Hi Mark, et al,
I called and monitored FT4 on 6m here in CN85 for awhile and heard none.
Checking PSKReporter I saw very few FT4 reporting stations on 6m, compared to
FT8. After a couple of hours of switching back and forth I didn't check it any
further.
I expected some activity on FT4, especially as people had mentioned in previous
contests switching to FT4, particularly on 6m. Outside 6m, it had also been
mentioned elsewhere that FT4 may be advantageous on 1296, particularly due to
excessive drift on 23cm with the IC-9700; a half-as-short (and half as
sensitive!) cycle keeps the Hz drift inside the limits for decoding.
2m was my mainstay on this one though 2m SSB activity near me was nil, and I
was furiously busy on FT8 (2m) until it went almost silent maybe 2hrs into the
contest. 6m was hopping on FT8 but SSB was next to none here.
Greg, K3RW
CN85ro
________________________________
From: VHFcontesting
<vhfcontesting-bounces+greg_winters=hotmail.com@contesting.com> on behalf of
Alex <alex@kr1st.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 1:33:05 PM
To: Mark Spencer <mark@alignedsolutions.com>
Cc: vhfcontesting@contesting.com <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] FT4
Hi Mark,
I was on only a very limited amount of time but I worked 30 FT4 stations vs 78
on FT8 on 6m. Of course I'm on the other side of NA so things may be different
here. Like you, I constantly keep an eye on the bandscope to see where the
activity is. If I see FT4 signals, then that is where you will find me. I
really was hoping that people got a good taste of FT4 during the June contest
and that the momentum would continue into the CQ WW.
I barely have the patience to work FT8 during a contest. It takes so long to
complete a Q that it gets boring quickly for me. On the other hand, the pace of
FT4 is like that of RTTY and quite enjoyable.
If there's a band opening there is really no need to use FT8 because there are
plenty of stations strong enough to work. FT4 also seems to be better suited
for those very brief openings as we experienced during the CQ WW.
I also wish people would spread out a bit, but that's another story.
73,
--Alex KR1ST
On Jul 23, 2020, 1:24 PM, at 1:24 PM, Mark Spencer <mark@alignedsolutions.com>
wrote:
>Hi I am curious to hear from anyone who used FT4 during the CQ VHF
>contest. I don't recall seeing any activity on the 50 MHz FT4
>frequency on my band scope when I was in CO80 on Saturday, but I may
>have missed some activity. I did manage to detect SSB activity on
>various odd frequencies such as 50.150 and worked stations so I believe
>I was keeping a reasonable eye on things (:
>
>I sort of enjoyed watching the band scope and changing frequencies from
>time to time but it got rather hot inside the truck in the sun despite
>the cool outside temperatures (below 20 degrees C) but air conditioning
>helped at times at the expense of a somewhat higher noise floor.
>
>73
>
>Mark S
>VE7AFZ
>
>mark@alignedsolutions.com
>604 762 4099
>_______________________________________________
>VHFcontesting mailing list
>VHFcontesting@contesting.com
>http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|