I suspect there isn't much digital activity on 1296 or above in VHF+
contests. When I've gotten someone to run up the bands with me, I don't
recall anyone asking if it would be digital or SSB/CW. I know there are
WSJT modes used on 10 GHz to work EME, but I have not encountered any for
terrestrial communication.
Zack W9SZ
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025 at 6:10 PM VE3KH via VHFcontesting <
vhfcontesting@contesting.com> wrote:
> This thread is kind of funny ... but sad
>
> Fact ... the average age of a Ham is quite high ... the older we get, the
> less likely we are to change or be persuaded by others attempts to get us
> to do what they want.
>
> Back in the good old days
> ... I didn't like VHF Contests allowing FM QSO's ... stations in big
> cities that were willing to put up vertical antennas got lots of points for
> arranging / working local handhelds ... stupid I thought because the point
> was DX and farther grids ... I wasn't going to do that just to win.
> ... I personally don't operate much digital now ... I did some EME that
> way but it just isn't the same reward as hearing it with your ears.
>
> I agree the VHF bands seem dead on CW/SSB ... disappointing as many of you
> have pointed out ... but I don't think any rule changes are going to fix
> the split between Digital and Analog ... people are going to do what makes
> them happy.
>
> BUT ... consider this ... the 10GHz & Up Contest is this weekend ... not
> really any digital up there (yet) ... and 10GHz is AMAZING ... there are
> now quite a few modest stations that have worked 50 Grids or more. Back in
> the good old days we used to arrange 10GHz contacts on 2m ... I'd need a KW
> & 18 element yagi or more to make the contacts we routinely make on 10GHz.
> So come on up ... maybe this is the solution you are looking for !!!!
>
> 73 Kevin VE3KH
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting-bounces+ve3kh=icloud.com@contesting.com>
> On Behalf Of Steve Hewlett via VHFcontesting
> Sent: September 17, 2025 12:44 PM
> To: vhfcontesting@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] [NEWSVHF] Here's a Proposed Solution for
> Digital/Analog Operating
>
> From WA2TEO's post:
>
> "Lastly, boycotting to make a point is , I believe self defeating. Imagine
> being on for your first contest and finding dismal activity because lot's
> of guys don't operate to make a point. It's really hard to find new blood
> in vhf contesting. Turning any new ops off isn't a good way to succeed. If
> we're frank about it, one of the issues since FT8 is that quite a few long
> term ops stopped operating since they didn't like it. Essentially they have
> been boycotting. I believe that is a contributor to lower analog activity.
> Why not just get on and have fun any way you enjoy? It's a VHF truism -
> activity breeds activity. A number of times this weekend I was on 6 or 2M
> ssb and didn't see any other stations on that mode."
>
> The above paragraph sums up the problem from my perspective. I only
> operate the traditional analog modes and have no desire to expand my
> horizons to computer-centric modes. I am not computer-phobic; I spent my
> career primarily as a language level computer programmer. In my spare time
> years ago I dabbled in machine language programming as well. By the time I
> retired I was really tired of staring at a computer screen and rarely use
> our home computer, mostly just for emails. As FT8 began to siphon available
> contest contacts away from the traditional analog modes I simply stopped
> participating starting in January 2020. My attitude towards FT8 is that I
> prefer to do the work of making contacts myself and want at least some
> personal involvement in the actual QSO.
>
> This wasn't a conscious decision to "boycott" on my part; VHF Contesting
> just wasn't that much fun anymore for me. I did give the January 2022
> Contest a go as an FM Only entrant for the first time, on 2 meters and 70
> cm, on a limited basis. Predictably, my QSO count was quite limited. I did
> enjoy it though to some extent. My next effort was a very short one on the
> Sunday evening of the June 2024 contest. I had finished up with a 2 meter
> net around 8:00 pm and for the heck of it tried calling CQ Contest on
> 146.52 which netted me two QSO's, one with an operator fairly local to me
> and one with a contest participant quite a ways from me (in FM terms) in a
> different grid. Since then I've been participating in each VHF contest as
> an FM Only entrant. For the most part the pace is leisurely to say the
> least but I am enjoying it. I call CQ fairly often on each of the 4 bands I
> now operate and in between monitor while reading a book.
>
> I don't know what the ideal mode scheduling compromise would be. Clearly
> lots of people are unhappy with the current state of affairs. Since amateur
> radio is dependent on showing use of the frequencies available to us to
> justify our frequency allocations, an important variable to consider is
> overall activity levels when trying to arrive at an optimum solution to the
> mode scheduling problem. Another important consideration is attracting new
> operators to VHF contesting. Most newly licensed operators are going to
> have a radio and antenna(s) and that is about it. Getting them into the
> traditional analog modes for contesting seems to be the easiest way to
> attract their attention for the most part. Also, being patient and
> courteous with new contesters is important. I heard some very poor
> operating practices from a few people who should know better in regards to
> setting a good example for new contesters during the last weekend's contest.
>
> 73, Steve W1NIV
> On Wednesday, September 17, 2025 at 11:09:43 AM EDT, wa2teo--- via
> VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com> wrote:
>
> I think Ed, K3SK and K1DS are on the right track. Same timeframe,
> digital and analog with perhaps extra points for analog. Or not. I believe
> we all agree that the goal is to increase activity in what has been a
> declining activity. By allowing contacts on digital and analog, it
> encourages the digital guys to work analog stations. My concerns about
> other approaches :- making it a 48 hour contest is going to negatively
> impact rovers. How many can stay out that long? I don't find many out in
> the middle of the night. So we are basically limiting the time they are on
> for all practical purposes. And many rovers I work are only analog. So
> basically they are down to one day of operating, so fewer grids they can
> hit. On a different note, I see on 3830 in most contests I operate more
> hours than most single ops. Yeah, as my xyl says I'm a bit obsessed, hi.
> But even I would not feel enthused about a 48 hour vhf contest. We just
> don't have enough ops these days.
> - We had a great experiment with separate mode events this summer in CQWW.
> In fairness, 6 meters was not good either weekend from what I can tell (I
> had very limited operating in the Analog weekend). I operated the digital
> and it was really slow. And there was no option to go analog to reduce the
> lack of digital stations. And vice versa for the analog weekend. So I don't
> think having separate operating modes accomplishes anything since it
> further thins an already thin herd.
> - I worked about 140 Q's this weekend on 902 and up. All were analog. I
> don't currently have digital on those bands but I am working on that. Even
> so, it would take a lot of time to work what I did on digital and the only
> advantage would be I might add some further out Q's. So, by having separate
> operating times by mode, I think you would end up with very limited results
> on 902 and up. Basically the digital only session becomes primarily a lower
> 4 bands contest. Many of my microwave contacts were with rovers who don't
> currently operate on digital. So back to the top. I think the goals are met
> by allowing an analog Q and a digital on the same band. If need be, weight
> the analog to push activity there. It's a disappointing reality that we
> might need this. I'm old enough to remember when I worked more stuff than I
> do now on Analog only. But that ship has sailed and we should stay focused
> on how to best run all modes in the future to increase activity. We all
> need that to keep it interesting and fun. And given current activity
> levels, I don't think we will be overwhelmed using both. We definitely
> would need help from the contest programs so it doesn't become messy. Right
> now to run the sprints that allow both modes, I go back to the future and
> use a check sheet to remember who I worked on which mode, hi. Lastly,
> boycotting to make a point is , I believe self defeating. Imagine being on
> for your first contest and finding dismal activity because lot's of guys
> don't operate to make a point. It's really hard to find new blood in vhf
> contesting. Turning any new ops off isn't a good way to succeed. If we're
> frank about it, one of the issues since FT8 is that quite a few long term
> ops stopped operating since they didn't like it. Essentially they have been
> boycotting. I believe that is a contributor to lower analog activity. Why
> not just get on and have fun any way you enjoy? It's a VHF truism -
> activity breeds activity. A number of times this weekend I was on 6 or 2M
> ssb and didn't see any other stations on that mode. My .02 cents. Jeff K1TEO
> On Wednesday, September 17, 2025 at 03:17:08 PM GMT+1, Ed Kucharski
> via VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com> wrote:
>
> Not if there are rules in place to prevent this ("mode hopping").
> Something like: QSO's may only be made on recognized digital/analog
> frequencies/portions of the bands and a digital and analog QSO can not be
> made back-to-back on the same frequency (or similar wording of no
> back-to-back analog/digital QSO's maybe similar to the HF NA sprints...).
>
> I've been a proponent of a change in the contest rules similar to the
> format of the ARRL 10m contest and have submitted a couple of proposals to
> ARRL and heard crickets in return. Analog Only, Digital Only and Mixed
> categories allowing 2 QSO's (one analog and one digital) on each band.
> After reading others ideas, I also think additional encouragement may be
> needed to further promote analog operation - perhaps making analog QSO's
> worth additional points? But is that enough to get the digital operators
> off digital and explore analog?
>
> There were a couple of times last weekend where I went an hour without
> making a QSO (4 bands, KW+ power on 6 and 2m, 100w on 222/432). I called
> CQ on 6 and 2m SSB on the top of many hours and self-spotted making only a
> couple QSO's that way, worked only a few multi-ops and just one (and only
> one) rover on 1 band from 1 grid. Chat rooms got me a only a couple more
> skeds and QSO's. It was beyond boring (thank goodness I could watch
> football on my iPad while operating). Trying to get stations to QSY on FT8
> to other bands was also a challenge and I had a higher failure rate than
> success rate.
>
> 73,
> Ed K3DNE
> EM94
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 09/17/2025 9:27 AM EDT David R Buckwalter via VHFcontesting <
> vhfcontesting@contesting.com mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > If you allow working a station both Digital and Analog on each band, all
> you will do is create “Mode Hopping’ …… “QSL the FN99, switch to FT8 and
> call me right here again, then we can move up a band and do it again”.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Ed Parish <k1ep.list@gmail.com mailto:k1ep.list@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2025 7:30 AM
> > To: Terry Price <terry@directivesystems.com
> > mailto:terry@directivesystems.com>
> > Cc: K3SK@buckwalter.co mailto:K3SK@buckwalter.co; NEWS
> > <NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net>; VHF
> > Contesting <VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com>
> > Subject: Re: [NEWSVHF] [VHFcontesting] Here's a Proposed Solution for
> > Digital/Analog Operating
> >
> >
> >
> > Well, if you go for a 48 hour contest, 24 analog and 24 digital, how
> about splitting it 12/24/12 to encourage people to work both modes and
> stick around? Instead of having people on for the first 24 and QRT or just
> get on for the second 24?
> >
> >
> >
> > Ed Parish, K1EP
> >
> > k1ep@arrl.net mailto:k1ep@arrl.net <mailto:k1ep@arrl.net
> > mailto:k1ep@arrl.net>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 20:38 Terry Price <terry@directivesystems.com
> mailto:terry@directivesystems.com <mailto:terry@directivesystems.com
> mailto:terry@directivesystems.com> > wrote:
> >
> > Well, I said make the contest a full 48 hrs, 24 digital and 24 analog.
> > Comments about too many modes is kinda correct, you don't know where to
> go.
> > You call CQ on SSB/CW and you miss FT8 folks, go to FT8 you miss
> > analog folks. That's why I think having two segments really fits well.
> > Both modes get evening, morning and day. If someone is opposed to
> > digital, they operate whichever segment is analog. This also would
> > reduce the "Sunday afternoon blues" when you'll do anything to work
> someone.
> >
> > So right now, there is SOLP and SOHP and analog only, for the folks
> > that only want to work digital, there is no digital award only that I
> > am aware of. Yes, it may be creating another category but it's not
> > just so "everyone wins" Digital isn't going anywhere and to think the
> > league will remove digital from VHF contests is not realistic. Anyone
> > who has contested for a while knows that FT8 is NOT a contest mode,
> > yes you can dig out folks that are too weak for cw or folks that don't
> > operate cw, but neither is Q65,
> > MSK144 for that matter but folks don't abuse those.
> >
> > I for one see nothing wrong with an analog only, digital only and for
> > us guttens' both modes - and awards, I personally would love a 48 hour
> > VHF contest as long as there is activity to keep me awake. I couldn't
> > make the CQ VHF analog but I did operate the digital and if the
> > results are correct I was #1 in the US. I operated two K3's, one on 6
> > and one driving a transverter for two. The challenge was keeping both
> > going and trying not to miss anything. It wasn't the same fun as
> > analog and recognising someone by their voice or fist but it wasn't that
> bad.
> >
> > I've been contesting since 1978 when I worked with WA8LXJ in Kentucky.
> > I've singleop'ed, multiop'ed, and roved. I loved roving but getting
> > folks to QSY is difficult on FT8 and you miss a lot when folks are
> > hanging out on FT8 all the time so dividing the contest into two
> > sections would also help rovers and hopefully spur more to get on. Is
> > the idea perfect, of course not, what in life is perfect?
> >
> > Terry
> > Terry Price - W8ZN
> > Directive Systems and Engineering
> > 703-754-3876
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 16, 2025 at 4:43 PM David R Buckwalter via VHFcontesting <
> > vhfcontesting@contesting.com mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com
> <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > > Here is my 3-1/2¢ on using analog and digital modes for the ARRL VHF
> > > contests.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > There is an easy solution. Just read on ===
> > >
> > > First, it is not just about FT8. Some operators use other digital
> > > modes as well. This past weekend’s contest I logged CW, SSB, FT8,
> > > MSK, Q65 and
> > > JT65 contacts.
> > >
> > > Separating the contest for either analog or digital format is dumb.
> > > There are already too many things going on in life to worry about
> > > dedicating another weekend for contesting. Splitting the same
> > > weekend into slots for analog and digital is a bad idea. Which
> > > format gets the morning tropo time slot? What format gets the
> > > daytime Sporadic E? Does MSK144 for meteor scatter get assigned to
> > > the mornings, evenings, night, or afternoon? What about those like
> > > myself that add multipliers using digital modes to work EME? Do we
> > > get to use digital when the moon is available at our location?
> > >
> > > Over the past 3 to 4 years there has been much discussion on this
> > > subject and the one significant point made is Analog operators (SSB
> > > & CW) will not work digital stations. In most cases the analog
> > > stations don’t even own digital equipment or software. However,
> > > whether they choose to or not, Digital operators have the ability
> > > and many do work ‘Mixed Mode’, both digital and analog.
> > >
> > > Considering this, the most logical thing to do is change the rules
> > > for scoring and operating categories. Keep the current operating
> > > categories including ‘Analog Only’. Then, add a new ‘Digital Only’
> > > category. Create a points incentive for analog contacts. As an
> > > example, use the current point values for digital modes, then add 1
> > > point to those values for each analog contact. A 144MHz now 1 point,
> > > will be 2 points if an analog contact is made, a 222MHz contact is
> > > now 2 points and will be 3 if it is for an analog contact. This
> > > provides an incentive for ‘Mixed Mode’ stations to seek out and work
> > > analog contacts. Still permit only one valid contact per band with
> > > any station. If a station is previously worked digital and then is
> > > later worked analog, allow the higher point analog contact, letting
> > > the previous logged digital contact to become the ‘DUPE’. ‘Digital
> > > Only’ are competing with other ‘Digital Only’ even if they work a
> > > ‘Mixed Mode’ station. It’s the same for ‘Analog Only’ stations.
> > > There is no downside to this method of scoring.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yes, I know the logging software will need to be revised. But that’s
> > > got nothing to do with making everybody happy and increasing activity.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > FWIW – I have been VHF contesting since 1980
> > >
> > > Dave - K3SK - FM07
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > > VHFcontesting@contesting.com mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > > <mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > > mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com>
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> > >
> > >
> > ______________________________________________________________
> > NEWSVHF mailing list
> > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/newsvhf
> > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> > Post: mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net
> > <mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net mailto:NEWSVHF@mailman.qth.net>
> >
> > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email
> > list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting@contesting.com mailto:VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|