Sounds good to me.
I would add that I have made some FT-8 QSOs, mostly on the day it arrived and
before I grasped the implications, but also some more recently. That said,
although I am uploading to LoTW for my QSO partners' use, I am not using them
for credit for any awards. This suits my personal ethical position. I have a
DXCC certificate that says, "RTTY" on it and RTTY contacts are the only ones I
will submit for credits. Once again, this is the way I choose to do it; others
are free to march to their drummer, just as they are free to run excess power,
use remote stations in a different time zone, have their buddies work new ones
for them to keep their status on the "Honor Roll" and so forth. I don't care.
As I have been known to contribute to individual DXpeditions as well as
supporting NCDXF and INDEXA, I've obviously made it onto a "list" and from time
to time receive requests for donations. A couple of these leap to mind. One,
from an EU ham headed to a Pacific isle, bragged about how, even as a single op,
he was going to have a station on 24/7 making QSOs. I don't think it necessary,
but I will say, "No Deal" and no QSOs with me. A more recent one is also going
to a rare Pacific isle and is looking for money and operators skilled in FT-8
F/H. I'm not sure exactly what skill is required but that's the way it goes. If
they run a good operation and can fill in some slots on CW, SSB or RTTY for me,
I'll send a few bucks, but it will be after the fact.
In terms of DXpeditions, it should be remembered they need to work us. Their
reason for going is to make Qs and a lot of them. If no one works them on FT-8,
they'll try CW or some other mode.
My $0.02
Wes N7WS
On 8/2/2019 2:22 PM, Alan Swinger wrote:
Below is Letter for QST on this subject that may (or not) be published FYI.
Glad to hear AA1K back calling CQ on CW in the AM. I am there too looking for
CW DX. - 73, Alan K9MBQ
If Hams who use WSJT/FT modes enjoy using them, by all means do so.
However, I strongly disagree with and object to the fact that QSOs made in
these modes count for DXCC Digital awards in the same way as RTTY, PSK, etc do.
Since FT8 operators can walk away and not participate in QSOs, and come back
after some other activity and see how many new countries and QSOs that the
computer made, this is unlike Digital modes where operators must remain engaged
to make QSOs. Therefore, seems to me that such Computer-generated contacts
should have a separate category in the current award systems since the
operators are not directly involved in making the QSOs . . . call it
Computer-Aided Digital or something more clever. No argument that skill is
required to set up a station to make FT-8 contacts, but a different set than
what those of us who work DXCC, Challenge, etc use on CW, RTTY, and SSB,
including those towers, expensive equipment, skills, and years of hard work to
get the new ones when there was NO FT-8 or similar modes!
So, I do not be begrudge the new low signal computer-aided modes, nor do I cast
aspersions on the Ops who enjoy using them . . . even though I am unlikely to
join their ranks, but the Ham community should not penalize those of us who
used non-FT modes to get our hard earned awards by giving an unfair advantage
to a new technology. We (Ham Radio) need the New Technology, but these modes
are sufficiently different in many ways from the older modes that justifies a
separate category in the award spectrum. Therefore, I urge the ARRL and the CQ
Magazine leadership to establish a Digital award category that is separate and
different from the current DXCC et al Digital criteria.
Alan Swinger K9MBQ
Charlottesville, VA
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|