You know that your rig is a full fledged computer running all sorts of
DSP signal enhancement software for all modes, including CW and SSB,
right? The incoming (and outgoing) signals are digitally sliced and
diced beyond all recognition, processed mathematically, then reassembled
to look like the analog signals you want to hear. The ONLY differences
with FT8 is that the computer is outboard of the rig (although it
needn't be), the software processing is more sophisticated, and the
signals get transmitted before they are converted back to look like an
analog signal. Although it hasn't been done yet, FT8-type signals COULD
even be converted back to CW or voice in the receiver before you even
knew they were there.
I think you are severely splitting hairs here.
As I have said many times, though, I think that WSJT-X does a poor job
of making the best use of modern signal processing by having such a
stilted interface, and I also think it is a mistake to include FT8/FT4
in contests normally intended for other modes. The style of operation
is totally different.
73,
Dave AB7E
On 10/26/2022 7:47 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
On 25/10/2022 19:14, David Gilbert AB7E wrote:
<snip>
Calling FT8 an "existential threat to ham radio" is ludicrous no
matter how much you or I may dislike it. Anything that encourages
lots of activity like FT8 does is exactly the opposite.
Dave is right, insofar as anything that hams care to transmit, or
cause to be transmitted, on the ham bands may be described as ham
radio, and insofar as "lots of activity", regardless of how it's
generated, is inherently good in itself.
All the same, your computer talking to my computer over ham-band RF
leaves me cold. And, yes, that includes RTTY.
73,
Paul EI5DI
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|