My friend, and fellow ham radio blogger, Jeff, KE9V, recently wrote about the latest digital mode, FT-8. Since its introduction this summer, it has become very popular. Part of the reason for this is that it offers many of the advantages of JT65 and JT9, but contacts are four times faster.
Jeff’s blog post, “Look No Further Than the Waterfall,” describes how he—a die-hard CW man—has become enchanted with the mode and how it’s opened his eyes to a part of the hobby he hadn’t really been aware of. As the title implies, you only have to look at a waterfall display to see how popular digital modes have become. Not only that, Jeff notes, “A high percentage of these [FT-8 operators] are younger than average operators and many of them also happen to be relative newcomers to hobby radio.”
One of the reasons for this popularity is obvious. You don’t need crazy big antennas to operate FT-8 on HF. FT-8 allows you to make contacts with very weak signals. W6LG has even made FT-8 contacts, using two light bulbs for an antenna.
While I can appreciate the cool technology behind this, and I can see myself playing around with this a little, I can’t see myself becoming an avid FT-8 operator. It’s just too impersonal. That’s the same reason I’m not an avid contester. Contests are fun to play around with once in a while, but I’m definitely not an every weekend contester.
What I think would be cool is for this technology to somehow allow more information exchange than just IDs and signal reports. Might this be possible? If it was possible, what kind of information could be exchanged? Does it even make sense to suggest this? If you’ve been working FT-8, I’d love to hear your opinions on this.
Mark Smith says
For many (including myself), small-talk is a turn-off to ham radio. Contesting and these structured digital modes let you “play radio” and be a ham without having to make small talk with people you don’t know. What you see as a draw back is exactly the draw for people like me.
To be clear: I’m not saying you’re wrong, I’m saying we look for different things in the hobby. Ham radio is a lot of different things for different people, and that’s ok. That’s what I love about it.
To answer your direct question: should they modify FT-8 to allow for longer messages? Sure! Why not? It’s just technology and a protocol. But many will still use it the way they do now, and that’s not a bad thing. It may not be YOUR thing, but that’s ok.
They may not. But that’s ok too. You have PSK31, RTTY, FSQ, etc that are more conversational and less structured. Digital rag chew with those if they suit your style better. We have options, only some of which any given person is likely to enjoy, but they’re all valid.
Dan KB6NU says
You’re right that PSK31, RTTY, and FSQ are more conversational digital modes, but they don’t offer the same performance advantage as FT-8.
D Jeffrey Blumenthal says
I’m going to be moving to FT-8 due to a high noise QTH (downtown Chicago high rise), need to use low power, no room for any elaborate antenna, and getting hard of hearing. It means moving from rag chewing to perhaps contesting, although I love to run my brag “tapes” over RTTY. The nice thing about this hobby is the number of ways to enjoy it.
Joshua | DC7IA| KK4RVI says
I don’t think digital modes will be THE future, but a part of it.
Like you said: It’s too impersonal. The talking part will not go any soon.
I’m sure people we’re saying CW will be lost from the ham bands because everyone only will use voice, when voice started being used a long time ago.
73
Rick Barnich. KA8BMA says
I don’t think that any mode of communication that can be completely or nearly completely computerized is the future of ham radio. 30 second call sign exchange is not where it’s at for mainstream hams. Just my opinion.
Thom W8TAM says
I’ve made hundreds (perhaps a thousand+) contacts on JT65 and JT9. There’s a time commitment involved in those modes that FT8 does not have. I’m not sure if it’s a direct result, but there is a lot more QRM, frequency stealing, and general uncivilized mischief that I’ve seen on FT8 vs the JT modes. I personally don’t much care for the frantic click fest that FT8 seems to be. It’s also less sensitive for decodes by several dB. There’s some debate about what the exact differences are.
I know that when I operated FT8 QRP, I only managed a couple contacts. I don’t think FT8 really is a viable weak signal mode, and while it has a place, it’s not one that appeals to me currently.
Walter Underwood says
I certainly hope that digital modes are the future of amateur radio on HF. They were the future of radio when I studied them at Rice University in 1980.
After decades of being far behind the state of the art, hams are actually advancing the state of the art. Both WSJT-X and FreeDV are impressive technology.