Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hi Glenn,
Searching the User Guide for a keyword is often a helpful way to find a
section of interest, but it's hardly a substitute for actually reading
the Guide. The second and third paragraphs of the whole Guide introduce
each of the supported protocols and provide a few words about what it's
designed for. Here's what is said about FST4:
"FST4 is designed especially for the LF and MF bands."
For what it's worth: I note that the "CTRL-F" search that you mentioned
does take you directly to Table 7 in Section 17.2 -- the summary I drew
to your particular attention.
-- 73, Joe, K1JT
On 12/7/2023 5:41 PM, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel wrote:
Thanks for the guidance.
So I'll take the hit for overlooking FST4 and FST4W for the needed low
S/N. I jumped to conclusions too quickly. I do that too
often in life. This happened after operating FT8 since 2021. My
oversight is due to the following reliance on a method of quickly
scanning for the assumed discussion early in the User Guide.
I started from the top of the User Guide PDF file and did a CTRL-F
("find") for "S/N". The third "Find" hit on "S/N" occurs in
Section 7.1 of the User Guide. The fourth hit on "S/N" occurs in
17.2.10. Between those two points, and in "1. Introduction" no
tabulation of S/N advantages occurs, when S/N is such a key value for
all WSJT-X modes. Albeit, discussions do occur about
weak-signal conditions on LF, HF, and VHF between those two points in
the Guide, but "how weak" is not as often emphasized.
--73, Glenn, AF8C
On 12/7/2023 2:55 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hello Glenn,
I think that you wish is already heard and fulfilled.
The suitable mode is FST4. There are seven modes with
transmission periods from 15 to 1800 seconds. The
performance of the FST4-120 is about the same as for
WSPR. For longer transmission periods transmitter
frequency stability requirement is higher as the used
bandwidth goes down. See user guide 17.2.10. Summary. Of
course the (un)stability of the propagation path on 160m
band may prevent usage of the slowest modes.
73, Reino OH3mA
-Original Message-
From: Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-
de...@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 5:46 PM
To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Glenn Williams
Subject: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hello,
FT8 on 160m pales.
WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on
80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with
trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently
ran
WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on
160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR
faultlessly listed a
-28 dBm decode.
Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity
for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new
mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be
increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would
require additional operator patience and associated
protocols for the extended timing.
--73, Glenn, AF8C
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast
antivirus software.
www.avast.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
I've tried using FST4-xxx modes on 160. Trouble is not enough are using it. How can we get more people to try it? Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel wrote: > Spend some time reading the WSJT-X User Guide. Pay particular attention > to Section 17.2. Its Table 7 summarizes the threshold sensitivities of > many of the available modes and submodes. For weak signal work on 160m > you might want to look at the FST4-xxx submodes. These submodes offer > sensitivities from 3 dB to 22 dB better than FT8 on an AWGN channel, and > comparable improvements on most channel conditions likely to be found on > our MF bands, including 160m. -- Brian D G3VGZ G8AOE G3T IO94im ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Thanks for the guidance.
So I'll take the hit for overlooking FST4 and FST4W for the needed low
S/N. I jumped to conclusions too quickly. I do that too
often in life. This happened after operating FT8 since 2021. My
oversight is due to the following reliance on a method of quickly
scanning for the assumed discussion early in the User Guide.
I started from the top of the User Guide PDF file and did a CTRL-F
("find") for "S/N". The third "Find" hit on "S/N" occurs in
Section 7.1 of the User Guide. The fourth hit on "S/N" occurs in
17.2.10. Between those two points, and in "1. Introduction" no
tabulation of S/N advantages occurs, when S/N is such a key value for
all WSJT-X modes. Albeit, discussions do occur about
weak-signal conditions on LF, HF, and VHF between those two points in
the Guide, but "how weak" is not as often emphasized.
--73, Glenn, AF8C
On 12/7/2023 2:55 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hello Glenn,
I think that you wish is already heard and fulfilled.
The suitable mode is FST4. There are seven modes with
transmission periods from 15 to 1800 seconds. The
performance of the FST4-120 is about the same as for
WSPR. For longer transmission periods transmitter
frequency stability requirement is higher as the used
bandwidth goes down. See user guide 17.2.10. Summary. Of
course the (un)stability of the propagation path on 160m
band may prevent usage of the slowest modes.
73, Reino OH3mA
-Original Message-
From: Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-
de...@lists.sourceforge.net]
Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 5:46 PM
To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: Glenn Williams
Subject: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hello,
FT8 on 160m pales.
WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on
80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with
trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently
ran
WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on
160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR
faultlessly listed a
-28 dBm decode.
Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity
for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new
mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be
increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would
require additional operator patience and associated
protocols for the extended timing.
--73, Glenn, AF8C
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast
antivirus software.
www.avast.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hi Glenn, FT4 and FT8 are a tiny fraction of what's available in WSJT-X. Modes that meet the needs you describe are already available in the program. Spend some time reading the WSJT-X User Guide. Pay particular attention to Section 17.2. Its Table 7 summarizes the threshold sensitivities of many of the available modes and submodes. For weak signal work on 160m you might want to look at the FST4-xxx submodes. These submodes offer sensitivities from 3 dB to 22 dB better than FT8 on an AWGN channel, and comparable improvements on most channel conditions likely to be found on our MF bands, including 160m. -- 73, Joe, K1JT On 12/7/2023 10:46 AM, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel wrote: Hello, FT8 on 160m pales. WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode. Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing. --73, Glenn, AF8C ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hello Glenn, I think that you wish is already heard and fulfilled. The suitable mode is FST4. There are seven modes with transmission periods from 15 to 1800 seconds. The performance of the FST4-120 is about the same as for WSPR. For longer transmission periods transmitter frequency stability requirement is higher as the used bandwidth goes down. See user guide 17.2.10. Summary. Of course the (un)stability of the propagation path on 160m band may prevent usage of the slowest modes. 73, Reino OH3mA > -Original Message- > From: Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt- > de...@lists.sourceforge.net] > Sent: Thursday, December 7, 2023 5:46 PM > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Cc: Glenn Williams > Subject: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode > > Hello, > > FT8 on 160m pales. > > WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on > 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with > trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran > WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on > 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR > faultlessly listed a > -28 dBm decode. > > Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity > for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new > mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be > increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would > require additional operator patience and associated > protocols for the extended timing. > > --73, Glenn, AF8C > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast > antivirus software. > www.avast.com > > > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
A few days ago I worked a ZL stn with 80 watts to a 40ft vertical with just a few long radials. My report was -11 on FT8. >From time to time 160M propagation is amazing even during strong Sun Spot cycle times. Bill W2PKY Tampa Fl. ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Glenn,A mode that differs from FST4?Ed N4II. Original message From: Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel Date: 12/7/23 1:26 PM (GMT-06:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Glenn Williams Subject: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode Hello,FT8 on 160m pales.WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode.Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing.--73, Glenn, AF8C-- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.www.avast.com___wsjt-devel mailing listwsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Glenn the new mode you want has been out for quite awhile. FST4 is that mode. However 160M ops have been slow to adopt it. I guess because it’s not a set and forget mode like FT8 is. Fred N2XK > On Dec 7, 2023, at 2:28 PM, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel > wrote: > > Hello, > > FT8 on 160m pales. > > WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands > are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I > recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA > EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode. > > Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely > needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have > to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional > operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing. > > --73, Glenn, AF8C > > -- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > www.avast.com > > > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hi Glenn, You might like the FST4 QSO mode. Same operating procedure as FT8, but depending on cycle length it can decode below -30 dB. It is mostly used on 630m but I also had (transatlantic) contacts on 160m. https://wsjt.sourceforge.io/FST4_Quick_Start.pdf 73 Stefan On 07.12.23 16:46, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel wrote: Hello, FT8 on 160m pales. WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode. Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing. --73, Glenn, AF8C ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Keep in mind that 160 is dead right now due to the sun cycle. 160 is always dead during the day. Larry / W1DYJ On 12/7/2023 10:46, Glenn Williams via wsjt-devel wrote: Hello, FT8 on 160m pales. WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode. Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing. --73, Glenn, AF8C ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
[wsjt-devel] 160m S/N needs advanced mode
Hello, FT8 on 160m pales. WSJT-X operators customarily running FT8 and FT4 on 80m through 10m HF bands are likely disappointed with trials on 160m. As one of those operators I recently ran WSPR on 160m in comparison to working FT8 QSOs on 160m. In NA EST daytime operation at 2220Z WSPR faultlessly listed a -28 dBm decode. Here I suggest we need an improved decode sensitivity for 160m QSOs, likely needing to be done with a new mode. Granted, the TX and RX times would have to be increased (Shannon-Hartley Theorem). That would require additional operator patience and associated protocols for the extended timing. --73, Glenn, AF8C -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. www.avast.com ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
