[CQ-Contest] FT4 - Robotic Contesting

[Jim]

These digital modes, with appropriate tweaks to allow non-trivial information, can be very useful for communicating. But for sport? Not unless your sport is robotics.

Imagine a similar takeover by machines of a well known sport: tennis. It’s not hard to imagine a robot that would eject a tennis ball into the air and use a mechanical arm with a tennis racquet attached to hit a ball at a similar robot on the other side of a tennis net, and with appropriate vision software then get to that ball when it is returned to again hit it over a net, and so on. What would that prove, and what about it would be interesting to observe?

And I find that mentally decoding a call out of a pileup or out of noise comprises a lot more than 1% of contact management.


73  -   Jim  K8MR





> On May 2, 2019, at 9:01 PM, Sterling Mann <kawfey at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> In the beginning, there were people. And people raced on foot. And then man
> domesticated the animal, and raced that. And then man got creative, making
> cars, planes, boats, trains, rockets, and so on and so forth...and raced
> them all.
> 
> Ham radio is the same. In the beginning there was CW. And then phone. And
> then RTTY. And then BPSK. And so on and so forth, until now with FT4.
> 
> What I'm getting at is that FT4 contesting will still be just as much fun
> as CW, SSB, and RTTY, and just as competitive. But, I think now after
> reading a negative opinion or two on CQ-contest, QRZ, eHam, reddit, and
> elsewhere, is that the contesters ingrained in CW, phone, or RTTY
> radiosport will be hard pressed to believe me. Meanwhile contesters of
> modern-day modes will have as much fun with FT4 as those who have been
> contesting with CW for their lifetimes and it makes me sad that they'll be
> unlikely to share that experience. So, I challenge the naysayers to give it
> a try. I promise you that the "robot" you QSOing with will be no different
> than the N1MM automation that manage 99% of a contact already.
> 
> -Sterling N0SSC
> 
> On Thu, May 2, 2019 at 7:08 PM Mike Smith VE9AA <ve9aa at nbnet.nb.ca> wrote:
> 
>> Hey guys n' gals,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> I am not against FT# contesting, but I certainly won't pretend to
>> understand
>> it. (nor am I a Luddite)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> IMO, if you remove too much of the human element from the picture, the
>> 'rush', the 'reward', the 'competition' (if you want to call it that) is
>> lessened.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> IE: I derive the greatest pleasure from CW, then SSB, and much much less
>> for
>> RTTY. (I don't do very much RTTY - and that is one reason) Watch my
>> computer
>> work someone elses computer with a few mouse clicks and some guessing as to
>> the callsign and exchange depending on QSB/QRM etc.?  Some editing of
>> function key files to tweak my exchange "better" than maybe Joe-Blow down
>> the road who sends everything except his hat size. Being quick with the
>> mouse.(timing)  Much less than SSB or CW, but at least there's some human
>> interaction.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> When the JT modes hit 6m, it created a situation for the CW/SSB ops, that
>> lessened the overall appeal of 6m as "everyone was up the band on the JT
>> modes".
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Again, not against it, but don't "get it".  Maybe it's that
>> generational/instant gratification for very little outlay of energy
>> mentality. Maybe it's just the soup de jour.  I dunno.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Even though I am admittedly not a huge proponent of RTTY (as explained
>> above), I don't think RTTY contests and awards should be watered down by
>> including FT#, PSK31 or whatever.  There is still some human element in
>> RTTY, however small that might be.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Respectfully,
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> VE9AA Mike...CW and SSB forever !
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Keswick Ridge, NB
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest