ad: Preppcomm-1

A NEW FT8 with QSO and Rag Chew capabilities called FT8CALL

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by NN2X, Aug 12, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-Geochron
  1. NO2Y

    NO2Y Ham Member QRZ Page

    What I find particularly strange is that he's calling out Neil for something he's said on Facebook For those of you who don't know, Neil is one of the people who runs the FT8 Facebook community. Calling him a hater for his honest opinions is just ridiculous

    I won't comment on his mental state or diagnosis. I think some hams have problems differentiating between discussion and vitriol. If you're not saying something is the greatest thing since sliced bread and are instead objectively discussing it, you're a hater. This ham isn't alone in the inability to distinguish. If that makes him a paranoid schizophrenic, then he has a lot of company
     
  2. N0AN

    N0AN XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    First of all, at no time did I suggest that anyone should not use FT8CALL if they enjoy it. I identified a limitation of the mode and said that it has been touted as conversational, which it clearly is not. Quoting you:

    "I will say, though...the first time you snag a DX ragchew with -20dB SNR and proceed to have an actual conversation.."

    Nor did I put anyone down for using this mode. The mode is NOT a person. If it has limitations or questionable claims have been made about it....it's NOT PERSONAL, it's technical, and in some cases, simply opinion. I stated a limitation of the mode and challenged the touting of "actual conversation" as an important aspect of this mode.

    I am taking issue with calling stacked 15 second sequences to accomplish a single short sentence, a "conversation". That is my only point about the mode . Can one consider that this throughput allows an "actual conversation" to take place?

    It is communication, but so many comments I've seen, seem to imply that it's a great conversational tool...well...it's not....unless neither party has much to say, or they have a very long time to say it. (speaking of throughput, not content)

    As I said earlier, it has it's uses, and assets. "Actual conversation" isn't one of them. The only thing "conversational" about the mode (because of the throughput), is the fact that it has a person on each end, actively attempting to share spontaneous information, not canned scripts or pre-defined information....and that is good!

    Is it Communication: Most Certainly
    Is it Effective: Certainly
    Is it Conversational: Not very.

    I have witnessed the claims being made for this mode. They are what led me to download and install the software. The fact that these claims cannot be challenged or even questioned without provoking dismay, misrepresentations and hostility towards the questioners, is quite revealing.

    So, please, don't misrepresent or mis-characterize what I've actually said. There are some very impressive elements to the software. Carrying on a real conversation just doesn't seem to be one of them, in my opinion (and I'm not alone in this assessment, from some of the feedback I've been getting).

    I wish you much success in your endeavor.

    73, N0AN
     
    N4UP, VK3AMA, NO2Y and 1 other person like this.
  3. KN4CRD

    KN4CRD Ham Member QRZ Page

    Appreciate the follow-up. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, which is what my post was about.

    Hope to see you on the air, whether that is in FT8Call or one of the many other modes available to us.

    Cheers.
     
    W7SUA likes this.
  4. WH6FQE

    WH6FQE Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page


    I have to disagree with you on this one. We are able to have real conversations with FT8CALL, the other night myself and 3 other people from different countries spent over half an hour in a mutual conversation getting to know about each other, our families, and our respective countries. Yes, it takes a while sending the sentences in short bursts, but all 4 of us had -23 and -24 signals. I highly doubt if we would not have been able to achieve such a conversation any other way.

    Just because you chose to have a fly by the seat of your pants conversation going 100 miles per hour does not mean that those of us who are not able to do that and are limited to hunting and pecking on the keyboard cannot also enjoy what we also call a "conversation".

    To each his own, as I like to say. What you like may not be what everyone likes, that does not make it right or wrong, that is for each person to decide. As long as I am able to exchange ideas with someone and share interesting information with them, I consider that a conversation.
     
    WD4IGX, K8XG, W7SUA and 1 other person like this.
  5. WH6FQE

    WH6FQE Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    "never gets utilized because it never encounters a situation where it fulfills a need that the other modes cannot fulfill at a faster rate and more conveniently"? Well, try connecting to Winlinnk here in the mornings when there is no NVIS available to upload the ready-made form and the mountains block you from a direct line of sight connection and you will see that there ARE times when this may be the only available option.

    In an EmComms situation, you may not have your beam antennas sitting on top of a 100-foot tower to help you in making the connections, you may only have a random piece of speaker wire that you salvaged from a tornado-ravaged parking lot and not a single tree in sight to string it up on. In situations like this (which I have been in myself) you need every single tool in that toolbox to get the job done, and I can see FT8CALL as just such a tool for such an occasion.
     
    KN4CRD likes this.
  6. WH6FQE

    WH6FQE Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    It is also a "possible alternative" for those of us who have not been able to learn CW yet. And by the way, I am one of those DX operators who want more than a simple signal report, location, and callsign for a logbook.
     
    KE0EYJ likes this.
  7. NN2X

    NN2X Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Sign me up on that one! Even at 10 wpm, I can have some ability to have a QSO! Heck we did this for years on CW, using 10wpm...I did pass the 20 wpm, (1980). But we built up to it, by using 5, 10, 13, and finally 20 wpm. But in no way, could we decode at -24 db below the noise floor, (AT 10 WPM).

    Cheers, NN2X Tom
     
    WD4IGX and WH6FQE like this.
  8. VE3VWD

    VE3VWD XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    This will allow deaf and heard of hearing another mode to use Hamradio.

    73
    Bill
    VA3QB
     
    W7SUA, KD2NOM, N0AN and 1 other person like this.
  9. N0AN

    N0AN XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    No doubt, it can be fun in its own right, ....I'm chatting on 20m right now with FT8CALL. I can read and reply to email, surf the web and check out spots on FT8 ...all during a few transmissions of FT8CALL. I do appreciate the work that has and will go into this, but the pace really takes some getting used to! "-)

    73, N0AN
     
  10. N0AN

    N0AN XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I have never said anything about this mode was right or wrong. (other than complimenting its feature set). I have said it is slow. That is indisputable. If you like slow, fine. I don't consider "slow" conversations enjoyable. If you do, fine, just don't rephrase what I have said to make it something I did not say. I said it is slow and I find the "conversational" aspect tedious.

    As long as I'm busy with other things and don't have to watch paint dry, I'm quite content to have some contacts using this mode.

    Your example of your contacts earlier above is perfect for what this mode is capable of, and I'm glad you enjoy it....

    but don't be snide. It is unseemly and disrespectful (the 100 mph comment was unwarranted)....did I call you a tortoise? Did I call you slow? No...I addressed the MODE, I did not make it personal. You , on the other hand apparently could not help yourself. More's the pity.

    You are free to enjoy whatever aspects of FT8CALL that suit you. Just because I do not enjoy one particular aspect of it (throughput) , does not warrant misrepresenting what I have said. We do have differing definitions of what constitutes a "conversation", so be it.

    73, N0AN
     
    NO2Y and VK3AMA like this.

Share This Page

ad: Momobeam-1