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

[Wes Stewart]

Peter has written elsewhere about this.  Perhaps he is too modest to refer to 
it, but I am not:

http://www.sm2cew.com/jt65.html

Additionally, traditional RTTY is still a "hear it" mode.   I actually listen to 
the tones and while obviously I can't decode them by ear, I can certainly tune 
them by ear.  Furthermore, MMTTY, which I use, decodes one signal at a time, the 
one I tune in and respond to.  So, at least in my operation, I have to be there 
and actively engaged.

I will turn 76 tomorrow and in a few months will pass my 60th anniversary as a 
licensed ham. https://qrz.com/db/N7WS

Some, perhaps many, will say I'm an old geezer who rejects progress.  Nothing 
could be further from the truth. As a matter of fact, as a relatively new 
Topband enthusiast I had decided that, considering my modest station and abysmal 
160 location, I would probably have to enter, kicking and screaming, the ranks 
of imaginary QSO digital modes to complete my personal goal of 160 and 9-band DXCC.

So before venturing into transmitting, I "listened" to JT65 for about a week.  
Just before committing to transmitting, FT8 was announced.  I downloaded it and 
began making QSOs, as they were. It didn't take long to determine that unlike 
RTTY where LoTW confirmations are sometimes received with hours, over half of 
the FT8 ops never QSL, at least anywhere where the confirmations count for 
something.

One other depressing issue arose.  Conventional wisdom was that running JTAlert 
was almost a requirement.  I wasn't quite sure why, but it did do a better job 
of logging than WSJT-X, which hogs the serial port, preventing my normal logging 
program from being useful.  I use a laptop on a shelf above the rig and the 
second monitor below.  I was trying to work a west African station and having 
trouble completing because he was getting covered up by a stronger station.  I 
was split so he was "hearing" me.  I noticed that a window popped up but it 
straddled the two screens and I didn't figure it out before it was gone.  I ran 
another sequence or so until a second window popped up.  This time I managed to 
more-or-less figure it out.  Apparently, he was sending a text message that he 
was sending me RRR and I needed to be sending him 73!  Who needs a radio?

I turned off the radio and uninstalled WSJT-X.  If I change my mind and 
reinstall it in the future, I will set a personal standard, at least for awards 
purposes, that 1) I will be at the controls of the station. 2) I won't count any 
QSO that couldn't have been copied on CW. 3)  I won't count any QSO that 
requires the software to have prior knowledge of the two station calls or could 
not be copied by an uninterested third party.

Wes  N7WS


On 10/25/2017 10:50 AM, Peter Sundberg wrote:
> Jay, please don't compare the new digi protocols with RTTY, a character based 
> protocol.
>
> What you see on the screen or paper in RTTY has actually been sent, and is 
> received as it was sent. Or it is garbled because the link is not good enough.
>
> With some of the new popular digi protocols most of what is written on the 
> screen, some call it "received", has never been received as a complete 
> message. It is reproduced from other sources than the radio path.
>
> As a well known 6m op said after summing up his Zero to DXCC journey this last 
> summer - "without entering already known information (calls) to the software I 
> wouldn't have been even close to where I am now.."
>
> BIG difference - no wonder the users of new digi protocols apply for a DXCC 
> award after a week. Try that with RTTY.
>
> 73
> Peter SM2CEW