Having no interest in FT8 or JT modes (for now), I don't have much to
comment on that, but do have a few comments on the subsequent discussion.
My feeling is that, as mentioned already, many stations haven't made a
decent job of improving their receiving capability, or are unable to do so.
I'm not sure how many people have actually compared the new digital
modes with CW as far as low signal level decoding. I did that for a
long time when JT-65 first became available. Back then it was much
easier to separate one station and compare the reported S/N to what I
see on my receiver
On 2018-04-23 12:08 PM, Tim Shoppa wrote:
On being able to hear signals at -12 to -17 dB on FT8, I do broadly
> agree. A CW signal at those levels would be easily heard and copied
> by any decent CW operator.
-12 to -17 dB on FT8 (or any of the other "JT modes") is signal to noise
+ QRM in a
I have no idea how FT8 compares with other weak-signal digital modes (such
as the ones that JT himself wrote), Dave. If no one knows here, then Google
is your friend. :-)
As for waiting until next fall and winter, keep in mind that we are
approaching the southern hemisphere's fall and winter.
Hi Mike and all who responded.
I guess I was just underwhelmed at what I could accomplish on FT8
vs CW on 160. I figured it would open up a whole new level of rare
countries and places that were now workable to me. Working Kazakhstan on
160 CW from my location is difficult, but doable
Dave,
Remember that the reported S/N is relative to the receive station noise
+ QRM level. Since many TB stations don't have your antennas and have
high noise, they can't decode you or report a poor S/N. I get +9 and
-18 reports from YB stations a hundred KM apart. It's not spotlight
Hi Dave,
In my [very, very, extremely] limited experiences with any of the JT
modes, it has always seemed to me that many are alligators. I think
the FT8 craze has inspired a lot of people to get on 160 with
compromise tx antennas -- this is a good thing -- but I'm not sure
they realize how much
On being able to hear signals at -12 to -17 dB on FT8, I do broadly agree. A CW
signal at those levels would be easily heard and copied by any decent CW
operator.
I think a lot of the FT8 “processing gain” claims, assumes a really poor CW
operator. A 0dB FT8 signal is not at noise level, it is
I have been playing around with FT8 on 160M and am a bit puzzled. I have
made plenty of contacts, but with many stations, it seems to require an
inordinate amount of power to get their attention, or they do not
respond at all. I also have noted that I can hear in a 2.8 kHz passband,
signals
