Date   

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

Panos
 

Forgot to mention: rig IC-7300 connected via usb cable to win 10 pc, waiting for the new driver from Icom 73.


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

Panos
 

Hi dear friends, same problem here (v. 2.2.2 - 0d9b96) while answering the same station: J28PJ 17M F/H on January 29 the frequency doesn't dropped down from 1000, few minutes later I called him again and everything worked OK. Strange but looks like is a temporary error. 73 de SV1GRN


CW signals in band #GeneralGroupInfo

Williams, G (af8c)
 

Hi,
Having read the story on how RX decoding works, I think that the code gurus could do a better-than-most job on decoding CW, because of having expertise on digital correlation in the presence of noise.  Once the CW note is pulled out into the "clear"  decoding is a piece of cake.  Would people object to having their ears and brain no longer needed for copying CW?  For me, I have permanent CW dyslexia which is complicated by, like in the 160m contest, having QRM covering up the station I want to copy, and it's impossible to copy when multiple stations call me at the same time.  So I can't "RUN" in a CW contest, only S&P.

--73, Glenn, AF8C

--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

K8BL BOB LIDDY
 

P5 is the only thing I need - any Band, any Mode, any Time!!!

Please send me an e-mail if you hear it.  TNX/73,  Bob  K8BL



On Saturday, January 30, 2021, 06:54:15 PM EST, Jim Brown <k9yc@...> wrote:


On 1/30/2021 8:04 AM, Jim Shorney wrote:
> Agreed. FT8 is a DXing tool for me and has brought me to within 7 contacts needed for b. But when the prime bands are packed wall to wall with stateside ops happily working each other I don't even bother with it. When prop is there I happily go wherever I need to in order to add to my DXCC count.

Same here, on 6M for grids and on 160 to pick up new countries. I mostly
work CW and RTTY contests.

73, Jim K9YC (near San Francisco)






Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Jim Brown
 

On 1/30/2021 8:04 AM, Jim Shorney wrote:
Agreed. FT8 is a DXing tool for me and has brought me to within 7 contacts needed for b. But when the prime bands are packed wall to wall with stateside ops happily working each other I don't even bother with it. When prop is there I happily go wherever I need to in order to add to my DXCC count.
Same here, on 6M for grids and on 160 to pick up new countries. I mostly work CW and RTTY contests.

73, Jim K9YC (near San Francisco)


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

Martin G0HDB
 

On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 07:02 PM, John, K9MM wrote:

I checked my all.txt file. He was on 18095 not 18100.

John, K9MM
Ok John, understood.  Sounds like J28PJ was a 'genuine' Fox so I can't explain why your rig didn't QSY down to the Fox's frequency when you were called, unless there was some sort of temporary glitch in your CAT control.  I've never experienced any similar issues with v2.2.2 (or earlier versions) when I've been in Hound mode, although there haven't been many Foxes around recently so the opportunity to use F/H mode has been rather limited!

--
Martin G0HDB


Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

neil_zampella
 

Bwahahaha !!! :)

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 1/30/2021 4:27 PM, Jon Ermels via groups.io wrote:
Give it up Neil, as my Grandmother told me, You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Friday, January 29, 2021, 10:31:34 PM CST, neil_zampella <neilz@...> wrote:


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.








Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

Jon Ermels
 

Give it up Neil, as my Grandmother told me, You can't make a silk purse out of a sows ear.

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Friday, January 29, 2021, 10:31:34 PM CST, neil_zampella <neilz@...> wrote:


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.



  




Re: #Cat_RigControl FT-817 Hamlib issues #Cat_RigControl

Bill Somerville
 

On 30/01/2021 20:53, Brad Fuller wrote:
I am using a Yaesu FT 817 rig with my 222 ad 1296 transverters and when trying to set up Cat control on RC4 for the rig. When I press the TEST CAT button I get the following message.
Rig Failure
Hamlib Error
Command Rejected by Rig while Exchanging VFO

I also tried to get this working by selecting the FT-818, FT-857 (which worked with version 2.2.0)

The rig does work with Version 2.2.2 on a windows 10 machine.

The computer is a HP 8440p running Ubuntu  20.04.1 LTS 64 Bit
The sound card interface is a West Mountain Radio Rigblaster PNP.

Any help would be appreciated.

--
Brad Fuller
WQ5S

Hi Brad,

so I can see what is happening put the attached file into your WSJT-X configuration files directory, on Windows that is the same as the log files directory ("Menu->File->Open log directory"), restart WSJT-X and carry out he minimum steps to reproduce the issue, then quit WSJT-X. Send the file WSJT-X_RigControl.log, that you will have on your Desktop, to me for analysis (directly to g4wjs <at> classdesign <dot> com) please?

73
Bill
G4WJS.


#Cat_RigControl FT-817 Hamlib issues #Cat_RigControl

Brad Fuller
 

I am using a Yaesu FT 817 rig with my 222 ad 1296 transverters and when trying to set up Cat control on RC4 for the rig. When I press the TEST CAT button I get the following message.
Rig Failure
Hamlib Error
Command Rejected by Rig while Exchanging VFO

I also tried to get this working by selecting the FT-818, FT-857 (which worked with version 2.2.0)

The rig does work with Version 2.2.2 on a windows 10 machine.

The computer is a HP 8440p running Ubuntu  20.04.1 LTS 64 Bit
The sound card interface is a West Mountain Radio Rigblaster PNP.

Any help would be appreciated.

--
Brad Fuller
WQ5S


Re: #NewUser Duplicates #NewUser

nelson w
 

Thank you, Reino. There is a lot for me to learn but I am enjoying getting there.

73, Nelson K8DJC


Re: Tail ending my signal #FT8

William Perry
 

I agree with your. I’ve made thousands of QSO s on FT8 using 45 watts to an OCF wire. No need to crowd others out.
N3VEZ.


On Friday, January 29, 2021, mchenryproj via groups.io <mchenryproj=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:
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:
>


Re: #NewUser Duplicates #NewUser

Reino Talarmo
 

How do I see if a potential contact has already been worked?
Hi,

You can use wsjt-x Colors, see User Guide 4.7. for more details. It provides
various choices for indication of new contacts. With a suitable "new" ones
the remaining is just indication that there is CQ in the message and you may
take that as already worked.

Even more information is provided by companion program JTAlert, if you are
using Windows.

73, Reino OH3mA


Re: WSJT Log Problem #WSJTX_config #FT8

Woody
 

WOW!  Thank you Reino.   I had overlooked the "X".  I renamed wsjt_log to wsjtx_log, restarted the program and now it works great.   Such a dumb error on my part is now fixed.
Don't know how I missed that - But I did.

Woody - KZ4AK
kz4ak.com


Re: No ALC or power when transmitting #AudioIssues #FT8 #transmit

Michael
 

I seem to be up and running...so far so good.  Thank you, all, for your help and suggestions.

Best,
Michael
KE4DHK


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

John, K9MM
 

Also, you say that J28PJ was using F/H mode on 17m - if your QSO was on the standard frequency of 18100kHz then it's almost certain that J28PJ was using the MSHV multi-stream variant of WSJT-X and not the genuine F/H mode. AFAIK the latter prevents its use on the standard frequencies.

--
Martin G0HDB

I checked my all.txt file. He was on 18095 not 18100.

John, K9MM


#NewUser Duplicates #NewUser

nelson w
 

How do I see if a potential contact has already been worked?


Re: Band hopping in other modes #Cat_RigControl #FT8 #Timesync

Don Melcher
 

Band hopping in WSPR. A known bug in 2.2.2
--
Don
W6CZ/W6ZB
DM07bk


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

JP Tucson, AZ <samcat88az@...>
 

Hi Chuck,

According to my cpu & gpu monitors, the cpu has never hit 100% under normal conditions with wsjtx; most @ around 55-68%.  Even with 40-46 decodes per pass.

Duo core w/8Gb RAM helps with that, I guess.


I should add that I also wasn't on 'deep' or 'AP'.



73 - John - N7GHZ


On Sat, Jan 30, 2021, 9:47 AM Nc8q-mesh@... <nc8q-mesh@...> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 09:44 AM, JP Tucson, AZ wrote:

My cpu & gpu %'s are normal. Nothing else running in background, system not connected to internet.
JP:
I think that at least 1 core should be running at 100% during the decode.
The length of time it takes to complete the 3-pass decode is proportional to the CPU speed of that one core.
If your computer is not completing the 3rd pass withing the 15 seconds, perhaps you can reduce your audio bandwidth.
I hope this helps,
Chuck



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

Martin G0HDB
 

On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 01:08 PM, John, K9MM wrote:
...

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...
John:

That sounds like the stations calling 4U1UN weren't correctly configured to use Hound mode, with the consequence that their stations wouldn't automatically QSY down to the 4U1UN Fox's Tx frequency when they were called.

It still amazes me how many operators just don't seem to have a grasp on how to chase a Fox using Hound mode - for example, the great numbers of people who call the Fox below 1000Hz and expect the Fox to respond to their calls!

Also, you say that J28PJ was using F/H mode on 17m - if your QSO was on the standard frequency of 18100kHz then it's almost certain that J28PJ was using the MSHV multi-stream variant of WSJT-X and not the genuine F/H mode.  AFAIK the latter prevents its use on the standard frequencies.

--
Martin G0HDB

4601 - 4620 of 25839