> With some of the new popular digi protocols most of what is written on the
> screen, some call it "received", has never been received as a complete
> message. It is reproduced from other sources than the radio path.
> "without entering already known information (calls) to the software I
> wouldn't have been even close to where I am now.."
Both are true when you use a DXCLUSTER. Any spotting network will give you the
whole call already. No need to decode it yourself, received over the internet,
a non radio path. Even better, it’s spotted by a RBN Bot without human
intervention.
I don’t think we need to go down that rabbit whole.
I am with Bob, AA6VB - we are not forced to use the new modes. On the other
hand, these new modes enable a whole new layer of operators. A new target rich
environment for more opportunities to work new DX. The RF still has to go from
A to B to be decoded.
73, Andreas, N6NU
> On Oct 25, 2017, at 10:50 AM, Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com> wrote:
>
> Jay, please don't compare the new digi protocols with RTTY, a character based
> protocol.
>
> What you see on the screen or paper in RTTY has actually been sent, and is
> received as it was sent. Or it is garbled because the link is not good enough.
>
> With some of the new popular digi protocols most of what is written on the
> screen, some call it "received", has never been received as a complete
> message. It is reproduced from other sources than the radio path.
>
> As a well known 6m op said after summing up his Zero to DXCC journey this
> last summer - "without entering already known information (calls) to the
> software I wouldn't have been even close to where I am now.."
>
> BIG difference - no wonder the users of new digi protocols apply for a DXCC
> award after a week. Try that with RTTY.
>
> 73
> Peter SM2CEW
>
>
> At 13:38 2017-10-25, JAYB1943@OPTONLINE.NET wrote:
>> I guess I don’t understand what makes the new Digital modes any different
>> from old RTTY...the “sounds†are similar enuf to learn to love and the
>> words are still displayed on (in the old days) paper or a screen. There are
>> many audibly-compromised hams out there such as me â– who really welcome
>> a mode that doesn’t require sharp hearing to work CW or especially SSB. In
>> addition, I have recruited several new (young) hams by attracting them with
>> the computer-based modes...all but eliminates “mike-fright†and
>> “key-freezingâ€. I guess a lot of old-timers (I am 75) feel that the
>> awards like DXCC and WAS, etc. earned with FT8 have less merit than they did
>> with good-old CW or Phone or RTTY. But few people objected when CW filters
>> were invented or SSB replaced AM or smaller, lighter, more efficient radios
>> replaced the old tube stuff...so is a CW DXCC earned in 1948 somehow worth
>> more than one earned in 2000 using these major tech improvements ? There
>> will always be a place for CW and voice modes in ham radio for those that
>> want to practice those..and remember one of the major facets of ham radio is
>> to “advance the state of the radio art†which surely describes the new
>> digital modes. Room for everybody out there, guys....73 Jay NY2NY
>> _________________ Topband Reflector Archives -
>> http://www.contesting.com/_topband
>
>
> _________________
> Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
_________________
Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband
|