Date   

locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Michael Black
 

Please ignore this....link has been removed.


Testing hamlib fixes and sent to wrong address.

Mike W9MDB




On Tuesday, November 9, 2021, 12:16:09 PM CST, Michael Black via groups.io <mdblack98@...> wrote:


On Monday, November 8, 2021, 11:36:22 AM CST, Max NG7M <ng7m@...> wrote:


I can confirm Rick's experience with the K4.. makes sense that the K3 would also see the same regression on this issue.  Max NG7M







locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Michael Black
 

On Monday, November 8, 2021, 11:36:22 AM CST, Max NG7M <ng7m@...> wrote:


I can confirm Rick's experience with the K4.. makes sense that the K3 would also see the same regression on this issue.  Max NG7M




locked Re: MacOS Monterey Upgrade #macOS

Marty Bigos
 

I upgraded my MacBook Air about a week ago to Monterey and the latest version of WSJT. I checked my USB card settings and they still were at 48kHz. Not everything even from same source works exactly the same. Checking is always good to do. 


Marty 
KN6OKN


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Max NG7M
 

Hi Jack, thanks for responding... I'm working with W9MDB / Mike right now, and it's pretty clear you are on to something with the mode setting None.  Your response / two cents was very helpful.  More after Mike does some more debugging here (Mike is the one doing the heavy lifting in the debug session...). Max NG7M


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Jack Trampler
 

I would like to add my 2 cents to this thread.  I forget what version of WSJT-X the K3 delay was first noticed, either version 2.50.5 or 2.50.6 but it was a solid 3 second delay.  The suggested workaround was to change the Mode setting from Data/Pkt to None.  This reduced the delay on my setup (K3) to zero.  WSJT-X would transmit at the very beginning of the cycle.  Upon installing WSJT-X 2.50.7 I set the Mode setting in WSJT-X back to Data/Pkt and immediately noticed a 1 second delay.  Setting the Mode back to None, WSJT-X & the K3 are back to transmitting at the beginning of the cycle - no delay.  My settings are:

PTT Method: CAT
Mode: None (Data/Pkt causes a delay)
Split Operation: Rig

CAT Control is set to 38400, 8,2,N

I don't know if this helps but it seems various settings are introducing this delay.

73,
Jack - N2JT

Michael Black via groups.io wrote on 11/9/2021 9:14 AM:

Hey Max

Would you be available to debug this?  We had this fixed at one point and I guess I broke it again.

Mike W9MDB




On Tuesday, November 9, 2021, 08:04:13 AM CST, Max NG7M <ng7m@...> wrote:


Bob, this is a regression issue with the 2.5.2 release... it works fine in 2.5.1.  And in WSJT you can't use multiple methods for PTT, you pick one.  And it doesn't matter if you are using CAT, VOX or a COM port RTS line for example, the problem is there on any PTT type in 2.5.2 when using the Rig Split option.  The issue returned in 2.5.2. And CAT isn't necessarily preferred on a K3/K3S/K4, the PTT type is whatever your preference is.  This isn't a PTT type issue. Max NG7M









locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Michael Black
 

Hey Max

Would you be available to debug this?  We had this fixed at one point and I guess I broke it again.

Mike W9MDB




On Tuesday, November 9, 2021, 08:04:13 AM CST, Max NG7M <ng7m@...> wrote:


Bob, this is a regression issue with the 2.5.2 release... it works fine in 2.5.1.  And in WSJT you can't use multiple methods for PTT, you pick one.  And it doesn't matter if you are using CAT, VOX or a COM port RTS line for example, the problem is there on any PTT type in 2.5.2 when using the Rig Split option.  The issue returned in 2.5.2. And CAT isn't necessarily preferred on a K3/K3S/K4, the PTT type is whatever your preference is.  This isn't a PTT type issue. Max NG7M




locked Re: lost ability to control Yaesu FT-450D #Cat_RigControl

Michael Black
 

Loren was trying to split his rig port using VSPE which is known to be unstable.
So he's working now with FLRig and using rigctlcom to let ACLog work FLRig as a TS-2000 emulator.

HRD is still problematic....but there's a future change to rigctlcom which should hopefully allow HRD to work in this type of setup.  That will be a pass-through facility in rigctlcom since HRD expects to be talking directly to the rig and wants lots of information.  rigctlcom will use the passthru on FLrig and should be able to provide this transparency.

Mike W9MDB


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Max NG7M
 

Bob, this is a regression issue with the 2.5.2 release... it works fine in 2.5.1.  And in WSJT you can't use multiple methods for PTT, you pick one.  And it doesn't matter if you are using CAT, VOX or a COM port RTS line for example, the problem is there on any PTT type in 2.5.2 when using the Rig Split option.  The issue returned in 2.5.2. And CAT isn't necessarily preferred on a K3/K3S/K4, the PTT type is whatever your preference is.  This isn't a PTT type issue. Max NG7M


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Bob McGraw - K4TAX <rmcgraw@...>
 

Make sure you are using only ONE method of PTT, either CAT or VOX but not both.  In my case CAT is preferred with my K3S.   Also, set the SPLIT mode in WSJT-X to Fake It.  It seems this reduces the number of communications between the radio and computer. 

73
Bob, K4TAX


locked Re: Use of telemetry messages #TechnicalHelpQuestion

Bill Somerville
 

On 08/11/2021 23:01, Philip Gladstone wrote:
I'm somewhat puzzled by the telemtry message support in WSJT-X. I understand that these encoding a 71 bit message (i.e. not quite 18 hex digits). However, I don't see how to use them since there is no source (or destination) callsign. If I'm using these messages for something, how am I supposed to distinguish "my" messages from somebody else's?

I can see establishing a convention that puts (say) the owner's callsign in as the first 28 bits of the telemetry message and then the rest of it is encoded as they specify. This would partition the space between all amateurs with standard callsigns.

Am I missing something?

Philip

p.s. The reason that I'm interested is whether it would make sense for PSKReporter to collect all telemetry messages and make them available....
Hi Philip,

as far as I know there are no applications that use the WSJT-X 77-bit modes telemetry message format yet. I suspect that if they are used then they might be used in combination with other messages that contain identification, i.e. maybe a sequence of 2 messages where the second has telemetry data. Another possibility might be using a few bits for a unique number that can be used to identify the source via some sort of lookup, even then I suspect that normal messages will be used for regulatory identification using a callsign, perhaps a series of high-altitude balloons or ocean-going buoys.

As to whether you collect any telemetry messages, until a use of them is invented I doubt they will be of value, e.g. they may only be meaningful in the context of other messages you have not stored.

One issue I see with your proposal that 28-bits be reserved for callsign identification is that the sort of vehicle that might generate telemetry probably would not be allocated an Amateur Radio callsign that fits in the 28-bit encoding the WSJT-X 77-bit modes use.

73
Bill
G4WJS.


locked Decode datagram's "low confidence" field -VS- "?" appended to the datagram's 'message" field? #networking #decode

Adrian B
 

I'm confused about the relationship between two things:
  • The "low confidence" field in a UDP decode message
  • The "?" character appended to the decode message's content.
The documentation for each says that they are used to indicate that a particular decoding is not certain enough to justify sharing it publicly (e.g. to PSK Reporter). Some questions:
  1. Are these two things supposed to represent exactly the same thing as the documentation implies?
  2. Has anybody ever seen the "low confidence" field set to True?
  3. Should Decode meta-data like the "?", "a1", "a2", etc, really be appended to the message field?
Concerning Q2, I don't ever see "low confidence" set to true, even when AP is enabled and the message field ends with "? a1". I've briefly looked at the WSJT-X source and don't see low_confidence being set to anything after being initialized to False.

Thanks, in advance, for any thoughts on the matter.

Adrian


locked Use of telemetry messages #TechnicalHelpQuestion

Philip Gladstone
 

I'm somewhat puzzled by the telemtry message support in WSJT-X. I understand that these encoding a 71 bit message (i.e. not quite 18 hex digits). However, I don't see how to use them since there is no source (or destination) callsign. If I'm using these messages for something, how am I supposed to distinguish "my" messages from somebody else's?

I can see establishing a convention that puts (say) the owner's callsign in as the first 28 bits of the telemetry message and then the rest of it is encoded as they specify. This would partition the space between all amateurs with standard callsigns. 

Am I missing something?

Philip

p.s. The reason that I'm interested is whether it would make sense for PSKReporter to collect all telemetry messages and make them available....


locked Re: IC 705 CRASHES WSJT-X WHEN TX #band #AudioIssues #Icom

Jim Brown
 

On 11/8/2021 9:04 AM, Steven Reich wrote:
If you do a Google search you'll find this is a common problem with the IC-705.
It is a common problem with nearly all ham gear, because connectors are mounted in such a manner that they fail to bond cable shields to the shielding enclosure (chassis) at the point of entry. This manufacturing defect was first identified in 1994 by Neil Muncy, W3WJE (SK), working in the world of pro audio, where within a few years the problem was mostly eliminated. Unfortunately, the word never got out engineers designing equipment for other fields, like ham radio, consumer audio and video equipment, CATV equipment, and so on.

The most effective "band-aid" for the problem our stations is proper bonding and grounding, both of which are both good engineering practice and required by LAW (local Electrical Codes). Study N0AX's ARRL book on the topic, to which I contributed, and/or the slide deck for talks I've done at Pacificon, Visalia, and to several ham clubs. Note that a few details of power system bonding are specific to North America.

http://k9yc.com/GroundingAndAudio.pdf

The Pin One Problem and many other aspects of RFI are addressed in tutorial form in these two app notes.

http://k9yc.com/RFI-Ham.pdf
http://k9yc.com/KillingReceiveNoise.pdf

73, Jim K9YC


locked MacOS Monterey Upgrade #macOS

The Greene Family
 

I just upgraded to Monterey last week from the most recent version of Big Sur.

This morning, just because it struck me while brushing my teeth (!), I checked in Audio MIDI Setup to see if anything had changed.  You never know, right?  (Yes, I am slow.)

Sure enough, the sample rate for my USB connected A-D/D-A used with WSJT-X had changed to 192 KHz.  Easy enough to change back to 48 KHz, of course.

I'm not sure if this really matters in the grand scheme of things.  Indeed, WSJT-X had been working ok since the upgrade.  But, it never hurts to set parameters to what the software and hardware engineers suggest for their products.


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

John Nelson
 

I’m also consistently seeing the ‘SPL N/A’ error message with my K3 and 2.5.2 and the SPLIT LED doesn’t light. 
 


locked Re: IC 705 CRASHES WSJT-X WHEN TX #band #AudioIssues #Icom

Ryan Tourge, N2YQT
 

I will echo this assessment. In my case, it was a short USB cable to a Raspberry Pi. A one-foot cable and generic snap-on ferrites have not fixed it. I ended up changing the direction of my loop which helped in the short term but never revised the initial issue. It didn't matter what make of the cable I used. It didn't matter how many snap-on ferrites I used (I'm not sure of the mix). My next trick will be to wrap the cable through an appropriate mix toroid and see if that helps. 

Ryan, N2YQT


locked Re: K3 Transmit Delay #Cat_RigControl

Max NG7M
 

I can confirm Rick's experience with the K4.. makes sense that the K3 would also see the same regression on this issue.  Max NG7M


locked Re: IC 705 CRASHES WSJT-X WHEN TX #band #AudioIssues #Icom

Michael Black
 

Please describe your shack grounding system.

Mike W9MDB




On Monday, November 8, 2021, 11:04:10 AM CST, Steven Reich <wi9ssr@...> wrote:


I purchased an IC-705 to use for digital mode QRP operation. Quickly found out that my IC-705 is very sensitive to RFI coming in on the USB port, and did the same thing yours does.

I was able to decrease the issue somewhat by wrapping the USB cable to the IC-705 around some 240-43 ferrite donuts. More wraps is better and I have 10 wraps on mine.

The RFI was decreased some more by doing the same on the antenna output of the radio. Another 10 wraps. This doesn't totally eliminate the RFI, but it allows the radio to operate in digital mode fairly reliably.

If you do a Google search you'll find this is a common problem with the IC-705.


73

Steve WI9SSR




locked Re: IC 705 CRASHES WSJT-X WHEN TX #band #AudioIssues #Icom

Steven Reich
 

I purchased an IC-705 to use for digital mode QRP operation. Quickly found out that my IC-705 is very sensitive to RFI coming in on the USB port, and did the same thing yours does.

I was able to decrease the issue somewhat by wrapping the USB cable to the IC-705 around some 240-43 ferrite donuts. More wraps is better and I have 10 wraps on mine.

The RFI was decreased some more by doing the same on the antenna output of the radio. Another 10 wraps. This doesn't totally eliminate the RFI, but it allows the radio to operate in digital mode fairly reliably.

If you do a Google search you'll find this is a common problem with the IC-705.

73
Steve WI9SSR


locked Re: #question Local replies to CQ DX #TechnicalHelpQuestion

Roger
 

On 07/11/2021 23:05, WB5JJJ - George wrote:
With all the comments on DX or not DX, here's my 2-cents.
As stated on my QRZ page, if I'm calling a SPECIFIC station, then you will be totally ignored until I feel he's not going to work me.  If I don't see him that often, I "may" respond to your call as it only takes a minute and it better satisfy your needs for me.  But, if you are going to call me several times while I'm calling a specific DX station, and the when I give up on him and return your previous cycle call, you better be there or I'll ignore you for the next 24 hours.  Best filter made is between the ears.
However, if I'm calling CQ DX, then you are more than welcome to chime in even if you are just across town.  Again it only takes a minute.   I agree that is not "proper" behavior, but you must remember, many of those on WSJTx now have never been on CW or SSB in their short ham career's to fully grasp courteous operations.  It also could be the somewhat anonymous operations of digital communications, or they are just LID's that really don't care what we think.
--
73's
George - WB5JJJ
Hamshack Holine #4969
My policy is not to respond to CQ DX as I've no idea if the other station regards me as DX or not. (However I sometimes accidentality respond as I pay more attention to new country or grid or my screen.)

CQ DX is not formally defined by my licencing authority or, as far as I know, national amateur radio society so there is no formal definition in the UK.

73
Roger
GW4HZA

10021 - 10040 of 39792