[CQ-Contest] Merging Social Media and Contesting

[Paul O'Kane]

   On 14/03/2020 18:02, David Gilbert wrote:

   > Except that fundamentally FTx is simply an encode/decode system.

It is fundamentally a software modem, optimized for processing 
weak-signal data.

   > It doesn't have to be semi-automated or fully automated,

In practice, it is often automated.  I know of one significant 2019 
DXpedition where FTx was used in fully-automatic, unattended mode at 
night.  There may have been others.  We all know there will be more.

   > and modern signal chains aren't human recognizable anyway

This applies to all data modes, including RTTY.

   > When operating CW or SSB with any radio built in the last couple of
   > decades the incoming signal is sliced and diced, digitally analyzed,
   > digitally processed with various algorythms (filters, noise reduction,
   > etc), and then digitally restored to analog.  That digital processing
   > improves SNR to allow better readability of signals.
   > FTx simply an extension of that process .... it just pre-encodes
   > the signal at the transmit end for more effective decode processing
   > at the receiving end.

Cool things can be done with DSP on all modes, whether at RF or AF. The 
bottom line is that FTx represents automatic (for most practical 
purposes), machine-to-machine, data processing over RF.  All modes can 
be enhanced by DSP, but CW and SSB tend not to be automated.

   > I could literally create a tunable narrow band (essentially single
   > signal) version of FTx that has the same superior SNR performance
   > of FTx, except that it translated the received text to audible CW
   > instead of printing it to the screen.

We might equally translate the received text to audible speech.  But why 
do it?

   > The only difference between that and normal CW in a contest (which
   > is already almost always sent via macros) is that there would be a
   > few seconds delay (probably less than 5) on the receiving end, the
   > CW would be at whatever speed the receiver wanted it to be, the SNR
   > capability would be about 10 db better than normal CW, and the CW
   > would be QRM free.  To be clear, the digital frame wouldn't even
   > have to be locked to a clock cycle ... it could be asynchronous.

Yes, it is cool technology, but how many such simultaneous CW signals 
would be "QRM free"?  Some of us can still mentally decode individual CW 
signals in the presence of several others.  We choose to do things the 
hard way, for its own sake.

   > FTx as a mode by itself is simply modern signal processing.

It also happens to facilitate automated unattended contacts.

   > RTTY is also essentially machine-to-machine with visual text, and
   > FTx could have been designed almost exactly like RTTY except with
   > much better SNR and much better utilization of bandwidth.
   > Maybe you have a gripe against RTTY too, but it is hugely popular
   > for contesting.

All data modes, including RTTY, are essentially machine-to-machine - and 
each has its good and bad points.  What RTTY does have in common with 
FTx is that it can not be decoded by people.

   > FTx created a whole new ballgame for DXing and general contacts,
   > but some of the features of WSJT-X made it a bit clumsy for
   > contesting and took away some of the ability for skill to be a
   > differentiator.  That could be addressed.

This "whole new ballgame" needs an appropriate name, and I've already 
suggested "Data Processing Over RF".  However technically accomplished 
it may be, and however altruistic its designers' intentions, this 
ballgame now distorts and devalues the DXCC program, it de-skills both 
DXing and DXpedition operating, and it diverts those who don't know any 
better (and some who should) from CW and Phone contesting.  I consider 
FTx to be a WMD for ham radio.

As for the suggestion to merge social media and contesting - why do it?  
When disparate communications media are merged, the dominant one usually 
wins out - and contesting is the junior partner here. Are phone apps 
anyone's idea of ham radio?  It seems to me that once ham radio becomes 
inseparable from the internet, it will have ceased to exist.

73,
Paul EI5DI