[CQ-Contest] RBN Announcement on FT8 Spotting
gordon.lapoint at gmail.com
Thu Jun 14 08:50:01 EDT 2018
Thanks!!! I'm still learning CW (did the CWOPS academy course
this winter), but live in a very high noise area. I used to do lots of
contesting from my qth, that is no longer feasable with the high noise.
I do some remote ops, and travel to Vermont to operate some contests.
FT8 (and CW) allow me to make qso's from my home qth that would not be
The RTTY contesting I used to do from home is now just not possible to
do with the same results. I can not hear the stations I used to.
Some of us have switched to the FT8 and JT modes because that is the
only way we can work some DX stations.
Gordon - N1MGO (BAMBI on RTTY)
On 06/14/2018 05:12 AM, Jim Brown wrote:
> On 6/13/2018 10:53 AM, Peter Sundberg wrote:
>> Who cares any more as FT8 is about computers talking to computers
>> while the operator is doing - or has his mind - on other things. Ham
>> Heaven is here according to the masses and apparently statistics. RBN
>> is all about computers anyway. And we must make decisions based on
>> statistics - right?
>> To be able to make use of the FT8 "Deep" functionality the computer
>> needs the info to decode unknown callsigns that are "22 dB below the
>> noise level".
> The above quotes are deceptive half-truths. I must say that I'm
> getting awfully tired of the bashing of fine operating modes developed
> by K1JT and his team that requires a lot more operator sophistication
> than those who have never used it assume. I'm a pretty good CW op
> (starting in 1955), but I also concentrate on station building,
> understanding propagation, and the other aspects that contribute to a
> successful QSO. In the recent WPX CW contest, I was in the top 4 high
> power single-op scores from the west coast (signing KU6W). Ragchewing
> bores me to tears.
> There are good reasons for the degree of automation that WSJT-X
> provides for modes with short turnaround times. But a successful QSO
> over a difficult path includes good antennas, good stations with good
> radios, good feedlines, good switching, knowing where to point the
> antenna, when to be working what distant QTH, knowing when propagation
> can make it possible, picking an operating frequency within the
> waterfall. My computer didn't make the QSO -- me, my radio, my
> station, including my antennas made the QSO!
> I mostly use WSJT modes for QSOs I can't make another way -- mostly 6M
> and 160M, mostly E-skip, meteor scatter, and some tropo. About two
> months ago, I managed a QSO with 5A1AL in Libya, who running barefoot
> with a compromise antenna; my neighbor W6GJB and I had been chasing
> him for three years. Libya is TOUGH from the west coast of the US. I
> think we worked him on 17M or 20M.
> I chase grids on 6M (only), and have found both JT65 and FT8 a huge
> help. There are thousands of SSB ops living in rare grids who never
> learned CW, but they can run FT8 and give me a QSO with 20 dB better
> noise immunity than SSB!
> And there's another HUGE issue -- most of us are surrounded by homes,
> each of which, including our own, are filled with noise sources that
> cover all but the strongest signals. K1JT's modes have given hams with
> these limitations a chance to do ham radio.
> I'm a genuine old fart, first licensed in 1955. I try to learn
> something new every day, and in the spirit of ham radio, try to share
> what I've learned with others. I suggest that the bashers adopt these
> 73, Jim K9YC
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
Gordon - N1MGO
More information about the CQ-Contest