Very gracious of you to include my noodlings (https://www.zeroretries.org/i/140529022/easy-allstarlink) in your fine newsletter. Today, with the wind blowing hard and temperatures in the teens, we're getting power bumps. These are the conditions when RF carries the day!
An interesting perspective! I recall checking out w3w years ago but had that same privacy concern.
A few things spring to mind, and I say this as someone who is a new ham with a fairly broad range of interests for and against:
- w3w is an excellent concept in terms of pinpointing location. It's potentially less cumbersome than lat/long for precise location, and more efficient than grids.
- For POTA/SOTA/xxxxOTA uses, I see potential in terms of very localised information. For public outings such as POTA/etc, I see this as a positive in the way that folks can identify where in a park they are conducting their operations. This could help others in identifying good spots for setting up operations, committing to a body of knowledge about a particular park, etc.
- I see the three-word format as potentially problematic in the CW and digital domains - that can be a lot of characters to hammer out on a key/paddle. In the case of digital, thinking specifically of FT4/8, and not being fully aware of the adaptations necessary, I don't see how the three words could fit inside a standard transmission length in these modes.
- For non-xOTA ops, I see a bit of a risk in terms of privacy. Gridsquares give us a box in which we're operating, which is good to help us in recognizing how our propagation is working. 63 sq km (for a standard 6-character grid square) is a large tract of land to track someone down in. Since we appear to handle this kind of information on the regular, to my mind, this feels like a reasonable degree of accuracy in terms of operations. With this in mind, I'm aware that a large number of hams also make their address data available through LoTW, QRZ, or even the FCC database (ISED in Canada). Privacy is up to the individual.
I agree on privacy and security issues - in the cellphone age, the individual has to take responsibility. At least in W3W the operator can choose how truthful he might want to be choosing which W3W block to claim.
I guess my perspective is as an old ham who has trouble answering the question "What's the point?" from friends and acquaintances (the family gave up long ago). How many stations/states/countries does not seem as impressive as in years past. Especially so when I have business zoom video calls with developers in India, listen to commuters in the UK, or chat to Jakarta on my DMR handheld/hotspot each day.
It is certainly voice oriented. For emergency comms, alignment with emerging techniques such as W3W is wise operationally and a ready demonstration of possible value from a public relations standpoint. It's a technique that new hams can quickly incorporate W3W into their skillset and contribute immediately on HF/VHF/UHF voice.
As you note, CW or digital becomes more complicated.
W3W accuracy in CW operations would be a tough nut to crack, for old ops like me.
We implicitly leverage a lot of English language redundancy in plain text CW that allows us to skate, copy in our head, understand the gist of the conversation and keep rolling. Quite different from three words that need to be copied accurately - similar to military five random letter code groups.
I'm just dipping a toe into digital - and this may be beyond FT4/8 structured payloads. However, I've not used Olivia or FT65, but they look to be made to order for W3W.
The EMCOMM value of w3w is undeniable (as is for other logistical purposes like delivery services, etc). Realistically, too, and I'm thinking of this through the lens of the upcoming Winter Field Day, FT4/8 aren't allowed (for the same kinds of reasons we've discussed), so the freeform methods like Olivia, RTTY, PSK, and all the other acronyms/modes (JS8 especially) are good to go, meaning that the bridge between text and radio is there.
As I'm writing this, I'm thinking back to the couple of times I've done EOC volunteer work for community events like marathons, bike races, etc. Our comms are primarily VHF/repeater based, using APRS to help track mobile aid stations. Having w3w as an overlay, potentially sent via a digital mode, could be a workable extra layer (but that adds extra requirements). So much to weigh and consider!
Very gracious of you to include my noodlings (https://www.zeroretries.org/i/140529022/easy-allstarlink) in your fine newsletter. Today, with the wind blowing hard and temperatures in the teens, we're getting power bumps. These are the conditions when RF carries the day!
An interesting perspective! I recall checking out w3w years ago but had that same privacy concern.
A few things spring to mind, and I say this as someone who is a new ham with a fairly broad range of interests for and against:
- w3w is an excellent concept in terms of pinpointing location. It's potentially less cumbersome than lat/long for precise location, and more efficient than grids.
- For POTA/SOTA/xxxxOTA uses, I see potential in terms of very localised information. For public outings such as POTA/etc, I see this as a positive in the way that folks can identify where in a park they are conducting their operations. This could help others in identifying good spots for setting up operations, committing to a body of knowledge about a particular park, etc.
- I see the three-word format as potentially problematic in the CW and digital domains - that can be a lot of characters to hammer out on a key/paddle. In the case of digital, thinking specifically of FT4/8, and not being fully aware of the adaptations necessary, I don't see how the three words could fit inside a standard transmission length in these modes.
- For non-xOTA ops, I see a bit of a risk in terms of privacy. Gridsquares give us a box in which we're operating, which is good to help us in recognizing how our propagation is working. 63 sq km (for a standard 6-character grid square) is a large tract of land to track someone down in. Since we appear to handle this kind of information on the regular, to my mind, this feels like a reasonable degree of accuracy in terms of operations. With this in mind, I'm aware that a large number of hams also make their address data available through LoTW, QRZ, or even the FCC database (ISED in Canada). Privacy is up to the individual.
Good points, Brayden
I agree on privacy and security issues - in the cellphone age, the individual has to take responsibility. At least in W3W the operator can choose how truthful he might want to be choosing which W3W block to claim.
I guess my perspective is as an old ham who has trouble answering the question "What's the point?" from friends and acquaintances (the family gave up long ago). How many stations/states/countries does not seem as impressive as in years past. Especially so when I have business zoom video calls with developers in India, listen to commuters in the UK, or chat to Jakarta on my DMR handheld/hotspot each day.
It is certainly voice oriented. For emergency comms, alignment with emerging techniques such as W3W is wise operationally and a ready demonstration of possible value from a public relations standpoint. It's a technique that new hams can quickly incorporate W3W into their skillset and contribute immediately on HF/VHF/UHF voice.
As you note, CW or digital becomes more complicated.
W3W accuracy in CW operations would be a tough nut to crack, for old ops like me.
We implicitly leverage a lot of English language redundancy in plain text CW that allows us to skate, copy in our head, understand the gist of the conversation and keep rolling. Quite different from three words that need to be copied accurately - similar to military five random letter code groups.
I'm just dipping a toe into digital - and this may be beyond FT4/8 structured payloads. However, I've not used Olivia or FT65, but they look to be made to order for W3W.
The EMCOMM value of w3w is undeniable (as is for other logistical purposes like delivery services, etc). Realistically, too, and I'm thinking of this through the lens of the upcoming Winter Field Day, FT4/8 aren't allowed (for the same kinds of reasons we've discussed), so the freeform methods like Olivia, RTTY, PSK, and all the other acronyms/modes (JS8 especially) are good to go, meaning that the bridge between text and radio is there.
As I'm writing this, I'm thinking back to the couple of times I've done EOC volunteer work for community events like marathons, bike races, etc. Our comms are primarily VHF/repeater based, using APRS to help track mobile aid stations. Having w3w as an overlay, potentially sent via a digital mode, could be a workable extra layer (but that adds extra requirements). So much to weigh and consider!