I watched trans-Atlantic openings occur from the NE and East Coast who were also working SA and Caribbean stations but it was absolutely nada in most of Texas. That's the way the propagation ball bounces on the Magic Band---and I won't complain too much since I've been more fortunate from my South Texas QTH than much of the West and Pacific Northwest when it comes to great Es openings almost every day since early May. The CQ VHF Contest still awaits us in mid-July as well as other probable possibilities for increased activity, too. Now that I have three dedicated semi-stealth antennas for 6M up at my HOA QTH I'll be able to respond anytime I hear beacons, voices or weak cw waft in... Despite a bottoming-out solar cycle there will be much fun to be had on up on 50 megahertz as long as we live; it is not always so dependent on sunspots with so many propagation modes naturally inherent to it (F2 long dx prop being the main exception, of course). 73, Jeff
50 mHz is 50 milliHertz....... 50 MegaHertz is 50 MHz. 50 mHz not equal to 50 MHz. Only off by a billion.... OK? ------------------------------------------------------------ 10−1 Hz dHz decihertz 10−2 Hz cHz centihertz 10−3 Hz mHz millihertz 10−6 Hz µHz microhertz 10−9 Hz nHz nanohertz
QSOs are WAY DOWN this season, in no small part because the action is now on JT65 on 50.276. 6M as we know it is now morphed to weak signal machine to machine.
OK, W1YouWin, ha ha! I stand corrected with my tail between my legs... True that 6M has morphed into inaudible computer-to-computer contacts lately. If I can't hear the voice of an operator in some exotic land over the airwaves on what has always been my favorite band (50MHz) I'd rather QSY back down to 20 or 40M or somewhere that still remains in the good old-fashioned "regular" radio arena. Long live traditional ham radio! 73, Jeff
Pretty discouraging Jeff... I am hearing many beacons tonight and calling CQ on 50094.0 --and no one is coming back. That's with 25,000 watts ERP... :-( They are all watching the computers talk on 50276.0 No doubt I will do so at some point, I am just disappointed that JT65 has become dominant. Its like RTTY replacing fone AND CW... 73 Chip W1YW
I am thinking of making a Joe Taylor Voodoo Doll but I admit it might not do much good at this point. 50.276 is the new 50.110 73 milliHertz, Jeff
Nah. Not Joe's fault. I had just assumed a transition to, maybe ,30% JT65 on 6m-- not a jump to 85% in one year...
I know---if it hadn't been Joe the mode would have come along from someone else---nothing personal, JT if you're reading this. Question: If only computers make and log the contacts between them that we humans can't even hear shouldn't the computers have to be licensed? If so, we could then call them licensed hamputers thereafter. 73, Jeff
IMHO, the current JT mode fad could be causing a regretful attrition, and atrophy, of traditional, and very important and valuable, "real time" operator skills. Unfortunately JT-mania and subsequent live QSO suppression, isn't just a 6 meter phenomena. It's spread to all bands. Controversial rules taboo and interoperational paranoia notwithstanding, its pretty much the only way to work a new DX station on 60m now too. I can see the big attraction for achieving true "weak signal" contacts, ie, EME (or MSK144 for meteors), HF QRP adventures. But for more casual contacts, what's the point? Zzzzzzzzzz ... The tragedy, an unintended consequence, seen by monitoring and working on HF digi channels myself, is it seems the majority of JT-65 QSO's are NOT made between peanut-whistles. I feel there is plenty of QRO being used in the usual pile-up "arms race" type escalation. Most of the time a signal even with a JT "report" of -20 or less, is visible on the waterfall, and if not for the adjacent channel QRM, could be ear copied as CW or perhaps even voice. In the time required, several minutes, for ONE minimal JT65 info exchange, a good CW or Fone op would get to know the other op well, and/or work many many more stations. For awards chasing the JT modes seem to be an irresistible enhancement, like PED / bionics in sports - perhaps such certs issued should a least be amended with a notation, an asterisk, if they include such semi-automated assisted QSOs in their tally? 73 de John - WØPV
John, Ultimately the near absence of human input will drive us back to communicating with each other;-) I think the K1JT modes are important and valuable. I just would have preferred that they would have been transitional rather than disruptive on 6m. I know I have a shot at DXCC on 6M with JT65. But I wonder if I have the will to try it for the last dozen counters....no; not this season anyway. 73 Chip W1YW
CW is digital, just ear decoded, JT is digital, just computer decoded(some of the time, I know the straight tones and can cue up the next message before a decode happens). And you can edit the messages that are swapped, I do it quite often if it is casual operating.
Chip, We agree completely, the new digi-modes are indeed important contributions to the art, and any negative is certainly not Joe's fault. I'm sure to be using them even on 6m soon too. I just wish they hadn't become the primary means instead of the last resort. Ironically, it's the same as has happened with telco TXT'ing, which dominates interpersonal device useage now. I've been complaining to my GF that for all communicating she now defaults to just sending long barrages of text msg's, info that would have been so much easier, faster, and pleasant if she had just told the phone "call John". I tease her that soon to avoid the hassles of mis-typing we will be using speech-to-text coders, dictating TXT's to each other, and vice-versa, get read to us in a synthetic voice ... geesh. VR is creepin' in - but I hope not to the level of in Demolition Man for awhile ;-) I'm still for a little less digi hocus-pocus on the Magic Band! 73, John WØPV
The issue I am raising is not ear versus computer decoding. It's why waste time using a synchronized periodic signal aggregating decoding mode when signal levels are perfectly readable by PC, or perhaps, optionally, even by ear, in immediate real-time. That's not an efficient use of bandwidth, power consumed, or operator lifespan.
