I’d like to briefly weigh in in support of default split mode.
Trunked radio and cellular systems operate this way all the time - the actual
operating frequency is unknown to the user, and changes depending on a variety
of factors. This is advantageous.
In an FT8 environment, I suggest it is also advantageous. By responding to a
station (DX or not) on a frequency that is clear at your location, you are
actually minimizing QRM and improving circuit effectiveness. Other callers on
other frequencies can be selected by the target station without having to worry
(as much) about overlapping signals effectively destroying an otherwise working
path.
Being “zero beat” doesn’t improve anything, and, unless you’re looking at the
waterfall, doesn’t mean anything in an FT8-like situation. Consider the whole
passband (approx 3 kHz) as “on channel” and it’s all good.
Admittedly, it took some getting used to. Forty years of habits aren’t shed
overnight. Now, I find my best results are had by finding a clear spot, locking
(holding) my TX, and responding to stations in the passband. I never liked
having the software move my TX based on the remote operator’s stability or
preferences. I think QSO rates are better this way, and interference is reduced.
By the way, using split does not cut the number of contacts per kHz in half.
The same number of signals can be sent during each cycle, either way. Once you
don’t worry about the guy on “your” frequency during the opposite cycle not
being your QSO partner, it’s no problem at all.
So, a vote for the rc3 method.
George J Molnar, KF2T
Nevada, USA
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
