As many of you know, I had been forecasting the "death" of SSB on 6M due to
FT8 for some time. It has certainly come true on day-to-day openings.
While I understand the attractiveness of the mode for some purposes, FT8 is
not something any thinking contester should want to use during a Es opening
on 6M. At least I thought so. Why would a thinking contester want to
operate a mode that throttles the QSO rate to WELL BELOW 60/hr, regardless
of activity. BTW, there is NO WAY anybody is going to run 1 per minute on
FT8 for a entire hour - show me a log, as submitted to ARRL and prove me
wrong, if you can. In the past, a good contester in a excellent opening
COULD and DID run 3-4/minute as long as that opening stays good. I ran
3-4/minute from W5UHF last weekend in the only decent Es opening we had,
which lasted less then 45 minutes.
Since this discussion is taking place on the VHF *CONTESTING* reflector, I
assume the members of the list are interested in CONTESTING, not just
making contacts. Even if you are just interested in making contacts or
working new grids, I would also assume you would want to do it in the most
efficient way possible and make the most of any opening. When the band is
OPEN, that way is via SSB (or CW, to a lesser extent). When the band is
NOT open well, that way could be FT8 or any other WSJT mode that works for
you.
As far as my "death" forecast is concerned, I have seen mixed opinions and
mixed results. K1TO appeared to have had no lack of SSB/CW stations to
work. N9HF says the same. AF5CC argues the opposite - that FT8 has
impacted the run rate on SSB. Unfortunately, the station I was at, while
capable of big rate, never had the kind of opening that would prove my
forecast one way or the other. Is this something that can even BE proven ?
The bottom line in my mind is the same as before the contest - operate FT8
(or JT65 or MSK144 or <?>) when the band is marginal or just opening. As
soon as the band is obviously open, get the heck off the WSJT-X screen and
on to SSB (or CW, if you wish). This is what we did from W5UHF and it
worked (as well as it could with limited Es openings). If "you" (the
collective you) wish to stay on FT8 during a loud Es opening, just remember
that your rate will suffer immensely, as well as your senses, due to the
massive QRM. If you are NOT contesting, then remember your ability to make
contacts and maybe work new grids will be impacted negatively.
If FT8 continues to be the dominate mode during contests, conditions be
dammed, you will probably find a lot of the talented operators (a lot of
them are loud stations and easy to work for the masses) missing from future
contests, or at least from serious participation. Speaking for myself, I
LIKE TO RUN RATE ! If I can't, because there is no rate to be run, I will
most definitely reevaluate my participation is ARRL June VHF and CQWW-VHF.
Why would you care ? Because that's one less multiplier everyone else can
work....
You all can do as you wish - at least think about what you're doing. As I
mentioned earlier this spring, FT8 appears to be the first technology
"breakthrough" embraced by contesting that actually reduces rate.
Any hate mail received direct will be responded to via the reflector, so
don't - we're having a "state of 6M contesting debate" :)
-W9RM
Keith J Morehouse
Managing Partner
Calmesa Partners G.P.
Olathe, CO
On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 12:36 PM, David Kerl via VHF <vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu>
wrote:
> Here at the N9LHS contest station, there were times when were worked 4
> stations per minute on 6 meters. SSB. I saw the writing on the wall BEFORE
> the contest, and Linda, N9LHS and I decided against using FT8. Its too slow
> during a band opening.
> Dave N9HF el99
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 2:00 PM, John Geiger via VHF <
> vhf@w6yx.stanford.edu>
> wrote:
>
> > I have been waiting a while to see what others experiences were with FT8
> > and the June contest, in case my experience was unique. It doesn't
> appear
> > to be.
> >
> > First off, I worked VP9I on 6 meter CW Sunday afternoon for country #50
> on
> > 6 meters, so the contest was worth it. That was also the only new grid I
> > worked in the contest.
> >
> > My experience sounds pretty much like the one that N9LB expressed. I
> have
> > been doing FT8 since the of April, and have made a couple of hundred QSOs
> > with it. In the couple of weeks leading up to the June contest I worked
> 1
> > new 6 meter country-Guatamala, and 5 new grids on 6m using FT8, 4 in
> Mexico
> > and the TG grid (EK44).
> >
> > On Saturday we had pretty limited Es here in Oklahoma so FT8 appeared to
> be
> > an asset. I caught a few brief Es openings with it to Arizona,
> California,
> > South Carolina, and Virginia. I even worked a few close in grids on FT8
> > groundwave and copied one I still need-DM93, so I know a QSO with that
> grid
> > is possible.
> >
> > On Sunday the band was open all day, first to Arizona and California, and
> > then to all of the eastern US. 50.313 was best described as a
> > "Cluster____" and I don't mean DX cluster. Having 150 stations all of
> > roughly the same frequency is bound to be a disaster. Imagine 150
> stations
> > all on 50.125 using SSB. It wouldn't work, so we spread out from 50.125
> to
> > 50.200 or higher. I worked what stations I could on SSB and CW, but
> there
> > weren't that many. Everyone appeared to be hanging around on 50.313
> > running FT8.
> >
> > I have been on 6 meters and I think I have participated in every June VHF
> > contest since 1992, although I did forget to send my log in once or
> twice.
> > This was probably the least fun I have ever had in a June contest with a
> > big 6 meter opening. I would call one station on FT8 for 2 or 3 minutes
> > with no luck. Move to another one, call, same result...... It appears
> > that many of the bigger contest stations were not having that great of
> luck
> > because they were constantly CQing without working stations either. I
> > think the shear QRM on that frequency overloaded FT8 for most people and
> > their computers were just not decoding anything. I won't even get into
> the
> > problems with people calling you in non-contest mode, or calling you
> while
> > you were trying to work someone else.
> >
> > I worked 44 grids on 6 meters. Had FT8 not been invented and everyone
> was
> > still on CW and SSB I think I would have worked at least twice that many
> > grids. I don't have a large 6 meter station, and probably not even a
> > medium one, but I have worked over 100 grids on 6 in a single VHF contest
> > at least twice, and I think maybe 3 times. This wasn't one of them.
> >
> > I hope something gets worked out FT8wise before the 2019 June VHF
> contest.
> > People either need to:
> >
> > a. Spread out more on FT8, as was suggested. Maybe from 50.313 to
> 50.320.
> > b. Use narrow filters on receive. It will obviously greatly cut back on
> > the number of stations you are decoding, but you might be able to work
> some
> > of them
> > c. Use CW/SSB during openings and save FT8 for slower times. Maybe this
> > will happen after the novelty of FT8 wears off. As was mentioned
> earlier,
> > the fastest you can make a FT8 QSO is 1 per minute. I am sure W2SZ,
> W4IY,
> > and others can run at 4 SSB QSOs per minute during a big opening.
> >
> > If this is the new normal for the June VHF contest, I will probably get
> on
> > now and then, try to work a few new grids, if I can find any, and watch a
> > lot of baseball on TV that weekend.
> >
> > 73 John AF5CC
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 4:37 PM, Lloyd - N9LB <lloydberg@charter.net>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > My observations...
> > >
> > > 6M was frequently open for the week leading up to the ARRL June VHF
> > > Contest. I had a chance to play with JT8 during that week. It worked
> > > well, the weak signal capabilities on a non-congested band were
> > remarkable,
> > > and I collected many new Fred Fish grids and four new DXCC entities.
> > >
> > > However during the contest FT8 really folded up. 50. 313 was severely
> > > overloaded ( actually 50.313 to 50.316 MHz )
> > >
> > > Hours of wasted calling, scrambled calls and grids, reception of "one
> > > shot" CQs, never to be detected again, partial contacts never
> completed,
> > no
> > > clear spots in the Wide Graph spectrum display to TX, etc.
> > >
> > > 3KHz just won't hold all the stations that used to occupy
> 50.100-50.300.
> > > There needs to be several additional FT8 base frequencies ( maybe
> 50.316,
> > > 50.319, 50.323, 50.326, 50.329 maybe even more ??? )
> > >
> > > I assume this limitation has already been discovered and that is what
> > lead
> > > to the special "DXpedition Mode", but that that won't be of use in a
> band
> > > opening during a contest like the June VHF Test.
> > >
> > > 73
> > >
> > > Lloyd - N9LB EN52
> > >
> > > P.S. What the hell is wrong with the guys that were calling "CQ DX"
> all
> > > contest long and never responded to any NA stations during the contest
> > when
> > > the band was open to most of NA ???
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > > VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHF mailing list
> > VHF@w6yx.stanford.edu
> > https://w6yx.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/vhf
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Это безумно смешно!
> _______________________________________________
> VHF mailing list
> VHF@w6yx.stanford.edu
> https://w6yx.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/vhf
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|