Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Lets compare Digital modes...!  (Read 5966 times)
AA6YQ
Member

Posts: 3252


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #15 on: February 03, 2018, 10:01:47 AM »

I had no idea I created such a explosive thread...This is like talking politics..All I was try to say, is the best digital mode to have a DX and a real QSO considering the least amount of power and a modest antenna is Olivia... (Many Hams on the post missed that, as they keep referring to FT8, (But with no QSO)..

Yes there are a ton of digital modes, But the graphs I seen, easily Olivia wins...And against QSB, might add..

Truth be told, I like the best SSB on 10 meters..but no play there...Since my desire is DX, AND A QSO , Olivia is the only choice..(By math, by practice, and by logic)...


Your conclusion is erroneous because you've ignored a critical factor: the probability that a station you wish to work is "available" via Olivia. That probability is low, which is why Olivia gets little use, despite its other virtues and despite several efforts over the years to bootstrap it -- like this one. If you want this to change, develop an application that provides panoramic reception for one or more effective Olivia submodes.
Logged

#1 DXCC Honor Roll, DXCC Challenge 3000
K0UA
Member

Posts: 4361




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: February 03, 2018, 10:33:57 AM »

Then there is the little matter of bandwidth.  FT8 Bandwidth, about 50 hz.  Olivia 8/500 bandwidth, about 500hz. The faster versions are even wider.  Hm.. We put ALL of the FT8 QSO's in the world on 40 meters on 7074khz in a 2500hz bandwidth.  Sometimes you can't find an open spot to operate and operators are piled up on each other. How in the Heck are we going to operate Olivia in the same bandwidth?  Answer, we are not going to. We would all have to spread out, but the problem quickly becomes, spread out to where? Everyone has their favorite frequency's staked out already when you take into account ALL of the modes in use and the people that love them.

  I saw an "uninformed person" last night come on to the FT8 frequency with an Olivia 8/500 transmission.  He wiped out 1/5 of the entire worldwide FT8 usage frequency for 40 meters.  Right over the Malta station I was trying to work. And a bunch of others.  Right now there isnt a problem with Olivia, as not too many folks are on it. If everyone on FT8 tried to get on Olivia, there sure wouldn't be room for them in the digital subbands. You need to be thanking your lucky stars that NOT more people are on Olivia.  It is great when there are just a few people using it.  Olivia is a slow speed and bandwidth hog.  PSK31 was MUCH MUCH better even though it wont go as deep into the noise as Olivia can. BUT it uses 31hz of bandwidth for a good speed that is as fast as most guys can type anyway.

Be careful of what you wish for.! Smiley
Logged

73  James K0UA
ARRL Missouri Technical Specialist
AA6YQ
Member

Posts: 3252


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #17 on: February 03, 2018, 10:52:11 AM »

Olivia 8/500 would need about 20 KHz of bandwidth to support an activity level comparable to FT8 or PSK31 (in its heydey).  14105-14125 and 7105-7125 don't get much use except during contests. So a new application that exploits wideband SDRs to provide panoramic Olivia 8/500 reception would have watering holes for daytime and night time operation; build it, and see if they come.
Logged

#1 DXCC Honor Roll, DXCC Challenge 3000
K0UA
Member

Posts: 4361




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: February 03, 2018, 12:43:31 PM »

Olivia 8/500 would need about 20 KHz of bandwidth to support an activity level comparable to FT8 or PSK31 (in its heydey).  14105-14125 and 7105-7125 don't get much use except during contests. So a new application that exploits wideband SDRs to provide panoramic Olivia 8/500 reception would have watering holes for daytime and night time operation; build it, and see if they come.

Yes, but you have some pactor and all of the DX ssb qso's there already as well as the RTTY contests..  PSK31 was a good ragchew mode, and only takes 31hz, and is faster.  It just doesn't go as deep into the dirt, but it still works well.  Of course it is a moot point, at this point, and everyone is still on FT8.  At least for a while until everyone has worked everything.  Smiley
Logged

73  James K0UA
ARRL Missouri Technical Specialist
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 2865




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: February 03, 2018, 07:16:06 PM »

Yes there are a ton of digital modes, But the graphs I seen, easily Olivia wins...And against QSB, might add..

How does it win when the number of QSOs are so limited. Put theory aside, look at reality. FT8 is the most used mode right now, by far. ClubLog put out a graph showing that a few months ago, the number of FT8 QSOs uploaded to the site was more than CW and SSB combined.

If you're just interested in the technical aspects of a mode, there may be others even better than Olivia, who knows. They are so good they are a secret. Shocked
Logged
HS0ZIB
Member

Posts: 3




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2018, 03:06:42 AM »

Quote
the probability that a station you wish to work is "available" via Olivia

Suppose a rare DXCC or Dxpedition (Bouvet next time?) announced that they were going to use Olivia and not FT-8?

What do you think hams would do?  Refuse to use Olivia and not make that QSO? Smiley
Logged
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 2865




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2018, 05:04:15 AM »

Quote
Suppose a rare DXCC or Dxpedition (Bouvet next time?) announced that they were going to use Olivia and not FT-8?

What do you think hams would do?  Refuse to use Olivia and not make that QSO? Smiley

Make no mistake about it. They will use whatever is needed for an ATNO. Don't believe the pontificating.
Logged
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 908




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2018, 09:17:20 AM »

Quote
the probability that a station you wish to work is "available" via Olivia

Suppose a rare DXCC or Dxpedition (Bouvet next time?) announced that they were going to use Olivia and not FT-8?

What do you think hams would do?  Refuse to use Olivia and not make that QSO? Smiley
I doubt that will happen however I'm not sure why a DX'pedition wouldn't want to maximize the Q rate so FT8 would by default be the digital go to...
Bill, AA2UK
Logged
AA6YQ
Member

Posts: 3252


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2018, 10:35:03 AM »

Quote
the probability that a station you wish to work is "available" via Olivia

Suppose a rare DXCC or Dxpedition (Bouvet next time?) announced that they were going to use Olivia and not FT-8?

What do you think hams would do?  Refuse to use Olivia and not make that QSO? Smiley

DXers in need of QSOs would of course use Olivia to make contacts with the Dxpedition. After the operation was over, they'd stop using Olivia for the same reasons they hadn't been using it beforehand.

Logged

#1 DXCC Honor Roll, DXCC Challenge 3000
N3QE
Member

Posts: 5576




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2018, 11:46:24 AM »

I doubt that will happen however I'm not sure why a DX'pedition wouldn't want to maximize the Q rate so FT8 would by default be the digital go to...

Do we have actual FT8 rates recorded by a DXpedition in excess of 20 per hour?

I regularly achieve 100+ an hour on RTTY simplex and have heard DXpeditions doing at least 60 an hour on RTTY with split pileups. Admittedly that's above average operators in decent bands.
Logged
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 2865




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: February 06, 2018, 11:49:15 AM »

I doubt that will happen however I'm not sure why a DX'pedition wouldn't want to maximize the Q rate so FT8 would by default be the digital go to...

Do we have actual FT8 rates recorded by a DXpedition in excess of 20 per hour?

I regularly achieve 100+ an hour on RTTY simplex and have heard DXpeditions doing at least 60 an hour on RTTY with split pileups. Admittedly that's above average operators in decent bands.


No, we don't. The 'hope' is the new Dxpedition mode to be included in WSJT-X version 1.9. A theoretical 600 Qs per hour, more like 200-250 in actual use.
Logged
K0UA
Member

Posts: 4361




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: February 06, 2018, 01:01:09 PM »

I doubt that will happen however I'm not sure why a DX'pedition wouldn't want to maximize the Q rate so FT8 would by default be the digital go to...

Do we have actual FT8 rates recorded by a DXpedition in excess of 20 per hour?

I regularly achieve 100+ an hour on RTTY simplex and have heard DXpeditions doing at least 60 an hour on RTTY with split pileups. Admittedly that's above average operators in decent bands.


No, we don't. The 'hope' is the new Dxpedition mode to be included in WSJT-X version 1.9. A theoretical 600 Qs per hour, more like 200-250 in actual use.

I am very eager and optimistic about the new Expedition mode of FT8.  I will finally give us "little pistols" a shot at some of these rarer countries.  especially in these "not so good" propagation times.
Logged

73  James K0UA
ARRL Missouri Technical Specialist
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 908




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: February 06, 2018, 01:12:49 PM »

I've been testing recent developers versions of FT8 w/Fox and hound.
I think the capacity to support high Q rates is there.
It's still difficult to predict real rates. During the January VHF contest I did manage to work 80 Q's using FT8 in the 2nd hour using NA Contest mode w/RR73 on 6 meters.
Without much prop this is not sustainable but that wasn't FT8's fault.
Bill AA2UK
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!