>>BTW I thought RTTY was a digital mode.
As is CW. I think I get your point, and if so, I agree. Another case of
nomenclature becoming the issue. Easy to fix though.
>>If Ft4 is faster than RTTY why did all of the RU winners make so few
FTx(so called digital) QSOs?
Most contests' so called QSOs are actually contacts. A QSO happens when
you talk about the weather, station improvements, bad propagation, or
just silliness as the main reason for the link up. Saying hi or wishing
your buddy good luck in the contest does not make it a QSO, regardless
of mode, but I digress.
Back to the RTTY/FT4 speed/efficiency point, this is one more reason to
try and understand what is happening. Was it because FT4 is less
efficient than RTTY, or because RTTY users being proficient with the
mode stayed with it? Did experienced contesters use RTTY, while the
'unsophisticated' used FT4? If the latter, can they make the jump to
perceived 'legitimate' contesting modes after experiencing a new aspect
of the hobby?
If FT4 was less efficient in the contest, was it because FT4 is still
not the best FT-x contesting protocol, or something else? I have an
opinion on this, check past posts in the unlikely event that you are
interested.
This is all new stuff. Good, bad, time will tell.
73 de Vince, VA3VF
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|