|
Locked
Re: Not transmitting xeigu g90 ,CE-19, HRD wsjt-x
Grumpyguy
Hello, I had that exact same issue. The problem was within the Audio my radio was not receiving or sending single to the sound card try fixing that issue and see if it works. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Saturday, October 3, 2020 7:16 PM, keithwaning via groups.io <Keithwaning@...> wrote: having issues transmitting im using xiegu G90 ,CE-19 interface, run with HRD and WSJT-X ...everything seems to work till I try to transmit, radio switches to transmit like its supposed to but no signal going out , I've checked this with WEBSDR need alittle help please |
|
|
|
Locked
radio turning on
John Kjos
When I start WSJT-X, how to I stop the program from starting my rig up?
Thanks, John W9RPM -- EMAIL: john@... WEBPAGE: http://www.w9rpm.com/ DX CLUB: http://www.tcdxa.org/ |
|
|
|
Locked
Not transmitting xeigu g90 ,CE-19, HRD wsjt-x
keithwaning
having issues transmitting im using xiegu G90 ,CE-19 interface, run with HRD and WSJT-X ...everything seems to work till I try to transmit, radio switches to transmit like its supposed to but no signal going out , I've checked this with WEBSDR need alittle help please
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Gary - AG0N
On Oct 3, 2020, at 13:40, Sam Birnbaum via groups.io <w2jdb@...> wrote:That’s not always true. Sometimes, someone else is on the opposite sequence on the same frequency. Happens often. Gary - AG0N |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
I think this has been a very healthy discussion with a lot good reasons why there is not one single way to operate. DX is its own animal and requires sensible choices to get through so everyone for themselves.
My annoyance with not doing split is when the band is relatively quiet. As to on top of someone I always offset so the brackets (red/green) touch each other down down up up or reverse. The digital modes like FT8 can squeeze through the smallest crack. When the band is busy and crowded I just move around a lot. I find for DX if I can TX close to their freq like one has mark on the waterfall I have more success Thanks all for the great suggestions, this has been a great and helpful discussion. I operate primarily digital and have been hooked since JT65 first showed up. Hope to catch everyone on the air. Warren KC0GU |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
I never call on the other op's transmitting frequency. I formerly did so for stateside contacts when there was little chance of competition for the contact, but now I universally pick a clear TX frequency. I usually try to transmit within 500 Hz of him, thinking in terms of receiver filter bandwidths, though this is an unlikely issue with modern rigs and use of USB exclusively. I may select a TX slot 50 Hz above or below him, but never closer. If the band is full then I just change bands, or I change Mode to the FT4 frequency on the same band. Don't forget FT4 - I am often rewarded. 73 de Tim, WA5MD in Dallas |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Decoder theory of operation
careyfisher@...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 8:12 PM JP Tucson, AZ <samcat88az@...> wrote:
Carey Fisher
--
73, Carey, WB4HXE |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Decoder theory of operation
On 03/10/2020 23:14, Williams, G (af8c) via groups.io wrote:
Hi,Hi Glenn, the protocols used in WSJT-X are in the public domain, anyone is free to independently implement decoders for them. The implementations of the WSJT-X decoders are Open Source and protected by a GPLv3 Copy Left licence. The authors of WSJT-X have *not* put the decoder implementations in the public domain, but they are not proprietary since they are Open Source. As such, anyone referencing them in derivative works is bound by the obligations of the GPLv3 licence, and the intellectual property rights of the authors. Although each mode in WSJT-X has a specific decoder implementation, there are some similarities depending on the type of modulation used, and the targetted RF paths and propagation modes. The references linked on the WSJT-X project page include detailed descriptions of the protocols and a flavour of the algorithms used to decode them in WSJT-X. https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/refs.html The new modes FST4 and FST4W, available to users for the first time in a candidate release (v2.3.0 RC1) this week, are described here: https://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/FST4_Quick_Start.pdf 73 Bill G4WJS. |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Decoder theory of operation
JP Tucson, AZ
The source code is open source. They have at least a basic theory of operation in the manual, but unless you have a Ph.D. in math & physics, good luck understanding it! I understand it up until the math hits a point; calculus, then my eyes glaze over... Like I said, good luck. 73 - John - N7GHZ On Sat, Oct 3, 2020, 4:37 PM Williams, G (af8c) via groups.io <af8c=alumni.caltech.edu@groups.io> wrote: Hi, |
|
|
|
Locked
Decoder theory of operation
Williams, G (af8c) <af8c@...>
Hi,
Under "Operating courtesy" Jeff, KB6IBB, wrote that WSJT-X has "one of the best decoders in the world". Where would there be paper(s) aka theory of operation on how the decoder works? Is it proprietary? --73, Glenn, AF8C -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Svein Henriksen
IT IS NOT ok to overlap as described below.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Happens to me quite often that stations start calling on top of me. Sometimes both stations get decoded but by far not often. As a rule, my QSO gets interrupted which often means lost. I have lost many good DX contacts in this manner. 73 de LA3PU Svein. -----Original Message-----
From: main@WSJTX.groups.io <main@WSJTX.groups.io> On Behalf Of Jeff Stillinger Sent: lørdag 3. oktober 2020 23:35 To: main@WSJTX.groups.io Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Operating Courtesy At the risk of restarting the war that took two years to settle down... On the average, there are two types of operators using WSJT-X on HF. The DX/numbers chasers, and the Weak Signal operators. Going back to roughly 2016/17 it was negotiated between the two waring factions that the decoder would first "look" on frequency, then "look" to the splits. This very effectively appeased both parties. Weak Signal operators tend to use very narrow filters. As a WSO, I normally use 6-800 Hz filtering. With capabilities of narrowing as far down as 300 Hz. Gladly sacrificing a -15 or better on split for a -22 or lower on frequency. The point here, there is a reason for the way people operate. Now calling CQ following a contact is the normal split mode of operation. Remember, they have already moved their transmitter frequency. It's split, so it matters not. You don't need a "blank spot" on the band to operate. This is one of the best decoders in the world. Over lap is perfectly fine. Specification calls for 1 Hz spacing, but in reality it's 8 Hz. So you can be at 1000 Hz having a contact, I can be at 1008 Hz having a contact, and decoder doesn't care. Both of us will enjoy a decoded contact. It's a visual mind melt when a operators puts too much faith in the waterfall instead of the decoder. On 10/3/20 9:09 AM, WarrenG KC0GU wrote: I have noticed lately that more people are are answering my CQ |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Jeff Stillinger
At the risk of restarting the war that took two years to settle down...
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On the average, there are two types of operators using WSJT-X on HF. The DX/numbers chasers, and the Weak Signal operators. Going back to roughly 2016/17 it was negotiated between the two waring factions that the decoder would first "look" on frequency, then "look" to the splits. This very effectively appeased both parties. Weak Signal operators tend to use very narrow filters. As a WSO, I normally use 6-800 Hz filtering. With capabilities of narrowing as far down as 300 Hz. Gladly sacrificing a -15 or better on split for a -22 or lower on frequency. The point here, there is a reason for the way people operate. Now calling CQ following a contact is the normal split mode of operation. Remember, they have already moved their transmitter frequency. It's split, so it matters not. You don't need a "blank spot" on the band to operate. This is one of the best decoders in the world. Over lap is perfectly fine. Specification calls for 1 Hz spacing, but in reality it's 8 Hz. So you can be at 1000 Hz having a contact, I can be at 1008 Hz having a contact, and decoder doesn't care. Both of us will enjoy a decoded contact. It's a visual mind melt when a operators puts too much faith in the waterfall instead of the decoder. On 10/3/20 9:09 AM, WarrenG KC0GU wrote:
I have noticed lately that more people are are answering my CQ directly on my calling frequency. Here a couple of issues with that, IMHO. |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Bill Lederer
Warren: I absolutely agree with this. I see more failed QSOs where the caller has not checked "hold tx" and is calling on my frequency. Now there is a lot of magic in WSJTX decoding stations near the same frequency, but the chances are smaller for the QSO to go through if there are two or more stations calling. Please call on a different frequency than the station calling CQ. w8lvn On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 9:09 AM WarrenG KC0GU <kcZEROgu@...> wrote: I have noticed lately that more people are are answering my CQ directly on my calling frequency. Here a couple of issues with that, IMHO. --
--w8lvn-- |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Harold Miller
From what I have seen of the FT8 segments of the bands, it appears the most days especially weekends the bands are CROWDED and so trying to find a clear spot is difficult. When replying to a station calling CQ. IMO it is best to call him on his frequency to give other stations a chance to operate also. When the bands are full it is like a contest weekend. The loudest / strongest signals are going to get thru. Running split just takes up more of the band.
Until there is more band allocated to specific modes this is the way it is going to be. Also it does not help that WSJTX modes were meant to be low power modes and I have come across several operators stating that they run 100W to operate. It is coming to the point of the more power the more contacts. Not the way of the QRP operator, the more distance the lower the power…
This is MY opinion and not meant to offend anyone…
Hal, KB1ZQ OKC, OK
From: main@WSJTX.groups.io [mailto:main@WSJTX.groups.io] On Behalf Of Timothy Nichols via groups.io
So, I have a question: Does it help at all to partially offset your transmit frequency (in terms of WSJT-X's ability to sort out signals) or should you get completely clear, with the understanding that what looks open to you might not be to the station being called. Thanks.
Tim N2TC
-----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Svein Henriksen
I very often offset by 50% or so with very good success.
73 de LA3PU Svein
From: main@WSJTX.groups.io <main@WSJTX.groups.io> On Behalf Of Timothy Nichols via groups.io
Sent: lørdag 3. oktober 2020 20:07 To: jshorney@...; main@WSJTX.groups.io Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Operating Courtesy
So, I have a question: Does it help at all to partially offset your transmit frequency (in terms of WSJT-X's ability to sort out signals) or should you get completely clear, with the understanding that what looks open to you might not be to the station being called. Thanks.
Tim N2TC
-----Original Message-----
|
|
|
|
Locked
Re: Operating Courtesy
Sam Birnbaum
Hi,
The way I operate and the way I have setup QLog (for the blind hams) is to call on his offset.
As someone mentioned, the DX station picked that offset because it is clear at his end.
Now, if after 3 calls, I don't get a response or get stopped by WSJT-X in the case of the
DX station working another station, I (QLog) automatically shift the offset by 25 for ft8
(40 for FT4) Hz towards the center of the band pass. The idea behind this is that if more
than one station is calling on his frequency the DX station will probably decode either
the strongest signal, or another station on a different offset. In either case someone or
all on his Tx offset will get stopped automatically by WSJT-X anti QRM logic.
73,
Sam W2JDB
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Shorney <jshorney@...> To: main@WSJTX.groups.io Sent: Sat, Oct 3, 2020 2:32 pm Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Operating Courtesy In my experience that does seem to help sometimes. Completely clear is usually better but if the DX is only paying attention to callers on or near his TX it is worth a try IMO. 73 -Jim NU0C On Sat, 3 Oct 2020 18:07:28 +0000 (UTC) "Timothy Nichols via groups.io" <parkerfly3=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote: > So, I have a question: Does it help at all to partially offset your transmit frequency (in terms of WSJT-X's ability to sort out signals) or should you get completely clear, with the understanding that what looks open to you might not be to the station being called. Thanks. > TimN2TC > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Shorney <jshorney@...> > To: main@WSJTX.groups.io > Sent: Sat, Oct 3, 2020 12:55 pm > Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Operating Courtesy > > > The flaw in that theory is that for the DX his RX slot will almost certainly have multiple callers slugging it out on his frequency. Despite WSJT-X's almost magical ability to sort out multiple signals on top of each other there is only so much it can do in this situation. > > 73 > > -Jim > NU0C > > On Sat, 03 Oct 2020 09:11:52 -0700 > "Ron W3RJW via groups.io" <w3rjw=verizon.net@groups.io> wrote: > > > Good points. However, when the band is crowded and I really want to work a DX station, my theory is that he sees his frequency as clear on his end, so it's worth a try. Just like I try to pick a clear slot when I am calling CQ. > > -- > > 73 > > Ron W3RJW > > |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: perplexing error message updating with wsjtx_2.3.0
John ve3sjv
Thank you Bill. That did the trick. I now have 2.3.0 active and will try it out likely tomorrow.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
John ve3sjv On 10/3/20 3:13 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
sudo apt remove wsjtx-data |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: perplexing error message updating with wsjtx_2.3.0
John ve3sjv
Thanks Bill. I'll give that a try. John On 10/3/20 3:13 PM, Bill Somerville
wrote:
On 03/10/2020 19:38, John Lindsay wrote: |
|
|
|
Locked
Re: perplexing error message updating with wsjtx_2.3.0
On 03/10/2020 19:38, John Lindsay wrote:
I'm running Linux Mint 20 for my OS and possibly I should uninstall wsjt-x (currently at 2.1.2) however I thought I could update it to 2.3 RC1 so I typed this in terminal "sudo dpkg -i wsjtx_2.3.0-rc1_amd64.deb". It seems to start off with the statement "Preparing to unpack wsjtx_2.3.0-rc1_amd64.deb ...Hi John, looks like you have a repo sourced WSJT-X installed, you will have to uninstall that first before installing the new package. Looks like it is called wsjtx-data, try: sudo apt remove wsjtx-data 73 Bill G4WJS. |
|
|
|
Locked
perplexing error message updating with wsjtx_2.3.0
John ve3sjv
I'm running Linux Mint 20 for my OS and possibly I should uninstall wsjt-x (currently at 2.1.2) however I thought I could update it to 2.3 RC1 so I typed this in terminal "sudo dpkg -i wsjtx_2.3.0-rc1_amd64.deb". It seems to start off with the statement "Preparing to unpack wsjtx_2.3.0-rc1_amd64.deb ...
Unpacking wsjtx (2.3.0-rc1) over (2.1.2+repack-2build1) ..." I get this error message "dpkg: error processing archive wsjtx_2.3.0-rc1_amd64.deb (--install): trying to overwrite '/usr/share/pixmaps/wsjtx_icon.png', which is also in package wsjtx-data 2.1.2+repack-2build1 dpkg-deb: error: paste subprocess was killed by signal (Broken pipe)" I even went so far as trying to chmod 777 wsjtx_icon.png and did a ls -l which showed the file as "-rwxrwxrwx" and I still get the same error. Tried renaming it and got this message ---"Bareword "wsjtx_icon" not allowed while "strict subs" in use at (user-supplied code) line 3". I may have the wrong format but that's where it is at the moment. I still have 2.1.2 so wsjtx still works but JS8Call and FLDig are all updated to the latest and I'd like to get wsjtx updated as well. |
|
|