Reading a bit about the past of amateur radio has got me thinking about where amateur radio is going to be going in the future. The challenge that I see is going to be keeping the aging body of the amateur community from miring us in the past and keeping us from making the innovation necessary to maintaining the appearance that amateur radio is relevant enough to justify our spectral grants.
Hams are going to face increasing demands for their spectrum, as the demand for more and faster wireless connectivity places increasing demands on the limited amount of usable spectrum available. The commercial services are all looking at ways to squeeze more signal into limited spectrum, mainly by heavy use of digital modes that provide far more spectral efficiency than the old-fashioned analog modes that dominate voice communication in the amateur service today. If hams want to retain their spectrum grants, they're going to have to prove that they're not wasting their spectrum on spectrally inefficient modes like double-sideband AM (which, I hear, is making a comeback in 75 meters). Largely, this means wider use of digital voice modes, and not just in UHF (which is where most of the digital voice is today). We've practically been ordered to do so (eight years ago) by Dale Hatfield, the Chief of the FCC's Office on Engineering and Technology.
At the same time, I don't want to see amateur radio embrace closed technologies like the AMBE codec used in D*STAR. We need to be more spectrally efficient, but with open standards so that our ability to improve further is not curtailed by having to navigate around restrictive patents. It is therefore essential that we develop freely available codecs that are at least as spectrally efficient as AMBE.
Reinvigorating packet radio, or something related to it, to create a real digital message network (akin to the "Global Backbone Project" I've written about elsewhere) would also be a good idea. And not just as a gateway to the Internet, either; we need to build and maintain a network that can stand alone if it has to. Building a multilayered network like this would go a long way to filling our spectrum with justifiable activity, too.
But I think the main thing is as Jeff KE9V writes: we have to look forward. Ham radio has and must be primarily about innovation. Once a technology is mature, it's no longer properly in the ambit of ham radio. We can use mature technologies to accomplish our other goals, but we must never become complacent, satisfied that the solutions we have today are "good enough" for our purposes. There's a reason the public generally thinks of ham radio as "obsolete"; while to some degree that's due to a lack of public education, it's also because so many hams are still stuck in 1965. It's not 1965 anymore. Practically everyone has a cell phone today, and enjoys more communication freedom than even the most qualified, capable, and equipped ham did in 1965. Your hot and fancy Icom IC-7800 doesn't make you any more innovative if all you're using it for is analog SSB voice on 75 meters.
Fundamentally, we need to move away from the "Communicator" model of the ham, a model which dominated the hobby through the 50s and 60s; other services now provide much easier access to the same capabilities without forcing the communicator to learn about things they really don't care about. Trying to recruit new hams by stressing the communication opportunities in ham radio just makes us look old-fashioned, and probably chases off as many as it brings, especially with younger people. For those of you who are communicators, enjoy it while it lasts; there will be plenty of communicators to talk to for some time yet.
The area where we need to recruit more is with computer technologists. It's plainly obvious that software-defined radio is going to be a huge aspect of the radio art for some time yet, and it's important that we recruit people who can do this. The radio art is already too large for one person to understand all of it, and as computer technology (also something too large for one person to understand all of it) becomes ever-more enmeshed with radio, we're going to need to collaborate more and more to continue to advance the art.
Hams are going to face increasing demands for their spectrum, as the demand for more and faster wireless connectivity places increasing demands on the limited amount of usable spectrum available. The commercial services are all looking at ways to squeeze more signal into limited spectrum, mainly by heavy use of digital modes that provide far more spectral efficiency than the old-fashioned analog modes that dominate voice communication in the amateur service today. If hams want to retain their spectrum grants, they're going to have to prove that they're not wasting their spectrum on spectrally inefficient modes like double-sideband AM (which, I hear, is making a comeback in 75 meters). Largely, this means wider use of digital voice modes, and not just in UHF (which is where most of the digital voice is today). We've practically been ordered to do so (eight years ago) by Dale Hatfield, the Chief of the FCC's Office on Engineering and Technology.
At the same time, I don't want to see amateur radio embrace closed technologies like the AMBE codec used in D*STAR. We need to be more spectrally efficient, but with open standards so that our ability to improve further is not curtailed by having to navigate around restrictive patents. It is therefore essential that we develop freely available codecs that are at least as spectrally efficient as AMBE.
Reinvigorating packet radio, or something related to it, to create a real digital message network (akin to the "Global Backbone Project" I've written about elsewhere) would also be a good idea. And not just as a gateway to the Internet, either; we need to build and maintain a network that can stand alone if it has to. Building a multilayered network like this would go a long way to filling our spectrum with justifiable activity, too.
But I think the main thing is as Jeff KE9V writes: we have to look forward. Ham radio has and must be primarily about innovation. Once a technology is mature, it's no longer properly in the ambit of ham radio. We can use mature technologies to accomplish our other goals, but we must never become complacent, satisfied that the solutions we have today are "good enough" for our purposes. There's a reason the public generally thinks of ham radio as "obsolete"; while to some degree that's due to a lack of public education, it's also because so many hams are still stuck in 1965. It's not 1965 anymore. Practically everyone has a cell phone today, and enjoys more communication freedom than even the most qualified, capable, and equipped ham did in 1965. Your hot and fancy Icom IC-7800 doesn't make you any more innovative if all you're using it for is analog SSB voice on 75 meters.
Fundamentally, we need to move away from the "Communicator" model of the ham, a model which dominated the hobby through the 50s and 60s; other services now provide much easier access to the same capabilities without forcing the communicator to learn about things they really don't care about. Trying to recruit new hams by stressing the communication opportunities in ham radio just makes us look old-fashioned, and probably chases off as many as it brings, especially with younger people. For those of you who are communicators, enjoy it while it lasts; there will be plenty of communicators to talk to for some time yet.
The area where we need to recruit more is with computer technologists. It's plainly obvious that software-defined radio is going to be a huge aspect of the radio art for some time yet, and it's important that we recruit people who can do this. The radio art is already too large for one person to understand all of it, and as computer technology (also something too large for one person to understand all of it) becomes ever-more enmeshed with radio, we're going to need to collaborate more and more to continue to advance the art.
Its interesting to note that twitter is not unlike packet radio, and brightkite is not unlike APRS. Both web apps appeal to younger folks.... but had little to no interest generating capability to the young when they arrived on the scene years ago.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you as concerns the innovation aspect. Unlike 1965, its no longer really possible for an individual to design a complete system on their own. The complexity in hardware and software is just too unmanageable for the lone hobbyist. With the internet, we have the tools for collaboration like none before, yet it seems there actually was more collaboration in years past, than today. Not sure why that is...
KB0PAX
Fantastic Post! Growing up I've always wanted to become an amateur radio operator. Electronics was a passion of mine. A number of circumstances at the time prevented me from perusing the hobby but I've always been on the sidelines, tagging along at field day events and swap meets.
ReplyDeleteNow that I'm an adult and have the resources I'm finding it very polarized. It seems either you can take the test and buy off the shelf equipment and go at it like a CB'r or you need an advanced degree in engineering from MIT to participate in anything that would get you near the smell of molten solder and generate some excitement.
I guess I missed the boat and time passed me by, but I do still have the occasional dream of building a QRP rig and practicing my code. Hmm.. does anyone use CW anymore other then for ID?
Don't overlook something that may be not so obvious to people already firmly enmeshed within the culture: that ham radio is a service, that amateur radio is a culture, a system of values and a method of doing things which is valuable of preservation in its own right. And with a rich history and tradition, a mature technology culture has much wisdom to share with newer technologies whose aims and paradigms may seem different at first, but which are wholly aligned, ultimately in intent and effect. Happy to have made your acquaintance!
ReplyDeleteRon: Tools are just tools. You still need someone to use them, and in the case of complex projects, you need someone to manage the people using them.
ReplyDeletePaul: You couldn't be farther off base. There are many hams who are still melting solder and building things. Just tune down to the low end of 40m or 80m some evening and you'll find plenty of guys still operating CW. Just do it!
One of the issues with ham radio is that it is heavily focused on the tradition of HF radio and world DX'ing. That's certainly an important part of it, but it's not really what appeals to younger people and it's not the cutting edge and the hot tech now. It doesn't have the bandwidth people are getting used to for data, and soldering tubes into boat anchors doesn't seem cutting edge.
ReplyDeleteThings are more IP-based than ever the the hottest area of homebrew and experimenting these days is with stuff like wifi. The Amateur radio community should embrace this fully. Once you get your ticket you can hook up a big amp to your wifi project and do all kinds of neat stuff with it.
I think this is a good place to look for people to get drawn into the hobby. From there it can expand to other area that will interest people. AMSAT is the kind of thing that really seems to have some appeal. A lot of people I know who are not hams do get pretty excited when you mention that you could work satellites and use them to transmit your data. It would be nice to see some more interest in that to hopefully eventually get some next-generation satellites launched. Of course, that's expensive, so interest and contributions are important.
We need to realize that most of geeks these days are used to wifi, bluetooth, cell phones and that kind of thing and if ham radio can branch out of that, then it will be successful. Of course that doesn't mean that next generation methods of transmission can't also become more standard on HF - they certainly can.
I agree that things like AMBE are an issue. There really have not been the kinds of standards I'd like to see for digital convergence on ham frequencies. AMBE is just a problem because it's so tightly controlled by DVSI. I think D-Star is great, if not for that fact. Open source standards might have a better shot in the long term.
That's getting into a whole other issue because ham radio is not the only one at a crossroads right now. Between D-star, Project-25, Opensky, Provoice, iDen, Astro and all the other generally incompatible voice transmission systems out there being used by industry and government, it's getting more and more difficult to figure out which one is the way to go.
In my late 40s, I finally got my Ham technician's license, spurred on by the need to have emergency communications since we live in a hurricane-prone area. However, I was disappointed in the lack of opportunities to practice my newly-won skills, because the bands available to techs are bereft of users.
ReplyDeleteI wish that I had the time and inclination to pursue this more as a hobby, but I don't. I wanted to have it available for SERVICE during extreme weather events, but it seems to be limited even for that.
I am not a HAM radio guy but a telecommunication architect working for one of three big vendors of Internet gear. I just got my hands on a little hobby project, an audion using a Chinese EF92 valve, just for the heck of it. I started researching where radio stands today. What I noticed is that radio is not gone but it moved into "wave guides" and this is essentially what modern telco wires are. The principles are the same, only that I can reuse frequency spectrum again and again but just putting in another wire. Fiber is not that different from good old copper in that I still modulate a signal, only that, at least as of now, we do not do any fancy encoding such as phase shifts on fiber. Instead of blasting a signal in a large footprint, the signal is limited to the wire. If I run out of frequency spectrum, aka out of bandwidth, I just use a second wire, and a third, etc. Something very similar is done with Wifi, mobile phone and other commercial wireless technologies: transmission is limited to a very small footprint so that spectrum can be recycled. The wireless interface today is the last mile into the "wave guided" network of fiber ooptics. I am sure that what I say sounds quiet trivial, but I wanted to give the perspective from a guy who only knows the new technologies. Radio is very much alive, just in different form.
ReplyDelete