Sorry I hit send a bit to fast on my iPhone.
Anyways I did spend some time this morning trying what I believe is the latest
version of WSJT-x with FT8 (with two computers and two radios) and I'm
personally not overly enthused with the way the "/R" suffix appears to be
supported. That being said I usually enjoy using the WSJT-x application and
appreciate the efforts of the development team. Perhaps I need to re set my
expectations about how the "/R" suffix should be handled by digital modes but
as a rover I'm not very enthused by a mode that seems to work differently when
I add a "/R" to my call.
I can also see why the developers may not want to change the application to
address my concerns. (Rovers are likely a fairly small subset of a fairly
small part of the hobby.)
I do understand that other rovers have run WSJT-x (with FT8 and other modes)
and may or may not share my views re this. I also understand that there are
numerous advantages to using modes such as FT8 and MSK144.
73
Mark S
VE7AFZ
All the best Mark S
VE7AFZ
mark@alignedsolutions.com
604 762 4099
> On Jan 23, 2018, at 1:23 PM, Mark Spencer <mark@alignedsolutions.com> wrote:
>
> Re roving. I'd suggest that we look for digital modes that easily
> explicitly support (edited typo in original message) the "/R"'suffix or
> consider removing the requirement to use the "/R" suffix.
>
> Mark Spencer
>
> Aligned Solutions Co.
> mark@alignedsolutions.com
> 604 762 4099
>
>> On Jan 23, 2018, at 12:52 PM, JamesDuffey <jamesduffey@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>> Let me preface these comments with the statement that these observations are
>> meant to provoke some productive and objective discussion on the digital
>> modes in VHF contesting and not aimed at criticizing any individuals. Please
>> take it in that spirit.
>>
>> I find it odd that after years of wringing our hands over declining or
>> steady participation in the VHF contests that some are now criticizing the
>> increased activity that the digital modes, primarily FT8, are bringing to
>> contesting. I realize that there is more to the sentiments some express than
>> that, but to me, any increase in activity is good, particularly for the
>> January contest when propagation is often flat.
>>
>> I think that there are three primary reasons that FT8 and MSK144 are popular:
>>
>> 1. FT8 offers many of the advantages that CW offers on VHF. To people who
>> have entered the hobby over the past 25 years without knowing the code, this
>> is a powerful attraction, and one not to be taken lightly.
>>
>> 2. Using both FT8 and MSK144, even a modestly equipped station on 6M can
>> work other similarly equipped stations out to the limits of one hop Es. In
>> some areas it is possible to work everyone within this radius that is on in
>> a contest. This is not easily possible on either CW or SSB with a modestly
>> equipped station.
>>
>> 3. A lot of ops run FT8 on HF and many of the skills translate directly to
>> 6M. With the proliferation of HF+6M rigs, this provides a large pool of
>> potential VHF Contesters. The contesting skills do not necessarily
>> translate, but it is, in part, our responsibility to educate these potential
>> new VHF ops on how to operate contests. Posts educating newbies on VHF
>> contesting practices on local contesting, VHF, DX, club reflectors and
>> newsletters should be made by those of us who are experienced Contesters.
>>
>> It does not do much good to complain that FT8 ops would do better on CW if
>> they don’t know CW. But if conditions support it, they should go to SSB, and
>> we should spread the word that when the indicated SNR on FT8 is over a
>> certain threshold, say +6dB for SSB and maybe -14dB for CW, the band is
>> probably open and they would do better on CW or SSB depending on the
>> operator’s skill.
>>
>> A nice addition to FT8 would be an alert, perhaps flashing, included in the
>> SNR report on FT8 suggestLet me preface these comments with the statement
>> that these observations are meant to provoke some productive and objective
>> discussion on the digital modes in VHF contesting and not aimed at
>> criticizing any individuals. Please take it in that spirit.
>>
>> I find it odd that after years of wringing our hands over declining or
>> steady participation in the VHF contests that some are now criticizing the
>> increased activity that the digital modes, primarily FT8, are bringing to
>> contesting. I realize that there is more to the sentiments some express than
>> that, but to me, any increase in activity is good, particularly for the
>> January contest when propagation is often flat.
>>
>> I think that there are three primary reasons that FT8 and MSK144 are popular:
>>
>> 1. FT8 offers many of the advantages that CW offers on VHF. To people who
>> have entered the hobby over the past 25 years without knowing the code, this
>> is a powerful attraction, and one not to be taken lightly.
>>
>> 2. Using both FT8 and MSK144, even a modestly equipped station on 6M can
>> work other similarly equipped stations out to the limits of one hop Es. In
>> some areas it is possible to work everyone within this radius that is on in
>> a contest. This is not easily possible on either CW or SSB with a modestly
>> equipped station.
>>
>> 3. A lot of ops run FT8 on HF and many of the skills translate directly to
>> 6M. With the proliferation of HF+6M rigs, this provides a large pool of
>> potential VHF Contesters. The contesting skills do not necessarily
>> translate, but it is, in part, our responsibility to educate these potential
>> new VHF ops on how to operate contests. Posts educating newbies on VHF
>> contesting practices on local contesting, VHF, DX, club reflectors and
>> newsletters should be made by those of us who are experienced Contesters.
>>
>> It does not do much good to complain that FT8 ops would do better on CW if
>> they don’t know CW. But if conditions support it, they should go to SSB, and
>> we should spread the word that when the indicated SNR on FT8 is over a
>> certain threshold, say +6dB for SSB and maybe -14dB for CW, the band is
>> probably open and they would do better on CW or SSB depending on the
>> operator’s skill.
>>
>> A nice addition to FT8 would be an alert, perhaps flashing, included in the
>> SNR report on FT8 suggesting that CW or SSB might be a better choice for a
>> QSO and the band may be open.
>>
>> I don’t think that there is really a viable analog, that is CW or SSB
>> alternative, for meteor scatter QSOes in a contest, at least not for one
>> that is as quick.
>>
>> I understand that it is hard to work scatter out to the limits with CW or
>> SSB. It takes skill and patience. With FT8, these QSOes are much easier and
>> the skill required is less, and hence there are more operators that can
>> utilize these modes. I think that this is good. Again, some education for
>> these ops on what propagation modes they are working on and how best to
>> utilize the various modes would help.
>>
>> As several have stated, the problem with the digital modes is that they may
>> take activity away from the conventional modes. I am not sure how best to
>> deal with this, but getting people to use more of the assistance resources
>> available is a start. That will alert the FT8 op that there is a QSO that
>> can be made on SSB or CW that is not available on FT8. They can go to the
>> analog modes after their FT8 QSO is complete, say in a minute or so. After
>> doing this a few times, hopefully it will become second nature. The conflict
>> between MSK144 and other modes is not as easily resolved as the time
>> commitment for meteor scatter is longer. I have heard ops explain that they
>> work FT8 because that is where the activity is and there is nothing to work
>> on CW or SSB, and at the same time rovers in those same areas will complain
>> that there is no one to work on CW or SSB because all of the ops they
>> usually work are on FT8. Emphasizing FT8 over CW or SSB because of lack of
>> analog activity is a self fulfilling prophecy.
>>
>> So, I think that to begin with, we should launch an education campaign to
>> those new FT8 contest ops as to how best to maximize their scores by using
>> modes other than FT8.
>>
>> Adding alerts to the FT8 software to prompt an op to go to CW or SSB when
>> the SNR is good would help.
>>
>> Encouraging the FT8 ops to monitor the various forms of assistance so that
>> they can be alerted when CW and SSB ops are available for QSOes would help
>> as well. If FT8 ops keep an APRS window and local VHF chat room/activity
>> window open, and pay attention to it, that would help alert the FT8 op that
>> there are other, perhaps more fruitful and faster sources of QSOes and
>> points.
>>
>> One issue that has not been expanded on much is the impact on rovers. FT8
>> and MSK144 are additional activities layered on an already busy rover
>> activity. Rovers usually work the easy pickings first when they make a stop.
>> I, and I suspect most rovers, also try to work as many others that are on
>> the air. If the rover goes to MSK144 or FT8 to work stations, that takes
>> additional time, but it may make it worthwhile to get the extra mults and
>> QSO points. Stations that are busy with scatter QSOes will put off working
>> the rover. The end result will be that the rover will miss out on working
>> stations he would normally work, or have to spend more time at a given stop,
>> or perhaps operate on two radios simultaneously, probably with another
>> operator and certainly with more hardware complexity. The simple three band
>> single op rover may become a thing of the past and everyone will suffer for
>> it.
>>
>> I think the digital modes offer great contesting opportunities for the entry
>> level operator and modestly equipped stations. We need to figure out how
>> best to utilize them to derive the best benefit though. Education is a good
>> place to start.
>>
>> Rational opposing views and thoughts on the subject?- Duffey KK6MC
>>
>> James Duffey KK6MC
>> Cedar Crest NM
>> _______________________________________________
>> VHFcontesting mailing list
>> VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|