He wrote; "amateur radio community depends on large companies (Icom, Yaesu, Kenwood) and solutions they provide."

What I have to add to this is as time has elapsed this dependancy has become more so than in it the early days of the hobby. And clearly this is not good without at least a better line communcations with these companies.

However, there are external to the hobby factors to consider. Globalization is what has lead us from a lot of small companies to a few large ones. Some good of globalization has come, but truthfully a lot of bad as well.

In am 45 and when and where I grew up there was still a vibrant manfactuting based economy. Now that has sadly shifted to a consumer based economy. And how does that house of cards even really work in a global society? What do you have to trade? You once did....

The education system (at least speaking of the American one) is another point of failure as it has really not kept in check with promoting technical schools and life skills vs 4 year colleges.

My grandfather and father's generation were handy, they could fix jut about anything they had. Why did this change? Part of it was they lived through or had an effect left by the great depression. Now are better off (at least in the pocket book), and really I hate to say it, this has made us lazy. Sure maybe you father now doesn't change his own oil for example, but if that's the case his son will likely never learn it. It's not rocket science, but if the future doesn't learn certain things then they die off.

Wojciech alos talks about pitfalls of volunteer-based work. He is talking about open source development, but when I look at any number of clubs or groups, be them ham radio or other; the bulk of the reliable volunteers are that of an older generation.

The question is what motivates people these days? The survival instinct of the older generation has faded.

How we have the VHF/UHF bands carved up and regulated and adminstered by overbearing repeater coordination bodies plays a part on moving from FM to something more useful. If you have been reading my ramblings you know that I feel we could likely so with less repeater coordination. I feel more shared non protected pairs should exist for any system less than 100 watts and 100 feet etc, should just use those.

You've also likely noticed how I feel about mode disparity. Data has significantly more stringent regulations than other modes.. and well Spread Spectum... it's just unclear if this even exists as a mode, since we classify our transmissions by the content they carry, which is also just stupid.

I'd like to see the tables turned to promote advancements in the hobby. Make FM ugly and over regulated. Make voice also the ugly red headed step child.

It's time for QAM and other types of modern modulation.

But there are no radio's you say? Well that is where changing regulation will force a manufacturing change. An example of this is when PL became required for repeaters in the late 80's and early 90's. This mandate was from coordinaton bodies and in a few years user end radios began to have PL encoders in them as a standard. (Prior to that you had to wire in your own PL deck.)

Then there is the M17 labs that we don't hear really anything about. And for that matter in 2015 TAPR mentioned they's like to see the OFDM work of John, KD6OZH advanced...

In short FM is 40 year old technology. And most of the current Digital Voice modes are not using modulation that is a whole different than conventional analog FM. The only way to achieve better data rates is move to modulation that is significanly different than FM.

Some times I think the ARDC ought to post bounty grants to help move certain things forward.

I considered writing a longer paper, but Steve Stroh had already done that, covering everything nicely. The other reason I opted for the express route is because in the back of my mind I figued the good old (freaking) FCC would sit on this like the main HF part for god only knows how long. I even remarked on how it was unclear when a decision would be made by the commission.

I must be getting more impatient as I get older, as even at work and in other projects I particpate in, I look at what the outcome is and when it will be achived Before donating my time. Short summary: I like things the bear fruit.

So are we going to have to get congress woman Lesko involved again to kick the FCC in the rear end again?

For what its worth, in a somewhat private circle I have brought up the idea of having the whole amateur regulation business outsourced since the FCC does such a poor job. It seems almost inconceivable to accomplish, but I do believe we'd be better off that way.

I picked up one of those Quansheng UV-K5's that there was a lot of buzz about in terms of aftermarket firmware development.

The chip/microcontroller that is has really limits what it could be doing (digital modes like M17, P25 etc).... it sad really.

If nothing else I hope the Quansheng's open popularity is noticed by other manufactures (Covalue?) to encourgage that sort of thing.

What hams should be doing is directly asking manufactures at Dayton and on their social media platforms when they will see a radio that does more tham one digital flavor.

As I said in the first part, continuing to buy radio after radio, without holding out for your principles is NOT helping change anything.

I live on a bit of a high spot, though most the area is pretty flat with the exception of Scray's hill where the TV transmiters are.

Over the past 20 years I have basically come the conclusion a 50 ft VHF repeater serves little purpose. I've watched the noise floor grow considerably.

The concept this lower profile repeater was started by a friend that will retire in less than 5 years and I promised him long ago I would continue being its home till then. The concept started in the 90's when all the repeaters were very active and it served as a place for a younger generation to hang out and "shoot the shit."

While I wasn't really interested in another rebuild, I welcomed the Kenwood TKR replacement. The TKR-750 and its poor internal isolation between the transmitter and receiver at 600 KHz splits. (The only solution to that noticeable desense and annoying mixing is to run the thing less than 15 watts, use a larger split or, get a new repeater.) The guy who started the club donated a Motorola Quantar which is capable of mixed mode; analog and P25. I am not sold on any specific digital mode I do see P25 as somewhat logical. Its been around since the early 90's so there are options on the used market for radios from several manufacturers. The vocoder is also out of patent and there is a good sounding open source implementation.

It will mostly be used in analog mode, but this does permit others play with another mode.

So I am still doing things in ham radio for anyone wondering.

There is no no cell service in this area. AT&T & Verizon volunteered to set up COW's for a long team search, and what a game changer.

I started this blog many moons ago, when blogging/RSS was new as were smartphones. There was a pretty good following then as most web content wasn't very mobile friendly.

A different Steve, Steve Stroh, N8GNJ has been pointing out much of the same sort of thing I had been doing here. Advancing ham radio, this blog's title was supposed to focus on more modern things, that the traditional sources I felt overlooked.

So I encourage you to check out his news letter, which he calls Zero Retries: https://zeroretries.substack.com/

Wayne Green once said he was impatient with new technologies. I can see that had rubbed off on me. I am beyond annoyed that we still don't have a mainstream radio that we can load our own firmware on.

I've written about that at length here as it related to AMBE and M17.

As a matter of fact in 2008 (15 years ago), I made the observation that ;

Technology is ever changing, which makes standards hard to set. This is why open standards are so very important. It expedites production and advancements , as you are effectively working together or sharing information. Be wary of any thing proprietary, as this impedes technology and is terribly unhealthy for the hobby.

Protocols and standards need to be dynamic as possible to avoid equipment obsolesce. This is where the software defined radio (SDR) concept is key. However once again between here and there, manufactures should highly consider flash/field upgradeable firmware.

While some very talented hams have spent the time and effort reverse engineering a few radios to bring us closer, the fact is, 15 years later we still have a manufacture controlled firmware scenario instead of that radio with an open application space (apps) idea.

And I am pretty much tired of beating the drum that we need better leadership than the ARRL knuckleheads who are really good at drama, but sadly not very good at their job of advancing the radio art.

PS; If you are thinking of publishing a ham radio book, please do NOT reach to the ARRL to be the publisher. I have spent a good portion of my life trying to track down and obtain copies of information (mostly obscure/local history) that is out of print. Here is to hoping future content creators are smart and don't give all their rights away all haphazardly like in years past. Self publishing and crowd funding are more logical this day in age, than continuing to fund the ARRL and their tantrums.

I keep close tabs on whats going on in broadcast, since my interests aren't just related to ham radio. It also stems from my fathers involvement in broadcast. Mowing the grass at the sites, and keeping in touch with the engineers is what its all about. Most of the towers that the hams are on are owned directly by the stations themselves. That is not common for any recently constructed towers. Newer ones are owned and managed by a holding company and are harder to work with for hams.

My recent radio exerimenting has to do with ATSC 3.0 / Netgen since locally we have a transmitter. So I went out and bought a Silicon Dust Flex so I can receive this stuff. I was using an older Silicon Dust receiver for building my own MythTV DVR.

Anyway what is going on locally is all the stations main channels are being transmitted from one tower in the new format. This host station's old ATSC 1.0 channels have been scattered to other towers as subchannels by the other broadcasters. Interesting stuff. Lots of working together.

If this new format with monkier NextGen TV catches on, it should help broadcasters to be more competitive. I see this as important since most of the inital towers put up in the 1950's are continually derated in terms of the load they can bear by insurance carriers as they age. Thusly they are becomming almost non profitable since you cannot rent space to other tennants. So ultimately they will need to be replaced, which is a major expense.

There are provisions in the new standard to simulcast which will replace the old translater (on a different channel) approach for the fringe areas. Anyway I cannot see broacasters going back to their own towers once this ATSC 3.0/ NetGen layover period where they broadcast in both formats ends. Hopefully from the SmartTV feedback channels broadcasters will finally be able to show their adversisters who watches what and when, just like the cable guys do.

So in the end, new towers will be erected replacing the old. And due to the legal world we live in they will be managed by holding companies and hams will be in a worse place than they are now.

I find the M17 project a noble effort, and impressive to see hams from some many corners of the world working together on it. But honesty it doesn't "blow my skirt up", as its still based on ages old traditional narrow band FM carrier technology. That and I don't expect to see it materialze and displace the incumabnt modes in my life time.

I wish something like Tetra was in the works. What I find especially good about that modes is their mesh like extension that allows a portable radio that might not be able to reach the main site directly to same channel (TDMA) repeat though any other Tetra radio it can reach. This is a part of their DMO mode. This modern day radio relay / mesh style stuff is what I wish was baked into M17. I view this as important as repeater sites become fewer and harder for clubs to maintain/obtain. Short of technology addressing this site acccess problem that will just get more prevelant and difficult as time goes on, then the league or someone really needs to write a Dale Carnegie style book on how to shake hands, win friends and be a good site neighbor.

And at the same time people (coordinators and repeater owners) don't feel passionate about the duties of coordination like they used to. The fact is in most of the coordination bodies guidelines their own purpose is to make most efficient and interference-free use of the limited frequency spectrum.

Here in Wisconsin there have a been several years where the annual update (still done by mailing in a form) was waived by the coordination body. Then there are people who have requested coordination and have waited over a year for a pair.

I don't feel more short lived coodination volunteers is the answer. The solution in my eyes is to ease the bureaucratic burden by changing the existing policies.

Also some general guidance / editorial ship when it comes to putting things on the air makes sense to me. Most areas don't have easy acccess to good sites, and thus can't support one analog, one D-Star, one DMR and one YSF system, etc. Repeater owners should be at least thinking about retrofitting with a STM32-DVM to enable more than one mode. Coordination bodies is in a leadership position to suggest such best practices. And do they really want to deal with coordinating all those seperate machines? I've noticed most digiatl modes go in fads, and then a mode/repeater sits idle when the next one becomes popular.

I feel users should be deciding what the future of digital voice modes are, not the repeater owners (with good sites) and coodination bodies. Promoting MMDVM modems helps level the playing field in this regard. I am not sure if anyone ever really thinks about this.

In addition to promoting smarter spectrum use and cutting down on coordinating extra machines, I think in the long term this could signal to manufactures that user radios that do more than one mode are logical. It's like how PL mandate on repeaters helped encourage PL built into user radios which became the norm later.

To be clear when I speak of MMDVM I am not referring to the low power personal hotspots. I am referring to the origional implementation of using a MMDVM modem to flat audio drive an analog system.

MMDVM - Blog and interface ordering from Bruce, VE2GZI

INADVM - MMDVM (type) interface board from INAD Communications / Kevin, W3KKC

RB_STM32_DVM - Repeater Builder Multi-Mode Digital Voice Modem.

Teensy MMDVM - Interface board and microcontroller from Micro-Node International.

Since my interests are radio and Linux, it shouldn't be suprising that I tend to pay attention to Bruce Perens. Well know as the open source definition guy, but also a ham, K6BP.

A not too distant DCC paper titled "Open That Which is Closed," will give you a pretty good snapshot of the guy and what makes him tick.

I've always been a marginal coder, so I've always adopted the "what I can't do in software, I'll do in hardware", since I was into electronics before computers became common. Now things are so much software and less hardware, so I'm feeling old and dumb. Never fear, there is this thing Bruce does that he calls "Evangelism," and it can work for you too!

Basically stuff outside of his abilities or that require group effort he gets on the pulpit about. He explains how that works attacting like minded folks in that DCC PDF. A recent example would be the Codec2 thing. He felt closed source vocoders in the hobby were bad, thus a movement was born and in comes some talent named David Rowe.

I've found the same logic works, so don't sit idle with your thoughts folks. Because thats what makes ham radio great, everyone has a talent in a specific area, and when that can all work together the community benefits.

Here are some things I've harped about (some right in this blog), that have come to light thanks to other talented hams;

802.11, HSMM (1999-> ongoing)

-Part 97 only 802.11 channels (Nov 2013)

SAME/FIPS software decoder (May 2010) (multimon-ng)

D-Star AMBE DTMF decoder (Sept 2009-Jan 2011)

AMBE voice software decoder (March 2010)

IPV6 embeded callsign application (July 2012)

Linux streamer to Zello (Jun 2020)

Apparently the few that are working on the TH-D74 project so far are having some dificulty with the Ghidra reverse engineering.

I think it would be benefical for a wider audience to understand the former md380 project... maybe Linux in the Ham Shack could interview someone so others better understand (& appreciate) the motiviations and process (stumbling blocks and all), etc.

I feel there are important lessons that can be learned, especially since manufactures apparently are content with pumping out the same old crap. Props to the folks working on these projects trying creative ways around that problem.

The problem is two fold. Obisuoly a lack of these fine folks; hackers, engineers, or just plain technically oriented folks. Then there are the gadget obsessed folks...

Oh! we changed the color of display and added another 1000 memory channels, come buy our new HT!

But then there obviously fools falling for this gimic buying this nonsense. I call them gadget obsessed dimwits. They seem to have more money than brains, cannot put on a connector etc.

Please study and learn to apprecaite the few fine folks that don't play that game. Those who are moving things forward, both past and present players. Ham radio needs their inspiration!

Here is my list on interesting / inspirational people:

Wayne Green, Phil Karn, Bruce Perens, Aaron Schwartz, Richard Stallman, Jason Scott, Cory Doctorow, George Carlin. Some of all time favorite article authors: Doug Demaw, Ray Marston, Joseph Carr, Harold Kinley, Bill Cheek, Don Rotolo, John Champa

Not all are hams, but they all to me thought a bit out of the box. The first guy that I payed attention to, was Phil Karn, since I entered ham radio with an interest in packet radio. Its interesting to learn a bit about the people behind certain things and their logic & motivations to see if you can understand what makes them tick.

To me there has been a lot of stagnation in the hobby lately, so I haven't been overly active. I spent the last half dozen years working with some more fearleess tower climbing folks here in my home state. Our goals were to help "get shit on the air" with as few strings for folks as possible. Getting on towers and working on them has been a big problem here in Wisconsin. A lot of clubs and indivduals don't have the resources for that. We got a lot done.

Now another one of my main tower climbing folks is taking a job out of state, so that is winding down, and I am looking for my next thing to dive into. I have to say sadly there really isn't a whole lot that holds my interests these days.

I like what is going on with the ARDC grants, but I think it will take some time for those funded initiatives to bear fruit.

There are two to me of interest, the M17 Grant, and the Allstarlink grant.

I'm glad this happened:

The ARRL Board granted several awards at its July 2021 meeting.

The Board bestowed the 2021 ARRL Technical Innovation Award on Steve Haynal, KF7O; Wojciech Kaczmarski, SP5WWP, and Roger Clark, VK3KYY. Haynal was cited as the instrumental and driving force behind the Hermes Lite 5 W HF SDR transceiver as a fully open-source hardware and software project. Kaczmarski was recognized for developing the open-source digital radio communication protocol M17, leading to the development of DroidStar (an Android application) by Doug McLain, AD8DP. Clark was cited for spearheading a successful effort to augment a low-cost handheld radio for use by visually impaired operators, significantly lowering the cost of entry for such amateurs.

Once upon a time the ARRL had a "Future Systems Committee", the RSGB has an "Emerging Technology Coordination Committee".. I think the ARRL needs to reinstitute this concept.

Too bad we don't have a technology director, but somehow Emcomm still is apparently even in the light of firstnet and starlink.

http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-seeking-emergency-management-director

http://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-hires-paul-z-gilbert-ke5zw-as-director-of-emergency-management

In the past, the leauge techical specialist was more vocal and had written regular pieces for QST. Not so these days for whatever reason. From their past censure tatics and over all lackadaisical attitude its time to write these good old boys off.

In short of anything ever changing at the league level (and it likely never will), I think the best option is to find a good number of hams willing to particpate in a coordinated social media and in person campaign to become more vocal to manufactures on what we'd like to see brought to the market. I believe if 100 hams would commit to making a point at Dayton to being more vocal to the reps then we might get something other than a "new HT" that in reality has a few extra memory channels and a new color display.

What I am about to present isn't new. Bruce, K6BP wrote a well thought and researched overview in 2017 in response to a Technological Advisory Council (TAC) on reforming rechnical regulations across all FCC radio services.

Several of the personal radio service rules (Part 95) were subsquenctly.

https://www.radioworld.com/news-and-business/business-and-law/fcc-to-consider-changes-to-part-95-rules

http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-personal-radio-service-revisions-will-affect-gmrs-frs-cb-other-part-95-devices

And some are still in motion:
https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-374114A1.pdf

Meanwhile there are number of ham radio requests, some even from the ARRL that have gone no where. (Symbol Rate Petition of 2013, and the 2018 Technician Enhancement Proposal). And as Bruce pointed out most of our regulations have been unchanged for 65 years or more.

ex:
Oct 2017 (Puerto Rico):
http://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-grants-temporary-waiver-to-permit-higher-symbol-rate-data-transmissions>

Sep 2019:
https://www.arrl.org/news/arrl-renews-request-for-fcc-to-replace-symbol-rate-with-bandwidth-limit

Sep 2021 (Hurricane Ida):
https://www.arrl.org/news/fcc-grants-60-day-waiver-of-part-97-data-rate-rules-for-hurricane-relief-traffic

So here we go:

Our Basis and Purpose MUST be freshened up to relect the educational benefits and purposes for continued justification of spectrum allocation to the Amateur Service.

Our emergency services role continues to diminish (with the advent of FirstNet and Starlink) and the other currently-stated missions of Amateur Radio have already reached irrelevance.

Examples:
Bruce pointed out the context of "enhance international goodwill" was written before direct dialing of long distance calls (transatlantic telephone cables). So, Radio Amateurs were the only people who regularly had casual conversations with people overseas.

He also pointed out that the word "reservoir" is critical to understanding this statement:
"Expansion of the existing reservoir within the amateur radio service of trained operators, technicians, and electronics experts"

The U.S. was at war in Korea as this statement was written, and World War II had concluded less than a decade before. The military had a need for a reservoir of trained radiotelegraph operators who could go to war.

Bruce pointed out the word “education” doesn’t appear in §97.1, and there is no tie-in to the oft-promoted need to educate young citizens in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics).

This second part is my own hot button topic since data is my fotre.

"§97.305 through §97.309 spell out a limited set of modes, modulations, and digital data codes which Radio Amateurs can use on the air. They date back to the analog age, and limit innovation because they do not permit the use of modern modes and modulations in the Amateur Service"

I've written before on how I feel its just plain silly that we classify our transmissions by how we use them (what we convey) and that defines what rules apply. i.e Digital voice modes, while all ones and zeros don't fall under the data rules, the fall under the voice rules. I've also harped about how the fast scan amateur television rules let video modes occupy 6 MHz or more (actually no bandwith limit), while data is limited to 100 KHz.

And its dumber that just all that. Now that FreeDV is starting to become more common on HF, its classified as a voice mode since that is what is being conveyed. So its required to be in the voice segments, not the data, etc.

Regulation based on the bandwidth of the transmission, rather than the modulation type and mode is overdue folks. Its the only thing that makes any sense.

I'm partial to the 2.8 kHz below 30 MHz proposal, and no maxium bandwidth or data rates above 30 MHz.

Whatever you wish for please keep in mind that is almost next to impossilbe to get the FCC to change anything for Part 97 and takes decades to do so. We'd be best off with as few rules as possbile and just implementing more gentlemans agreements. It's not like the FCC does any active enforcement anyway.

Per W5NYV who serves on aa FCC TAC "movement at our current FCC happenings are when there are compelling economic or public safety motivations. Preferably, both."

That does explain why N9NB put the open communications for the sake of national security spin on things.

It does not explain how Part 95 services were granted their requests and ours are in limbo.

I think this podcast has been around since about 2008. Or thats about when I first learned of it. Russ, K5TUX (like the penguin) is one of the main co-hosts.

In the grand scheme of things I think this podcast is serving an area that the ARRL isn't by promoting collorabative software development. Years ago a lot of collorabative hardware projects were thanks in a large part to the now dying print media. Wayne Green's, 73 Magazine, as well as other technically oriented publications like Ham Radio Magazine, provided a platform to show the general ham populas what some talented folks were working. Others would use and build upon those ideas, and that is a large part of how technology marched forward.

Since the fall of of the previously good publications and transition to other information descimation methods like the internet, that leading force with all its subsribers has changed. With the ARRL's latest introduction of another watered down publication, I had hoped that meant some of the more intermediate topics would make QST, and the begginers stuff would be shifted to this "On The Air Magazine." Well folks, sadly that hasen't happened, and I think its time I throw in the towel for my ARRL hopes. The time spent checking perodicaly to look at the QST editorial is likely a waste. Instead I encourage you to focus that time in other place and with other ham oriented organizations and causes.

"Linux in the HAM Shack is a podcast designed to help amateur radio enthusiasts to migrate to Linux and Open Source from Microsoft or other closed-source software. Our goal is to provide a sound foundation in Open Source and demonstrate how it can help amateur radio operators participate in many of the best parts of the hobby."

So here are some of the LHS podcasts that I have bookmarked as they fit my mostly VHF/UHF interests:

Episode #138: Being David Rowe
https://lhspodcast.info/2015/01/lhs-episode-138-being-david-rowe/

Episode #206: Hamlib
https://lhspodcast.info/2018/01/lhs-episode-206-hamlib-deep-dive/

Episode #242: FreeDV/Codec2
https://lhspodcast.info/2018/08/lhs-episode-242-freedv-codec2-deep-dive-2/

Episode #310: DMR
https://lhspodcast.info/2019/11/lhs-episode-310-dmr-deep-dive-2/

Episode #340: Hamlib
https://lhspodcast.info/2020/04/lhs-episode-340-hamlib-deep-dive-redux/

Episode #343: YSF and WiRES-X
https://lhspodcast.info/2020/05/lhs-episode-343-ysf-and-wires-x-deep-dive/

Episode 393: DUDE-Star
https://lhspodcast.info/2021/02/lhs-episode-393-dude-star-deep-dive/

Episode #396: M17
https://lhspodcast.info/2021/03/lhs-episode-396-m17-deep-dive/

Episode 399: OpenRTX
https://lhspodcast.info/2021/03/lhs-episode-399-openrtx-deep-dive/

Episode 403: MVoice and MRefD
https://lhspodcast.info/2021/03/lhs-episode-403-mvoice-and-mrefd-deep-dive/

I like this project as it finally provides a way to retrofit an existing analog rig to do multiple digital modes.  It and its user base should show potential manufactures what the community wants.  

Sadly what seems to get the most interest is the DroidStar app.  But that is okay too, as I see that helping fuel attention to the underlying software vocoder performance issues.  I am hoping sooner or later someone with the software skills will step forward.

And for the app, I do think this makes more sense than having to buy multiple digital radios and a "hotspot", to effectively talk (maybe 10 feet over RF) over the internet on these modes.

There has been a fuss about this topic in a variety of places.  Radioreference, reddit and the old YaesuSystemFusion Yahoo email reflector.

John Kruk, N9UPC Yaesu National Sales Manager Amateur Division writes "CHIRP damages the internal firmware and programming of the radio BEYOND repair."

John Hays, K7VE wrote the best reply:

The converse is having the radios built so that 'bad programming' doesn't damage them.

Also, having vendor provided software that runs on more than Windows, especially Linux and MacOS. Including easy import and export of data in a vendor neutral format. 

Quality engineering and open system design is the proper way to go.

Listen to your customers' needs and desires. 

A number of hams on the email reflector wrote why would anyone use Chirp on a Radio that is supported by the manufacturer?  For some the point of ham radio isn't talking on the radio, the point of it to  understand how it works, and maybe even build or modify your own equipment.  In order to learn we must be able to inspect; to tinker, or at the very least have access to a specification we can build from.

For a good number of years at various DCC meeting the concept of a radio with open firmware has been brought up.

Let's take a quick look at why this would be good for the hobby:

The Linksys WRT54G WiFi router of the early 2000's was a good example of the good that can come from open firmware/open source.  The history here was the original factory firmware was discovered to be based on Linux components, which are covered by the GPL.  This required the manufacturers to release the source code.  With the code in hand, developers learned exactly how to talk to the hardware inside and how to code any features the hardware could support. It has spawned a handful of open source firmware projects for the WRT54G that extend its capabilities, and reliability, far beyond what is expected from a cheap consumer-grade router. In short, due to open source, one can load a third party firmware on the router and give a $60 consumer home-grade router all the functionality of a $600 Cisco professional router. 

Lets keep in mind that Yaesu was the latecomer (2011) to bring something to the amateur digital arena.

You may recall at the time there was speculation at the time that Yaesu might adopt the P25 or DMR standard.  This made sense because between 2007 to 2012 there was an 80% joint venture between them and Motorola.  

At the TAPR digital conferences between 2009 to approximately 2013 there was quite a few talks about the digital fragmentation problem.  With theoretical solutions presented by; Chris Testa, KD2BMH - Practical Handheld Software Radio. Bruce Perens K6BP Talking about the HT of the future, and David Rowe, VK5DGR's Codec2 to replace AMBE.

They didn't listen to the digital fragmentation problem then. They introduced another total incompatible digital flavor.  They still aren't listening apparently when it comes to the open firmware desires of the ham community.

Apparently they haven't been paying attention to the recent radio firmware reverse engineering efforts.  The most well known is the MD380 project by Travis, KK4VCZ.  The hobby can use a lot more of this and a lot more people like Travis.   We haven't yet figured out how to re-write a radio's firmware to create that elusive digital radio that can do more than one digital mode.  But that day may still come.  Software Defined Radio was likely a foreign concept to many 20 plus years ago when this problem was first brought to our awareness by Bruce Perens.  USRP, HackRF, HamShield, RTL-SDR, are known to many now, and having to have a hardware dongle to do the speech coding with those is illogical. 

The Yaesu radios are firmware update-able (yet no open for third party development).  So those thing were done right, however their digital design is disappointing, as well as their internet linking tie-in.  The design took a 30 year step backwards in digital communications by releasing a design based on P25 Phase 1, but occupies more bandwidth to do less.

For what its worth, I used to always buy Yaesu, but I haven't since 2011. 

Technical implications 

While the discussion above has focused on the 6 m band, one thing that the applications based method has revealed which is applicable to all bands is that we need to come up with applications (transmission modes) that use more, rather than less spectrum, if we are required to justify our allocated spectrum. More amateurs or more band activity would also help, but they are separate and difficult issues… 

The move towards digital coding, a rising noise floor and internet reporting has driven us in the direction of reducing the bandwidth that we, as amateurs, use to communicate. The ‘JT’ modes are a superb example of very clever coding, allowing communications in very narrow bandwidths. They allow (usually limited) communications to occur in situations where conventional analog applications (modes) do not function. Similarly various digital voice modes generally use narrow bandwidths and operate in poor signal-to-noise environments. In general the direction of application development is to use less bandwidth and this leads to some questions: 

- While the advantages of narrow bandwidth applications are very important when band conditions are poor or band occupancy is high, what about the rest of the time? What about the VHF bands and above where propagation conditions are relatively favourable and stable, why limit the application bandwidth? 

- Why not consider developing modes that use more bandwidth, or at least are adaptive and can use more bandwidth when band conditions permit? Wider band modes offering better voice quality are certainly easier on the ear. Other information could also be transmitted which would enhance the communications experience. Reduced Bandwidth Digital TV is a possibility for UHF bands and above, possibly even on 6 m and 2 m. Acceptable video quality can be achieved using bandwidths of 300 kHz or less. 

-How about moving away from our reliance on internet mediated modes, or at least supplement the internet with an amateur equivalent. HAMNET in Germany and Broadband-Hamnet in the US are examples of this. Why not use some of our spectrum assets to transmit amateur-specific and non-commercial information (DX clusters, WSPR reports, etc.) instead of commercial internet services? Considering that amateurs have exclusive use of the 44.xx.xx.xx IP address range (AMPRNet) we could build an independent, though internet-linked amateur-specific network. Given the low population density in many Region 3 countries an extensive broadband network using any of the microwave bands is unlikely to be feasible, but perhaps lower frequency bands could be used for (relatively) broadband links if the application data rate is kept low enough.

Acting upon some of these ideas, and other innovations, would increase spectrum occupancy and help justify the bands we have.