Just to underline Tom's comments, see the following paper http://www.sm2cew.com/Digital%20communications%20using%20minimal%20transfer.pdf
73 Jan OM2XW > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 08:33:28 -0400 > Subject: Re: Topband: The use of digital modes on 160 metres > > >> The simple fact is that digimodes, thanks especially to K1JT and his > >> excellent software, are a game changer. DX is now workable on 6m via EME > >> (I'm not suggesting topband via the moon, in case anyone was wondering!) > >> but also via terrestrial paths when conditions are marginal - JT65 (and > >> its > >> HF variant) can integrate and pull out signals that are well below > >> ambient > >> noise levels. > > So can a good CW operator. > > >> I can see the same happening on 160. How would you feel if you have built > >> and 4-square and got 200+ countries, only to find someone with a bit of > >> bent wire doing the same thing? > > A bit of bent wire can easily work 200+ countries on 160 on CW. Probably > more so than on "digital" modes at the present time. > > But, on the flip side, how excited will > >> the > >> latter operator be when he finds he can work DX on a band which > >> previously > >> he had found impossible because he doesn't have room for that 4-square? > > ....or doesn't have patience or CW skill. > > >> It's early days yet, but as the digimodes software improves further (and > >> it's really down to the processing power of PCs at the end of the day) > >> and > >> other matters like bandplanning get resolved, these are the dilemmas we > >> will increasingly be facing. Maybe we will need two versions of 160m > >> DXCC - > >> one of which specifically states "SSB and CW only" or somesuch! > > That's a good suggestion. It really should be one award for the case where a > human operator copies the signal, a man and his radio, and another > certificate where a machine actually copies the signal, a man reading the > text decoded and printed on a machine. > > This fits with the trend to make rewards in life increasingly less dependent > on human effort, patience, and skill, and those who prefer to do it with > human involvement. There should be two clear classes. > > But that isn't the primary issue for me. The issue for me is technical, and > surrounds how we plan growth when some groups simply go off on their own and > ignore bandplans and the IARU. > > 73 Tom > > _______________________________________________ > UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK _______________________________________________ UR RST IS ... ... ..9 QSB QSB - hw? BK
