Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

flexradio.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#81

Post by setquk »

silman wrote: post #64
setquk wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

QSX is coming soon. https://www.qrp-labs.com/qsx.html Just google like any other technology. Answers are all out there. I never went to any amateur radio clubs. I paid up to do my exams, bought a radio and just wobbled into the bar like a drunk. Also you don’t have to talk to someone past exchanging RST etc. If they start going off on one just tune away.

can you explain how QSX is different from the other SDRs being mentioned (ADALM-PLUTO, HackRF One, etc)? Is it just more transmit power than those other SDRs? I feel like i'm missing something.

One's a transceiver. One's an SDR. The first is way more human oriented and focused on utility.

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#82

Post by setquk »

silman wrote: post #71
ianburrell wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a SDR-based HF transceiver instead of wide-band SDR. SDR is implementation detail and extra feature. Most SDRs are receive only, and the ones that can transmit, like ones you listed, are limited in power. The other difference is interface. The QSX, and other SDR-based transceivers, work like other regular transceivers. They have USB port for computer control and sound card output. Some newer radios provide I-Q…

So would you recommend the QSX as a good way for a beginner to get to explore all the different bands/modes? Do you think this is a good replacement to - say - a hackRF? Or is the hackRF better for specific use cases like debugging because it has wide bandwidth?

When you're doing RF stuff you're usually really only interested in single signal reception and usability. To learn about the various modes this will be way better than an SDR.

The SDR sure has utility but that comes at a compromise. I've done some professional RF stuff in the past and 99% of the problems are solved with very simple and way more precise gear compared to an SDR.

Have a look at http://websdr.org and have a play around with SDRs and then go look at a video for a Yaesu or Icom "rig" and see the difference in the usability. The QSX is more the Yaesu or Icom end of things.

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#83

Post by 3rdAccount »

AWildC182 wrote: post #4

This has one unspoken bonus feature: Not having to talk to an octogenarian about politics. I know it sounds silly, but I suspect this is one of the huge features driving it's success. Amateur radio is plagued by bad actors and grumpy old men, along with the general age imbalance that makes it fairly unpleasant for young people and extremely unpleasant for anyone who sounds vaguely feminine...

My grandmother is a ham that is heavily involved in her ham club. Everyone was older, but polite. Of course they have different political views, but they're not a bunch of creeps, although there are some weird hams for sure. I knew one guy in college that was getting a license so the government couldn't listen to him like they could for his phone. I was like "what...you do realize you're basically broadcasting out to the whole city".

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#84

Post by silman »

setquk wrote: post #82
silman wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So would you recommend the QSX as a good way for a beginner to get to explore all the different bands/modes? Do you think this is a good replacement to - say - a hackRF? Or is the hackRF better for specific use cases like debugging because it has wide bandwidth?

When you're doing RF stuff you're usually really only interested in single signal reception and usability. To learn about the various modes this will be way better than an SDR. The SDR sure has utility but that comes at a compromise. I've done some professional RF stuff in the past and 99% of the problems are solved with very simple and way more precise gear compared to an SDR. Have a look at http://websdr.org and ha…

Well i'm sold, can't wait for the QSX to be released so I can really start using my AE license! Thanks!

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#85

Post by VLM »

zokier wrote: post #55

I feel like I'm missing some context here; why is FT8 controversial in the first place?

Ham radio is an incredibly large hobby much like model railroading or warhammer40K or photography or RC aircraft or sex or ... computer programming.

Similar to every other area of human activity thats ever existed and ever will, tiny sub-group Z will always trash talk everyone doing sub-group A thru Y as not enjoying the model railroading hobby the 'correct' way or not using the 'correct' editor/IDE or not doing the correct thing in the bedroom or whatevs.

So its discussing the usual collision of "whoa this new activity (fad?) is becoming super popular outta no where" with the usual "What I've been doing for 50 years is the only correct way to do it"

There's nothing inherently wrong or bad or incorrect about SSB analog voice modulation on wavelengths near 80 meters; but you can't expect life long aficionados of that particular sub-group to be excited about some rapidly growing subgroup they're not interested in. So thats the "FT8 is killing ham radio"

Now as for why any of this matters, the analog HF SSB crowd has cornered the national USA hobby club such that QST magazine etc promotes 80M SSB operation in the USA as being the "only real ham radio" and then the usual political fallout and drama.

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#86

Post by VLM »

esaym wrote: post #9

I'm trying hard to figure out what these "modes" are. Even after watching a video[0] I'm still not sure what is really going on. Is the whole point just to acknowledge 'pings' from other transmitters? Seems kind of pointless but I assume I'm missing something.... [0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzXkIvoqvAY

"Seems kind of pointless"

Its a hobby...

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#87

Post by VLM »

geofft wrote: post #37
kawfey wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel like in an emergency situation, voice would still be the preferred mode since ARES and other HF radio organizations are dispatched to fill in coverage gaps that would have been there otherwise. You also need a working computer with the latest software, a digital interface, and have practiced digital mode operating skills.

In an emergency situation I'll probably have my cell phone, too. What I'd love to have is an app (or packaged web app using WebAudio) that encodes/decodes PSK31 so I can plug in an audio cable from my iPhone to my Baofeng and start typing.

DroidPSK works great, along with many other apps for other modes; android only AFAIK.

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#88

Post by setquk »

silman wrote: post #84
setquk wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you're doing RF stuff you're usually really only interested in single signal reception and usability. To learn about the various modes this will be way better than an SDR. The SDR sure has utility but that comes at a compromise. I've done some professional RF stuff in the past and 99% of the problems are solved with very simple and way more precise gear compared to an SDR. Have a look at http://websdr.org and ha…

Well i'm sold, can't wait for the QSX to be released so I can really start using my AE license! Thanks!

Before you do, if you have money available to throw at it, I'd probably go for a commercial rig first that can kick out 100W and start there. Yaesu FT-450D is the sort of thing that's a decent "first rig".

If you can't afford it, go for the QSX! I may replace my commercial rig with one if it's any good.

Re: FT8 – Tipping Point for Ham Radio?

#90

Post by tasty_freeze »

jpmattia wrote: post #77
ianburrell wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FT8 and other weak signal modes can work with more noise and less signal than conventional modes. Which makes possible to communicate with the current poor HF propagation, or with lower power devices and longer distances. It does this by using low bandwidth (50 Hz), low bit rate (6 bit/s), and error correction. The other special thing about FT8 is that it only does contacts, with binary messages for doing the exchang…

> FT8 and other weak signal modes can work with more noise and less signal than conventional modes I'm a little surprised that FT8 is better S/N than conventional mode of morse code, but then I didn't think in terms of S/N back when I was active in the 70s/80s (btw: Straight key! I finally build a keyer after 5 years of straight key, and then went off to college and didn't have another QSO for many years. :( Edit: Re…

These low bandwidth / low power modes are mathemagic, extracting signals that are well below the noise floor. Redundancy, forward error correction, and low baud rates are the key.

In morse, the baud rate is low, but you get one chance at each symbol and that is it. With these new modes a small set of bits is sent in a highly redundant fashion such that you can recover the whole message even if you capture only, say, 30% of the bits, not necessarily contiguous.

Post reply on HN