Date   

locked CAT/Logging Error #FT8

Lance Collister, W7GJ
 

Recently I have been getting the attached error during a contact.  The posting of these errors prevent me from logging  the contact until I dismiss each error message. I made a new file folder and put a  blank text file in it and am hoping that solves the problem.  However, I would think that the program should do this automatically if it is going to hang up when it doesn't find it.  I am using Windows 10 and WSJT-X Version 2.4.0 rc-4.  TNX and GL!

I also am now unable to use CAT with my FT-857 and RIGblaster Plug and Play.  I think this worked before. Now I get the following error:

Hamlib error: Protocol error

read_block(): Timed out 0.209065 seconds after 0 chars

rig_get_vfo: returning -8(Protocol error

read_block called

read_block(): Timed out 0.209065 seconds after 0 chars

read_block(): Timed out 0.209065 seconds after 0 chars)rig.c(2591):rig_get_vfo return(-8) while testing getting current VFO


Timestamp: 2021-05-21T12:19:51.351Z

The PTT works fine, so I have been selecting "NONE" for the radio as a work-around.  I don't know if this is a problem with my cables or Hamlib...

VY 73, Lance



--

Lance Collister, W7GJ(ex WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8, E51SIX, 3D2LR, 5W0GJ, E6M, TX5K, KH8/W7GJ, V6M, T8GJ, VK9CGJ, VK9XGJ, C21GJ, CP1GJ, S79GJ, FO/W7GJ, 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

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


locked Re: Q: What is this traffic/mode? #modes

Tom V. Segalstad
 

Hi Klaus,

 

This looks like a false decode.

When the signal strength is so low as -21 dB (or lower), you must be suspicious.

 

Here is a false decode I got today on 6 meters, even at -15 dB:

091115 -15  2.0 2064 ~  NJ4WMH HJ2JUR/R R GD98

 

And here is one false decode with -18 dB which I got yesterday night, apparently from New Zealand, but we had no propagation from Norway to New Zealand on 6 meters:

221345 -18  0.5 1210 ~  TU; 4V6CMZ ZL0POH 559 0056

 

73 from Tom, LA4LN

 

 

Fra: Klaus Werner via groups.io
Sendt: fredag 21. mai 2021 kl. 12.22
Til: main@WSJTX.groups.io
Emne: [WSJTX] Q: What is this traffic/mode? #modes

 

On the bands from time to time I see messages like the one in the screen snip. Only ever one side of the exchange, if it is an exchange. The call signs are very similar to amateur radio calls but can’t find them on QRZ.com or general web search. What are they?

Thanks,

Klaus

G7RTI

 

 


--
Tom (LA4LN)


locked Re: Q: What is this traffic/mode? #modes

neil_zampella
 

Unless there was some sort of contest going on, with the dB of -21, I suspect false decode.

Neil, KN3ILZ

On 5/21/2021 4:24 AM, Klaus Werner via groups.io wrote:

On the bands from time to time I see messages like the one in the screen snip. Only ever one side of the exchange, if it is an exchange. The call signs are very similar to amateur radio calls but can’t find them on QRZ.com or general web search. What are they?

Thanks,

Klaus

G7RTI

 





locked FT8 CQ as for MSK144? #FT8

Aurelian <aurelian.bria@...>
 

hi,

is it any way to call CQ on FT8 in he same way as for MSK144?...so people can answer on a different frequency. This will be very useful especially now with 50 MHz Es openings when everybody hears everybody. During second thursday activity contests in EU we would need such feature.
73! SA0CAN


locked Re: Calling with TX2 #FT8

Pat
 

I do not log qso,s with no grid information 


locked Re: Callsign piracy, is there a solution? #FT8 #WSPR

Roger
 

On 21/05/2021 12:14, Dave Garber wrote:
years ago, some software had your callsign embedded in it, by the
programmer. Although it could be hacked ( in those days), it was never a
need to enter your call in a box. so no changes could be made on the
fly. difficulty was if you changed calls, or had a special event call, you
had to ask for another copy of that software.
Going this way would require each download to be registered, before you
could download. a lot of work for the many thousands using free software
today.
Dave Garber
VE3WEJ / VE3IE
Unfortunately it's all to easy to replace a call with someone else's in the WSJT-X standard messages. I've been pirated a couple of times by a local amateur who was trying to take over an exchange but fortunately I was able to mitigate it by restarting the contact again shortly afterwards.

Piracy of calls has been going on since before I was born and will continue until our hobby is terminated.

The biggest risk is from misbehaviour by these culprits.

73
Roger
GW4HZA


locked Re: Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

Brad, K8ZM
 

RR73 !!

Brad, N8GLS

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S10 "not so" Smartphone


-------- Original message --------
From: "Al Groff via groups.io" <al.k0vm@...>
Date: 5/21/21 9:23 AM (GMT-05:00)
To: main@WSJTX.groups.io
Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

Its easier to end an FT8 QSO than it is to end this topic.
AL, K0VM


On 5/21/2021 6:52 AM, Jon Ermels via groups.io wrote:
Just because WSJT says to log a QSO doesn't mean the other guy got your report. You still have to pay attention. I got an email at least once every two weeks or so from someone demanding I get into my eQSL out box and delete a QSO because it was NOT IN MY LOG. When I was new at this I just logged everything WSJT reminded me to. Signals fade rapidly with FT8 so just because you are satisfied doesn't mean the other guy is.

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Thursday, May 20, 2021, 07:09:08 PM CDT, Larry Menzel <pensionguy@...> wrote:


I had always assumed that if the software logs the contact that both sides of the exchange are satisfied.

No?

If I don't get a RR73 or something similar and WSJT doesn't ask me to OK logging the contact, I assume that the QSO was incomplete.

FWIW

Larry, W0PR

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:49 AM Martin G0HDB <marting0hdb@...> wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:46 PM, Kermit Lehman wrote:
 
There's been a lot of discussion since FT8 came out about when a QSO is complete.  Often it comes down to whether a final 73 is necessary or not following an RR73 or RRR.  The experts and logicians claim it's not.  For those of us out in the trenches, it is.
              
 
I have a great many QSOs that go like this one:
 
CQ PC2K JO22
PC2K AB1J FN42
AB1J PC2K -16
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot -  did PC2K send RR73 or RRR here?)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - if I heard PC2K send a CQ here, I would have logged the QSO, making the assumption he was happy with the QSO)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - at this point I gave up)
 
 
A few minutes later I heard PC2K call CQ again.  I didn't call him as I figured our chances of a QSO were iffy and I'd moved on.
 
Next time I looked in eQSL I found I had one from PC2K for the "QSO."   He must have sent an RR73 and logged the QSO without a 73 from me.  
 
I rejected it because the QSO ended without closure on my end.  
 
What should I have done?  What would you do?
 
Log it along with a comment that the QSO wasn't complete because you hadn't received the other station's RRR or RR73 (or perhaps just even a 73) because of QRM, QSB or whatever else might have affected your reception of their final confirmation, which might well have been sent so the other station would (presumably) have deemed the QSO to be complete and would have logged it.

--
Martin G0HDB







    


locked Re: Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

Al Groff
 

Its easier to end an FT8 QSO than it is to end this topic.
AL, K0VM


On 5/21/2021 6:52 AM, Jon Ermels via groups.io wrote:

Just because WSJT says to log a QSO doesn't mean the other guy got your report. You still have to pay attention. I got an email at least once every two weeks or so from someone demanding I get into my eQSL out box and delete a QSO because it was NOT IN MY LOG. When I was new at this I just logged everything WSJT reminded me to. Signals fade rapidly with FT8 so just because you are satisfied doesn't mean the other guy is.

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Thursday, May 20, 2021, 07:09:08 PM CDT, Larry Menzel <pensionguy@...> wrote:


I had always assumed that if the software logs the contact that both sides of the exchange are satisfied.

No?

If I don't get a RR73 or something similar and WSJT doesn't ask me to OK logging the contact, I assume that the QSO was incomplete.

FWIW

Larry, W0PR

On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:49 AM Martin G0HDB <marting0hdb@...> wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:46 PM, Kermit Lehman wrote:
 
There's been a lot of discussion since FT8 came out about when a QSO is complete.  Often it comes down to whether a final 73 is necessary or not following an RR73 or RRR.  The experts and logicians claim it's not.  For those of us out in the trenches, it is.
              
 
I have a great many QSOs that go like this one:
 
CQ PC2K JO22
PC2K AB1J FN42
AB1J PC2K -16
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot -  did PC2K send RR73 or RRR here?)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - if I heard PC2K send a CQ here, I would have logged the QSO, making the assumption he was happy with the QSO)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - at this point I gave up)
 
 
A few minutes later I heard PC2K call CQ again.  I didn't call him as I figured our chances of a QSO were iffy and I'd moved on.
 
Next time I looked in eQSL I found I had one from PC2K for the "QSO."   He must have sent an RR73 and logged the QSO without a 73 from me.  
 
I rejected it because the QSO ended without closure on my end.  
 
What should I have done?  What would you do?
 
Log it along with a comment that the QSO wasn't complete because you hadn't received the other station's RRR or RR73 (or perhaps just even a 73) because of QRM, QSB or whatever else might have affected your reception of their final confirmation, which might well have been sent so the other station would (presumably) have deemed the QSO to be complete and would have logged it.

--
Martin G0HDB










locked Re: Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

William Smith
 

On May 20, 2021, at 8:59 PM, Ted <k7trkradio@...> wrote:

I’m on my hands and knees here….pls take this topic to:


At the end of every message, there's a 'mute this topic' link, shoudl anyone want to take advantage of it.

73, Willie N1JBJ



locked Re: Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

Chip
 

1. My log is just that, MY log. I will put in it what I choose. For example I log a 'contact' with the NCS when I participate in a net. I log incomplete QSOs because as they did in the old days, having a log of activity can be important (i.e., to resolve potential RFI issues).
2. You do not have to QSL any contact with me. I'd love it if you did, but you don't have to. One of the problems with eQSL is that it notifies you of a potential contact. I've seen some pretty weird requests there. It is on your decision how to, or not to, acknowledge a contact.
3. If you're not a moderator then please don't demand that I don't participate in a discussion on this list (or any other).
4. Please consider having a great day.

--Chip/N1MIE

On May 21, 2021, at 07:53, Jon Ermels via groups.io <n0igu@...> wrote:

Just because WSJT says to log a QSO doesn't mean the other guy got your report. You still have to pay attention. I got an email at least once every two weeks or so from someone demanding I get into my eQSL out box and delete a QSO because it was NOT IN MY LOG. When I was new at this I just logged everything WSJT reminded me to. Signals fade rapidly with FT8 so just because you are satisfied doesn't mean the other guy is.


locked Re: Successfully ending an FT QSO #FT8

Jon Ermels
 

Just because WSJT says to log a QSO doesn't mean the other guy got your report. You still have to pay attention. I got an email at least once every two weeks or so from someone demanding I get into my eQSL out box and delete a QSO because it was NOT IN MY LOG. When I was new at this I just logged everything WSJT reminded me to. Signals fade rapidly with FT8 so just because you are satisfied doesn't mean the other guy is.

73 de NØIGU Jon


On Thursday, May 20, 2021, 07:09:08 PM CDT, Larry Menzel <pensionguy@...> wrote:


I had always assumed that if the software logs the contact that both sides of the exchange are satisfied.

No?

If I don't get a RR73 or something similar and WSJT doesn't ask me to OK logging the contact, I assume that the QSO was incomplete.

FWIW

Larry, W0PR


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 9:49 AM Martin G0HDB <marting0hdb@...> wrote:
On Wed, May 19, 2021 at 09:46 PM, Kermit Lehman wrote:
 
There's been a lot of discussion since FT8 came out about when a QSO is complete.  Often it comes down to whether a final 73 is necessary or not following an RR73 or RRR.  The experts and logicians claim it's not.  For those of us out in the trenches, it is.
              
 
I have a great many QSOs that go like this one:
 
CQ PC2K JO22
PC2K AB1J FN42
AB1J PC2K -16
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot -  did PC2K send RR73 or RRR here?)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - if I heard PC2K send a CQ here, I would have logged the QSO, making the assumption he was happy with the QSO)
PC2K AB1J R-12
                           (empty time slot - at this point I gave up)
 
 
A few minutes later I heard PC2K call CQ again.  I didn't call him as I figured our chances of a QSO were iffy and I'd moved on.
 
Next time I looked in eQSL I found I had one from PC2K for the "QSO."   He must have sent an RR73 and logged the QSO without a 73 from me.  
 
I rejected it because the QSO ended without closure on my end.  
 
What should I have done?  What would you do?
 
Log it along with a comment that the QSO wasn't complete because you hadn't received the other station's RRR or RR73 (or perhaps just even a 73) because of QRM, QSB or whatever else might have affected your reception of their final confirmation, which might well have been sent so the other station would (presumably) have deemed the QSO to be complete and would have logged it.

--
Martin G0HDB






locked Re: Callsign piracy, is there a solution? #FT8 #WSPR

Dave Garber
 

years ago, some software had your callsign embedded in it, by the programmer.   Although it could be hacked ( in those days), it was never a need to enter your call in a box.   so no changes could be made on the fly.  difficulty was if you changed calls, or had a special event call, you had to ask for another copy of that software.   

Going this way would require each download to be registered, before you could download.   a lot of work for the many thousands using free software today.


Dave Garber
VE3WEJ / VE3IE


On Thu, May 20, 2021 at 8:07 PM Paul <sthcsttkd@...> wrote:
I'd like to think that it's an accident but really, there are no other VK0 operators down here, I looked up VK5PD and he isn't in that grid. It would be s struggle to mess up a call by that much so I don't see any other possibility. It could be pure accident but what are the odds. The same thing has been happening on FT8, and I haven't been on it at all. Even my VK2 callsign has been pirated on FT8. There has to be a better way of stopping this behaviour, it's sad to think anyone would be doing this kind of thing deliberately.
73,
Paul



locked Re: Q: What is this traffic/mode? #modes

Bill Somerville
 

On 21/05/2021 10:24, Klaus Werner via groups.io wrote:

On the bands from time to time I see messages like the one in the screen snip. Only ever one side of the exchange, if it is an exchange. The call signs are very similar to amateur radio calls but can’t find them on QRZ.com or general web search. What are they?

Thanks,

Klaus

G7RTI

Hi Klaus,

the decoders in WSJT-X are working close to the theoretical limits of sensitivity, that necessarily means that occasional false decodes occur. The nature of the compression used to get the utmost utilization of the limited number of payload message bits means that random false decodes will have similarities to valid messages. You must apply some common sense and realize that such decodes are not due to transmitted messages, often a gridsquare that doesn't match the geographical location of the message sender is an obvious clue, also message forms like the above contest message decoded when no contest activity is expected is another indication of a false decode.

As has been said before, if there are no false decodes then the decoders are not working at their optimum sensitivity.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Q: What is this traffic/mode? #modes

Klaus Werner
 

On the bands from time to time I see messages like the one in the screen snip. Only ever one side of the exchange, if it is an exchange. The call signs are very similar to amateur radio calls but can’t find them on QRZ.com or general web search. What are they?

Thanks,

Klaus

G7RTI

 


locked Re: Calling with TX2 #FT8

Lou VK3ALB <vk3alb@...>
 

Thanks Kari,

Yes that's exactly what I was looking for. I did check the manual but obviously missed it.

Regards

Lou
VK3ALB


locked Re: Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS, IC-7300 Audio working, but no CAT control #WSJTX_config

Freddy ON7VQ
 

I use Ubuntu 20.10 with IC-7300 and these settings, worked immediately.
Good luck, 73
Freddy, ON7VQ


Op vr 21 mei 2021 om 03:48 schreef Jim Shorney <jshorney@...>:


Actually that is not necessary either IF you have a good understanding of your radio and how it works and carefully set your levels. But I understand that is beyond the technical skill set of a lot of ops.

73

-Jim
NU0C


On Thu, 20 May 2021 14:07:10 -0400
"Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@...> wrote:

> In addition to CAT control you need to set Split Operation to Rig or Fake-it in WSJT-x to help keep the signal clean.
>

>
> From: main@WSJTX.groups.io [mailto:main@WSJTX.groups.io] On Behalf Of Gary - AG0N
> Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2021 1:12 PM
> To: main@wsjtx.groups.io
> Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS, IC-7300 Audio working, but no CAT control #WSJTX_config
>

>

>
>
>
>
>
> On May 20, 2021, at 6:03 AM, Dave Garber <ve3wej@...> wrote:
>

>
> cat is only required if you need the saftware to change the bands on the radio , so logging gets on the correct band...  if you are careful, cat could be left off…
>

>
> Only partially correct.  Band changes can be done manually as always.  But keeping the signal clean is more complicated, and CAT control helps a lot there.  With CAT, your transmitter is shifted an amount and direction to help eliminate transmitting harmonic signals with your rig each time you transmit.  Don’t be “that guy” who is putting out several versions of his signal, causing interference to others up and down the band.
>

>
> Gary - AG0N
>

>





locked Re: Calling with TX2 #FT8

Karza
 

Lou,

Is there any way to skip TX1 and start with TX2 when responding to a station calling CQ?

yes. It's in the manual: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjtx-doc/wsjtx-main-2.3.1.html#_standard_exchange

( Double-click the Tx1 control under Now or Next to toggle use of the Tx2 message rather than Tx1 to start a QSO. )


73's de Kari, oh2gqc


locked Re: Smoothing the ALC adjustment in Yaesu FTDX-10 #WSJTX_config

Jon Eyre
 



Sent from Jon's mobile.

On 20 May 2021 20:22, Mike 2E0HCE <mike@...> wrote:
Hi Bruce, 
Also have the ft dx 10 and with latest firmware VO1-08 which has default "Preset" and can be enabled via front screen VFO-A  short cut to Mode, Preset is bottom right hand corner
to activate the Grey box click on it to turn it Blue and also Data-U for both VFO's, if you hold the Preset while Blue you will get another screen pop up with Preset settings, all are
default except RPTT Select - DAKY and RPort Gain - 19 and make sure your WSJT-X Settings are CAT for PTT Method, Mode - Data/Pkts and Split Operation - Rig
so the ft dx 10 can TX on offset freq of choosing.   The ALC is below 1 ( you do need to adjust your PC output mic setting for transmit quiet low, mine is 6) Never wanders up to 3 or 4 
Radio front screen settings ATT - off, IPO on 3kHz and AGC Off. and Span set to 10k to view signal on Multi via oscilloscope. I use ldg at 100 pro 2 with 10 pin power and sense cable to control the ldg from the tune button on the ft dx 10, which tunes at 10w to 1.1:1 and contacting US, Cuba, Pureto Rico, all over Europe, Oman, Kuwait and Asia Russia...(I am in the UK.) on Wolf River Coil SB 1000 ( i do also have DX Commander Classic 10 ABV 6 band resonant antenna... ) and the ft dx 10 is fine with ALC, i have tried the method of using PWR on the front GUI of WSJT-X but it is not reliable, or able to control the ALC or in some cases drops power by more than 5w.  If you do have unsettled ALC adjust the Preset RPort Gain by increments of 1 up or down depending on band freq you are using... which you will encounter either in FT 8, FT 4 or JT65 are all slight different. 

I have like yourself one monitor for the ft dx 10 and two 27" monitor in dual setup stand... but i use omnirig ver 1.9 to control WSJT-X for Radio Rig... as i use JT Alert, with Log4om 2 and Gridtracker all communicating, with eQSL but also use QRZ and everything works fine with RSP1A via MFJ 1708B SDR via CRTL using SDRUno 1.42.. when you set the UDP protocols... at present Omnirig latest version will not work with all these programs.  FT DX 10 ver 1.6 firmware was very buggy to say the least.  Hope you get Green Clean signal low ALC lol 73
Mike H
2E0HCE
Greetings from the UK
Keep Safe
until a fix or newer version is out.. 


locked Re: Just starting to use WSJTX...have been using FLDIGI successfully in the past. #Cat_RigControl

Gary - AG0N
 



On May 20, 2021, at 8:48 AM, Walter Egenmaier <wegenmaier@...> wrote:

I'd like to use my rig, laptop (WIN 10), and ACL with WSJTX, but don't know where to start.  I have been using FLDIGI successfully in the past and wanted to make the move to WSJTX.
Any hints on where to start? I've been reading the user guide and keep hitting the error mentioned below. 

If you’re a registered user of ACL, you should have recently received a notice from them telling you that ACL is now compatible and has setup for WSJT-X.  I just got mine a few days ago, but I’m not going to use it because I have pretty much moved over to Mac.  Have a run over to their web site and look for ACL 7.0.

Gary - AG0N


locked Calling with TX2 #FT8

Lou VK3ALB <vk3alb@...>
 

Hi All,

Is there any way to skip TX1 and start with TX2 when responding to a station calling CQ?

Lou
VK3ALB

14921 - 14940 of 39792