Michael Black
It could be filtered with a QRZ lookup. I have a filter for the JTAlert email interface that does a QRZ lookup to avoid bad decodes like this and uses it's own local cache to reduce the QRZ queries to almost zero. I also put the filter in my spot filtering program that sits between the cluster and Log4OM to avoid Log4OM triggering on false decodes too. But with the spot reporting being done internally in WSJTX the QRZ validation would have to be added internally unless we migrated it externally. Mike W9MDB
On Wednesday, November 3, 2021, 07:40:27 AM CDT, Tom V. Segalstad <la4ln@...> wrote:
We see from time to time that wrong decoding of weak signals are plotted on DXMAPS.COM (and other maps). But I assume that such wild decoding and reporting cannot be avoided?
Some examples of wrong FT8 decoding on 50.313 MHz here during the last week (WSJT-X v. 2.5.0):
181130 -24 2.0 1118 ~ FT0XHT 5R9KHX JP91
104745 -24 2.3 2951 ~ 7I7IBM/P QF6GOM/P R KP02
122845 -20 4.0 899 ~ PT2KFL/R IP0RT PC08
122115 -19 4.1 210 ~ M52FPI/P TX5SPH BQ51
73 from Tom, LA4LN
Fra: Bill Somerville
On 03/11/2021 12:22, Roland wrote:
-- Tom (LA4LN)
|
|
On 03/11/2021 12:56, Roland wrote:
Biil, GM1BAN is only sending 4 character locator as all of our BeaconsHi Roland, that was not clear from the link you sent when I first asked, hi. Many of the large volume WSPR spotting sources are not using WSJT-X so I guess they are forming spots from their own decoders, or more likely from running the underlying wsprd decoder application. Do you know if these bad spots are more prevalent from particular types of spot sources? 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|
Biil, GM1BAN is only sending 4 character locator as all of our Beacons
|
|
On 03/11/2021 12:38, Roland wrote:
Hi Bill, Hi Roland, is GM1BAM sending a 6-character grid locator? If it is you could reduce the likelihood of false decodes by using a 4-character grid square or checking the "Prefer Type 1 Messages" option which ensures only 4-character grids are sent. 73
|
|
The question I have is can we validate some of the Spot data like the locator before it gets uploaded? As explained in my opening post?
|
|
Tom V. Segalstad
We see from time to time that wrong decoding of weak signals are plotted on DXMAPS.COM (and other maps). But I assume that such wild decoding and reporting cannot be avoided?
Some examples of wrong FT8 decoding on 50.313 MHz here during the last week (WSJT-X v. 2.5.0):
181130 -24 2.0 1118 ~ FT0XHT 5R9KHX JP91
104745 -24 2.3 2951 ~ 7I7IBM/P QF6GOM/P R KP02
122845 -20 4.0 899 ~ PT2KFL/R IP0RT PC08
122115 -19 4.1 210 ~ M52FPI/P TX5SPH BQ51
73 from Tom, LA4LN
Fra: Bill Somerville
On 03/11/2021 12:22, Roland wrote:
> It seems many decoded Spots contain wrong information like TX locator > for example. There is no Data validation in the whole chain which > leads to problems if you are into Data Analytics. Hi Roland, do you have evidence that the stations you mention are sending the wrong locator in their WSPR beacon transmissions? It may be that the invalid location information is being added in one of downstream databases. 73 Bill G4WJS.
-- Tom (LA4LN)
|
|
Hi Bill,
I am the founder of the Intl. WSPR Beacon Project, GM1BAN is one of our Beacons. Here are his transmissions Link That is just one example. I don't know how many there are in total, difficult to quantify exactly. Cheers Roland
|
|
On 03/11/2021 12:22, Roland wrote:
It seems many decoded Spots contain wrong information like TX locator for example. There is no Data validation in the whole chain which leads to problems if you are into Data Analytics.Hi Roland, do you have evidence that the stations you mention are sending the wrong locator in their WSPR beacon transmissions? It may be that the invalid location information is being added in one of downstream databases. 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|
It seems many decoded Spots contain wrong information like TX locator for example. There is no Data validation in the whole chain which leads to problems if you are into Data Analytics.
My proposal is to validate decoded locators against 3rd party DBs like qrz.com etc. on the client-side.Something like this Compare decoded locator with 3rd party databases (qrz.com etc.) match callsign and locator if no match then discard - no upload, if call/locator is not registered in 3rd party DB accept Spot and upload. I think this would eliminate a lot of wrong Spots like this one for example.
|
|
locked
Re: Rig Control Error v2.5.1 on Mac OS
#macOS
#Cat_RigControl
On 03/11/2021 06:10, Frank, DH4FR wrote:
Hi Bill,Hi Frank, WSJT-X still reads the mode even if it is not setting it, "FM" and "WBFM" are considered valid as DX Lab Suite Commander is known to report those mode designations among others. 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|
locked
Re: Exact frequency span occupied
#TechnicalHelpQuestion
#FT8
On 03/11/2021 10:50, David Gould wrote:
In UK on 60m our upper band limit is 5.358, so with dial set to 5.357 we should not TX above 1000Hz.Hi Dave, in all WSJT-X QSO modes except MSK144 the Tx audio offset (from USB VFO dial frequency) is the offset of the lowest frequency modulation tone (in MSK144 it is the centre frequency of the two tones, i.e. 1500 Hz). So your option 1 would be correct for FT8 mode. 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|
locked
Exact frequency span occupied
#TechnicalHelpQuestion
#FT8
David Gould
In UK on 60m our upper band limit is 5.358, so with dial set to 5.357 we should not TX above 1000Hz.
On another forum, there is conflicting advice about the highest freq that the TX offset can be set. Option 1 950Hz with 50Hz upper sideband above. Option 2 975Hz with signal +/- 25Hz I think it is option 1 with the red "goalposts" showing the correct span of the TX signal keeping below 1000Hz Could the development team please confirm. 73, Dave G3UEG
|
|
locked
Re: WSJT-X 2.5.0 and MCHF: issue reading-back the VFO setting
#Cat_RigControl
#linux
#Yaesu
#IssueReport
Hi Mike,
just a clarification: as per subject and tags, my tests are based on linux using my mcHF-QRP rig: it has a native CAT/Audio USB interface and emulate the ft817 ... hamlib 4.3.1 ( wsjtx 2.5.0) and mcHF with 817 setting I got this error testing CAT:
as you suggested, i will repeat the test also for HamLib 4.4 As well I will repeat tests using my ft817 .... I start a thread on mcHF group: https://groups.io/g/mcHF/topic/86598682 PS. just understood what really means 847UNI .... sorry for the confusion -- 73 paolo IU2OMT
|
|
locked
Re: Rig Control Error v2.5.1 on Mac OS
#macOS
#Cat_RigControl
Hi Bill,
One final question regarding modes: Is it an error for WSJT-X when the mode on the rig is not set to USB-D? And how is this impacted by the "Mode" setting on the Radio panel? For example, will WSJT-X throw an error when I switch mode to FM or LSB on the rig while WSJT-X is actively controlling the rig and mode is set to "None"? Best 73 Frank
|
|
locked
Re: WSJT-X 2.5.0 and MCHF: issue reading-back the VFO setting
#Cat_RigControl
#linux
#Yaesu
#IssueReport
Michael Black
And what if you replace the dll with the appropriate 32/64-bit one from here which is the current 4.4 development ? What error do you get from the FT817? Mike W9MDB
On Tuesday, November 2, 2021, 08:30:31 PM CDT, PFA <fpaolo63@...> wrote:
for who is interested on this topic: just done some troubleshooting ... RECAP working settings: wsjtx 2.4.0 (it use Hamlib 4.2) -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 wsjtx 2.5.0rc5 (it use Hamlib 4.3) -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 wsjtx 2.5.0 + Hamlib 4.3.1 -> set CAT for FT847 (no UNI) wsjtx 2.5.0 + Hamlib 4.3 -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 ... so which is the expected settings ? 817 or 847 or both ? Any way it seems new Hamlib introduced the different behaviour . -- 73 paolo IU2OMT
|
|
locked
Re: WSJT-X 2.5.0 and MCHF: issue reading-back the VFO setting
#Cat_RigControl
#linux
#Yaesu
#IssueReport
for who is interested on this topic:
just done some troubleshooting ... RECAP working settings: wsjtx 2.4.0 (it use Hamlib 4.2) -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 wsjtx 2.5.0rc5 (it use Hamlib 4.3) -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 wsjtx 2.5.0 + Hamlib 4.3.1 -> set CAT for FT847 (no UNI) wsjtx 2.5.0 + Hamlib 4.3 -> set CAT for FT817 or FT847 ... so which is the expected settings ? 817 or 847 or both ? Any way it seems new Hamlib introduced the different behaviour . -- 73 paolo IU2OMT
|
|
locked
Re: Kenwood TS-2000 - no TX-NF in Versions 2.4 up
#linux
#Cat_RigControl
#txaudio
#IssueReport
#Kenwood
On 02/11/2021 20:20, Karl Beckman
WA8NVW - AFA5VB wrote:
Stefan: Karl, that is not a correct assessment, many users of many different rigs use a simple serial port driven PTT switch utilizing the RTS or DTR signal and a basic singe transistor circuit. There's no need whatsoever to ditch CAT control just because a hardwired PTT signal needs to be provided to cause a rig to select a particular Tx audio source (I know you are not saying that but your message can easily be misinterpreted as such). This not unique to the TS-2000 either, several Kenwood rigs require PTT via the correct ACC socket pin if audio is provided via the same socket. WSJT-X via all of its CAT interfacing options provide for PTT using either the RTS or DTR signal, either on the CAT serial port itself or via a second serial port specifically for that purpose. I agree that the TS-200 CAT TX; command cannot be used to key the
rig when audio is provided via the ACC socket, but almost
everything else you mention is incorrect or confusing the issue
unnecessarily. Buying a redundant audio interface is folly if one
already has an audio interface to the PC and only need a simple
PTT switch circuit to get up and running. 73
|
|
locked
Re: Kenwood TS-2000 - no TX-NF in Versions 2.4 up
#linux
#Cat_RigControl
#txaudio
#IssueReport
#Kenwood
Stefan:
The Kenwood TS-2000 is indeed a bit peculiar regarding use of the rear panel 13-pin DIN J7 accessory connector for data interfaces. If you are sending USB sound card audio to the rear connector J7 you can only apply data PTT ground to the proper pin of that same connector. Sending a CAT PTT command to the TS2k radio will ALWAYS mute the Accy Conn audio input and enable the front panel microphone connector instead. There is no known easy or seriously difficult way to alter this behavior of the TS2k. That is why almost every TS2k owner uses a Signalink USB interface with built-in VOX to operate the WSJT-x modes. You don't need to modify or patch anything involving HamLib or RigCtl libraries because you can't use CAT. Erase all those thoughts permanently from your mind. Just buy the Signalink USB and the CAT13 interface cable which plugs into the rear panel 13-pin Accy Conn. -- Karl WA8NVW OH WA8NVW@... in WSJTX@groups.io
|
|
locked
Re: 60 METER FT8
#TechnicalHelpQuestion
I finally figured it out. Thanks for the reply
On 11/2/2021 2:01 PM, Bill Somerville
wrote:
On 02/11/2021 18:50, Dave Tucker Nu4N wrote: --
Thanks 73's de NU4N/Dave
|
|
locked
Re: 60 METER FT8
#TechnicalHelpQuestion
On 02/11/2021 18:50, Dave Tucker Nu4N wrote:
How do i add 60 meters to WSJT-X ? I know it's under frequencies but I forgot how to add a new frequency.Dave, the WSJT-X User Guide is always a good place to start when you need to find out how to do something: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/wsjtx-doc/wsjtx-main-2.5.1.html#BAND_SETTINGS 73 Bill G4WJS.
|
|