Topband: Subject: Re: Straws in the Wind ....A 160m Dx'ing Sea Change

[Brian Pease]

I assume that the same thing occurred when CW (Continuous Wave) started 
to replace spark, and tube receivers started replacing crystal sets. 
"Its to easy, takes away the challenge".
Back in the 80s I used a pocket-size 2 Watt 20m kit xcvr to work >100 DX 
entities in a 1 year period on CW.
Try for DXCC with 5 or 10W using CW and digital modes.  The fun is still 
there, now for more Hams, as is good antenna design.

On 4/1/2018 12:44 PM, Pete Rimmel N8PR wrote:
> This is just the same type of comment that was made back when SSB took over for AM Phone operations.
>
> SSB was considered “Not Real Ham Radio”  and now is not even a pause in anyone’s mind about it being a “development” mode.
>
> FT8 is the same...  a development that allows us to hear deeper into the noise.
>
> I work EME using JT65 and most of the QSOs on 2 meter EME would not have been made if the stations were using CW.
>
> I don’t understand why there is resistance to change and progress.
>
> You must remember that since CW is no longer required to get a license in the US, why denigrate those who want to work DX with a mode other than CW and SSB (oh, and RTTY,PSK31, Heilschreiber, Olivia...)?
>
> BTW, Is not part of ham radio figuring out how to put together effective stations and antennas?  Without that ability, the rare ones would not be worked, ,no matter what mode is used.
>
> Many hams still have not figured out that FT8 is a WEAK SIGNAL mode, not a LOW POWER mode.  1500 Watts and a good TX antenna is still frequently not good copy on the other side of the world on 160.  the testament to that is that if you watch the signal reports on FT8 anything lower than a – 12 SNR report would not be good copy on CW...  I see and have worked – on HF – stations with a –24 SNR...  Yes I know that it is said that lower than  -19 is not possible on HF with FT8, but That is not true, since I use a Waller Flag receive antenna on 160 through 30 Meters, which hears better than most receive antennas other than phased beverages, and unless you have 100 acres, you cannot have them in at least 8 directions.  My WF rotates to point at any incoming sighal, and will change polarization, as well.
>
> 73, and Keep complaining... as long as you are on here typing, I’m on there working the DX without you in my way  --  LOL  !!
>
> 73,  PeteR  N8PR
>
>
> Date: Sun, 01 Apr 2018 07:16:07 +0000
> From: Peter Sundberg <sm2cew at telia.com>
> To: "k1zm at aol.com" <k1zm at aol.com>,topband at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: Topband: Straws in the Wind ....A 160m Dx'ing Sea Change
> is Upon us!
> Message-ID: <20180401071612.32FC3AC9BC8 at mx.contesting.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
>
>
> Apparently SV5DKL made 13.000 QSO's on the bands in a few months,
> totally without operator intervention. I bet many hams were happy to
> put SV5 as a new DXCC in their log, Isn't it wonderful that his
> computer was so helpful with that while the operator was busy with
> other things.
>
> As for the legal aspects of unattended operation of a ham radio
> station - who will be able to tell if the operator is there or not as
> it is fully automatic anyway..
>
> In the near future - if we embrace this way of operating -   for
> Wednesday activity nights on 160m we just let our computer do the
> work and check in the morning how many contacts that were made and
> how many that are already credited via LotW. Simple as that.
>
> In contrast to this digital automation it was very interesting to
> read Jeff K1ZM's report from the Spratly expedition on how the
> experienced and highly skilled crew put in a BIG effort to make real
> radio contacts. Way to go!  And I am glad that they did not leave an
> FT8 robot station behind, neatly tucked away in a corner of the
> conference room.. :-)
>
> I do not want to take part in this modern Internet driven computer
> game. If people would disconnect their FT8 computers from the report
> services on the net there would be a lot less amazing contacts in the
> noise as the "a priori" advantage is lost. Then it would be more
> apparent what the radio channel is actually providing for them.
>
> I think that the statement from Ken K4ZW in his recent posting is
> very appropriate:
>
> "For those who think guys like me are dinosaurs, I would kindly
> suggest you don't understand what motives us. 73 Ken K4ZW"
>
> We can't change/stop this new lazy way of automatic band harvesting.
> Many will even make huge amounts of money on the new way of operating.
>
> But we can still do it the old fashion way, as it pleases us to make
> radio contacts. Therefore I will continue to populate the 160m band
> with my CW signal until there are no more stations to work.
>
>
> 73
> Peter SM2CEW
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>