[CQ-Contest] 6M CW

[David Gilbert]

You know that your rig is a full fledged computer running all sorts of 
DSP signal enhancement software for all modes, including CW and SSB, 
right?  The incoming (and outgoing) signals are digitally sliced and 
diced beyond all recognition, processed mathematically, then reassembled 
to look like the analog signals you want to hear. The ONLY differences 
with FT8 is that the computer is outboard of the rig (although it 
needn't be), the software processing is more sophisticated, and the 
signals get transmitted before they are converted back to look like an 
analog signal.  Although it hasn't been done yet, FT8-type signals COULD 
even be converted back to CW or voice in the receiver before you even 
knew they were there.

I think you are severely splitting hairs here.

As I have said many times, though, I think that WSJT-X does a poor job 
of making the best use of modern signal processing by having such a 
stilted interface, and I also think it is a mistake to include FT8/FT4 
in contests normally intended for other modes.  The style of operation 
is totally different.

73,
Dave   AB7E



On 10/26/2022 7:47 AM, Paul O'Kane wrote:
> On 25/10/2022 19:14, David Gilbert AB7E wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Calling FT8 an "existential threat to ham radio" is ludicrous no 
>> matter how much you or I may dislike it. Anything that encourages 
>> lots of activity like FT8 does is exactly the opposite.
>
> Dave is right, insofar as anything that hams care to transmit, or 
> cause to be transmitted, on the ham bands may be described as ham 
> radio, and insofar as "lots of activity", regardless of how it's 
> generated, is inherently good in itself.
>
> All the same, your computer talking to my computer over ham-band RF 
> leaves me cold.  And, yes, that includes RTTY.
>
> 73,
> Paul EI5DI