VarAC V13 AI Gateway
Each of us has his or her own opinions. I’ll share mine at the risk of being “flamed”. (Note: I am an active member of Amateur Radio Emergency Service, but the discussion below is not an official ARES position, only my own.)
Bottom line: I think the AI Gateway in Version 13 is a bad idea.
VarAC is becoming a good mode for EmComm. In a “grid down” situation, where EmComm would likely be employed, VarAC has an advantage over Winlink in that VarAC allows a message sender to connect to a station which is known to be on the air (beaconing) rather than having to depend on a Winlink propagation forecast or resorting to hunt-and-try for a usable Winlink gateway. ( Winlink propagation forecasts are useful when they can be updated via internet, but they rapidly become outdated and in a grid-down situation without Winlink VHF FM, the forecasts take too long to load via Winlink HF — often over an hour.)
In my opinion, VaraHF has two limitations for EmComm use.
Limited slots for any given band: For the standard set of frequencies, any band has only the meeting frequency and ten additional slots to support all the message traffic within HF range. If some of those slots are taken up with people playing chess with each other or using AI to research car repairs, there are even fewer slots available for valid EmComm traffic. A work-around for this is probably VarAC connections outside the standard slot frequencies, but this would need to be pre-arranged.
Congestion on the calling frequency: Except for CQs, all QSOs originate on the calling frequency for a given band and then must QSY to an unused slot. So even if I see a station with Gateway capability on the Beacon list, I must initially try to establish contact on the calling frequency. VarAC’s forced QSY off the calling frequency helps, but I have had experience lately with the calling frequency being chock-a-block with beacons and initial contact establishment for other users. Yes, VarAC has an Emergency mode and identifies stations in that mode with red highlighting, but I don’t think there is any mechanism to prioritize link establishment for emergency stations over routine traffic. Could such a feature be implemented?
Just because we CAN establish a capability doesn’t mean we SHOULD establish that capability. To me, the AI Gateway seems to be a solution in search of a problem, with the potential to degrade existing capabilities.
I welcome other (respectful) comments and opinions.
Mike W4BZM
Dear Mike,
Let me start with the bottom line — Ham radio and VarAC are hobbies, much like chess. If someone enjoys “doomsday practice” as a hobby, that’s perfectly fine. If another prefers playing chess with friends, that’s fine too. VarAC is not a business — and like any hobby, it doesn’t require a business plan.
Now, to your point:VarAC is not limited to 10 slots. You can QSY to any frequency you wish. You mentioned there’s no problem to solve, but I see it differently. Until now, there was no real way to browse the web via HF radio — and now there is. This opens up real EmComm use cases, such as accessing weather updates or news when completely off-grid. Most organized EmComm groups don’t use the VarAC CF anyway; they have their own designated frequencies.
I fully respect your opinion, but I simply don’t share it. VarAC was created first and foremost as a hobby, and only secondarily does it offer useful capabilities for EmComm. For example, I personally dislike packet radio — but I don’t consider it illegitimate. The same goes for RTTY. Different people enjoy different aspects of the hobby: some are drawn to RTTY, some to packet, some to chess, and some to AI.
And one last note: AI is here to stay. We all use it daily — every Google search already benefits from it. History has shown that opposing technological progress has never been an effective strategy.
I wish you many enjoyable hours with VarAC — and may you never truly need its EmComm capabilities.
Warm regards,
Irad