Topband: FT8 - the end of 160m old school DXing? (long)

[W0MU]

I am pretty serious about DXing.  I am not on the honor roll.  I have 
over 300 confirmed.  I couldn't tell you who is at the top. Why does it 
matter?  Those at the top did it their way, whatever that was.  Some did 
it all from their own homes and never moved, many started over, many 
today use remote stations all over their own county and probably beyond 
some use 100 watts, some use 1000 some use 5000 or more.

I can't compete with the DX guy on the East Coast or with the guy with 
200 ft towers and room for huge antennas.  DXCC is nowhere close to a 
level playing field.

The ARRL did not make it a competition.  They sell awards.  They could 
and should offer more awards and endorsements because I think people 
would buy them.

FT8 is not a level playing field all it does is allow people that could 
not even get on the field to do so.  My ft tower and a tribander is king 
over a guy with his hidden wire in the attic on FT8 just like it is on 
CW or SSB or RTTY.

To work rare dx on FT8 requires them to get on FT8.  S79 popped up on 
17m just as I left he was -20db down.  I didn't get him.  I believe 3Y0X 
is going to try FT8, that should be a zoo!  I can't wait for a bunch of 
people who have never tried the mode to learn that day!  It will be 
gloriously poor.

W0MU


On 10/25/2017 12:17 PM, Mark K3MSB wrote:
> As I’ve said before, I don’t believe it’s a case of FT8 being “good” or
> “bad” for ham radio.   The problem is a level playing field for competition
> purposes.
>
> Personally, I don’t believe statements such as “Your DXCC is your own” or
> “Your DXCC is what you make of it” etc.  Rubbish.    All serious DXers are
> always looking to see where there are in the pecking order of
> accomplishments.  If you’re a serious DXer and don’t care where you stand
> among your peers,  then while you may be out there, I figure you’re few and
> far between.
>
> The ARRL could easily & significantly mitigate this by allowing band
> specific DXCC awards with mode endorsements; stated alternately,  160M
> DXCC-CW,  160M DXCC-FT8,  40M-Digital, 17M-SSB etc.
>
> I’ve been a software engineer for 35 years.   While I appreciate the
> complexity aspects of such a change to the DXCC award program,  I believe
> the only real factor standing in the way of making such a change is the
> ARRL’s desire to do so.    It’s not rocket science.    Make your voices
> known.
>
> For those that claim that mode is not important,  then ask the ARRL and CQ
> to get rid of mode specific contests.   We’ll just have a single CQ WW
> where you can use SSB, RTTY, Digital etc, one ARRL DX Competition where any
> mode goes.    See how far the contest community will let that one go.
>
> 73 Mark K3MSB
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband