radio can fill in the gaps, but these systems should be designed to operate in adverse conditions.

73, Bob K0NR

Motorola, Yaesu (Vertex), Kenwood and ICOM

Posted on by

The amateur radio community has been buzzing about Motorola’s purchase of Yaesu. Actually, the deal is structured as a joint venture with Mot owning 80% of Vertex Standard (Yaesu is the marketing name for Vertex ham products.) The speculation is running wild on eham.net and other forums about what this means. As usual, these opinions are mostly bull hockey speculation… worth about what you paid for it.

This caused me to dig into the numbers behind this deal. How big is Vertex and how much of that is amateur radio? The total purchase price for 80% of the shares will be approximately ¥12.3 billion (or about US $108 million). From a PRNewswire report, Vertex sales for the fiscal year ending March 2007 were approximately ¥21.98 billion or $192.8 million. On the Vertex web site, I found a breakout of their revenues by product type: 27% ham radio, 70% land mobile and 3% data terminal. This means their ham radio sales are about $52M annually. A look at Kenwood’s 2007 Annual Report reveals that their Communications Equipment Business is about 36% of their total business, or $514M. The Communications Equipment Business includes Land Mobile Radio, Amateur Radio and some consumer wireless devices. I did not find the amateur radio number broken out separately. It is interesting that Kenwood’s annual report emphasizes their Land Mobile business and claims they are #2 in market share in that business. (I assume Mot is #1.) ICOM’s 2007 Annual Report shows their annual sales at $263.5M, almost all in the category of “Radio”. Just like Kenwood and Vertex, ICOM sells radio equipment to both the land mobile and the amateur radio markets. I can’t conclude from the data the specific amateur radio market share for these companies. However, if we look at the combined amateur+land mobile markets, these companies look like this:

  • Vertex: $192.8M
  • Kenwood: $514M
  • ICOM: $263.5M

This is probably not a true “apples to apples” comparison, but it gives a rough feel for the relative size of these businesses. If we assume that Vertex is representative of these companies, then we see that the land mobile business is over twice the size of the amateur business. Not a surprise.

What does this mean for Motorola and Vertex? Hard to say, really. The main conclusion for me is that the land mobile market is the dominate business, with amateur radio playing the role of “little sister.” The amateur radio portion of Vertex probably lives or dies based on its profitability and how well it can leverage the land mobile R&D investment.

73, Bob K0NR

BPL Provider Ambient Gets FCC Hand Slap

Posted on by

I guess things must be a bit slow at the FCC Enforcement Bureau this month. They finally got around to responding to the complaints about Ambient’s Briarcliff Manor, NY BPL (Broadband Over Powerline) system. It seems that the FCC has concluded that Ambient has “violated the radiated emission limits of Section 15.109 of the Commission’s Rules”.

You can view the complete FCC letter at http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/AmbientBPLAdmonishment.pdf

Let’s see…the ARRL first filed a complaint via a letter to the FCC on March 29, 2006. Various hams had filed complaints long before this date. I suppose that the FCC has been rather busy and hasn’t had time to actually do its job of enforcing its own regulations.

OK, so Ambient is clearly violating FCC rules. What’s next?

73, Bob K0NR

FCC Reports on Broadband

Posted on by

From the ARRL web page:

FCC Releases Broadband Report (Nov 5, 2007) — The FCC has released their latest report summarizing the state of broadband in the US as of December 2006. It shows that in December 2006, Internet-access BPL has increased slightly over December 2005, but also shows that it has been decreasing slightly from a peak that occurred sometime around mid-2006. According to the report, BPL ended up with a deployment total of 0.006 percent of the total broadband lines in the US, compared to 0.011 percent at the end of December 2005.

OK, let’s just see how BPL is doing in terms of adoption. Here are the number of BPL subscribers listed in the report:

June 2005: 4872
December 2005: 4571
June 2006: 5208
December 2006: 4776

So in the last six months of the study, BPL actually declined in use while the other broadband technologies increased by 17 million. See Slow Death for Broadband Over Powerline.

73, Bob K0NR

Slow Death for Broadband Over Power Line (BPL)

Posted on by

The ham radio community has been rightly concerned about the radio frequency interference potential from most Broadband Over Power Line (BPL) systems. The ARRL continues to do battle with the BPL providers and the FCC over specific RFI issues. Most recently, the ARRL faced the FCC in the US Court of Appeals, challenging the FCC’s regulatory action concerning BPL. The ARRL BPL page shows highlights of BPL activity over the last year.

At the same time, the ARRL Lab Manager Ed Hare, W1RFI, has been working the technical issues with the BPL industry, public utilities, the IEEE and other interested parties. A few BPL equipment companies have taken the amateur radio interference issue seriously and have notched out the ham bands from their devices. Specifically, HomePlug technology and systems based on it (such as BPL systems from Current Technologies ) appear to avoid interference to amateur radio equipment. Other users of the HF spectrum, including shortware broadcast stations, may be hosed since it is only the ham bands that are notched out. While these systems have taken steps to address inteference to amateur radio receivers, interference from amateur radio transmitters is still a big risk.

However, none of this really matters.

The economics of the situation will drive BPL out of the picture, or at least keep the technology limited to certain niche applications. BPL has to overcome the same cost-per-subscriber issue that cable modems and DSL providers face. The myth that BPL will someone light up rural areas with highspeed internet is just that: a myth. The economics don’t support it. The number of repeaters and infrastructure required on the power lines to cover a rural area is just too expensive. This forces BPL to be deployed in areas that are more densely populated….usually areas already served by cable and DSL. Because of this reality, the BPL equipment companies are rapidly moving away from the “broadband for everyone” message and instead are focusing on helping the utilities manage the electrical grid. This “smart grid” story sounds green and plays well into today’s concerns about efficient use of energy, but it does not support the broadband internet vision of the FCC. See the letter to shareholders from the Ambient CEO for more insight into the financial stability of BPL.

Duke Energy was a big proponent of BPL, working with Ambient Corp on a major BPL program. Recently, Duke has decided to “move away from BPL” in favor of wireless technologies, dealing another blow to the BPL industry. In the long run, wireless technologies are the biggest competition for BPL, as they have the potential of covering areas not served by cable and DSL in a cost-effective manner.

Where does this leave the amateur radio community? We will continue to experience RFI at certain isolated locations as various utilities keep trying to make BPL work. There will continue to be battles with the FCC and the utilities over specific interference problems. Systems that are “ham friendly” will fare better than the others. But mostly, BPL will continue its slow journey to the scrap heap of technologies that don’t work economically.

73, Bob K0NR

ARRL Snags QST.org

Posted on by

From the Big News From Newington Department:

Long-time ham and ARRL member David Lien, W6OVP, of Battle Ground, Washington, has transferred the Web address www.QST.org to the ARRL. If you head to that URL, you’ll now find yourself in the QST section of the ARRLWeb. “I bought the rights to it about nine years ago,” he said. “I was just trolling — I own quite a few [Web addresses]. I came across QST.org and grabbed it. It’s so important to ham radio, and there’s only one use for it.”

See http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/10/18/100/?nc=1

and http://www.qst.org/

73, Bob K0NR

K9JY’s 30 Ham Radio Contesting Tips

Posted on by

Scot K9JY took it upon himself to write up a ham radio contesting tip every day in September. He ended up with a great list of 30 tips for improving your contesting experience. Scot writes from an HF contester’s point of view but most of the tips work well for VHF contests, too.

Whether you are a contest newbie or veteran, these are worth a look!

73, Bob K0NR

Jay Maynard K5ZC on D-STAR Repeaters

Posted on by

The Radio Amateur Information Network (RAIN) Report has an interview with Jay Maynard, K5ZC, from the National Frequency Coordinators Council concerning the use of digital repeaters. Jay discusses the issues around the alledged FCC statement that “D-STAR systems are not repeaters” and gives a good overview of the challenges of adopting digital repeater technology.

The interview exists in two parts:

Part1: http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-9-27-2007.mp3
Part 2: http://www.therainreport.com/rainreport_archive/rainreport-10-5-2007.mp3

If you are interested in the future of amateur radio repeaters, this is worth a listen.

73, Bob K0NR

Religion and Ham Radio

Posted on by

We need to get the religion out of ham radio. No, I am not talking about the HF nets that support missionaries or similar activities. (Those people might actually be doing something good for the world.) I am talking about the religious debates concerning new technology…this technology is better than that technology.

Amateur radio is a technical hobby, one based on technology, hobbyist pursuits and mutual interest. One might think that this means issues are looked at objectively and discussions are based on logic, scientific principles and facts. Of course, this is completely wrong. What often shows up in ham radio are religious debates about technology or operating modes.

Here’s a definition of Religion:

a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.

You can tell when you are stuck in a religious debate…the facts quickly fade and statements like “this is the right way to do it” become louder. Underneath this is a fundamental belief trying to come out that the person may not even be aware they have.

A long running example of a religious debate is Linux versus Windows. On the surface, people argue about which one has more defects, which one is more secure and which one ultimately serves their needs better. Underneath the surface is the religious belief: software should be free, Microsoft is evil, etc. Then there are those Mac enthusiasts (you know who you are)….these folks tend to act like a cult as they attempt to convert other people to their group. (Where is the line between enthusiast and cult member?)

The latest one on the ham radio front is the debate over digital technology in the VHF and higher bands: D-STAR versus APCO P25. The debate starts out rational with a discussion of the merits of each but soon the deeply-held beliefs come out: D-STAR is bad because ICOM is pushing it, P25 is good because it is the commercial standard, D-STAR is good because it is an amateur radio standard, D-STAR uses a proprietary vocoder chip so it is bad, etc. (For specific examples, click here, here and here.) Then don’t forget the guys that say “all digital is bad, analog FM is good.”

Again, you can tell when the religion kicks in because the facts start to fade and the beliefs rise to the surface. Usually, these arguments can’t be resolved because you can’t really debate beliefs. What you get instead are flame wars on the various email groups.

What other religious debates are out there? Code versus No-Code, Open Source Software versus Commercial Software, My favorite rig versus Your favorite rig, … what else?

-73, Bob K0NR

P.S. Was Betamax really better than VHS? 🙂

HamLinks Toolbar for IE and Firefox

Posted on by

I just came across the NØHR Toolbar for Internet Explorer and Firefox. I just installed the HamLinks toolbar into Internet Explorer. (I had previously given up on Firefox.)

HamLinks: The Ham Radio Toolbar for Firefox and IE

HamLinks is a free ham radio toolbar that extends your (Internet Explorer or Firefox) web browser to give ham radio operators quick access to great ham radio content. It’s completely free, easy to install (and uninstall) and can be configured by the user. No registrations, spyware, spam or other hooks.

The default configuration has a few too many features turned on for my use, so I turned many of them off. (Not a problem, just takes a little configuration.) The features that seem useful to me are:

Powerful search box (QRZ.com, DXwatch, QSL Manager, FindU.com, etc.)
UTC Time
WWV gadget to show propagation bulletins
Propagation Data from WWV

You may decide to keep other features, depending on your ham radio interests. Take a look the toolbar and give it a try.

73, Bob K0NR

ARRL Rocky Mt Division – Elect KØRM

Posted on by

There is an important election coming up….no, not that silly race for the White House…I am talking about something really significant — the race for the ARRL Rocky Mountain Division Director. This person will be our representative to the ARRL Board of Directors. Talk about a tough job! You try representing the interests of the amateur radio population in the Rocky Mountain Division….see how easy that is!

Sometimes we lose sight of the fact that the ARRL is a member organization. Yes, there are those folks at HQ in Newington that seem to have their own agenda but it is the Board of Directors that run the ARRL.

From ARRL.org:

Current Rocky Mountain Vice Director Division Brian Mileshosky, N5ZGT, of Albuquerque, New Mexico, is running for Director against Jeff Ryan, K0RM, of Westminster, Colorado. Current Director Warren G. “Rev” Morton, WS7W, of Casper, Wyoming, is not seeking re-election. Vice Director candidates for the Rocky Mountain Division are Dwayne Allen, WY7FD, of Devil’s Tower, Wyoming, and Chris Howard, W0EP, of Fort Collins, Colorado.

Ballots will be sent to all full members of the League in that Division who are of good standing as of September 10, 2007 (you must be a licensed radio amateur to be a full member). The ballots will be mailed not later than October 1, 2007 and, to be valid, must be received at ARRL HQ by noon Eastern Time on Friday, November 16, 2007.

I am supporting Jeff Ryan K0RM for the Director position. I have had the pleasure of working with Jeff on a variety of ham radio activities over the last decade or so: ARES, Hamcon Colorado, Colorado Council of Amateur Radio Clubs (CCARC), Pikes Peak FM Association and other activities in the Colorado Section. Jeff makes a positive impact in every role he takes on. Jeff has consistently served the amateur radio community, using his strong leadership skills, excellent judgment and hard work.

Jeff is currently the ARRL Colorado Section Manager and does an excellent job of leading the section. The thing that impresses me most about Jeff is his ability to listen to all points of view while still letting people know where he stands on an issue. This is a tough balance that is critical in an elected position such as a Division Director.

To learn more about Jeff K0RM, see his web site at http://www.k0rm.net/

73, Bob K0NR

How Big is the Worldwide Market for Ham Radio Gear?

Posted on by

Ever wonder how much amateur radio equipment gets purchased each year? I was looking at some information on the new Kenwood TM-D710, including a press release on the Kenwood (Japan) web site.

The Kenwood press release includes some background on the ham radio market:

The global amateur radio equipment market is estimated to be worth 16 to 17 billion yen today. In the FM mobile transceiver segment, the dual band type, which was once considered a luxury model, has been gaining market share every year, accounted for about just over 50% of the amateur radio equipment market in sales value on a global basis and for almost 100% in both sales volume and sales value in Japan in the fiscal year ended March 2007.

Let me try to interpret this data. Since the Japanese yen is trading at around 115 yen to the US dollar, 16 Billion yen is equivalent to $139M. So this means that $139M in new ham equipment is purchased each year. The next statement is really interesting…I think it says that 50% of the dollars being spent on FM mobile transceivers are used to purchase dualband radios. And the final statement says that in Japan almost all of the FM transceivers sold are dualband. Clearly, the price of a dualband FM transceiver has come down over the last decade, especially those that have a single receiver in them. So it is believeable that dualband rigs cover a large piece of the FM transceiver market.

73, Bob K0NR

Pikes Peak Report – Colorado 14er Event

Posted on by

Every morning (assuming clear skies and a clear head), I can look out my front door to see Pikes Peak towering over the horizon to the west. For an amateur radio operator, Pikes Peak is a convenient way to obtain awesome Height Above Average Terrain (HAAT). They were even nice enough to build a road so you can drive to the top. If that doesn’t work for you, then take the train (Pikes Peak Cog Railway).

You can talk me into going up Pikes almost anytime, but during a VHF event it is even more attractive. One such radio event for mountaintop operation is the Colorado 14er Event. This is an annual radio even that I have blogged about previously. Chris K0CAO put some video of his hike to the summit of Mount Harvard on the web which shows the event from the hiking/climbing viewpoint.

Four of us had a great time operating from Pikes Peak this year…that story is told on my website and can be found here.

73, Bob K0NR

VHF Contest Survey -N5AC

Posted on by

Steve N5AC recently completed a survey of amateur radio operators about their thoughts on VHF contesting. The results are now published on the web at http://www.n5ac.com/VHFSurvey.pdf

In the forward of the document, Steve writes:

I love VHF and microwave contesting and I know many of those that read this feel the same. And although I’ve only been doing it a few years, I’ve formed some strong opinions about what I like and don’t like and even how I think others should behave while contesting. But why is this — why can’t we all just have fun? As I tried to understand what I took issue with and why others had issues, I came to realize that even though we are all “playing together,” we are each playing for different reasons and with different goals. Some want to accumulate band-grids for VUCC and the contest, itself, is not terribly important. Others are in a dead heat in their category trying to beat out known opponents. Personally, I enjoy working long, difficult microwave shots with my friends, but I like to see a high score at the end of the day too. And all of these different goals and many others combined with how we were trained as operators, our local culture and our personalities all affect our on-air behaviors and how we operate a contest.

If you have an interest in VHF contesting, this survey report is good reading.

73, Bob K0NR

Video from Colorado Mountaintop Event

Posted on by

The 2007 Colorado 14er Event was held on August 12, 2007. During this event, amateur radio operators make radio contact from the summits of the state’s 14,000 foot mountains. Chris K0CAO made a short video of his hike up Mount Harvard and some of his radio action on the summit. The video also shows Chris using a signal mirror to flash operators on nearby mountaintops. Mount Harvard is the 3rd highest peak in Colorado, at 14,420 feet above sea level.

See the video at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6446083004152361265

See my previous post on the 14er event.