|
Locked
Re: V2.4.0-rc2 TX mode & frequency
#WSJTX_config
Hello,
did someone else notice that the 6m frequenvy/mode q65 setup seems to change after a reboot. I deleted the default 6m q65 frequency (50.305) to be sure my observation can be reproduced. Inserted new mode (q65) and frequency 50.305 and saved setup. !st call up works as itz should be. After complete reboot the line seems unchanged but 50.305 is not exclusive for q65 anymore and appears as option for other WSJTx modes on 6m. 73, Charly DF5VAE |
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: Not receiving anything...
#GeneralGroupInfo
ve3ki
Your Wide Graph does not show any signals, only harmonics of the 60 Hz AC frequency. This looks like a sound card that is not connected to any signal source. Check whether the wrong sound card input has been selected in the WSJT-X settings, and/or whether the hardware connection between the radio and the sound card is good.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
73, Rich VE3KI On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 09:52 AM, Ron Schunk wrote:
|
||
|
|
||
|
JP Tucson, AZ
You are welcome Ken, glad I could help with the suggestion. 73 - John - N7GHZ
|
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: #BugReport RC2 issue with sending 73
#IssueReport
Problem has been resolved in RC 3
-- M0MVB |
||
|
|
||
|
Andy Talbot
|
||
|
|
||
|
Derek Brown
Hi All, I have tried to get Meinberg to work, but have failed many times, cannot remember what the problem was, but if anyone has an "Idiots" guide to installing and setting up Meinberg, I would appreciate a copy to have another go at it, currently using TimeSync which is working fine. 73 Derek G8ECI
On Wednesday, 17 March 2021, 13:22:37 GMT, Ria, N2RJ <rjairam@...> wrote:
Meinberg avoids sudden shifts in the clock. It’s also set and forget, completely unobtrusive. This is why I prefer it over nettime. Ria N2RJ On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 6:12 AM Jim Brown <k9yc@...> wrote: On 3/16/2021 3:48 PM, Bob Lewis wrote: |
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: Not receiving anything...
#GeneralGroupInfo
JP Tucson, AZ
Ron, Check your RADIO MODE & make sure you are in UPPER sideband. I see you are on 40M... This is a common issue & modern radios auto switch to LSB on bands below 10 MHz. 73 - John - N7GHZ On Wed, Mar 17, 2021, 6:52 AM Ron Schunk <ron051798@...> wrote:
|
||
|
|
||
|
Ken
TU Bill and John.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I set up new config files as John suggested. Works like a charm. Thank you for your comments. Ken - W8KEN On 3/16/2021 6:53 PM, Ken via groups.io
wrote:
Thanks Bill & John, |
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: Why you should use split on FT8
#QSO_practices
#FT8
Sam Birnbaum
Hi,
First of all “SPLIT”
within this context means that WSJT-X will move your TX offset so
that you are transmitting within the sweet spot (center) of the band
pass. It has nothing to do with you picking another TX offset. As to
transmitting on the same offset as the station calling CQ, there is
nothing wrong with that as that is the clear offset that the calling
station picked. What you should NOT do is continue using that offset
when either you complete the QSO or abandon that attempt.
As to the argument
that you are causing QRM, well, for one you could be causing QRM on
the offset you picked because you may not be hearing all the
transmissions out there. There is a higher probability that either
WSJT-X would cancel your attempt if at the calling station WSJT-X
decodes a stronger signal at the same offset or another signal at a
different offset and answer them. If the offset if far enough away
from yours, you will end up tail ending.
73,
Sam W2JDB
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Lederer <w8lvn.9@...> To: main@wsjtx.groups.io Sent: Wed, Mar 17, 2021 9:48 am Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Why you should use split on FT8 #QSO_practices #FT8 All:
I second this emphatically.
Please use split: set that "hold tx frequency" and try to transmit on as clear a frequency as possible.
w8lvn
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:22 AM Tony Collett via groups.io <tony.nbs=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:
For those that insist on calling directly on top of someone's frequency instead of calling split on a separate frequency --w8lvn--
|
||
|
|
||
|
Mike Lavelle K6ML
Joe & Andy,
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Sorry, that was my mistake. I mixed up ISCAT (which is unfortunately being deleted... it’s still being used for microwave aircraft scatter) with JT4 (which is alive and well). In the last part quoted, I was not writing that JT64 was retired, just QRA64 (the parens only applied to QRA64). The discussion after the ellipsis was about which modes used hard keying vs Gaussian keying. Mike K6ML Sent from Xfinity Connect App ------ Original Message ------ From: Joe To: main@WSJTX.groups.io Sent: March 17, 2021 at 6:43 AM Subject: Re: [WSJTX] #JT4 Worrying comment for beacon users Hi Andy, You say someone told you "the earlier JT4 (which has unfortunately been declared 'obsolete' and removed from the latest release candidate), JT65 and QRA64 (also removed..." ... but you don't identify the source. Certainly the comment did not come from the WSJT Development Team. We have no plan to retire either JT4 or JT65. While I think of it: The wider Q65 submodes work very well on 10 GHz rainscatter. An example is included in the sample files downloadable from the WSJT-X Help menu. -- 73, Joe, K1JT |
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: Not receiving anything...
#GeneralGroupInfo
Ron Schunk <ron051798@...>
Here we go...last night I had a good list of stations...this morning I started things up again and this is what I got..Notice the band condition box on QRZ.com shows 'good' on 80-40m..is the graph showing NO activity??? I find that hard to believe... 
|
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Re: Why you should use split on FT8
#QSO_practices
#FT8
Bill Lederer
All: I second this emphatically. Please use split: set that "hold tx frequency" and try to transmit on as clear a frequency as possible. w8lvn On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 8:22 AM Tony Collett via groups.io <tony.nbs=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote: For those that insist on calling directly on top of someone's frequency instead of calling split on a separate frequency --
--w8lvn-- |
||
|
|
||
|
Hi Andy,
You say someone told you "the earlier JT4 (which has unfortunately been declared 'obsolete' and removed from the latest release candidate), JT65 and QRA64 (also removed..." ... but you don't identify the source. Certainly the comment did not come from the WSJT Development Team. We have no plan to retire either JT4 or JT65. While I think of it: The wider Q65 submodes work very well on 10 GHz rainscatter. An example is included in the sample files downloadable from the WSJT-X Help menu. -- 73, Joe, K1JT |
||
|
|
||
|
Locked
Why you should use split on FT8
#QSO_practices
#FT8
Tony Collett
For those that insist on calling directly on top of someone's frequency instead of calling split on a separate frequency
And for those that insist on remaining on somebody else's frequency after the QSO has completed...... This is what I observed last night on 80m (sorry it includes real calls). 225615 -21 0.3 2676 ~ CQ VU2DED ML88 India 225631 Tx 2551 ~ VU2DED G4NBS JO02 225645 -20 0.3 2676 ~ SQ8OAU VU2DED -14 225700 17 -0.2 2676 ~ VU2DED SQ8OAU R-13 225730 16 -0.2 2675 ~ VU2DED SQ8OAU 73 225745 0 0.1 2673 ~ SQ8OAU 9A4ZM JN64 225800 -12 0.5 2676 ~ VU2DED DO4MTB JO41 225815 -2 0.1 2672 ~ SQ8OAU 9A4ZM JN64I doubt if I would have made the QSO as it was in/out with QSB but no chance of seeing the VU again once the third party decided he wanted to use the same frequency! PLEASE USE SPLIT!!! 73 Tony G4NBS |
||
|
|
||
|
Meinberg avoids sudden shifts in the clock. It’s also set and forget, completely unobtrusive. This is why I prefer it over nettime. Ria N2RJ On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 6:12 AM Jim Brown <k9yc@...> wrote: On 3/16/2021 3:48 PM, Bob Lewis wrote: |
||
|
|
||
|
ve4cy
With scatter, the more power the better.. But 80W into 3 elements will work well. (I'm getting good results with 100W into 4 elements). I have a friend who makes contacts using a simple dipole. There are two great online resources for meteor scatter. The first is PSK reporter. Above the map, fill in the filter boxes with the appropriate info. That will let you see everyone who is running MSK144 on 6 meters over a given time period. This will also let you see the overall conditions at a glance. (It works for other digital modes as well). And... So you can share your results on the site, make sure you have "Enable PSK Reporter Spotting" checked off in the Reporting tab in the Settings menu. There's an online chat site called Ping Jockey. All the die hard scatter guys hang out there and discuss current conditions and all things scatter: 73 de Jim VE4CY From: "va7qi" <ve7mdl@...> To: main@WSJTX.groups.io Sent: Tuesday, March 16, 2021 11:38:53 PM Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Q65 on VHF - which frequencies are used for 2 and 6m? #Q65 Running 80 Watts into a 3-element Yagi currently pointing SE. |
||
|
|
||
|
Buddy Morgan
Around here (Florida) using 144.174 or 144.150 would be very unpopular. As long as you stayed below 144.170, you could set up a Q65 sked on about any frequency you wanted.
Buddy WB4OMG
-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Phipps <qrz@...> To: main@wsjtx.groups.io <main@WSJTX.groups.io> Sent: Wed, Mar 17, 2021 7:27 am Subject: Re: [WSJTX] Q65 on VHF - which frequencies are used for 2 and 6m? #Q65 I haven’t seen anyone come up with a QRG for 2m, but when I had a homebrew 6el Yagi up for 2m, we were testing Q65 out on 144.170 MHz. I’m not sure how that jives with Region 1 or 3 band plans, though… ymmv.
We started out using 30A, but found that 30B works better up there. It’s been weeks since I was active there, and it’ll have to wait until I can build a better Yagi and get it up higher (hopefully with a decent rotator this time), but I’d imagine that they’re still doing Q65-30B on 144.170. Mike K8WU > On Mar 17, 2021, at 12:38 AM, va7qi <ve7mdl@...> wrote: > > OK, thanks. I will be listening there over the next 24-48 hours and call the occasional CQ. > Running 80 Watts into a 3-element Yagi currently pointing SE. > > 73 de va7qi, ....Erik. > > |
||
|
|
||
|
Mike Phipps <qrz@...>
I haven’t seen anyone come up with a QRG for 2m, but when I had a homebrew 6el Yagi up for 2m, we were testing Q65 out on 144.170 MHz. I’m not sure how that jives with Region 1 or 3 band plans, though… ymmv.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
We started out using 30A, but found that 30B works better up there. It’s been weeks since I was active there, and it’ll have to wait until I can build a better Yagi and get it up higher (hopefully with a decent rotator this time), but I’d imagine that they’re still doing Q65-30B on 144.170. Mike K8WU On Mar 17, 2021, at 12:38 AM, va7qi <ve7mdl@...> wrote: |
||
|
|
||
|
Andy Talbot
In an email I received today, someone made the comment "the earlier JT4 (which has unfortunately been declared 'obsolete' and removed from the latest release candidate), JT65 and QRA64 (also removed..." I'm hoping above all else this was just a mistake on the writer's part and that JT4 and JT65 will always remain, even if they are less efficient than the others They have been implemented on a large number of beacons around the World now and it would be catastrophic if the modes were removed from the WSJt-X suite, and users required to keep an older copy in parallel with the latest. AFAIK, it's only QRA64 that has gone, to be replaced with Q65. As far as I can see, JT4G is still the only mode that can cope with the really wide spread of rain scatter on 10GHz and 24GHz. I'm also hoping JT9 stays, too. Like JT4 its implementation in a small processor, encoding in real time is straightforward, unlike the memory-heavy matrix-encoder later modes. It really would be a great pity if beacons were forced into using the rather cut-down PI4 mode because of a fear of built in obsolescence on any of those in WSJT-X. PI4 itself, being inspired by and generated the same way as JT4G Andy |
||
|
|
||
|
Jim Brown
On 3/16/2021 3:48 PM, Bob Lewis wrote:
The Meinburg monitoring service only works with Meinburg NTP so both must be installed and the windows time service (or any other time service like D4) must be disabled.As long as your computer has internet, NetTime is Sooo much simpler. http://www.timesynctool.com/ 73, Jim K9YC |
||
|
|
