ad: CQMM-1

FT8 TEST on air "DXpedition Mode" on 6 and 7 March !

Discussion in 'Amateur Radio News' started by IW2BSF, Mar 2, 2018.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-3
ad: Radclub22-2
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
  1. KD2NOM

    KD2NOM XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Added to my calendar and frequencies added to my WSJT-X configuration - see you all there!
     
    WU8Y likes this.
  2. NU4R

    NU4R XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    YEEEEEEE-YAAAAWN!

    End of story...
     
  3. LA6VQ

    LA6VQ Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    Dave,
    I did not flame and I did not invite characterizations, just asking some questions re your statement that we are moving towards automation to fill logbooks, and your statement that SSB, CW and RTTY require at least a little bit of skills, antithetically to be interpreted like e.g. FT8 does not require any skills, or at least considerable less skills than the little bit required by SSB, CW and RTTY.

    First of all, I don't think it is fair to blame the software for the operators' choice of switching on or off the automated actions. It is an option, for the operator to choose, or not, if he wants to exercise some fast eyes/mind/fingers skills in FT8. I believe most ham activity has the inherent capacity that it fills logbooks, if you care to keep one, and that more activity fills the logbooks faster. And for DXpeditions (which is the topic of this discussion), filling as many logbooks as possible is a major purpose. FT8 is certainly creating lots of activity, clearly filling logbooks at a time of the solar cycle when it is hard for a great number of hams to fill their logbooks with activity in other modes, particularly to fill them with DX. Same thing for contesting, also a fairly automated activity, at least in my short, but not entirely unsuccessful experience. Listening to the extended unanswered "CQ Contest" calls in the ARRL International SSB Contest this weekend, tells me that many European participants had quite a challenge filling their log books (it may have been better stateside). Quite a bit of automated activity, but not much filling of log books this time.

    Secondly, we can probably debate whether CW copying is an automated activity. That is also why it was not a statement and not calling for characterizations with double exclamation marks, but a question (although I see that it contains a typo, lacking a question mark in the end, while the wording o a question is clear enough for anybody to understand that wants to understand). However, I stand by my line of thinking that input (sound), processing (which character / prosign / word is connected to this sound) and response/output (writing/printing the character / prosign / word physically or in your mind) at least to my silly brain, resemble the basic elements of an automated process to the extent that a question can be justitfied, and maybe even get an affirmative answer. The CW instructors that I have met, make it clear to the candidates that they have to get to, maybe even start learning at, a level where you stop thinking about the number and sequence of dits and the dahs, and automate the copying and the fist. "Automate" is a key word, and it corresponds with my experience. Your experience may be vastly different, but at 37-42 WPM (my respect!), I will tend to doubt that you count dits and dahs. To what extent your intellectual abilities are involved while copying and sending, is beyond me, but it seems to me that you don't think that CW can be seen as an automated activity. Maybe fuzzy logic should be added, in that the brain may help out when the automated process produces a "J", while the brain knows it must be a number (probably "1" or "2"). However, isn't that also some of the basis for the synchronized Weak Signal modes and AP decoding , that at a certain time or place in the signal sequence, the various modes expect to find a signal with certain characteristics? However, when copying of CW stops at a certain SNR (approx -15 dB or so?), what is wrong with sacrificing speed for being able to copy even weaker signals.

    Finally, if it is the QSO rate capacity of the multistream decoding in the FT8 Dxpedition mode that raises issues with you, is that materially different from utilizing capacity in order to accomodate a higher number of DX-ers, just like adding operators, radios and antennas will add to the capacity of a DX-pedition to operate many bands and modes to accomodate more DX-ers? For one of the most technical hobbies around, is it natural to stick with old technology when improved technology develops? Where do we draw the line between what is and what is not amateur radio? And who possess the power of definition? Would you rather go back to DSP with fewer bits and weaker algorithms, or can you accept and maybe even utilize that DSP has developed into integrated and ingrained tools to improve signal quality in order to complete more QSOs (to fill the logbook)? Is SDR a step or two forward, or is SDR something that "is just not amateur radio"? Would it be better/acceptable if the DXpedition mode could be used for JT65 and JT9 only, so that the QSO rate would be down to approx. 100-125 QSOs per hour, not unheard of for a DXpedition?

    Despite having visited the Pacific Northwest many times (the Seattle area in particular), I am not familiar with your end greeting. You may want to improve my knowledge of PNW manners.

    73 de Frode LA6VQ
     
    WU8Y and KP4SX like this.
  4. W7UUU

    W7UUU Director, QRZ Forums Lifetime Member 133 QRZ HQ Staff Life Member QRZ Page

    Copy of Morse in a human brain is not an automated process. If it were, all radio amateurs in the US would have been 20 WPM Extra Class potentials at birth 50 years ago.

    Politely yours, from the Pacific Northwest, where we are not only polite, but sensible and logical regarding human endeavors vs. computer automation

    :)

    Dave
    W7UUU
     
    N7ANN and K4AGO like this.
  5. W3JJW

    W3JJW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I am going side with Dave here. You have to be present to decode CW with your brain...attention, reasonably well-filtered/tuned signal, etc. And you can't get there without work and practice and work and practice.

    On the other hand, with a bit of computer savvy one can be transmitting/logging contacts on FT-8 in a few minutes...hours at most, right? Nothing to learn except software?

    Ears, fingers...there is something there that is clearly missing with FT-8. I might suggest that FT-8 is more of a straight up experiment in propagation and less about contact per se. Maybe calling FT-8 signal reports a contact is a misnomer?

    I love the idea of FT-8 and using it for low strength signal propagation experiments. It's cool to see where you can reach. But it is nothing like using CW to communicate with another live human in real time...except both use RF.

    jay
     
  6. W7UUU

    W7UUU Director, QRZ Forums Lifetime Member 133 QRZ HQ Staff Life Member QRZ Page

    Exactly. There is nothing whatsoever automated about copying Morse in a human brain. Anyone who would equate decoding Morse by human brain to decoding FT-8 in "full automation mode" via a computer is simply daft or otherwise ignorant of what it takes to copy Morse via CW with human ears and brain or has just never actually done it.

    Politely, from the Pacific Northwest, in sunny Burley, Washington just south of the uber-polite city of Port Orchard,

    Dave
    W7UUU

    :)
     
  7. LA6VQ

    LA6VQ Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    As this discussion has moved off-topic (FT8 DXpeditions mode test tomorrow) and does not seem to bring any answers to questions raised i.a. about skills needed for non-automated FT8 operations, nor the sensibility and logic of the FT8 DXpedition mode, I rest my case and return my brain to work. By the way, 20 m FT8 conditions between Scandinavia and Puget Sound seems ok at the moment, even with modest receiving antennas. Regrettably not much to be seen on RBN on that path.

    73 de Frode LA6VQ
     
  8. K2WH

    K2WH Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    Critics, what's one to do.

    I for one really like the FT8 mode (as it currently is) and, the new DXpedition mode is just that - DXpedition.

    If you are not a dxpedition, then you can ignore.

    I thank all the code writers for FT8 especially during the basement sunspot cycle, its a God send.

    IMHO if not for FT8, then I would probably not be on the air as I am every day.
     
    N0NEV, K2NCC and W2VW like this.
  9. W3JJW

    W3JJW Ham Member QRZ Page

    I don't think anyone here is critiquing or harping on FT8. There is a consensus that it's great. There was just a sidebar comparing CW to FT8, and a debate about them being similar or not.

    FT8 and the whole tiny signal detection idea is amazing, and indeed it has opened up the bands and DX in a way never before seen.

    I think you are not alone in finding new fun in FT8.

    jay
     
    WU8Y and W0PV like this.
  10. YT5U

    YT5U Ham Member QRZ Page

    As i got it - DXPedition mode uses more than one signal at the time. More than one signal on the same band and mode is illegal, or I am wrong?
     
  11. N2BEF

    N2BEF Ham Member QRZ Page

    Only do one contest - Field Day. FT8 was great in the beginning, nice DX contacts, now really crowded. Burned out on FT8, doing other digital modes, just that simple. As far as automated or bots doing FT8, they already are, we are not heading there, hams are doing it now.
     
  12. KP4SX

    KP4SX Ham Member QRZ Page

    Actually its a single signal with five separate modulated data streams. That's something the authorities haven't ever had to deal with.
    But I don't think they would be opposed as long as there aren't multiple frequencies involved.
     
    N4UP and WU8Y like this.
  13. YT5U

    YT5U Ham Member QRZ Page

    In a manual, it says:

    It also says:
    For me, it is obvious - multiple signals on one band is what one transmit as a Fox.
     
  14. W3BNN

    W3BNN XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Remember that you are not required to operate FT-8... Use whatever mode, operating style you like.... Ham radio is a hobby and should not be an obsession... 73 all...
     
    KI7WL and WU8Y like this.
  15. LA6VQ

    LA6VQ Platinum Subscriber Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page

    "Not more than one signal on the same band" is a well known rule from contesting, but I don't think it is prohibited or illegal for any radio amateur to transmit more than one signal in a band, if he so desire. At least I could not find any regulation of the number of signals per band in the U.S Part 97 rules, nor in the Norwegian radio amateur rules, which are quite parallel to many other countries' rules.

    FT8 is a frequency shift mode (like RTTY, JT65, JT9, etc.), shifting between 8 frequencies 6,25 Hz apart, so in the normal version it sends a stream or sequence of these slightly varying frequencies, and never two or more different signals/frequencies at the exactly same time. However, the user manual for the FT8 Dxpedition mode states: "Moreover, authorized Foxes can transmit up to five signals simultaneously, ...", so that might have been a problem if multiple signals were prohibited. The number of simultaneous signals is governed by the "N Slots" setting. So the FT8 DXpedition mode will not be permitted for contesting, just for dx-peditions, and only to be used outside the ordinary FT8 frequencies.

    73 de Frode LA6VQ
     
    WU8Y likes this.

Share This Page

ad: Sussex-1