[CQ-Contest] [Contest] 2020 June VHF Contest

[fabio.grisafi at libero.it]

I agree but:

- the digital mode activity is growing due to its possibilities;

- in few years there will be much more activity on FT8/FT4 than on other modes (expecially if they will find a way to reduce QRM due to single frequency congestion);

So, I think in VHF Contests, it will be right to have a MIXED MODE CATEGORY (SSB/CW/DIGITAL) and SINGLE MODE CATEGORY (SSB/CW/DIGITAL) but ENANCHING QSO POINTS for SSB/CW QSOs.

If not done, detractors will remain alone calling CQ and spending a lot of power on desert frequencies as you can see these days on VHF (50 and 144 MHz): Es QSOs are almost 90% FT8/FT4 even if it is convenient to operate high speed SSB in short openings. 

This is what I think. My one euro cent!

73 de Fabio, IT9GSF.

> Il 10 giugno 2020 alle 0.28 Paul O'Kane <pokane at ei5di.com> ha scritto:
> 
> 
> On 09/06/2020 22:23, Jim K9YC wrote:
> 
> <snip>
> 
> > I see little difference between the attitude expressed in this post 
> > and those who, in the '50s and '60s, refused to switch to that 
> > new-fangled SSB.
> >
> > I also fail to see how FT8 differs from RTTY implemented by stations 
> > using, for example, N1MM or WriteLog with multiple decoder windows in 
> > which one simply clicks on a callsign to start an automated QSO and 
> > clicks on the report to enter it into the log.
> >
> > Perhaps someone could explain the difference.
> 
> 
> Jim is right - there is no significant difference.  As described, both 
> FT8 and RTTY represent automated machine-decoded data modes. All the 
> more reason, I suggest, to refrain from combining either with SSB/CW in 
> individual contests.
> 
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest