[TVARC] FT8 Article

[Tom G]

👍 I agree, Ed!

73,
Tom G... NV1U
SKCC #18720 ~ QCWA #37530






 	


On Mar 17, 2019, at 11:19 AM, <k2te at juno.com> <k2te at juno.com> wrote:

I don't think it is a surprise that FT8 has exploded in activity over the
past year or so.  I agree with many of the observations from the Club Log
folks regarding DXer migration to FT8.  I also notice that they are
firing up their amps as well.  I've seen a number of +15 dB and higher
signal levels from US stations when trying to work a DXpedition operating
on FT8.  I saw one post bragging about working XR0ZRC with 500 watts to a
dipole.  FT8 was created for weak-signal use in a bandwidth segment no
larger than an SSB signal.  I've seen signals frequently getting covered
up by the power hogs so that multiple repeats are necessary to complete
the QSO.  This dilutes the Fox/Hound mode whereby it is possible for a
DXpedition station to work 300 or more stations/hour, a rate many top
contesters would love.  I think it is time to limit power for FT8 and its
cousins (JT9 & JT65) to 100 watts to preserve sanity.  Yeah, the antenna
farms will still be stronger but at least it will cut down the swamping
while still allowing us PW guys in TVARC a chance.

73 de Ed

____________________________________________________________
Our Hearts Go Out To Denzel Washington
go.dedicatedoffers.com
http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3141/5c8e65deeeecd65de2132st04vuc
______________________________________________________________
TVARC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tvarc
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:TVARC at mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/tvarc/attachments/20190317/f725b547/attachment.html>