Hi Steve, I didn’t calculate everything - and thank you for doing “my work” for me. ;)
In the real world, we need more empirical data to support my thought = FT8 is superior for weak signal/DX/“valuable” contacts (and, of course, “value” is purely subjective). We know is “better” qualitatively, but in the real world, how much? We don’t have the history for FT4 DX pileups. In fact, we have only a smattering of good FT8 data. I *believe*, in more than 8000+ FT8 contacts (vs ~175 FT4 contacts!), FT8 is clearly better than FT4 for weak signals. But, how much value can be used for a QUANTITATIVE assessment (rare DX vs many more contacts). I need more data. Thanks for your response! I’m staying tuned.... 73 de W8NET Miles / “Gene” Secretary, Portage County Amateur Radio Service (PCARS) 3905 Century Club - Master #47 DV2/W8NET in the Philippines Licensed since 1974 > On Jul 28, 2019, at 10:32 AM, Steven Franke <s.j.fra...@icloud.com> wrote: > > Hi Gene, > >> FT8 is WAY MORE sensitive! (~8db) > > That number is not right. On the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) > channel, the 50% decode probability of FT8 occurs at SNR=-20.8 dB and the 50% > decode probability of FT4 occurs at SNR=-17.5 dB. The sensitivity difference > is therefore 3.3 dB. > > On channels with severe Doppler spreading, the threshold SNR is higher for > both modes, and the difference between FT8 and FT4 will decrease somewhat > because FT4’s larger tone separation tends to give it an advantage in those > cases. > > It might be of interest to some to consider that FT8 uses symbols with > duration 160 ms to send 3 bits apiece. FT4 uses symbols with duration 48 ms > to send 2 bits apiece. For a given average transmitter power, the energy that > is transmitted per bit for FT8 is larger than the energy transmitted per bit > for FT4 by the factor (160/3)/(48/2) = 2.22. Thus, the theoretical > sensitivity difference (ignoring any differences in signal detection, > synchronization or LDPC decoding efficiency) is 10*log10(2.22) = 3.46 dB, > very close to the actual difference of 3.3 dB that I quoted above. > > I have no strong feelings one way or the other about your main point, but I > think that it’s preferable to base the discussion on accurate numbers. > >> >> FT4 is awesome for MORE contacts (i.e. contests). >> >> I’m sticking with FT8 for QUALITY. >> >> 73 de W8NET Miles / “Gene” >> Secretary, Portage County Amateur Radio Service (PCARS) >> 3905 Century Club - Master #47 >> DV2/W8NET in the Philippines >> Licensed since 1974 > > Steve, K9AN > >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
