[CQ-Contest] possible changes for CQ VHF Contest

[rjairam at gmail.com]

And as I pointed out, ClubLog is not the only source of data.

RBN tested this. FT8 to CW was roughly 85% to 15%. If phone is another 15
to 20%, that still puts FT8 way, way ahead.

The point is that the user base is too large to ignore.

Ria
N2RJ

On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 12:48 PM Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at sbelectronics.com>
wrote:

> Chris, As I mentioned privately to Ria.  Clublog states to not draw any
> conclusions about overall activity vs their uploaded logs.  My personal
> tests have shown that FT8 is very much over-represented by FT8.  I base
> that on CQing and seeing how many of the responders are CLublog uploaders
> as well as scanning the band and recording the same.  Surprisingly, only
> 25% were showing up on Clublog.  I would venture to guess 90% of FT8
> activity is showing up on clublog (it’s a guess only).
>
> Tune around and do your own research.  I did.  And the answers made more
> sense.
>
> 73
>
> Ed  N1UR
>
> From: Chris Plumblee [mailto:chris.plumblee at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 9:59 AM
> To: Edward Sawyer
> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] possible changes for CQ VHF Contest
>
> Clublog statistics support (approximately) that ratio of FT8 to CW + SSB +
> RTTY and other digital qsos. I was also surprised.
>
> Chris W4WF
>
> On Wed, Jul 24, 2019 at 8:28 AM Edward Sawyer <EdwardS at sbelectronics.com
> <mailto:EdwardS at sbelectronics.com>> wrote:
> "70% of ham traffic is now FT8."
>
> I am curious where this datapoint is coming from?
>
> Ed  N1UR
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com<mailto:CQ-Contest at contesting.com>
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> --
> Chris Plumblee
> 407.494.5155
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>