Ed,
I am both a RTTY contester and a digital contester. I operated in the ARRL RTTY
Contest using FT4. I found that FT4 was faster than RTTY using S&P because I
didn’t have to wait as long at the pileups. I did try RTTY S&P and got bored
watching the screen while the station gave his report to a contact, the contact
replied and finally the station sent a TU QRZ. Then I had a chance to.....wait
for it....MOUSE CLICK on the macro that sends my callsign. If he replied to
someone else, I had to.....yep......WATCH THE SCREEN while he finished that
QSO. Then I would jump up and press F4 again to send my call.
Oh, you don’t do S&P, you run. That means that you MOUSE CLICK (or press a
function key) to send CQ, MOUSE CLICK on a call, MOUSE CLICK on the Exchange
macro, watch the screen, execute the TU QRZ macro and watch the screen to see
who is next. Or do you use call stacking to make that step more automatic?
Since you are running, the calls all come to you. You don’t have to SEARCH for
them or time your call to them to try to beat out the other guys. Tell me, Ed,
how much fun it that?
When I use FT8/FT4, I use a combination of running and S&P. I constantly watch
the decoding panel, looking for someone who is saying 73 so I can call him
before he needs to send a CQ. That beats out the guys who only call someone who
is calling CQ. I watch for others who are giving their exchange to see if I
need their multiplier and call them when they send their 73.
WSJT-X has a check box so that you can only see stations calling CQ. Anyone
that uses it is a fool. Whether you are contesting or DXing, there is much more
to be gained by watching exchanges being made and taking advantage of the
information revealed.
No, I don’t sit blankly watching the screen. I actively go after my Qs, running
only when there are no new gems for me to work.
Anyone who makes comments about how boring digital is has not learned how to
skillfully operate in that mode.
BTW, FT8/FT4 were designed using RTTY contesting as a template. Hearing such
comments for a RTTY contester amazes me.
Stan, K4SBZ
"Real radio bounces off the sky."
> On Jan 12, 2020, at 8:59 AM, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com> wrote:
>
> Hello David. Froom everything observed in real practice with the typically
> unsophisticated masses of FT8 users, its dreaming to think that such rates
> will ever be achieved. All current data points to the rates experienced.
> The question was about "how was it" nit "what you hope it to be". So "how
> was it, actually?"
>
> As someone who is running most of the time, and not bandmap clicking, the
> experience is a world to actually be engaged with the participants, with my
> ears and brain. I guess if someone's world in contesting is clicking on the
> bandmap, never actually verifying the call, and hitting a few function keys,
> then its not much different. Thankfully, that's not my world of contesting.
> IS it yours?
>
> Ed N1UR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces+edwards=sbelectronics.com@contesting.com] On
> Behalf Of David Gilbert
> Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2020 9:07 PM
> To: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] World Wide Digi DX Contest Results
>
>
> The rates would be considerably higher, and the operating somewhat less
> confusing, if everyone operated FT4 instead of being spread across FT4
> and FT8. If you have a steady string of callers on FT4 the theoretical
> maximum rate is 240 per hour, at least until you have to call CQ again.
>
> And I'm not sure that mouse clicks on a WSJT-X screen are any different
> than mouse clicks on a CW or RTTY bandmap together with macro key
> presses on a keyboard. Possibly you can explain what you see being the
> difference.
>
> 73,
> Dave AB7E
>
>
>> On 1/11/2020 5:26 PM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
>> With the results in, I am curious as to the answer to this question.
>>
>> With 30 - 40 an hour rates over 24 hours and just looking at a computer
>> screen and clicking mouses, was it fun?
>>
>> Ed N1UR
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|