[Moon] WSJT/CW DL9KR

[Klaus DJ5HG]

Hello Jan, hello all,


there seem to be considerable deficiencies in understanding 
how information really is transported in a digital mode. 
That is entirely of technical character, not political. 
Jan, you are right, there are people who try to keep off 
this point by putting it into the political cathegory. 
They belong to the group that should listen to these mails. 
The discussion simply is driven by an unsolved problem.

Whatever I have contributed here does by no means compare 
CW to digital or "nonaural" modes, although the current 
thread is named WSJT/CW. I am an advocate for fair digital 
modes. JT44 is excellent, JT65 without DS too.


73,

Klaus

 

> Gentlemen,
> 
> I've been reading the multitude of mostly thoughtful and polite arguments with great interest.
> IMHO, basically nothing has changed since the memorable last morning of the Prague conference in 2002.
> In January 2003 I presented the following text to W5ZN, ARRL president:
> "Dear Joel, it was with great interest and consent that I read the many letters concerning the inclusion of JT44 into the DXCC mixed mode along with CW and SSB. --- Wisely, up to now the ARRL has established a separate DXCC for non-aural modes such as RTTY.
> JT44 and the like are non-aural modes as well. After all, we are RADIO amateurs experimenting with RADIO aspects of our hobby, i.e. we are trying to obtain optimum performance of our antennas, transmitters and RADIO receivers, the latter predominantly meaning ultra-low noise front ends and overload insensitive receiving systems. --- Moreover, ARRL even issues a separate top band DXCC because top band reuires ingenious RX and TX antennas and personal efforts concerning (aural) weak signal work, quite comparable with (traditional) EME. ---
> In contrast, JT44 depends primarily on DATA PROCESSING in a non-aural way. In this context, experimentation is left to a knowledgeable minority and, by my opinion, has nothing to do with RADIO as we understand it since the days of W1AW and his fellow amateurs. --- 
> Inclusion of non-aural modes into the CW/SSB mixed count for DXCC, VUCC etc. would render decade-long efforts of many EMErs worthless because "EME" would become feasible with submarginal RADIO systems. --- To be sure, I'm absolutely not against modern and ingenious techniques and even prepaired to try JT44 myself. But PLEASE put this completely different mode whre it belongs, i.e. separate from the conventional (aural) modes."
> 
> 
> 
> In my view, the futile discussion about "how to marry WSJT and CW in contests, top lists and awards" can only be brought to an end by STRICT separation. Each mode has its own specific merits but they differ widely.
> For instance, the clamor about ARRL contest rules could be finished by re-introducing the time-proven rules for the CW mode.
> Lack of useful contest dates does not appear problematic for
> single weekend events after the successful introduction of the DUBUS and ARI contests.
> Rule making and definitions for WSJT contests can be worked out without touching time-proven CW structures.
> 
> Guess I'll have to live with my simple mind but I'd rather like to read technical stuff instead of "quasi-political" aspects on the reflectors as seemingly intended by their originators.
> 
> 73, Jan DL9KR.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Moon mailing list
> Moon at moonbounce.info
> http://www.moonbounce.info/mailman/listinfo/moon
> 
>  Please enter/update your standings: 
>  http://www.vhf-dx.net/top.html
> 
>  When you decide to remain anonymous I may consider this unpolite and remove you from the list