Date   

locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Williams, G (af8c) <af8c@...>
 

So what will happen when near the height of sunspot cycle 25 when on, say, 20m the FT8 waterfall is jammed full with three callers on each slot   (FT8 is decoded "three" times in deep decode per manual) and there's no clear slot?

2.2.0-rc1 " A second processing step starts at 13.5 s, and the final one at 14.7 s."

--73, Glenn, AF8C

On 1/29/2021 11:47 PM, Jim Shorney via groups.io wrote:
From the WSJT-X online manual:

"To avoid QRM from competing callers, it is usually best to answer a CQ on a different frequency from that of the CQing station. The same is true when you tail-end another QSO. Choose a Tx frequency that appears to be not in use. You might want to check the box Hold Tx Freq. "

From the Hinson document linked from same:

“The CQing station doesn’t need to say up 3 or anything else.  He will decode all stations in the audio spectrum.  You can call him at 300Hz or 2300Hz and it won’t make any difference.  They all display.  You don’t have to (and don’t want to) move to his frequency.  If there is more than one station calling him, they will hopefully be spread all over the audio spectrum, not causing QRM to the station trying to make a QSO or each other.  If a bunch call on his frequency, they just QRM each other and the guy CQing will be working those who are split.  Additionally, if he starts a QSO with someone close to your transmit frequency, your transmitter will be disabled so you don’t cause him QRM.  If you are transmitting further away, you can keep calling him and he should pick you up as he works through the list of callers.”

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 03:47:00 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj@...> wrote:

I haven't "obviously" missed anything.  Because it can be used that way doesn't make it intended to be used that way not is it the correct thing to do just because one can.
I am done with the subject. Do as you will and clutter the band. I will continue on and make my contacts as will everyone else.
Sean is the nameKB8JNE is the call

Spell checked by the NSA. 
 
  On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:48 PM, Jim Shorney<jshorney@...> wrote:   
You obviously missed the point that this is the way the software is intended to be used. In a time division multiplexing scenario it is expected that a clear slot is available for transmit use by anyone not using that slot for RX. It is the strict timing that makes it possible,

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj@...> wrote:

I still politely disagree.  
  






Avast logo

This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com



locked Re: Class C PA on FT8? #FT8

Chuck K4RGN
 

As to relevance, discussion of the internals of non-linear PAs may indeed be OT. But the OP's question was an interesting one. VHF/UHF operators occasionally see non-linear PAs for sale that were meant for FM but could be useful for some digital modes at lower prices than linear PAs.  

73 Chuck K4RGN


locked Re: wsjtx mchf and linux #AudioIssues #linux #WSJTX_config

PFA
 

Hi Bill
... :) ...


On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 02:13 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:

is the libqt5multimedia5-plugins package installed on your system?

 

Thanks it solve, now rig is connected amd wsjtx is controlling it.

 thanks a lot
--
73 paolo IU2OMT


locked Re: F/H mode malfunction or operator error? #FoxAndHound

Bill Somerville
 

On 30/01/2021 12:34, John, K9MM wrote:
I am currently using WSJT-X v2.2.2. I updated to this version on 6/26/2020. The computer is running Windows 10 Pro v20H2.

With the dearth of DXpeditions due to Covid-19, it has been months since I last used F/H mode.

Yesterday, J28PJ was using F/H on 17M. When he responded to my call, my transmit frequency stayed above +1000 instead of moving down to his frequency. I was unable to complete the QSO. I was definitely in Hound mode. Later, he was on FT4 and I had a complete QSO.

Last evening, 4U1UN had many calling him on 40M FT8, so he announced he was switching to F/H mode on 7056. He had about a dozen strong callers from NA, SA, and EU, but was making few QSOs and sending many reports repeatedly. After awhile, I stopped calling and just watched what was going on in both even and odd time slots. In many cases, he would give someone a report and they would reply, but their transmit frequency did NOT shift down to his. The QSO would not be completed, and soon the station would be calling him again. Occasionally there would be a QSO attempt where F/H correctly shifted the caller's transmit frequency and the QSO would complete, but this was less common.

Is it possible that there is an F/H incompatibility conflict between v2.2.2 and v2.3.0-rc4? Or are there this many operators who have something wrong in their setup? Strange!

73,

John, K9MM
Hi John,

is your CAT control working correctly?

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: wsjtx mchf and linux #AudioIssues #linux #WSJTX_config

Bill Somerville
 

On 30/01/2021 11:27, PFA wrote:
Hi all,
I'm try to use digital mode with my mchf.

Just download and build wsjtx v2.2.2 (last stable).
I run WSJTX then I'm trying to configure the rig.
I set Yaesu FT-817, /dev/ttyAM0, ptt on CAT, but I'm not able to select the audio interface (list is empty).

Linux detects the MCHF sound card and I'm able to hear and record the mchf audio signals. 
Running a previous version of WSJTX (2.0.0) I was able to see the sound interfaces, but CAT was failing

Any suggestion ?

some data on setup
mcHF:
hw 0.6.3
sw UHSDR 2.11.93
output DIG EXT

Linux kernel :
Linux version 5.4.0-64-generic (buildd@lgw01-amd64-030) (gcc version 7.5.0 (Ubuntu 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04)) #72~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 15 14:06:34 UTC 2021

lsusb report
Bus 001 Device 006: ID 0483:5732 STMicroelectronics
Device Descriptor:
../..
  idVendor           0x0483 STMicroelectronics
  idProduct          0x5732
  bcdDevice            2.00
  iManufacturer           1 UHSDR Community (based on STM Drivers)
  iProduct                2 USB Interface mchf
../..


--
73 paolo IU2OMT

Hi Paolo,

is the libqt5multimedia5-plugins package installed on your system?

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked F/H mode malfunction or operator error? #FoxAndHound

John, K9MM
 

I am currently using WSJT-X v2.2.2. I updated to this version on 6/26/2020. The computer is running Windows 10 Pro v20H2.

With the dearth of DXpeditions due to Covid-19, it has been months since I last used F/H mode.

Yesterday, J28PJ was using F/H on 17M. When he responded to my call, my transmit frequency stayed above +1000 instead of moving down to his frequency. I was unable to complete the QSO. I was definitely in Hound mode. Later, he was on FT4 and I had a complete QSO.

Last evening, 4U1UN had many calling him on 40M FT8, so he announced he was switching to F/H mode on 7056. He had about a dozen strong callers from NA, SA, and EU, but was making few QSOs and sending many reports repeatedly. After awhile, I stopped calling and just watched what was going on in both even and odd time slots. In many cases, he would give someone a report and they would reply, but their transmit frequency did NOT shift down to his. The QSO would not be completed, and soon the station would be calling him again. Occasionally there would be a QSO attempt where F/H correctly shifted the caller's transmit frequency and the QSO would complete, but this was less common.

Is it possible that there is an F/H incompatibility conflict between v2.2.2 and v2.3.0-rc4? Or are there this many operators who have something wrong in their setup? Strange!

73,

John, K9MM


locked wsjtx mchf and linux #AudioIssues #linux #WSJTX_config

PFA
 

Hi all,
I'm try to use digital mode with my mchf.

Just download and build wsjtx v2.2.2 (last stable).
I run WSJTX then I'm trying to configure the rig.
I set Yaesu FT-817, /dev/ttyAM0, ptt on CAT, but I'm not able to select the audio interface (list is empty).

Linux detects the MCHF sound card and I'm able to hear and record the mchf audio signals. 
Running a previous version of WSJTX (2.0.0) I was able to see the sound interfaces, but CAT was failing

Any suggestion ?

some data on setup
mcHF:
hw 0.6.3
sw UHSDR 2.11.93
output DIG EXT

Linux kernel :
Linux version 5.4.0-64-generic (buildd@lgw01-amd64-030) (gcc version 7.5.0 (Ubuntu 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04)) #72~18.04.1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jan 15 14:06:34 UTC 2021

lsusb report
Bus 001 Device 006: ID 0483:5732 STMicroelectronics
Device Descriptor:
../..
  idVendor           0x0483 STMicroelectronics
  idProduct          0x5732
  bcdDevice            2.00
  iManufacturer           1 UHSDR Community (based on STM Drivers)
  iProduct                2 USB Interface mchf
../..


--
73 paolo IU2OMT


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Austin 2E0MNV
 

>On the other hand, I've experienced many times that a station does not
answer unless I DO call them directly on their frequency. Why that is,
I've never figured out.

I can offer a simple explanation for this.  It is highly likely that, in this situation, they are experiencing very busy band conditions at their location and they can see signals all over their waterfall which you cannot see at your QTH because you are not receiving those signals.  Consequently the only place they are able to hear you is on their TX frequency which is clear at their location.  They've chosen that frequency because it's the only clear frequency they can find.

This is a possible reason why they don't answer unless you tx on their frequency.  They are not ignoring you on purpose; they just can't hear you unless you choose the same frequency as theirs.  Just to clarify, I'm not saying you should choose their frequency. We should all try to operate split.  I'm just offering an explanation as to why they might not respond unless you choose their frequency.  
--
Austin
2E0MNV


locked Re: Class C PA on FT8? #FT8

Jim Brown
 

On 1/29/2021 7:40 AM, K9RX - Gary wrote:
It is a shame that one can't run the new SS amps in at least Class B. My KPA1500 is extremely inefficient at less than legal limit
For an amp that runs on mains power (as opposed to batteries you must drag 3 miles up a trail), the only issues with efficiency are the cost of mains power and the design of the amp to handle additional dissipation without destructive failure. I have a pair of 87As on my operating desk, one of which is now "standby" for the KPA1500 sitting on top of it. The KPA is there mainly to provide legal limit on 6M, but it's built-in tuner is able to match a far wider range of SWR. My only complaint with the KPA is that it's dimensional footprint doesn't allow the use of larger fan, and the fan noise SCREAMS when I've been working MS for a while on 6M (the band where it's least efficient, and where I regularly run legal limit for weak signal work).

73, Jim K9YC


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Jim Brown
 

On 1/29/2021 7:46 AM, mchenryproj via groups.io wrote:
What you are advocating is everyone around the world trying to make contact randomly spread out all over the waterfall and all TX at the exact same time thereby filling up the slots available.
No, what smart operators are telling you is that when everyone calls you zero beat, they all QRM each other, and the guy with the biggest signal wins. I've been at this for 65 years, mostly work CW, do lots of contesting, use WSJT-X modes for its weak signal capabilities on 6M and 160M.

Methods we use on other modes are simply wrong for modes like FT8, JT65, JT9, MSK144. Folks would be marching on your QTH if you called a DXpedition on their TX frequency. Smart CW contesters call a CQing station a few hundred Hz above or below their frequency. When using MSK144 to work meteor scatter on the VHF bands, we all transmit at the same time on the same frequency because meteor pings will separate our signals.

73, Jim K9YC


locked Re: #Cat_RigControl #Cat_RigControl

KEN G4APB
 

Hi Bill,
have you had a chance to analyse that file please?

73 Ken g4apb 


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Jim Shorney
 

From the WSJT-X online manual:

"To avoid QRM from competing callers, it is usually best to answer a CQ on a different frequency from that of the CQing station. The same is true when you tail-end another QSO. Choose a Tx frequency that appears to be not in use. You might want to check the box Hold Tx Freq. "

From the Hinson document linked from same:

“The CQing station doesn’t need to say up 3 or anything else. He will decode all stations in the audio spectrum. You can call him at 300Hz or 2300Hz and it won’t make any difference. They all display. You don’t have to (and don’t want to) move to his frequency. If there is more than one station calling him, they will hopefully be spread all over the audio spectrum, not causing QRM to the station trying to make a QSO or each other. If a bunch call on his frequency, they just QRM each other and the guy CQing will be working those who are split. Additionally, if he starts a QSO with someone close to your transmit frequency, your transmitter will be disabled so you don’t cause him QRM. If you are transmitting further away, you can keep calling him and he should pick you up as he works through the list of callers.”

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Sat, 30 Jan 2021 03:47:00 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj@...> wrote:

I haven't "obviously" missed anything.  Because it can be used that way doesn't make it intended to be used that way not is it the correct thing to do just because one can.
I am done with the subject. Do as you will and clutter the band. I will continue on and make my contacts as will everyone else.
Sean is the nameKB8JNE is the call

Spell checked by the NSA.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:48 PM, Jim Shorney<jshorney@...> wrote:
You obviously missed the point that this is the way the software is intended to be used. In a time division multiplexing scenario it is expected that a clear slot is available for transmit use by anyone not using that slot for RX. It is the strict timing that makes it possible,

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj@...> wrote:

I still politely disagree.


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

neil_zampella <neilz@...>
 

Considering that the developers recommend using it in that manner must tell you something? 

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 1/29/2021 9:47 PM, mchenryproj via groups.io wrote:

I haven't "obviously" missed anything.  Because it can be used that way doesn't make it intended to be used that way not is it the correct thing to do just because one can.

I am done with the subject. Do as you will and clutter the band. I will continue on and make my contacts as will everyone else.

Sean is the name
KB8JNE is the call

Spell checked by the NSA.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:48 PM, Jim Shorney

You obviously missed the point that this is the way the software is intended to be used. In a time division multiplexing scenario it is expected that a clear slot is available for transmit use by anyone not using that slot for RX. It is the strict timing that makes it possible,

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

> I still politely disagree.




locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

mchenryproj <mchenryproj@...>
 

I haven't "obviously" missed anything.  Because it can be used that way doesn't make it intended to be used that way not is it the correct thing to do just because one can.

I am done with the subject. Do as you will and clutter the band. I will continue on and make my contacts as will everyone else.

Sean is the name
KB8JNE is the call

Spell checked by the NSA.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 8:48 PM, Jim Shorney
<jshorney@...> wrote:

You obviously missed the point that this is the way the software is intended to be used. In a time division multiplexing scenario it is expected that a clear slot is available for transmit use by anyone not using that slot for RX. It is the strict timing that makes it possible,

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

> I still politely disagree.


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Jim Shorney
 

You obviously missed the point that this is the way the software is intended to be used. In a time division multiplexing scenario it is expected that a clear slot is available for transmit use by anyone not using that slot for RX. It is the strict timing that makes it possible,

73

-Jim
NU0C

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 15:46:46 +0000 (UTC)
"mchenryproj via groups.io" <mchenryproj@...> wrote:

I still politely disagree.


locked Re: West Mountain Radio RIGblaster Blue #IssueReport #bluetooth

Sholto Fisher
 

Well I'll be ... the v2.3.0 RC4 with default buffer sizes appears to work perfectly with the RIGblaster Blue. I wonder what changed?

One thing I did need to do is disable the automatic PAN which Windows 10 configures when it detects that Bluetooth® is up. There seems to be some polling going on with the PAN which might have been causing latency in the audio.

The quick way to disable the PAN for those who may come across this post in the future:
Win+R, paste ncpa.cpl and press enter. Right-click on the Bluetooth® Network Connection and choose Disable.

Thanks for the tip about v2.3.0 RC4 Bill.

Sholto
K7TMG


locked Re: WSJT Log Problem #WSJTX_config #FT8

Bill Somerville
 

On 29/01/2021 19:08, Woody wrote:
I managed to corrupt my wsjt_log file. Along with this, somehow lost the program settings.
Managed to re-input the program settings and that is OK.
To restore the wsjt_log I downloaded an adi from LoTW and copied to my users file as wsjt_log.adi. That almost worked but have an issue.  Also tried an adi download from QSL.com log with similar poor result.

Previously, I had my "colors" set to show a new call CQ in one color and a CQ from a previously worked station in another color. Now there is no differentiation between a new and worked before CQ.
I have unchecked then rechecked "Show DXCC, grid, worked before status" and did an OK.  Also refreshed log (in colors).

CQs all show as "New Call on Band" even though they are in the log as worked.  No worked before color in Band Activity.
I have tried this with quite a number of different boxes checked with similar results.
What am I doing wrong??????????  Thanks!  Woody - KZ4AK  ...email good in QRZ.com
Hi OM,

you probably do not have your replacement log file in the right place or its name is wrong. The file name is wsjtx_log.adi and it should be in your WSJT-X log files directory ("Menu->File->Open log directory").

You can easily check if WSJT-X is reading in your ADIF log, a second or so after startup the number of worked before records processed if displayed on the main window status bar for a few seconds. If that number is zero or much lower than expected then check the location and name of the log file.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

mchenryproj <mchenryproj@...>
 

I hear you on that. I wonder if folks intentionally don't go to the low end to save that for folks using the answer first function. Low freq goes first as I remember reading. Also, folks that use the "Digital" mode instead of just USB may automatically have a tighter filtering?  That would almost make sense to keep the pass band tight but I hear ya.  I've caught a lot of unanswered DX at 2500Hz or above.

Sean

Spell checked by the NSA.

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:48 PM, K8BL BOB LIDDY
<k8bl@...> wrote:
(Name?) KB8JNE,

I don't think it happens enough that it has been a big problem
for the entire Ham community. Over time, it will naturally
work itself out as we've seen happen with other popular modes.

I've made over 26K FT8/4 QSOs since 1/2018 using no more
than 30W to wire antennas and never been stifled by any of the
Bands being "filled up" by callers to rare stations. When it's
busy, I go to the extreme Band edges and almost always can
make QSOs. What puzzles me is why so many stations plop
down right in the middle of the Bandpass clustered on top of
each other and call endlessly without success. Chaos!!

GL/73,   Bob  K8BL

On Friday, January 29, 2021, 10:47:03 AM EST, mchenryproj via groups.io <mchenryproj=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

I still politely disagree. If you are a station calling on some exotic island it would be natural to have a pileup, in any mode. What you are advocating is everyone around the world trying to make contact randomly spread out all over the waterfall and all TX at the exact same time thereby filling up the slots available.  There is a conversation on the group about how many simultaneous contacts can be going on. Doing this could potentially limit the entire usable bandwidth to a single station and the responders.

One thing people ALWAYS forget is just because you don't hear a conversation on a frequency doesn't mean that just out of your range to hear there is possibly a conversation happening especially in peak hours on a band like 40m FT8. For rare DX you are advocating who knows how many people to flood the band essentially rather than take one spot and work it until you get through.  This is tantamount to an SSB op calling and asking everyone to randomly spread out every 2.5 KHz up and down the band.

I am fully aware of the ability to receive all through the audio spectrum of a given frequency and hearing multiple responders.

Again, not a very fair usage of the band for the rest of us.  Pretty sure the whole thing has started to change into a contesting mode at this point anyway.  I too get disappointed when my responses seem to go unanswered by a rare station and I have occasionally split off but not all over the band. I tend to go slightly high or low to try there but usually only half the signal width of the calling station.  That's me being courteous if I can be.

If you could hear simultaneous responses to SSB or CW up and down the band no matter where people were actually responding, would you still advocate this behavior for SSB or CW?

I try to minimize band usage and power.  The other abuse is throwing a killowatt signal at someone to make sure you get through a pileup, but hey, we can't make people be civil I suppose.  We can only ask them to be good stewards.

I leave the rest of this conversation up to everyone else. I just don't operate that way and find it a dangerous precedent to set.

KB8JNE

Spell checked by the NSA.


>  
>  
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 3:08 AM, Reino Talarmo
> <reino.talarmo@...> wrote:
>


locked WSJT Log Problem #WSJTX_config #FT8

Woody <woody@...>
 

I managed to corrupt my wsjt_log file. Along with this, somehow lost the program settings.
Managed to re-input the program settings and that is OK.
To restore the wsjt_log I downloaded an adi from LoTW and copied to my users file as wsjt_log.adi. That almost worked but have an issue.  Also tried an adi download from QSL.com log with similar poor result. 

Previously, I had my "colors" set to show a new call CQ in one color and a CQ from a previously worked station in another color. Now there is no differentiation between a new and worked before CQ.
I have unchecked then rechecked "Show DXCC, grid, worked before status" and did an OK.  Also refreshed log (in colors). 

CQs all show as "New Call on Band" even though they are in the log as worked.  No worked before color in Band Activity.
I have tried this with quite a number of different boxes checked with similar results. 
What am I doing wrong??????????  Thanks!  Woody - KZ4AK  ...email good in QRZ.com
Current color settings:


locked Re: Delayed display of rcv'd decodes... #FT8

JP Tucson, AZ
 

Hi Mark, I am familiar with the 3 stage decode, but these are displaying after the new tx starts by 3-4 secs & causes tx msg to be incorrect -  tx1 when s/b on to tx3, or tx3 s/b tx4...




73 - John - N7GHZ

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 11:41 AM Mark Erbaugh <mark.election@...> wrote:
Recent versions of WSJT-X decode in stages, see the documentation. Clearly received signals are decoded first, even before the end of the transmit window. Weaker or covered up signals are decoded later. WSJT-X is able to take the received signal, remove the waveforms of decoded signals and re-examine what’s left, looking for other signals.

73,
Mark, N8ME


18781 - 18800 of 39971