t really "split" in the sense of the practice
that has been used for more than 60 years.
73, Jim K9YC
= = = = = =
All is well here now:) You're the Man!
tnx agn
Jim/k2hn
On Monday, September 4, 2023 at 04:23:25 AM EDT, Jim Brown
wrote:
On 9/3/2023 11:03 PM, Jim Mur
On 7/14/2023 10:30 PM, Björn Ekelund via wsjt-devel wrote:
1.30. I cannot believe why anyone would run an outdated firmware on a radio.
Björn,
You vastly overestimate the knowledge of the average ham (at least those
in the US), or their willingness to study more than it took to memorize
the
On 5/8/2023 10:06 AM, Adrian wrote:
How would you know ? You lack the technical ability..
I'm a Fellow of the Audio Engineering Society, on the basis of a wide
range of technical achievements. Also a member of the Standards
Committee of the AES, Vice-Chair of the WG on EMC, a principle
#1 is hardly a benefit, #3 is bogus. #2 is a side benefit, but VERY
secondary, and not the fundamental purpose of the practice.
73, Jim K9YC
On 5/8/2023 7:26 AM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
#1 It allows you to transmit outside your passband.
#2 It avoids roll off of power at band
I strongly disagree, Mike. Bjorn's suggestion to call it Transmit
Harmonic Prevention is a VERY good one, because it describes what the
choice does. It is NOT "split" in the sense it has been used in ham
radio for at least 70 years.
People learn from things being called what they are. Bjorn's
On 5/6/2023 10:41 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
This start to be really funny!
There's a saying in the States that "you can't argue with a drunk." A
corollary is that it's a waste of time to one who only wants the world
to tell him he's right.
The story related in your post is
On 5/1/2023 10:13 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
2# Limiting the usage of the split word to that most probably was a logical
decision to prevent mixing it to the 'split working', hi! Well, in reality
WSJT was designed for various weak signal modes especially EME and there is
(was) no
On 5/1/2023 8:31 PM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Nobody owns the definition of split
Mike,
For as long as I've been a ham (68 years) "split" operation has meant
transmitting on a frequency DIFFERENT from the station you're working.
The most common application is for a DX station in
On 4/30/2023 4:30 PM, Adrian via wsjt-devel wrote:
Reino, this is where we disagree, as my point is if the vfo frequency
changes, then the 'radio frequency' which I consider the same also changes.
Adrian,
Reino is right, and you are wrong. Nothing personal, just scientific
fact. The
On 4/28/2023 7:04 AM, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel wrote:
Yes I know exactly what split is in WSJT-X.
And it is confusing to long time hams because it was a very poor choice
of words, contrary to what "split" operation has meant on the HF bands
for at least 70 years. "Split" in the context of
On 4/28/2023 4:35 AM, Saku via wsjt-devel wrote:
How do you know that?
Of course, thanks to skip zones, we do not, but we know more than if we
hadn't paused to listen. But you chose not to quote this part of my
response, which acknowledged that. :)
> and then to choose a TX frequency that
On 4/27/2023 12:28 PM, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel wrote:
Yes exactly. After hundreds of QSOs and two+ years that's getting old.
But I do really understand the issues with revising good code.
Except for contesting, it has ALWAYS been good operating practice to do
a LOT more listening than
On 4/25/2023 7:27 AM, Uwe, DG2YCB via wsjt-devel wrote:
Dear WSJT-X Users,
(WSJTXY.groups.io), where you can discuss technical issues and help each
other with problems.
Thanks Uwe. I think that most of us who were banished were there simply
trying to help out, both with technical issues
On 4/23/2023 11:20 AM, Daniel Uppström via wsjt-devel wrote:
Isn't that obvious why he wants more than 16 bits? With a receiver using
more than that it could be possible to eliminate AGC all together and
just feed something with 100 dB of dynamics into WSJT.
If I'm not mistaken, what the
On 2/15/2023 9:05 AM, Fred Carvalho via wsjt-devel wrote:
However I would like to stick on why and how things happened that caused
so much confusion:
I suspect the fundamental problem with FT8 was like the problem with the
trip as a whole -- poor planning. I I couldn't see radials in relative
On 1/7/2023 2:06 PM, Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel wrote:
You can click on a decode that appears after the next sequence starts.
The program will know which sequence to transmit in.
Yes, and I've found that I'm often decoded starting 3-5 seconds late!
73, Jim K9YC
On 1/1/2023 12:59 PM, alawler mudhawk.com via wsjt-devel wrote:
I had an odd situation just now where operating as PP1/WB1BQE, I
attempted to work KB1EFS/2 on FT8. He heard me and appeared to answer
by calling me. I attempted to send back a signal report, but it was
truncated as well.
I
On 11/8/2022 1:07 AM, Erik Icket via wsjt-devel wrote:
I observed that confusion as well last weekend when F/H was used on the
regular FT8 frequencies.
Someone failed to study the F/H doc -- WSJT is programmed to NOT use F/H
on standard FT8 frequencies. If it's on regular frequencies, it's
On 10/15/2022 2:13 AM, Saku via wsjt-devel wrote:
Linux has Wine, but I do not have any need to run Windoze programs via it.
It seems that you might need it. You're asking for features to be added
to WSJT-X that are in Windows software. An operating system is a tool,
not a religion. Or
Hi Saku,
There are logging programs that keep track of contests. I log contests
with N1MM+ (Freeware), export the log to DXKeeper (FREEware), choose
from a dropdown menu in the DXKeeper Import screen what contest it's
from and choose the log file. That's all it takes! And when you're ready
On 9/30/2022 1:35 PM, Dave wrote:
JTDX has 2 features I really like. Since I work a lot of DX, the ability to
filter out regions particularly North America is very helpful. The second one
is the transmitting station's country is always listed not just for stations
calling CQ. Any chance
On 9/19/2022 10:25 PM, on4ckt--- via wsjt-devel wrote:
There is an alternative site namelywww.pskreporter.info. This can also be used
in the meantime.
I don't know about www.pskreporter.info as an "alternative" site, but
I've been using it for years for the functions that Adrian is looking
On 8/24/2022 12:57 PM, Dwayne Sinclair via wsjt-devel wrote:
Sure… All the LOTW awards come with rules.
LOTW does not issue awards. It is ONLY a worldwide log book that the
issuers of awards can consult to document QSOs. Some issuers of awards
are ARRL, CQ Magazine, the County Hunters, the
Thanks Dave. For those reading the mail, DXKeeper is part of his
FREEWARE DXLab Suite.
To the development team -- it seems to me that the time sent to logging
software as the starting time ought to be either 1) the completion time
or 2) 2 minutes prior to the completion time. This solves the
Thanks Stan.
73, Jim
On 7/28/2022 5:12 PM, Stan Gammons via wsjt-devel wrote:
On 7/28/22 18:38, Jim Brown via wsjt-devel wrote:
Please provide an option to start a new ALL.TXT for each calendar month,
keeping each month's file and naming it by the month. Without that
option, the file grows so
if the file is larger than a 1GB.
It does not load the file into memory. It can be active while WSJT-X is
active and can display a selected number of
records from the All.txt file while WSJT-X is appending to it.
73,
Sam W2JDB
-Original Message-
From: Jim Brown via wsjt-devel
Please provide an option to start a new ALL.TXT for each calendar month,
keeping each month's file and naming it by the month. Without that
option, the file grows so large that it cannot be opened by any software
on my computer.
73, Jim K9YC
___
On 3/19/2022 9:39 AM, DX Jami via wsjt-devel wrote:
My call is AH6FX and I am in Virginia now. For WSJT-X purposes I
configure or set-up WSJT-X for W4/AH6FX.
Totally unnecessary -- calling CQ or answering with your grid tells
others all they need to know.
73, Jim K9YC (in California since
On 2/19/2022 2:23 PM, Marco Calistri via wsjt-devel wrote:
Amazing explanation of an "historical" and already well identified issue
Grant!
Many of the answers to questions asked here are in the manual for
WSJT-X. To reduce the load on the guys who provide support here,
everyone should STUDY
On 2/19/2022 4:45 AM, Marco Calistri via wsjt-devel wrote:
Very interesting! I was not aware of the MSHV software, IMHO it's not a
good behavior to use "not standard" software expecting same results as
it should work as per the "standard way".
Fox/Hound mode is NOT a "standard way," it is a
http://www.arrl.org/news/view/arrl-announces-new-world-wide-digital-contest
73, Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
As a very active CW operator, I view this as a VERY BAD move. The
presence of FT4 in that region is a most unwelcome intrusion. I view it
as the only major bad judgement call by the WSJT team.
73, Jim K9YC
On 12/26/2021 7:44 PM, Tsutsumi Takehiko via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hi,
ARRL Letter on
On 11/12/2021 9:14 AM, Chris Elmquist via wsjt-devel wrote:
I apologize for resurrecting an old thread but I came back to the list
because I continue to have a problem in this very same space.
See the post I just made responding to another ham 2 minutes ago about
grounding and bonding in your
On 10/18/2021 12:10 PM, Conrad PA5Y via wsjt-devel wrote:
Well typically Lance asks that if you decode him you start with TX2.
To conserve battery/generator fuel, Lance does not call CQ on
expeditions, directing callers to call blind, and answering those he
copies. In that situation, callers
On 10/11/2021 2:22 AM, Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel wrote:
that space is basically an illusion. The reason is that the main window
layout is largely shared by all modes and variants, the exceptions to
that are WSPR, FST4W, Frequency calibration, and EME Echo mode. What
appears to be empty
On 10/10/2021 11:02 PM, Peter Sumner via wsjt-devel wrote:
Rather than extra buttons / tick boxes on the existing busy screen
I hardly see the FT8/FT4 main screen as "busy" -- indeed, I see plenty
of empty real estate for these two tick boxes with labels (or buttons
with labels within the
On 10/10/2021 7:12 PM, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote:
as F/H specifically requires you to reply to a Fox CQ above 1000 hz, and
since the decoder decodes the entire passband based on the base
frequency set, you would not need any 'waterfall history' to determine
where to Tx your reply.
Well said, Grant. From where I sit, very active on 6M, and both DX
chasing and contesting on HF and MF, the only poor decisions made by by
the design team are based on their lack of broad experience below VHF.
That's the only possible explanation for how 40M FT4 ended up where it did.
Your
On 10/3/2021 7:50 PM, Alex via wsjt-devel wrote:
No 73, no QSO. I really don't care if that means my log will be a few
Q's short. The world is already rude enough as it is. We can take a few
moments to be courteous.
Not when there's short band opening for DX, and not in a contest. :)
When
I'm seeing news stories saying aurora visibility is predicted farther
south than usual. I worked AU on CW from Chicago and WV, but have never
heard it here, 70 miles S of San Francisco. Would any WSJT modes be useful?
73, Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel
On 9/18/2021 10:08 AM, Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel wrote:
It turns out that Mike, W3IP, was using WSJT-X for FT8 with the
"Decode | Fast" setting.
With nearly any modern computer one should use "Decode | Deep" for
maximum FT8 sensitivity.
Was in the shack today, and checked WSJT-X setting and
On 9/14/2021 11:43 PM, Laurie, VK3AMA via wsjt-devel wrote:
That has been my experience as well. On the surface JTDX offers a
greater number of decodes, but many were false decodes.
If I made the QSO and it shows up on LOTW, it wasn't a false decode!
And, BTW, WSJT-X is not without false
On 9/14/2021 10:55 AM, Rich - K1HTV via wsjt-devel wrote:
*"When operating on FT8, I ran WSJT-X and JTDX in parallel. The JTDX
decode capability on weak signals is significantly better - but JTDX
doesn't recognize contest mode. I had several contacts that decoded only
on JTDX so I had to
On 9/1/2021 11:32 PM, Phil Karn via wsjt-devel wrote:
I don't see that that necessarily follows.
At this point, I think it is appropriate to note that the developers of
this software are VERY bright, have carefully observed how it works in
the real world, test extensively themselves, get
On 8/2/2021 5:04 AM, Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel wrote:
If reports were dropped in favour of grid squares the protocols would
need fundamental changes, including a loss of sensitivity, unless all
those non-standard calls were to be excluded from normal QSOs.
Does this mean that Contest
On 8/2/2021 5:04 AM, Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel wrote:
If reports were dropped in favour of grid squares the protocols would
need fundamental changes, including a loss of sensitivity, unless all
those non-standard calls were to be excluded from normal QSOs.
RE-READ KF2T's posts. He is not
On 8/1/2021 9:13 PM, MIKE LAVELLE via wsjt-devel wrote:
What's wrong with signal reports... lots of us like to know how well we
are getting out.
But signal reports only tell us signal to noise ratio in the other
station's receiver, NOT signal strength. I use WSJT modes on 6M and 160M
to make
On 8/1/2021 1:30 PM, Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel wrote:
read my post again, and also the Region 1 VHF handbook! The term is "QSO
specific" information, a grid is not QSO specific it is general
information about a station. I
YES, a grid IS QSO-specific -- operators move around. Just because
On 8/1/2021 9:34 AM, Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel wrote:
A grid square does not meet that criteria. OTOH the grid square is not
required by that definition of a QSO.
Horsepucky. A name is a piece of information. So is a State. And a grid
square a IS a piece of information, accepted as such
On 7/17/2021 2:59 AM, jan0--- via wsjt-devel wrote:
It is characteristic of this propagation phenomenon between NA and AS on
6m that the opening between any given pair of stations is brief: One or
two minutes is not uncommon.
That depends a LOT on which part of the US and which DX country.
On 7/16/2021 11:33 PM, Derek Turner via wsjt-devel wrote:
Is it just coincidental that of the 33 log records only two contain
Maidenhead locators.
Nope. I've probably worked close a hundred JAs, and I count count the
ones who call with their grid without taking my shoes off. But JA hams
are
On 7/9/2021 10:59 AM, Joe Taylor wrote:
As Bill has explained, the WSJT-X Rx bandwidth is currently limited to
5000 Hz. But I agree that larger FT8 sub-bands (or multiple sub-bands
on a given HF band) are really what is required to relieve congestion.
On 6M at least, our use of spectrum for
That's of of the things I like about you, Bill -- simple, logical
solutions to real world problems!
73, Jim K9YC
On 7/8/2021 1:19 PM, Bill Frantz wrote:
I have a significantly different way to try to address the underlying
problem. I'm not sure if it is even possible, and it is a fairly big
On 7/8/2021 12:02 PM, Jon Anhold wrote:
There are absolutely guys running narrow filters where you have to get
very close to them, or even right ON their frequency for them to hear
you. Apparently they have no idea what they are missing.
Not only missing callers, but also degrading the
On 6/20/2021 9:55 AM, Chris, HB9DFG wrote:
Well, I now have tested *JTDX 2.2.156* and *WSJT-X 2.4.0c19d62* a short
time (for about 30-40min) on a quiet 2m-band.
As many 6M ops did during last year's E-skip season, I'm running JTDX in
parallel with the 2.5 WSJT-X beta. And just as last year,
On 6/16/2021 1:28 PM, Joe Taylor wrote:
Do you understand just what changes caused the problem, and do you have
a fix in preparation?
W4TV suggested a workaround -- don't use WSJT-X to set the radio mode.
I've always selected None with my K3. And because I don't want WSJT-X to
leave my rig
On 6/10/2021 10:10 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
the oldest being about 2012-23 vintage,
Bad fingers -- 2012-2013.
Jim
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
On 6/9/2021 11:25 AM, Michael Pittaro wrote:
Intel provides tools to do the feature identification for you. See:
https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/05607/boards-and-kits/desktop-boards.html
The second choice in this link told me that all my active Thinkpads, the
On 6/10/2021 2:02 AM, Alan wrote:
I agree up to a point, but this is a hobby and older kit is often in
service for long periods to keep financial cost down.
It's unlikely that anyone would drive a Model T thinking it was a
suitable vehicle on today's roadways. A 15 year old computer, even a
I strongly agree with George.
FWIW, I found the link Bill provided in his initial post with
development names for processor versions useless -- looking at my
machines, they don't show those names.
73, Jim K9YC
On 6/9/2021 9:49 AM, George J Molnar wrote:
I’d definitely support development
On 6/8/2021 4:38 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
we are looking into some performance enhancements that will take
advantage of some parallel processing features of modern CPU architectures.
Bill,
I have a half dozen Thinkpads of various vintages, most running i7
processors, two running i5s. At
Indeed they are good contacts. W0YK is a leading contester, was part of
getting FT4 and FT8 integrated with major RTTY contests.
You guys are looking at things from the perspective of non-contesters.
73, Jim K9YC
On 5/10/2021 7:34 AM, Russ wrote:
Paul Kube wrote:
1. Answering a CQ:
On 4/4/2021 5:47 AM, Claude Frantz wrote:
Please explain me: What is the difference between VFO-A, VFO-B, VFO-C,
etc. and the subVFO's.
RTFM!
73, Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
On 3/17/2021 12:29 PM, Donhawbaker wrote:
The receive level, i.e. mic gain, should be set to 30, not 50 or 60.
I strongly disagree with this advice when there are very strong signals
present. On 6M and 160M which I most often use WSJT-X modes, I often see
my neighbors decoding in the range
On 3/14/2021 9:58 PM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Sets the LINE OUT level. LINE OUT connections go to PC soundcard inputs.
Settings above 10 may result in overdrive of the soundcard or saturation
of the
KIO3’s isolation transformers; monitor signals using the PC to avoid this.
Great
On 3/4/2021 12:02 PM, Richard Larson via wsjt-devel wrote:
Another way to fudge the time with or without the internet is to use the
manual set function built into a time sync windows app like BktTimeSync.
I use this app to sync time with either the internet or GPS dongle but
should be a help
On 2/26/2021 6:34 PM, Dave Slotter, W3DJS wrote:
I am part of the development team. Read the about box. My callsign is in
there for my earlier contributions.
I'm with you, Dave. The G8 who complained about your choice of words is
way off base. I've emailed him directly.
73, Jim K9YC
On 2/17/2021 5:02 AM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
I've also verified that reducing the volume level to eliminate the
effect does not reduce the power out either. My LP-700 wattmeter shows
the same wattage with 0 or -3.0dB
That could be caused by AGC within the rig. Or it could be in
On 2/16/2021 2:01 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
there are no analog audio stages involved. The trival distortion (lower
than -65dB) is probably the result of being passed through an
unnecessary sample rate converter with a small defect within the MS
Windows audio sub-system. The issue can be
On 2/16/2021 12:40 PM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Also there with no transmitter involved. 2nd copy of WSJT-X listening
to the 1st WSJT_X transmit audio device.
But the audio stages of two computers. The measurements I cited were at
the audio output of a "good" computer generating a
On 2/16/2021 5:56 AM, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
You're wrong -- it's being transmitted too.
I send that example a while ago.
That doesn't mean it's necessarily coming from the code -- the
distortion could be generated anywhere in the analog chain, from the
analog side of the D/A of
Several observations. First, MANY years ago thoughtful engineers
listened with headphones to the distortion output of instrumentation
devices (like legacy distortion analyzers) as "ear training" to help us
recognize a particular form of distortion. An very smart former Ampex
engineer designed
On 2/9/2021 1:34 PM, Adrian wrote:
Once a sought signal is known from a cluster or a random rx, then lost
etc on its audio freq, you can hone in on it with narrow filtering.
Last I heard, K1JT advised strongly against narrowing the IF, because
the filters create phase shift in the passband
On 2/8/2021 4:19 PM, JOE MIXSELL wrote:
Wonder if anyone has seen this behavior and if so what might you have
done to eliminate it. Set up is TS 590, MFJ 1204 and HP labtop. Cabling
supplied by MFJ with the 1204 unit. Antenna is ground mounted vertical
about 35 to 40 feet from shack. For a
On 2/5/2021 6:03 PM, k...@earthlink.net wrote:
Hi, Jim:
What frequency are you using FST4 on 160m?
I'm using a dial frequency of 1837.5 and offset of about 2.4 kHz, which
puts TX/RX just below FT8. I'm using that dial frequency so that big FT8
signals don't limit the dynamic range of the
It would be great to access this switch from the main window, making it
easier to switch from multi-decode once a QSO partner is chosen.
73, Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
On 2/5/2021 12:34 PM, Marco Calistri wrote:
No, as I wrote I don't oper on V-U-SHF, nor on LF/VLF, I'am a FT8/FT4
HF only user
Do you work 160M? FST4 with long sequence (60 sec) is a game-changer on
that band, allowing the use of smaller TX antennas and operation with
more local noise on
Team,
After only one night with FST4-60 on 160, it's obvious that if we want
to maintain full IF bandwidth, 1837.5 or 1838 would be a far better
choice, using offsets in the range of 2,000 - 2,500 or 1,500 - 2,000 Hz
respectively. Either puts TX between 1839.5 and 1840. The reason is
simple
Thanks.
Jim
On 2/3/2021 4:54 AM, Steven Franke via wsjt-devel wrote:
Next thought. I called CQ for quite a while set for FST4-60. No responses, but
a guy near Phoenix (I'm near SF) posted me to PSKReporter, probably unattended.
My question is with respect to decoding, if I set up for
On 2/2/2021 3:48 PM, Steven Franke via wsjt-devel wrote:
Increasing or decreasing the width of the search window will increase/decrease
the number of spurious candidates, so a larger search window means longer total
decoding time and higher false decode rate. That’s why we advise users to
On 2/2/2021 3:18 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
if you mean a narrower waterfall/spectrum bandwidth for the former, then
that doesn't make much difference. As always it is best to match your
receiver's bandwidth.
I was thinking of when the single decode is not checked.
The frequency tolerance
With FST4, is there an advantage to using narrower decode bandwidth
and/or narrower frequency tolerance?
Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Several members of the Slack VHF group have commented that JTDX is
decoding more signals than 2.2.2. Seeing that, I've started running both
programs in parallel. Since I use VOX, that's easy to do.
What I'm seeing is similar to my experience simultaneously running MMTTY
and 2TONE for RTTY
There are times when it could be quite helpful to be able to switch
special operating features on and off from the main operating window.
One of those times occurred this weekend, when I wanted to be able to
switch between FD messages to work FD stations and normal mode to work
DX stations. My
A few times since loading the general release, I've found that I wasn't
automatically answering callers responding to my CQ after receiving RR73
from the previous QSO. Instead, I called CQ again. Call First and Auto
Seq were checked. (I was running a short JA opening, and it is their
habit to
On 6/1/2020 11:07 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
no need for screen captures, all the relevant information should be in
your ALL.TXT file.
Hi Bill,
ALL.TXT brings Notepad to its knees, taking days to load. Can you
suggest a better viewer?
73, Jim K9YC
Thanks VERY much for this one:
"Hold Tx frequency no longer cleared when switching between modes."
We're halfway there -- TX frequency defaults to 1500 Hz when I've
returned from MSK144 to FT8. Is it possible to remember prior setting of
TX frequency?
I think the goalpost markers are
On 5/19/2020 6:35 AM, Joe Taylor wrote:
I operate on 6m a lot, using FT8, MSK144, and recently also FT4. I
never have the problem you describe.
Can you please tell me how your setup prevents the problem I've
described? Is there a reason that you cannot change the behavior I've
described?
Joe, Bill, and Steve,
I have made this "feature request before, and hoped to see it in this
beta, but it's missing. My request is that either 1) WSJT-X remember my
setting of Hold TX Frequency or 2) make Hold TX Frequency the default. I
am continually bitten by this when I switch back and
On 5/18/2020 10:23 AM, Gary McDuffie wrote:
Forgot to mention, six has been open almost every day. Early afternoon there’s
a lull, but still some signals. Picks back up again late afternoon and has
been running right up to around midnight here.
That's quite dependent on where you live.
I use the ZL1FZ palette. Running FT8, the setting occasionally changes
to User Defined with no "trigger" that I've been able to identify as the
cause. I know it's happened because the traces change to white from the
multi-color ZL1FZ palette. This has happened several times in the 6 days
I've
On 4/27/2020 10:59 AM, Rich Zwirko - K1HTV wrote:
I wish the "Ref Spec" check box would be removed in a future release of
WSJT-X as it is NOT needed by 99.99% or more of WSJT-X users.
I strongly disagree, Rich. I find it quite useful, and use it all the
time since discovering it a year or two
On 2/27/2020 12:45 PM, Paul Randall wrote:
I think the WSJT message exchange protocol is based on decades old
moonbounce and MS procedures where 73 is simply a luxury that often
isn’t affordable.
Exactly right.
73, Jim K9YC
___
wsjt-devel
On 2/27/2020 7:56 AM, Ron WV4P wrote:
RR73 is not part of the exchange.
Wrong. The definition of a QSO is the exchange of callsign and one piece
of info by each party, and the acknowledgement of receipt by by each.
Each station must receive acknowledgement of the other's exchange. If
that
On 2/7/2020 12:34 PM, j...@comcast.net wrote:
I’m in the market for a new computer, to be used largely for high-end
WSJT-X applications like maxed-out JT65 decoding on EME.
My shack computer is a T540 Thinkpad that I bought about four years ago.
It has an 2.7 GHz i7 processor and fast SSD. It
On 1/3/2020 9:05 AM, Christoph Berg wrote:
Re: Graham c 2020-01-03
WSPR of course uploads reception reports to wsprnet.org. WSJT-X uploads FT8
reports to pskreporter.info but only for those CQ messages -
as far as I know something like VE3GHM FN25 (without the CQ) would not get
uploaded by
This morning, I fired up to work AG6EE on 6M with MSK144 on an
expedition to a couple of rare grids in the desert along the US/Mexico
border. He was on 50.265 to stay out of the way of casual QRM, and I
worked him in one of those grids yesterday. This morning, online chat
told me he was now
YES! This is quite important, and something that Elecraft got right in
the K3 from the very beginning (2008). When you switch to digital modes,
the equalizer is bypassed and processing is turned off. They also tell
you how to set audio drive level so that ALC is disabled.
73, Jim K9YC
On
W9MDB wrote:
I'm all ears for opinions from operators who have had a call pileup on them.
I've been a ham since 1955, General in '56, Extra '59. I've always been
primarily a CW op, mostly contesting and chasing DX. I've been the guy
on the DX end of pileups working CW in a major contest, no
On 12/3/2019 10:11 AM, David Gilbert wrote:
find it ridiculous that people smart enough to get a license
Sadly, too many did nothing more than memorizing answers to multiple
guess questions, not bothering to study the concepts behind the questions.
73, Jim K9YC
1 - 100 of 233 matches
Mail list logo
