Is fully automated FT8 now acceptable?

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by WF4W, May 21, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-3
ad: L-Geochron
ad: Left-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. SQ9FVE

    SQ9FVE XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Actually we're not providing a separate signature to pskreporter for quite a few releases now, so unless you're using an old version of wsjt-z you will not stand out in the PSKReporter stats ;)
  2. KM1H

    KM1H Ham Member QRZ Page

    ARRL announced that fully automatic mode contacts are not eligible for DXCC credits, I dont know about other awards from them, CQ, etc.

  3. W7UUU

    W7UUU Principal Moderator Lifetime Member 133 Administrator Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber Life Member QRZ Page

    But how in the world would they ever know?

    Anyone running "fully automated FT8" has already crossed over to the dark side - I doubt they would stop themselves from then submitting to ARRL for credit.

  4. KM1H

    KM1H Ham Member QRZ Page

    I have no idea but possibly the software flags it as such?? Anyway that is the first good thing the new ARRL regime has done for DXCC. Next is to disallow remotes other than your own and with a distance limit. Then I may actively take DXCC as a meaningful award and participate again.

  5. SQ9FVE

    SQ9FVE XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    It's not about that. What they deem as acceptable, and what you personally deem as such is two different things.
    I for one, would be thrilled that few lines of code I have written achieved a task that many take weeks if not months to achieve.
    But then again, I am an automation geek... Others may feel different and I fully accept that ;)
  6. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's not a really fair characterization. Anything less than fully hands-off is just a matter of degrees when compared to clicking macros. This is actually the main flaw in ARRL's new awards and contesting language. And there are no truly "fully" automatic systems, since the operator has to start and stop the automation, and presumably do frequency/band changes.

    There's also a valid question of how any level of automation is used. Breaking FCC rules wouldn't be an acceptable reason to do so, but short of that, characterizing improved or increased UI automation as "dark side" is presuming ill will even when it may not exist.
  7. AA7EJ

    AA7EJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Noticed that some "operators" found the mode boring....
    Would it be off-topic to ask to describe the FT8 "QSO" to a person bored with all this "discussion" about validity of FT8 "automation"?

    Is this scenario close ?

    XYL :
    "honey-do mow lawn..."

    Sounds of started lawnmower triggers my bot and ether get filled with 15 seconds of
    "CQ DX de ....."
    awaiting response form another bot...
    QSO automatically logged
    repeated until the lawn is cut
    or DXCC is made - whichever comes first


    73 Shirley
  8. WJ4U

    WJ4U Subscriber QRZ Page

    Superimpose a world map on your lawn and set up a robot to mow the corresponding spot when you work a new entity. :p
    SQ9FVE likes this.
  9. K2FW

    K2FW Ham Member QRZ Page

    FT8 And all other modes that go below the threshold of human hearing should never had been placed in with the others modes, all of which had to be heard. It was sheer lunacy on the part of the ARRL.
  10. KK5JY

    KK5JY Ham Member QRZ Page

    That's why I added more automation to the UI. :)

Share This Page