On 4/28/2024 6:13 AM, John Webster NN1SS wrote:
I would like to suggest that there may be broader implications. On any
given day, more than 80% of all activity on the HF bands is in the
digital modes and largely in FT8.
Look at RBN spot data that was collected (I assume) last year:
I would venture to suggest that attempting to use RBN data to adjudge
intermittent and erratic CW callsigns as being an indicator of band
activity is a fallacy of and by itself. For example, note how many times
a CW caller is spotted on RBN while calling in a pileup. Or when in a
QSO and only signing once, and maybe every other ten minutes or two. RBN
requires several clear decryptions of an audible CW signal before it
will register a callsign... and then only when the decryption is clearly
a callsign, but it will also show something that somebody mangles while
attempting to send their call (which happens, believe it or not).
And what about the weekly CWT contests.... where are the RBN spots to
show that activity?? They mostly don't appear, because callsigns aren't
"heard" more than once or twice, or most of the time are always shifting
frequency. Or when they do appear, the RBN more often only shows the
strongest signals, rarely the weak pipsqueaks or those at the bottom of
a propagation peak.
That's not quite what happens with something like ft8 or 4, which
transmissions contain almost nothing BUT callsigns, and for minutes at a
time. Of course, ft8 is going to appear to be a more-heavily-used mode
in comparision.
And as Pete said, RBN doesn't register SSB signals (unless purposely
spotted).
Don't try using RBN as any indicator of relative activity for any mode;
it can't and doesn't compute.
Steve, K0XP
_______________________________________________
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk