Date   

locked Re: Some advice for newbie about these new digital modes #GeneralGroupInfo

Phil Davidson
 

Hi Bob.

 

Have a look at my website here ..  http://www.maghull-scene.co.uk/radio.htm

 

In particular, have a look at SIGIDWIKI here  https://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/Signal_Identification_Guide

 

There you will find a very comprehensive list of modes along with descriptions and sound file examples.

 

Another way to ‘hear’ samples is to run software that contains modes of interest in TX to a dummy load.

 

My preference is MixW for CW, PSK, Olivia and Hell,  WSJTX  for FT4/8 and FLDIGI for everything else.

 

Enjoy – Phil (G0DOR – Liverpool, UK)

 

 

 

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

 

From: w1av via groups.io
Sent: 02 April 2021 16:53
To: main@WSJTX.groups.io
Subject: [WSJTX] Some advice for newbie about these new digital modes #GeneralGroupInfo

 

I am older ham but newbie to the new digital modes.  Recently got back into the hobby and got myself a new IC 7300 with LDG auto tuner Z-100 plus. Antenna is G5RV. So far been successful with WSJTx running FT8. Made a bunch of contacts on 20, and 60 meters the past day and a half. I would like to try out PSK32 but not familiar with it. I got out of the hobby just as PSK32 and APRS were coming out, around 2000.  So FT8 seems to be the rage now and I am curious about some of these other modes that will allow a little longer QSO. However I dont know what the new modes SOUND like so I cant find them on radio. And I know some modes  people don't use much now since FT8. So if anybody could give me generalized info on which modes are good for communicating and which ones to avoid. And also how to set them up on WSJTx. I have computer connected to radio via a double shielded double toroid cable. No problems with it. I also have the USB driver for the IC 7300 installed and working. And Windows 10 sound setting seem to be good.  So I suppose the hard part is out of the way. I like the idea of running these modes cause I can use low power.  Thanks, W1AV Bob

 


locked Re: Some advice for newbie about these new digital modes #GeneralGroupInfo

Emory Haines WM3M
 

Tune to 14.070 USB, PSK31 will be there. Try downloading FLDGI at http://www.w1hkj.com
It is easy to use and docs, help files are good.  An even simpler program to try is digipan, google it.
With the USB cable connected to the Ic-7300 and your computer both will work, nothing else needed.
Good luck  73  Emory  WM3M


locked Some advice for newbie about these new digital modes #GeneralGroupInfo

w1av
 

I am older ham but newbie to the new digital modes.  Recently got back into the hobby and got myself a new IC 7300 with LDG auto tuner Z-100 plus. Antenna is G5RV. So far been successful with WSJTx running FT8. Made a bunch of contacts on 20, and 60 meters the past day and a half. I would like to try out PSK32 but not familiar with it. I got out of the hobby just as PSK32 and APRS were coming out, around 2000.  So FT8 seems to be the rage now and I am curious about some of these other modes that will allow a little longer QSO. However I dont know what the new modes SOUND like so I cant find them on radio. And I know some modes  people don't use much now since FT8. So if anybody could give me generalized info on which modes are good for communicating and which ones to avoid. And also how to set them up on WSJTx. I have computer connected to radio via a double shielded double toroid cable. No problems with it. I also have the USB driver for the IC 7300 installed and working. And Windows 10 sound setting seem to be good.  So I suppose the hard part is out of the way. I like the idea of running these modes cause I can use low power.  Thanks, W1AV Bob


locked Re: FT-950 Flashing Red on Transmit #WSJTX_config #FT8

Dave Garber
 

also make sure fake it is off.   and if your frequency was supposed to 5358, then that is still too high.  your transmission at 1600 hz puts you out of band, i beleive,   5357, and 1600hz keeps you within the allowed bandplan

Dave Garber
VE3WEJ / VE3IE


On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 9:56 AM Dave Garber via groups.io <ve3wej=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
i thought north america all used 5357, while trying to stay in the 1500hz area when transmitting.   that is what I have seen traffic on.    what is up at 5385??  is that europe???
Dave Garber
VE3WEJ / VE3IE


On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:01 AM Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
On 02/04/2021 10:59, pineapple Lane via groups.io wrote:
Been trying to figure our how to configure my FT-950 for 60 meters FT8.
I am using MFJ USB radio interface. WSJT-X is working just great on all frequencies.
I have programmed WSJTx for frequency 5385.
Reception is great with a lot of waterfall activity at night and I want to join and QSO all you fine hams.
But on transmit all I get is the blinking RED light.
Is there a way to do this without doing the "MARS MOD?"
---Layne AE1N

Hi Layne,

there are a couple of possible options. I believe some of these rigs that restrict 60m operation on transmit may work if you set them up for USB rather than USB-DATA, that will require settings changes for 60m in both WSJT-X and on the rig. Perhaps an easier solution is to make a new configuration in WSJT-X with rig control disabled "Settings->Radio->Rig->None", you will need to ensure that PTT works since CAT PTT will not be available. PTT via RTS is probably best if you have a CAT interface. Once you have set up such a configuration you can switch to it when you want to operate 60m, all that is need on the rig is to switch to a suitable memory channel.

73
Bill
G4WJS.








locked Re: FT-950 Flashing Red on Transmit #WSJTX_config #FT8

Dave Garber
 

i thought north america all used 5357, while trying to stay in the 1500hz area when transmitting.   that is what I have seen traffic on.    what is up at 5385??  is that europe???
Dave Garber
VE3WEJ / VE3IE


On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 8:01 AM Bill Somerville <g4wjs@...> wrote:
On 02/04/2021 10:59, pineapple Lane via groups.io wrote:
Been trying to figure our how to configure my FT-950 for 60 meters FT8.
I am using MFJ USB radio interface. WSJT-X is working just great on all frequencies.
I have programmed WSJTx for frequency 5385.
Reception is great with a lot of waterfall activity at night and I want to join and QSO all you fine hams.
But on transmit all I get is the blinking RED light.
Is there a way to do this without doing the "MARS MOD?"
---Layne AE1N

Hi Layne,

there are a couple of possible options. I believe some of these rigs that restrict 60m operation on transmit may work if you set them up for USB rather than USB-DATA, that will require settings changes for 60m in both WSJT-X and on the rig. Perhaps an easier solution is to make a new configuration in WSJT-X with rig control disabled "Settings->Radio->Rig->None", you will need to ensure that PTT works since CAT PTT will not be available. PTT via RTS is probably best if you have a CAT interface. Once you have set up such a configuration you can switch to it when you want to operate 60m, all that is need on the rig is to switch to a suitable memory channel.

73
Bill
G4WJS.





locked Re: FT8 and 73: #FT8

Jon Ermels
 

I like a 73.  I got tired of logging after WSJT reminded to and then get Lids sending me a "Not in my Log" from eQSL members.  

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Thursday, April 1, 2021, 07:04:37 PM CDT, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:




> but by not logging a QSO when you send your RR73 you're potentially
> not logging perfectly valid QSOs.

Better stated as "send your RR73 *or* RRR" ....

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2021-04-01 6:40 PM, Martin G0HDB wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 02:14 PM, Charlie Hoffman wrote:
>
>>
>> I send  RR73.
>> When I receive a 73 then the QSO is complete.
>> If I don't receive a 73 then I consider the contact incomplete.
>> I don't log a QSO until I receive a 73 from the other station.
>> My log - my rules.
>
> It is indeed your log and you can enter QSOs into it on whatever basis you choose, but by not logging a QSO when you send your RR73 you're potentially not logging perfectly valid QSOs.  The final 73 that you await/require before logging a QSO may be a nice courtesy but is completely superfluous as far as the completion of the exchange of the essential information required for the QSO is concerned.
>
> --
> Martin G0HDB
>






locked Re: #linux #linux

Bill W1PA
 

I'm having a similar issue with a microKEYER II, Ubuntu, and a 910H.  I had a working configuration on Win10, but on a smaller laptop with a small display.  Tried to move everything over to a larger Ubuntu laptop, and although the microkeyer and rig are talking through CAT (e.g. freq stays synced, i get a good "green" CAT test button), the display on the microKEYER is blank.  I've gone through the configuration of mxuhd to no avail. I put my user in dialout, set permissions, etc. This appears to be the only reference I can find to a working configuration with linux and the microKEYER: https://qsl.net/oh7fes/wsjtx.htm

Does anyone have Ubuntu, microKEYER, an Icom, and wsjt-x playing nice?

Is there any performance difference in linux to justify the extra hoops to jump through?  (i.e. should I just succumb and put Win10 on the bigger laptop)?

b


locked Re: FT-950 Flashing Red on Transmit #WSJTX_config #FT8

Bill Somerville
 

On 02/04/2021 10:59, pineapple Lane via groups.io wrote:
Been trying to figure our how to configure my FT-950 for 60 meters FT8.
I am using MFJ USB radio interface. WSJT-X is working just great on all frequencies.
I have programmed WSJTx for frequency 5385.
Reception is great with a lot of waterfall activity at night and I want to join and QSO all you fine hams.
But on transmit all I get is the blinking RED light.
Is there a way to do this without doing the "MARS MOD?"
---Layne AE1N

Hi Layne,

there are a couple of possible options. I believe some of these rigs that restrict 60m operation on transmit may work if you set them up for USB rather than USB-DATA, that will require settings changes for 60m in both WSJT-X and on the rig. Perhaps an easier solution is to make a new configuration in WSJT-X with rig control disabled "Settings->Radio->Rig->None", you will need to ensure that PTT works since CAT PTT will not be available. PTT via RTS is probably best if you have a CAT interface. Once you have set up such a configuration you can switch to it when you want to operate 60m, all that is need on the rig is to switch to a suitable memory channel.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Bill Somerville
 

On 02/04/2021 12:30, groups@... wrote:
If the contact is allowed to fully complete then the final reports sent by each station will be the ones logged.
Hi Roger,

that's not correct, you have no way of knowing which report transmission is copied when repeats are necessary. For example your QSO partner could be acknowledging a prior report you sent, not the last one you sent. They may never hear the last one you sent.

When analysing these situations you have to assume that when there are repeats on both sides; then which message copies are actually received cannot be certain.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked FT-950 Flashing Red on Transmit #WSJTX_config #FT8

---Layne AE1N
 

Been trying to figure our how to configure my FT-950 for 60 meters FT8.
I am using MFJ USB radio interface. WSJT-X is working just great on all frequencies.
I have programmed WSJTx for frequency 5385.
Reception is great with a lot of waterfall activity at night and I want to join and QSO all you fine hams.
But on transmit all I get is the blinking RED light.
Is there a way to do this without doing the "MARS MOD?"
---Layne AE1N


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Roger
 

On 02/04/2021 11:11, Tom Melvin wrote:
Another reason - contests - you send +05 on the repeat it changed to -06 - you log -06 but sender logs +05 as the report.
Points will be lost.
This was one of the main reasons that a large number of ft4/ft8 contests in the UK no longer require contest mode.
Regards
Tom
GM8MJV
If the contact is allowed to fully complete then the final reports sent by each station will be the ones logged.

If the contact is logged before completion there are going to be these discrepancies.

I've written to the RSGB about a couple of problems with their FT4 contest rules but they couldn't even be bothered to acknowledge my email.

I understand contest stations strive to raise their contact rate but those taking these short cuts deserve to lose points.

Roger
GW4HZA


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Tom Melvin
 

Another reason - contests - you send +05 on the repeat it changed to -06 - you log -06 but sender logs +05 as the report.

Points will be lost.

This was one of the main reasons that a large number of ft4/ft8 contests in the UK no longer require contest mode.

Regards

Tom
GM8MJV

On 2 Apr 2021, at 01:09, Jim Brown <k9yc@...> wrote:

On 4/1/2021 3:33 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
if an amended signal report is sent in repeats as you cannot be certain which signal report your QSO partner copied.
Why does that matter?

73, Jim K9YC



locked Re: No PTT Icom Pro III #Cat_RigControl

Bill Somerville
 

On 02/04/2021 03:55, Jim Keller wrote:
Martin, the PC that I use for FT-8 is dedicated for ham use only. No email.  Very limited browsing.   I've turned off the notifications so I don't have a problem with beeps sneaking out.

73

Jim  W6yxy
Jim,

you are using a SignaLink USB which contains a sound card, there's no need to have the SignaLink USB sound card as the either of the Windows default sound devices (Default, or Default Communications). Assign the default sounds to and from your PC built in sound card, so there is no need to suppress sounds from the operating system or other applications like your occasionally used web browser.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: No PTT Icom Pro III #Cat_RigControl

Jim Keller
 

Martin, the PC that I use for FT-8 is dedicated for ham use only. No email.  Very limited browsing.   I've turned off the notifications so I don't have a problem with beeps sneaking out.

73

Jim  W6yxy


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Lance Collister, W7GJ
 

Think you will have a 2m beam up in 3 weeks? Just asking... ;-) GL and VY 73, Lance

P.S. - this "report freezing" was a big improvement when listening for responses in the AVERAGE window, and is consistent with the way Q65 works. You can't average out over the transmissions if they change content each time...

On 4/1/2021 20:43:01, Chris Hannagan wrote:
I was operating 30 metres FT8 this morning and believe that a behavior has changed in sending the signal reports.
When a station didn't copy the TX2 sent report and responded again with TX1, each time you resent the callers signal report in previous releases, the report updated to the latest decoded report.
The report now appears to no longer update to the last decode and continues to send the original report.
I'm not sure if this is a problem but it is a behavior that seems to have changed.
Call 1st is enabled and I noticed this on several stations that were calling.
Chris zl7dx

--
Lance Collister, W7GJ(ex WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8, E51SIX, 3D2LR, 5W0GJ, E6M, TX5K, KH8/W7GJ, V6M, T8GJ, VK9CGJ, VK9XGJ, C21GJ, CP1GJ, S79GJ, TX7MB)
P.O. Box 73
Frenchtown, MT 59834-0073
USA
TEL: (406) 626-5728
QTH: DN27ub
URL: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj
Skype: lanceW7GJ
2m DXCC #11 - 6m DXCC #815 - FFMA #7

Interested in 6m EME? Ask me about subscribing to the new Magic Band EME
email group, or just fill in the request box at the bottom of my web
page (above)!


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Bill Somerville
 

On 02/04/2021 01:22, Jim Brown wrote:
On 4/1/2021 5:16 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
If that QSO specific information is a signal report then it is hard to confirm receipt of a report that has two values, i.e. the log entries may not match for critical QSO information.

That still makes no sense.

Jim,

if you made a QSO and received a QSL with a different report recorded than the one you sent would you query it? Yes I know QSL cards don't record received reports but electronic QSLs do.

Here's and example, your QSO partner receiving two different reports over three periods may reply with R+report to each but you could receive just the first or just the second, so you have no idea, in this case, which report is being confirmed. Which report sent do you log?

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Jim Brown
 

On 4/1/2021 5:16 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
If that QSO specific information is a signal report then it is hard to confirm receipt of a report that has two values, i.e. the log entries may not match for critical QSO information.
That still makes no sense.
TBH the most important factor is in modes that use averaging to increase sensitivity of decoding there changing the report defeats the averaging as the bits change significantly (the report bits, the FEC bits, and the CRC). Keeping the sent report constant for each QSO seems reasonable in all cases as a default procedure.
This DOES make sense.

73, Jim K9YC


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Bill Somerville
 

On 02/04/2021 01:09, Jim Brown wrote:
On 4/1/2021 3:33 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
if an amended signal report is sent in repeats as you cannot be certain which signal report your QSO partner copied.

Why does that matter?

73, Jim K9YC

Hi Jim,

because most definitions of a complete QSO include exchange and confirmation of receipt of callsigns and a QSO specific piece of information. If that QSO specific information is a signal report then it is hard to confirm receipt of a report that has two values, i.e. the log entries may not match for critical QSO information.

TBH the most important factor is in modes that use averaging to increase sensitivity of decoding there changing the report defeats the averaging as the bits change significantly (the report bits, the FEC bits, and the CRC). Keeping the sent report constant for each QSO seems reasonable in all cases as a default procedure.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Re: #FT8 FT8 signal reports 2.4.0-rc4 #FT8

Jim Brown
 

On 4/1/2021 3:33 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
if an amended signal report is sent in repeats as you cannot be certain which signal report your QSO partner copied.
Why does that matter?

73, Jim K9YC


locked Re: FT8 and 73: #FT8

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

but by not logging a QSO when you send your RR73 you're potentially not logging perfectly valid QSOs.
Better stated as "send your RR73 *or* RRR" ....

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2021-04-01 6:40 PM, Martin G0HDB wrote:
On Thu, Apr 1, 2021 at 02:14 PM, Charlie Hoffman wrote:


I send  RR73.
When I receive a 73 then the QSO is complete.
If I don't receive a 73 then I consider the contact incomplete.
I don't log a QSO until I receive a 73 from the other station.
My log - my rules.
It is indeed your log and you can enter QSOs into it on whatever basis you choose, but by not logging a QSO when you send your RR73 you're potentially not logging perfectly valid QSOs.  The final 73 that you await/require before logging a QSO may be a nice courtesy but is completely superfluous as far as the completion of the exchange of the essential information required for the QSO is concerned.
--
Martin G0HDB

16341 - 16360 of 40097