I protested to the ARRL regarding RTTY
being classified as digital. I suppose in
some perverse way it is digital but my
comments to the League was to keep RTTY
separate from the digital awards and
create a separate award for Digital.
I suggested if their goal was to increase
participation
>Modes over last 2 hours
Some may say this is nit picking but to me it is important:
MOST of those so called modes listed are NOT different modes of
transmission, they are digital protocols. A mode of transmission is a
method for altering a RF carrier so it conveys information. CW is a
mode.
Another entry in the "Great American Humorist" contest. Very good!
73, Kevin K3OX
- Original Message -
From: Wes
To: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 00:12:52 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
CW, it's just like FT-8 b
I applaud, Dave!
73,
Martin, OK1RR
Dne 11. 01. 20 v 6:02 Dave AA6YQ napsal(a):
+ AA6YQ comments below
It would seem that the new digital modes have re-invigorated ham radio, at
least activity wise. But if ham radio is so fragile that it cannot sustain in
the face of interest in a new mode,
I guess that I'm not among the many. I'm 78 and have been a ham for almost 62 of
them. I took up Satellite work at age 35, EME at 38, RTTY at 68 and I can't
live without my SDR panadapter.
By coincidence I got a handful of QSLs from the bureau today. One was from
JH7OHS for a 432 EME JT65B
it will, it is and has always been a big tent...73, Kevin K3OX
- Original Message -
From: Hans Hjelmström
To: W0MU Mike Fatchett
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:12:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC
CW, it's just like FT-8 but for men.
N7WS
On 1/10/2020 10:03 PM, kol...@rcn.com wrote:
BTW, sign seen in a local traffic handlers shack back in the late '60's:"Everyone is
welcome in my shack be you Ham Radio operator or Phone man."The more things
change...73 Kevin K3OX
_
0 23:52:07 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
It would seem that the new digital modes have re-invigorated ham radio, at
least activity wise. But if ham radio is so fragile that it cannot sustain in
the face of interest in a new mode, maybe it deserves
+ AA6YQ comments below
It would seem that the new digital modes have re-invigorated ham radio, at
least activity wise. But if ham radio is so fragile that it cannot sustain in
the face of interest in a new mode, maybe it deserves to die. I personally
don't think it will, it is and has always
, Kevin K3OX
- Original Message -
From: Hans Hjelmström
To: W0MU Mike Fatchett
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Sent: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:12:40 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end
"Stew Perry Next Generation" or "Ess Pee En Gee" Something for everyone to
like and not like in that title.-Brian N9ADG
On Friday, January 10, 2020, 6:23:12 PM PST, W0MU Mike Fatchett
wrote:
FT4 is not allocated on 160 for some reason. If the contest were to use
Grids then
FT-8 and RTTY while both using radios hooked to computers, (unless you use a
Model 28) are significantly different in practice.
I'm not an RTTY fanatic but I do have 255 countries confirmed and a DXCC
certificate that says "RTTY" on it. I won't repeat how FT-8 is used but will
point out that
FT4 is not allocated on 160 for some reason. If the contest were to use
Grids then supporting a new contest should be quite simple.
W0MU
On 1/10/2020 7:11 PM, DXer wrote:
>>I thought there was a contest version of FT-8 coming
out soon ? I forget what it was to be labeled as.
>>I thought there was a contest version of FT-8 coming
out soon ? I forget what it was to be labeled as.
The current version of WSJT-X supports the following contests:
NA VHF Contest;
EU VHF Contest;
ARRL Field Day, technically not a contest;
RTTY Roundup.
To activate
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:38:03 -0400
From: Herbert Schoenbohm
To: TopBand List ,
topband-ow...@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
I just joined Mike. Thanks
Herb, KV4FZ
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 8:21 PM Mike Waters wrote:
> The brand new https://groups.io/g/160Digital group should be good for
> that, Herb. Have you joined yet?
>
> 73, Mike
> W0BTU
>
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 6:04 PM Herbert Schoenbohm <
>
Lets just do it over the internet and say we did.
Don W4DNR
Quoting DXer :
1) you need a modern(relatively new)station
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
Quite few happy experimenters, lots of disgusted DXers.
73,
Martin, OK1RR
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
>>1) you need a modern(relatively new)station
How modern? Until getting an IC-7300 I used an IC-718. Before getting a
Signalink USB interface to go with it, I used dubbing cables between the
radio and the computer. Took some 'skill' not to TX garbage with that setup.
Don't tell me now that
The brand new https://groups.io/g/160Digital group should be good for that,
Herb. Have you joined yet?
73, Mike
W0BTU
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 6:04 PM Herbert Schoenbohm <
herbert.schoenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think the huge FT-8 community would come up with something quickly. The
> potential
I think the huge FT-8 community would come up with something quickly. The
potential for a very popular contest is big. Maybe a website would
eventually be established to aid in the process such as FT-8 160 meter
contesting replete with a checklist of possible preferences,
Let us just do it!
: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband.
The FT8 comet is back:
1) It's still legal;
2) It's still not mandatory to use it;
3) It only 'wastes' up to 3kHz on each band;
4) Lots of people are having fun with it.
.
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband
The FT8 comet is back:
1) It's still legal;
2) It's still not mandatory to use it;
3) It only 'wastes' up to 3kHz on each band;
4) Lots of people are having fun with it.
.
.
.
I can think of so many of Yoga Bera's sayings to reply to the negative
reactions.
As for an FT8 contest, they are
öm"
To: "W0MU Mike Fatchett"
Cc:
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2020 2:12 PM
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
Hans SM6CVX
10 jan 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev W0MU Mik
: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
Herb,
the stupid FT8 mode should be ignored by hams owning more than 2
braincells.
73s Steef PA2A
I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
statistics for only the past
Herb,
the stupid FT8 mode should be ignored by hams owning more than 2
braincells.
73s Steef PA2A
I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
statistics for only the past couple of hours,
AIf the contest was
Stealth derogatory expressions…that’s a new approach.
Cecil
K5DL
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
From: Jean-Paul Albert via Topband
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2020 3:42 PM
To: W0MU Mike Fatchett
Cc: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
Humm
Humm, it should be fun...
You can be in the contest and same time behind barbecue...
Are remote stations allowed ?
73´s
Jean-Paul
F6FYA en direct depuis son iPad.
> Le 10 janv. 2020 à 21:40, W0MU Mike Fatchett a écrit :
>
> The FT8 DMC Digital Mode Club on Facebook has nearly 10,000
Michael publishes a Club Log Summary of DX Activity each week.
If you look at the Most Active Modes, you will take away that FT8 is the
predominate mode. That said, if you drill down and look at the statistics for
DXpeditions, you can see many where CW still prevails.by a significant
margin.
The FT8 DMC Digital Mode Club on Facebook has nearly 10,000 members.
On 1/10/2020 1:30 PM, W0MU Mike Fatchett wrote:
Curious. If it is not Ham Radio then why is my K3 transmitting and
receiving the signals? Hmmm. I guess RTTY is not ham radio either.
On 1/10/2020 12:12 PM, Hans Hjelmström
Curious. If it is not Ham Radio then why is my K3 transmitting and
receiving the signals? Hmmm. I guess RTTY is not ham radio either.
On 1/10/2020 12:12 PM, Hans Hjelmström wrote:
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
Hans SM6CVX
10 jan
No wonder, imagine how many robots are active on all bands in parallel per
station.
-Original Message-
From: Topband [mailto:topband-bounces+dj7ww=t-online...@contesting.com] On
Behalf Of W0MU Mike Fatchett
1.5 million hits for FT8? WOW!
_
Searchable Archives:
To: Hans Hjelmström
Cc: Topband@contesting.com ; W0MU Mike Fatchett
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 Contest would be great for Topband
Some international diplomacy?
Save it!
K5DL
Sent from my iPad
On Jan 10, 2020, at 1:13 PM, Hans Hjelmström wrote:
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer
Some international diplomacy?
Save it!
K5DL
Sent from my iPad
> On Jan 10, 2020, at 1:13 PM, Hans Hjelmström wrote:
>
> And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
> Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
> Hans SM6CVX
>
>
>> 10 jan 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev W0MU Mike Fatchett :
>>
>>
Why not? I think that an FT8 contest would be a good experiment, at least.
It needs a sponsor(s) and some tentative rules. Any suggestions?
73, Mike
W0BTU
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 12:38 PM Herbert Schoenbohm <
herbert.schoenb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I know the purists will flame me for this but
This, sir, is not helpful. Our moderator has explicitly stated that
negative comments about FT8 are not allowed.
Respectfully,
Mike W0BTU
On Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 1:12 PM Hans Hjelmström wrote:
> And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
> Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
> Hans
Yes, the success is staggering.
There are graphs that show the FT8 usage and I would paste it into the body
of the email, but I can't. Clublog published it somewhere. It shows a
deep decline on CW and a minor decline on SSB and this was 2 years ago.
And its even not Ham radio.Its fake PC Computer business.
Sorry.Its the end of Ham radio
Hans SM6CVX
> 10 jan 2020 kl. 20:06 skrev W0MU Mike Fatchett :
>
> 1.5 million hits for FT8? WOW!
>
> On 1/10/2020 11:38 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote:
>> I know the purists will flame me for this but look
1.5 million hits for FT8? WOW!
On 1/10/2020 11:38 AM, Herbert Schoenbohm wrote:
I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
statistics for only the past couple of hours,
AIf the contest was designed well
I know the purists will flame me for this but look at the
frequency conservation this would present and look at the activity
statistics for only the past couple of hours,
AIf the contest was designed well sub-channels could be recommended for the
various continents as Stew Perry use to urge for
K5ESW said:
"The difference in the FT8 reported SNR and how most hams think of SNR
seems explained well by Jim, KC5RUO.
http://www.arrl.org/forum/topics/view/1957
https://tapr.org/pdf/DCC2018-KC5RUO-TheReal-FT8-JT65-JT9=SNR.pdf
Thanks Paul. I had read one of those articles before. I didn't
Jerry,
The difference in the FT8 reported SNR and how most hams think of SNR
seems explained well by Jim, KC5RUO.
http://www.arrl.org/forum/topics/view/1957
https://tapr.org/pdf/DCC2018-KC5RUO-TheReal-FT8-JT65-JT9=SNR.pdf
He says for FT8, the noise bandwidth that impacts FT8 software´s
behalf of K4SAV
Sent: Thursday, August 1, 2019 5:09:55 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 performance
I'm not sure how FT-8 calculates the reported S/N number. I found very
little information on the subject and what I did find was not easily
understandable. What
On 8/1/2019 1:27 PM, James Wolf wrote:
I think there is some misunderstanding of bandwidth using FT-8.
The power limited Shannon limit I posted about today is
independent of equivalent noise bandwidth
The equivalent noise bandwidth of an FT8 detected tone is only 6.25 Hz. So
-26 dB
I'm not sure how FT-8 calculates the reported S/N number. I found very
little information on the subject and what I did find was not easily
understandable. What I did was an experiment in which I was able to get
close to the same number being reported. According to what I have read
about
If anybody's interested in trying my version of the python FT8 decoder with
a more sensible SNR
implementation just go here: https://github.com/mcogoni/weakmon
I modified the code to look for the lowest power bin within the input
bandwidth and each
individual signal is compared to this.
To obtain
It is instructive to calculate the Shannon
maximum theoretical data rate (power limited case)
(refer to wikipedia page for Shannon-Hartley theorem).
If S/N ratio (BW=2,500 Hz) = -24 dB,
then S/N ratio (BW=1Hz) = -24 + 10 log 2,500 = -24 +34
= +10 dB. 10 dB converted to a dimensionless ratio is
Do either JT9 or FT8 *really* need a wide SSB filter? What happens if we
use a good narrow CW filter instead?
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 2:03 PM K4SAV wrote:
> W0BTU directed a question to me about JT-9. I have never tested JT-9 so
> I don't have any information to supply on
W0BTU directed a question to me about JT-9. I have never tested JT-9 so
I don't have any information to supply on that subject.
The S/N number supplied by FT-8 was only a curiosity to me because I
could see a huge disparity between what was being reported versus what I
was observing on my
You might want to listen to this TAPR presentation on Noise and Noise
calculations.
https://youtu.be/xXXj1Ko4ZXg
I found it pretty interesting.
Mike va3mw
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 2:12 PM uy0zg wrote:
> Is the main problem here in efficiency?
>
> The main thing here - the signal is not heard
Is the main problem here in efficiency?
The main thing here - the signal is not heard by a person!
---
Nick, UY0ZG
http://www.topband.in.ua
Tim Shoppa 2019-08-01 20:40:
The "work signals way down in the noise you could never work otherwise"
myth, is just part of the myth that FT8 is an
We went thorugh a similar discussion here a year ago about the "cooked" S/N
statistics. Or at least they are cooked in a way that no CW operator would
cook them, by considering a bandwidth 50 times wider than the FT8 signal.
On a quiet WARC FT8 band (no interfering carriers) signals that are -18dB
Good morning
Do we know if the SNR is calculated over the RF passband filter width, or
is is calculated over AF filter bandwidth in the WSJTx engine, which it
knows? There is a big difference.
Mike va3mw
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019 at 11:09 AM Marco Cogoni wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I agree with Jerry. I
Very interesting. How does JT9 compare, especially in regards to the noise
floor issue that Mark raised?
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
I meant Jerry, not Mark. Sorry.
On Thu, Aug 1, 2019, 10:15 AM Mike Waters wrote:
> Very interesting. How does JT9 compare, especially in regards to the noise
> floor issue that Mark raised?
>
> 73, Mike
> www.w0btu.com
>
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband
Hi,
I agree with Jerry. I spent a few weeks trying to use FT8 to obtain
antenna radiation patterns and I discovered how the SNR is computed:
it's totally flawed. Basically WSJTX computes the number in two steps:
the first one estimates how strong the adjacent frequency bins are with
respect
I get the feeling that I must be the only person that has ever tested
FT-8 to the extreme to see what it can do. It seems that everyone else
just assumes it will do what the published information says. It will
not. Below is a summary of my testing.
First I did a bunch of testing to see if I
amen, Cecil..
73, w5xz, dan
On Wednesday, May 29, 2019, 5:45:49 PM CDT, Cecil
wrote:
It seems to be a recurring issue herecan’t shake the elitist attitude.
Do what you enjoy doing...don’t beat others up for doing the same...if you find
yourself alone re-evaluate...
Cecil
Sent
It seems to be a recurring issue herecan’t shake the elitist attitude.
Do what you enjoy doing...don’t beat others up for doing the same...if you find
yourself alone re-evaluate...
Cecil
Sent from my iPad
> On May 29, 2019, at 5:39 PM, DXer wrote:
>
> Really sad to see that this 'comet'
Really sad to see that this 'comet' is already back in Topband 'orbit'.
Do we have new list members, by any chance? People that are
hearing/reading about FT8 on topband for the first time?
Nobody went to Dayton last week? What about the Topband Dinner? I was
there, and FT8 was not an issue.
AMEN...
Pass the cornbread!
K5DL
Sent from my iPad
> On May 29, 2019, at 4:22 PM, Eric Rosenberg
> wrote:
>
> As one who has operated from obscure locatons (including 9L, J2, and YJ)
> with gear that I carried on an airplane, I find your comments both naive
> and snobbish.
>
> As I write
As one who has operated from obscure locatons (including 9L, J2, and YJ)
with gear that I carried on an airplane, I find your comments both naive
and snobbish.
As I write this, I'm sitting in a room on small island (PJ7) running QRP
FT8 into a loop antenna on the balcony. Although I made a couple
amen to another computer free shack.
I too waste much time on 'puters as it is.
however to each their own. I did enjoy the story.
Renée, k6fsb
On 2019-05-29 5:57 a.m., Rob Atkinson wrote:
I can't get into any computer mode, mainly because I've been a software
engineer for almost 40 year and
Back in the good old days, all we had was PSK-31 and we were proud to have it.
It was uphill both ways in the snow.
Don W4DNR
Quoting Rob Atkinson :
I can't get into any computer mode, mainly because I've been a software
engineer for almost 40 year and dealing with computers at home is a
> I can't get into any computer mode, mainly because I've been a software
>engineer for almost 40 year and dealing with computers at home is a
>non-starter with me.I like ARC-5s, BC-348s, and Navy RBB's
>myself..
Same here. Computer science major; 30 years in front of monitors and
I spent 9 days in Haiti as HH6/K3MSB a few weeks ago on a missions trip to
Les Cayes, which is in the remote southwestern part of the island. As
the fellow I was traveling with was a ham, we of course hung some wires at
our guest house and had some on-the-air fun. This was good as there
> On Apr 25, 2019, at 1:24 PM, FZ Bruce wrote:
>
> If he expires, the FT-8 could go on.
A misconception. K1JT's WSJT-X software has a transmit watchdog timer with I
believe a 5 minute max limit - can be set lower of course.
de NA4M
-. .- ….- --
Phil Duff
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Cc:
> Sent: Thursday April 25 2019 12:25:31PM
> Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 vs CW
>
> Just a short story for this FT-8 vs CW/SSB discussion.
> We, with Helen UR5WA, have been waiting for QSL card from VR2XAN for
> 160m QSOs in CQWWCW 2017.
> Tw
. ( ; > ))
73
Bruce k1fz
-From: "Victor Goncharsky via
Topband"
To: topband@contesting.com
Cc:
Sent: Thursday April 25 2019 12:25:31PM
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 vs CW
Just a short story for this FT-8 vs CW/SSB discussion.
We, with Hele
Just a short story for this FT-8 vs CW/SSB discussion.
We, with Helen UR5WA, have been waiting for QSL card from VR2XAN for 160m QSOs
in CQWWCW 2017.
Two direct requests both with IRC and $$$ have been sent but no answer.
Tried some Italian assistance - same result.
So the obvious decision was to
*In addition to CW contesting*, this might be fun to try sometime for us
old men with chronic fatigue, mono, and Lyme. Thank you!
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
On Wed, Apr 24, 2019, 12:38 PM Joe wrote:
> ...
> Soon after the "FT8 Roundup" held on December 1-2, 2018, we started serious
> work on a
To: WSJT-X users interested in testing FT4
From: K1JT, K9AN, and G4WJS
Soon after the "FT8 Roundup" held on December 1-2, 2018, we started serious
work on a faster, more contest-friendly digital mode that can compete with
RTTY-contesting QSO rates while preserving many of the benefits of FT8.
Hi Rick,
I don't have a memory keyer. I do intend to set up a computer or
something to make the calls (CQ) while I do other things near the
radios. When somebody replies it will be back to sending by hand for me.
I do prefer CW. I am not even sure where a working mic is hidden - I
think I
Someone on 75m this morning said that there was a new FT-4 mode, meant for
contesting. I know nothing about it.
73, Mike
www.w0btu.com
_
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
So how many of us still send the whole QSO with a key?Buttons on my Pro III do
most of the work (like mouse clicks with FT-8), I only send the other station's
call (like typing it in with FT-8)
I have a friend here in Yorba Linda running 100W to a short vertical that never
worked east of the
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: w5zn
> .snip
> Last weekend leading up to and during CQWW 160, all of the FT8 folks
> bitterly complained that the CW guys had taken over the entire band and
> destroyed FT8.
> .snip
In the US anyway, it was pretty clear to me that folks were
The catch is DAILY operating. Few signals on 160 CW anymore...that's the rub.
KH7XS
-Original Message-
From: w5zn
To: topband
Sent: Fri, Feb 1, 2019 1:33 pm
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8
This is all very comical to me and reached a hilarious high point last
weekend. All of the CW folks
: Re: Topband: FT-8
There is simply no substitute for the real, direct, visceral
connection one
has with the person on the other end with either CW or SSB modes.
I'll be
in charge of the QSO, thank you. Not my computer.
73. . . Dave, W0FLS
-Original Message-
From: cqtestk4xs--- via
This is all very comical to me and reached a hilarious high point last
weekend. All of the CW folks say FT8 has destroyed CW activity on the
band.
Last weekend leading up to and during CQWW 160, all of the FT8 folks
bitterly complained that the CW guys had taken over the entire band and
So
I get up at 3 in the morning and go down to the CW part of the band to see
if I can hear any of you guys calling CQ. NADA ... from what I can tell,
the band is dead. Not one signal.
I go up to the FT8 section, and it looks like 20M. It is packed with
signals. This happens all the
A great summary of my feelings.
Wes N7WS
On 2/1/2019 4:03 AM, Mike Smith VE9AA wrote:
Bill just about summarized my feelings. I get no satisfaction from modes
where I can't even hear anything
in the speaker. I love that technology is marching forward, BUT I want to
be there with it.
I am
Bill just about summarized my feelings. I get no satisfaction from modes
where I can't even hear anything
in the speaker. I love that technology is marching forward, BUT I want to
be there with it.
I am with CW and SSB and to a much lesser degree RTTY (I do a vy small
amount of RTTY (maybe
2019 23:37
Till: cqtestk...@aol.com; topband@contesting.com
Ämne: Re: Topband: FT-8
There is simply no substitute for the real, direct, visceral connection one
has with the person on the other end with either CW or SSB modes. I'll be
in charge of the QSO, thank you. Not my computer.
73
meddelande-
Från: Topband För daraym...@iowatelecom.net
Skickat: den 31 januari 2019 23:37
Till: cqtestk...@aol.com; topband@contesting.com
Ämne: Re: Topband: FT-8
There is simply no substitute for the real, direct, visceral connection one
has with the person on the other end with either CW
ary 31, 2019 6:18 PM
To: daraym...@iowatelecom.net
Cc: cqtestk...@aol.com; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8
AMEN!
TBDXC Member #91
https://www.tbdxc.net <https://www.tbdxc.net/>
73, Tony K4QE
> On Jan 31, 2019, at 5:36 PM, daraym...@iowatelecom.net wrote:
>
> There i
Dave,
On 1/31/19 4:36 PM, daraym...@iowatelecom.net wrote:
There is simply no substitute for the real, direct, visceral
connection one has with the person on the other end with either CW or
SSB modes. I'll be in charge of the QSO, thank you. Not my computer.
73. . . Dave, W0FLS
My
h either CW or SSB modes. I'll be in
> charge of the QSO, thank you. Not my computer.
>
> 73. . . Dave, W0FLS
>
> -Original Message- From: cqtestk4xs--- via Topband
> Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2019 3:59 PM
> To: topband@contesting.com
> Subject: Topband: FT-8
>
: Thursday, January 31, 2019 3:59 PM
To: topband@contesting.com
Subject: Topband: FT-8
This thread has been addressed on various reflectors.
I've tried it, made around 400 contacts or so, and found the mode pretty
boring. Even with my pileups on FT-8 the mode left me cold. I felt the
same way
This thread has been addressed on various reflectors.
I've tried it, made around 400 contacts or so, and found the mode pretty
boring. Even with my pileups on FT-8 the mode left me cold. I felt the same
way with RTTY...tried it and found it boring. Why? With CW SSB/AM I felt a
connection
Yes Merv, we got clarification on the rulings at the national Hamfest from
the Ministry official on 28th December.
Manoj VU2CPL told me he had worked you on 23rd :)
73 de Prasad VU2PTT, W2PTT (ex-AF6DV), A45VA
ARSI, ARRL, FOC, CWOPS, IFROAR, MARC
NCDXF, INDEXA, SCCC, EUPSK, IOTA
ARRL DXCC
FB Prasad,
I worked a VU2 on 1840 on DEC 23 2018 so I assume that was just before
the new rulings.
Thanks for the new info.
73 Merv K9FD/KH6
Merv and all,
We had 1820-1860 kHz in VU but a newly released National Frequency Allocation
Plan has changed it to 1800-1825 kHz.
Talks are under
Hello All,
As stated by Prasad already, the new allocation has limited our allocation to
1800-1825 kHZ.
We were hoping to get a clarification from our licensing authority and were
told in December last week that the new allocation plan would be followed.
You would have seen me QRV on FT8
Merv and all,
We had 1820-1860 kHz in VU but a newly released National Frequency Allocation
Plan has changed it to 1800-1825 kHz.
Talks are under way to try and get back the old frequency allocation but until
then we will have to go low and work split on FT8 or other digital modes.
Couple of
I have worked VU2 on FT-8 on 1840 and see them calling cq quite often,
JA work split, there is no reason to work down at 1826 or there abouts
unless your just trying to irritate others.
Merv K9FD
Peter, Not all countries allow FT-8 ops on 1840. JA's work split on
11908. Last night attempts
Peter, Not all countries allow FT-8 ops on 1840. JA's work split on
11908. Last night attempts to work a VU2 he was only able to legally TX
around 1816 with my FT-8 being on 1844. The agreement came way before FT-8
or other digital modes. They also don't take in consideration for some
om
Subject: Topband: FT-8 gentleman's agreement for 160?
I recall hearing FT8 activity on 1830 kHz last evening ... isn't a bit low
in the band for digital modes? I hope FT-8 activity doesn't squeeze all of
the CW activity down into the DX portion before the dust settles.
I recall hearing FT8 activity on 1830 kHz last evening ... isn't a bit low
in the band for digital modes? I hope FT-8 activity doesn't squeeze all of
the CW activity down into the DX portion before the dust settles.
Pete k1zjh
_
Searchable Archives:
Good evening everyone. I just wanted to post a link to a video that I made
using the DXE NCC-2. I have had some high tension power line work done
about 1/8 mile from my qth over this summer, and since then I have been
subject to 10-20 over 9 noise floors on 160m. What used to be a S-2 S-4
band for
; topband@contesting.com
Subject: Re: Topband: FT-8 question
Hi Jim,
Well, yes on the 5 acres, but still suburban. But, I do notice that FT8 on
the vertical 160 T often decodes as well as my DXE 4 sq receive which has
directivity and thus less noise. Same comment from another op here locally.
I don't
> As is, its infuriating listening to high noise
> levels on 160m. If I cant hear on 160m...except for the usual louder
> stations, Im not going to even try TX.
Don't let noise stop you from transmitting.
>Right now, Im trying to evaluate if 160m is even worth
>the effort required. Are the
1 - 100 of 106 matches
Mail list logo
