←back to thread

How ham radio endures

(www.zdnet.com)
161 points CrankyBear | 1 comments | 14 Oct 24 17:26 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
melling ◴[14 Oct 24 19:09 UTC] No.41840805[source]▶
Ham radio always seemed a bit boring compared to the Internet, computers, and software development.

What are the most interesting things people are doing with Ham these days? I’ve had a technical class license for a couple decades but never used it, which I keep renewing. Willing to get a more advanced license.

replies(8): >>41841768 #>>41849620 #>>41855440 #>>41856027 #>>41856612 #>>41856640 #>>41858082 #>>41861350 #
blendo ◴[16 Oct 24 03:52 UTC] No.41855440[source]▶
I used the WSPR protocol to send a message from San Francisco to Georgia using a 250 milliWatt transmitter, operating in 20m.

It sends tiny messages (current lat/long, transmitter power, and your call sign) with so much error correcting code that each 50 bit message takes a minute or two to transmit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSPR_(amateur_radio_software)

It’s the only time I’ve used my General class privileges.

replies(1): >>41858240 #
chillingeffect ◴[16 Oct 24 12:21 UTC] No.41858240[source]▶
Omg reading the wiki for wspr i thought i saw a typo "630m" but yup, ~430 kHz, wow. What antenna did you use, a quarter mile dipole? ;)
replies(2): >>41858324 #>>41858460 #
1. wl ◴[16 Oct 24 12:31 UTC] No.41858324[source]▶
Wikipedia is just being weird by using an MF band in its example. Most WSPR is in the shortwave bands, which can use large antennas, but not THAT large.