Topband: FT8 vs other modes - my numbers

[Jeff Blaine]

Tim, My take on the popularity is explained this way.  FT8 has an SNR 
advantage over CW of around 5 dB, PSK31 - about 10 dB and SSB of more 
than 15 dB.  So for a given set of link conditions, FT8 result in a Q in 
the log more often than the other modes.

Add in the poor prop conditions and lousy antenna situations and you 
have a handy way to up the odds of a DX contact for the average Joe 
Ham.  And the average Joe Ham on FT8 (my guess) is more likely a SSB op 
where the compare is more impressive than the CW-VS FT8 meaning that 
coming from SSB, FT8 gives a pretty big relative improvement in working 
the weak ones.

I think FT8 is like any other mode - it's got it's areas of merit and 
it's areas of difficulty.  FT8 brings a nice low SNR capability, the 
occupied BW is tiny and the software minimizes required operator skill.  
On the other hand, the conversation contents and pace is 100% scripted.  
Like classic modes RTTY, AM, SSB & CW, FT8 has it's place.  FT8 is a 
great knife to bring to a knife fight.  But it's not the be all, end all 
of modes. [Pactor 4 is, of course.  ha ha.]

See you in the RTTY WPX next weekend.

73/jeff/ac0c
alpha-charlie-zero-charlie
www.ac0c.com

On 03-Feb-19 9:05 AM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
> Mike, you are buying into a myth that both supporters and detractors of FT8
> perpetuate. The myth that FT8 is superior for DX'ing, to other modes.
>
> 2018 was my "year of FT8". I participated in several on-air WSJT new
> feature tests including DXpedition mode testing. I spent the vast majority
> of my on-air hours, outside of contests, on FT8. I CQ'd a lot on FT8 and
> also chased DX on FT8.
>
> You ask: " Productive in what way?  To work new ones? ". I specifically
> checked by 2018 log statistics for new band slots. I worked 4 new band
> slots on 160M in 2018 - zero on FT8. I worked 13 new ones on 80M in 2018 -
> none on FT8. I worked 5 new ones on 40M in 2018 - none on FT8. And so on.
>
> You also ask: "How many countries did you work on FT8 that you did not or
> could not work on any other mode." My answer: I worked 4 ATNO's in 2018.
> None did I need FT8 to confirm.
>
> Now, I did work 13 of DXpeditions in 2018 for new digital mode DXCC credit
> in 2018. If I look at these stats, 8 of them I worked on RTTY, and 5 I
> worked on FT8. But the ones I worked on FT8 completely neglected RTTY -
> they never did any RTTY at all or made only a handful of RTTY Q's. I'm sure
> I could've completed a RTTY QSO with any of those 5 if they had made an
> effort on RTTY.
>
> No matter how I slice it or dice it, FT8 is not a superior mode. Both the
> detractors and supporters of FT8 are suffering from the myth that FT8 makes
> DX'ing easier. It does not. I tried hard to max out FT8 using any
> quantitative measure in 2018 - just look at the number of hours I invested
> - and FT8 came up short in every single measure, including the
> hard-DX-oriented measures you propose.
>
> Tim N3QE
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 2:28 PM W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu at w0mu.com> wrote:
>
>> FT8 was not created to be a rate mode.  It is a weak signal mode.  For
>> those of us a long way from the East Coast and salt it allows us to work
>> stations that we probably had very little shot of working without FT8.
>>
>> Productive in what way?  To work new ones?  Check!    DXing is not
>> necessarily about rate, I thought that is what contests were for.
>>
>> How many countries did you work on FT8 that you did not  or could not
>> work on any other mode.  That would be my definition of productive.
>>
>> Productive to me is working new ones with the least amount of time
>> expended.
>>
>> W0MU
>>
>> On 2/1/2019 9:12 AM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
>>> There are some untrue things being assumed here, as if they are
>> advantages
>>> to FT8 that make FT8 be a more productive mode for DX'ing.
>>>
>>> In fact FT8 is the least productive of all modes I used in 2018. And I
>> was
>>> on FT8 a lot in 2018. I tried hard to be productive in FT8 - measured in
>>> Q's per hour, or DXCC , or any other quantitative measure. And FT8 was
>> far
>>> and away the least productive mode for me.
>>>
>>> You will note I am no stranger to digital modes - I am often in top 3 of
>> CQ
>>> WW RTTY in USA SO HP(A). So please take for granted that I am competent
>> at
>>> digital modes and my poor FT8 results are not because I'm a poor digital
>>> mode operator.
>>>
>>> In below calculations I use "half hour off time" calculations, in
>>> calculating on time for each mode. "Half hour off time" calculations are
>>> super commonly done in contests.
>>>
>>> In 2018 I was on CW for 481 hours. I made 32610 QSO's for a rate of 68
>> per
>>> hour and worked 185 DXCC.
>>>
>>> In 2018 I was on SSB for 107 hours. I made 7344 QSO's for a rate of 69
>> per
>>> hour and worked 104 DXCC.
>>>
>>> In 2018 I was on RTTY for 250 hours. I made 13319 QSO's for a rate of 53
>>> per hour and worked 117 DXCC's.
>>>
>>> In 2018 I was on FT8 for 376 hours. I made 6460 QSO's for a rate of 17
>> per
>>> hour and worked 110 DXCC's.
>>>
>>> BY ANY QUANTITATIVE MEASURE, FT8 was my least productive mode by far.
>>>
>>> I DO NOT HAVE A SUPERSTATION. In fact I just have a single wire antenna.
>>> But I have worked hard on developing my operating skills in all modes in
>> my
>>> 40 years of being a ham.
>>>
>>> If I had to choose one mode in 2019 to exercise and improve my skills, it
>>> would be phone. I can get on for a half hour in Tuesday night phone fray
>>> with 100W and make Q's at a rate of 40-60Q's an hour (rates completely
>>> unachievable with FT8). While I have greatly improved my phone skills in
>>> the past couple years, I still think there's lots of room for
>> improvement!
>>> Tim N3QE
>>> _________________
>>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>> _________________
>> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
>> Reflector
>>
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>