Tuesday, August 20, 2024

Superfox and DXing

The Superfox name is not unique to WSJT-X. I didn't know that until I did an internet search for sites and images related to it. Although it isn't true that there's nothing new under the sun, this is so obvious a name for many reasons that I should not have been surprised by its commonality. 

I included an appealing image that my search uncovered. Considering the public availability of AI image generators it is surprising that these tools aren't used more often by hams as a way to create icons for our increasing software-centric hobby. If nothing else, it adds levity to discussions about new technology entering our hobby.

After I used the FT8 Superfox mode for the first time it spurred a few thoughts that I'd like to share. In this case it was to work N5J on 80 meters.

Although I prefer to work new DXCC countries on CW, that isn't always easy or convenient since most DXpeditions now devote more time to digital modes. Whatever you might think of it, digital has become more popular for HF DXing than CW and SSB. DXpeditions quite sensibly devote time to the modes and bands where there is demand. Digital is also beneficial to lightweight DXpeditions such as N5J, and to the majority that have small stations and are chasing them.

One night last week I happened to wake up before dawn. Instead of going back to sleep I padded down to the shack to see if N5J was active on CW on the low bands. With my 160 meter antenna unavailable during the summer, my objective was 80. But they were on FT8 instead. I got up to leave and then thought, what the heck. So I sat down and gave superfox mode a shot.

It was a simple matter to activate superfox since my version of WSJT-X supports it. I tuned to 3567 kHz and saw this:

On the spectrogram/waterfall their signal makes very little impression. If you listen, it sounds like the soundtrack of a 1950s sci-fi movie with its staccato series of seemingly random tones. The software decoded N5J, the superfox, however, the mode seemed vulnerable to noise. When it couldn't decode it couldn't decode any of the multitude of messages transmitted. That's unlike multi-stream FT8 where each stream is independently decoded.

I waited a minute for the noise to disappear -- probably software misconfigured by a caller -- and they were quickly logged. The 3-element vertical helped even though I limited myself to 100 watts. A friend with a smaller station was calling at the same time and got through a few minutes later.

It was easy. Was it too easy? Have DXing awards become a participation pin for just showing up rather than a sign of skill and achievement? With superfox, "verified" foxes will also reduce the risk of working pirates, something that often happens on FT8 and CW.

I don't know how to answer those questions, and I doubt the glib answers of the self righteous. But consider the progression we've made in the DXing art in the past 10 or 20 years:

  • Local and then global DX spotting networks
  • Real time communication by DXpeditions of their operating frequencies
  • Real time log confirmations
  • Large, well-financed DXpeditions that exceed 100,000 contacts
  • Digital modes to level the playing field: pile-up opportunities for smaller stations
  • Multi-stream and superfox for high digital rates

These advancements call into question the value of a QSL or DXCC certificate. After all, if everyone can work 'em, does the value of a DX award decline? Superfox mode accelerates the trend in two ways: more stations can be worked within the same time and resource budget, faster than CW or SSB, and getting those coveted band slots requires only a modest station investment and a few clicks of the mouse. FT8 ain't so slow any more.

I am not a curmudgeon: superfox is a marvel of logistics and technology. I applaud the technological advancements in our hobby. It's inevitable and will only continue. But I have to wonder whether DXing and station building are skills that have reached an inflection point. When reaching the stratosphere of DX achievement is far less difficult than it once was, is it a worthwhile endeavour?

Many (most?) hams enjoy working DX yet have no desire to build a big station or to devote a lifetime to reach DXCC Honor Roll. Technology brings it within reach. Does it matter that it takes far less time and effort than in years past? Probably not if the participants are enjoying themselves. It appears that they are.

One old timer of long acquaintance is using digital modes to close the gap to earn the 2500 endorsement for the DXCC Challenge award. Working N5J on FT8 superfox brought him a little closer. Most older DXers that I know have adapted very well to digital modes, often with enthusiasm. Digital modes are not being shunned by older hams, it is just that a hostile minority speaks loudly.

I've become a reluctant superhound.

2 comments:

  1. Hello Ron, superhoundfox or whatever we still depend on propagation and a good antenna. I've been looking for N5J since the start but not able to receive them on any band. Not with SF or any other mode. Working them from some parts of Europe is extremely difficult. I was visiting a friend 50km south of me who has a better station, I worked them from his QTH. But it would be more satisfying to work them from my own station. To me any mode of communication is valid to work the DX. We should embrace the technology that is available today. 73, Bas

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Bas. Certainly propagation always matters. However, digital is advantageous to smaller stations in all propagation conditions (except when there is none!) since you are less likely to be buried under the pile up. But you still have be above the DX's noise level and in marginal conditions a little more antenna and power will always make a difference.

    ReplyDelete

All comments are moderated, and should appear within one day of submission.