VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Digital modes in the VHF contests....

To: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Digital modes in the VHF contests....
From: Steve Kavanagh via VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Reply-to: Steve Kavanagh <sjkavanagh1@yahoo.ca>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 03:34:27 +0000 (UTC)
List-post: <mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
I thought I'd add my comments...

This time I was operating from a very modest station in terms of antennas 
(home!).  Having not got my antennas sorted out after moving, I had an HF 
inverted vee on 6m, a small Yagi on 2m and various indoor antennas on the 
higher bands.

I attempted digital QSOs on only 6m and one on 432 (all FT8), not really having 
enough oomph for any meteor scatter/EME (and way too much noise on 6).  On 6m, 
I certainly heard a lot more activity on FT8 than on CW and made a number of 
contacts.  Not all were completed in the minimum time, as QSB of one sort or 
another required some repeats (sometimes in cases where the signal was loud 
enough for CW to be copied solidly).  SSB was nearly a dead loss due to the 
high noise level.  Some of the stations worked on 6m FT8 were calls I had never 
heard before in a VHF contest, so yes, there was certainly some new blood 
around and I made more QSOs with FT8 than I could have done without it.  Mind 
you, there were a couple of serious local rovers, who didn't have FT8 
capability, and didn't really have time for it anyway (as has been noted by 
others).

I described the one 432 FT8 QSO earlier - in short...a QSO was made but it 
would have been a LOT faster on CW as FT8 had a lot of trouble with the 
multiple signals typical of tropo/aircraft-scatter.

There was a certain amount of confusion regarding contest mode or not...I was 
able to quickly switch on the fly (click off the contest mode box and 
re-generate the messages) so the QSOs went moderately smoothly.  The exchange 
is there...it's just a bit slower than with contest mode on, which was NOT much 
of a factor with my setup!

I think we ought to just see how things pan out and not make any rule changes.  
FT8 worked for me this time due to the high noise, poor antenna and complete 
lack of propagation.  JT65A might have worked better, for the same reasons, but 
I saw no sign of activity.  In a serious sporadic opening I'd rather run SSB or 
CW and work 'em faster.  In my (up to now) rover vehicle there really isn't 
room for a computer, let alone the time for FT8 QSOs (late at night I need to 
sleep in order to be able to drive the next day!).  For some situations it will 
be useful and in others it won't be.  Hopefully the novelty of FT8 will wear 
off and people will remember than when signals are decent (and for people who 
aren't interested in digital modes!), CW and SSB will work better and spend 
much of their time on the traditional modes.

73,
Steve VE3SMA

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>