Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
George, I sometimes used macros like XX0YY PSE QSY and the like just for fast firefighting.. That is not enough to solve the IARU Bandplan problem. Our representatives at all the three IARU Regions meet regularly and above all they communicate on their channels. These communications are much better as it has been during the eighties and the nineties when we get correspondeence in envelopes handled by snail mail. Now there are IARU websites and forums for the representatives of our countries. They collect recommendations for all fields of amateur radio into handbooks. Just an example is the VHF Managers' Handbook which has just been rewritten after the Landshut Conference. There still must exist a an IARU HQ in the USA and above all the IARU Adminstrative Council. http://www.iaru.org/administrative-council-meetings.html They are to take steps when urgent problems arise. When one checks qrz.com pages of many fellow amateurs you can see large pictures on the wall at ham shacks which shows bandplans. So, it is time to print new ones and to put them on the walls! We must create new traditions NOW. GL de HA6NN Andras On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 2:17 PM, George J Molnar wrote: > Andras, > > Yes my family is from Hungary. I clearly remember my grandfather’s strong > accent, expressions, and cooking! We have been in America only since WW1, > and am sure there are many relatives in Europe. I understand your concern > completely. Not sure there is much we can do about some operators who do > not operate as good citizens. > > Rather than this group get embroiled in debates over what constitutes a > worthy use of Fox/Hound mode, or what frequencies should or should not be > used, let’s see what we can do to help the dev team with constructive ideas > for appropriate use of Fox/Hound. It may well turn out that we all have to > change our ways. > > Should we split our FT-8 operations into two sub-bands, with one being > self-designated “foxes” and the other “hounds”? While we’d still want major > pileups removed from the customary working frequencies, perhaps this will > alleviate congestion and allow operators to become accustomed to this > particular brand of split operating. That way, the confusion will be > reduced (of course never eliminated) when the rare ones fire up. Train the > way you fight, right? > > Just an idea. Who has others? > > *George J Molnar* > Washington, DC, USA > KF2T - @GJMolnar > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 14, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Andras Bato wrote: > > Hello Mr. Molnar, > maybe our predecessors were fighting together for freedom here in Hungary. > A large port of the problem is jamming by operators of certain countries, > mainly in South-Europe. > Something has to be done against their bullying style. > I'm sure it helps! > GL de HA6NN > Andras > > > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Bill Somerville kirjoitti 14.03.2018 klo 14:12: On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Hi Jim, why not? I totally agree with Bill. Why this huge complain? Look at what Joe and his team has done! Really something new that we never have seen before. Maybe that is why there are always those ones that are against everything new. DXpedition mode is not yet ready, and never will be if it is tested only in laboratory. That includes also tests by real DX teams like TY7C group. Not just those organized debugging events that are the base for properly working versions. True DX teams need also experiences of usage, even with just buggy rc-versions of program. What do you think would happen if DX group just get 100% working program with them to DX pedition, but nobody have ever seen, tried or even heard about the usage? If we look to traditional DXpeditions using CW or phone they easily roll over "normal usage" frequencies. With Split CW from 1.5kHz to 10kHz and with split phone from 5kHz to 25kHz. That is 10 FT8 "bands". And so little complains ! We need more space for new digital modes. That is never going to happen if we just make plans. It will be endless chain of meetings without results if there is not urgent need to do something. And that need comes when new modes are used in somewhere. It is sure they always take part from some other mode as there are no empty gaps reserved for future modes within our bands. I have funny feeling that I remember time when PSK was invented and caused lot of anger because it was used on conventional rtty frequencies. Sounds like history is repeating itself... -- Saku OH1KH -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Hi Uwe, On 3/14/2018 5:15 AM, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote: Today I’ve had my first real-life experience with the new DXpedition mode. No, not really. FT8 DXpedition mode is not present in any full-release version of WSJT-X. A correct statement is that you participated in an exercise using beta-release software with intentionally limited capabilities. TY7C was the fox, the frequency was 7.070 MHz. The station came in with a rather stable signal around -12dB, and most stations (with exception of one Italian and one Romanian and a few others…) were following the instructions for DXpedition mode. However, I was somehow disappointed: - Although about five to ten hounds were calling TY7C simultaneously (in the correct range 1000 – 4000 Hz), in most cases TY7C sent his reply only to one station each. Of course, because in WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc2 arbitrary stations acting as Fox are intentionally limited to a single Tx "slot". Means that number of QSOs per minute was nearly the same as in normal mode. Even limited to one Tx slot, with plenty of well-behaved Hounds a practiced Fox operator can make QSOs at about twice the rate of standard FT8 QSOs. As sometimes up to four stations occurred in the rage 300 – 900 Hz, there must have been more than one QSO in the queue. Why did that happen? Did you read the "DXpedition Mode Test Results" that was widely distributed following the first public test on March 6-7 ? This issue and many others were described in some detail there. We distributed WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc2 in order to make possible a public test of FT8 DXpedition Mode in sustained pileup conditions. The test run was extremely helpful. Except for ad hoc testing in small groups by special arrangement, we have generally recommended against other use of DXpedition Mode with this program release. Of course it's OK to try it -- but you will not yet see anything close to its full capabilities. Known bugs brought to light by the March 6-7 public test run have now been fixed. We expect to have WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3 packaged and made available by next weekend. We will plan to announce another public test run soon afterward. -- 73, Joe, K1JT -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Andras, Yes my family is from Hungary. I clearly remember my grandfather’s strong accent, expressions, and cooking! We have been in America only since WW1, and am sure there are many relatives in Europe. I understand your concern completely. Not sure there is much we can do about some operators who do not operate as good citizens. Rather than this group get embroiled in debates over what constitutes a worthy use of Fox/Hound mode, or what frequencies should or should not be used, let’s see what we can do to help the dev team with constructive ideas for appropriate use of Fox/Hound. It may well turn out that we all have to change our ways. Should we split our FT-8 operations into two sub-bands, with one being self-designated “foxes” and the other “hounds”? While we’d still want major pileups removed from the customary working frequencies, perhaps this will alleviate congestion and allow operators to become accustomed to this particular brand of split operating. That way, the confusion will be reduced (of course never eliminated) when the rare ones fire up. Train the way you fight, right? Just an idea. Who has others? George J Molnar Washington, DC, USA KF2T - @GJMolnar > On Mar 14, 2018, at 8:48 AM, Andras Bato wrote: > > Hello Mr. Molnar, > maybe our predecessors were fighting together for freedom here in Hungary. > A large port of the problem is jamming by operators of certain countries, > mainly in South-Europe. > Something has to be done against their bullying style. > I'm sure it helps! > GL de HA6NN > Andras -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
why not? This is Amateur Radio which is experimental...> jarmo hat am 14. März 2018 um 12:23 geschrieben:> > > Wed, 14 Mar 2018 06:24:30 -0400> "James Shaver (N2ADV)" kirjoitti:> > > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. > > > > Jim S. > > N2ADV. > And why not?> > For me TY is quite DX...> > Jarmo> > --> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot> ___> wsjt-devel mailing list> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Hi all I do not think that pleading for “good operating sensibilities and consideration for others” will do much good. I did query ages ago when this mode was 1st being mentioned that if it was a good idea but got shouted down. All I see nowadays is people answering a cq then deciding to call cq themselves elsewhere but having not bothering to read the manual 1st fail to take their tx with them and proceed to call cq on the previous still occupied frequency. I have lost count of the people I have emailed to explain that just clicking on the waterfall does not move the tx and that they need to hold the CTRL button when clicking if they want the tx to move with the click of the mouse. I understand the developers are assuming that most operators will read the manual and have some common sense and while I admire their optimism the reality is not matching their expectations After general release everybody will think they are special and I can see havoc with multiple stations using the new mode think they are the only ones entitled to do it. Richard G7OED From: George Molnar Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 12:03 PM To: WSJT software development Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow Have to agree with Jim, N2ADV. An expedition should NOT be using a mode-in-development. It is a near-guarantee of confusion. That said, DXpedition mode is something of a Pandora’s Box. Once opened, the developers have no control over who uses it or when. It would be more than a little naive to assert that all users will a) read the instructions, and b) follow them. For good or ill, it’s out there. All we can do is plead for good operating sensibilities and consideration for others. Fox/Hound mode is too alluring a prospect for contesters and special event stations to willingly forgo its use. George J Molnar Washington, DC, USA KF2T - @GJMolnar -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Hi Mike, comments in line below. On 14/03/2018 12:46, mwbese...@cox.net wrote: Thanks Bill... but the point is people are NOT being respectful of others. And for the record, I never claimed that anyone 'owned' any give frequency, but we have lived by a gentleman's agreement for all of the 43 years I have been a ham - and people mostly respected that agreement. That's all we ask. I agree with band plans but when new modes become popular with many more users than some existing ones and there is no free space then something has to give. It is not an easy circle to square. As for national organizations, the ARRL has sold out on us and are totally worthless. And even if they weren't, what power do they have to fix it? I don't buy this. Are you confusing band allocations with band plans? The ARRL and other national societies and the IARU are absolutely the right place to request band plan changes, if not that we are not the gentlemen that the Gentlemen's Agreement that are the band plans require. If the ARRL is broken then fix it, they are just Amateur Radio operators that have taken on a role not some official government body. The point is not to complain, but to try to draw attention to the fact that there is a problem. If it's not brought to the attention of the people who use the mode (and develop the software), how will it every get fixed. This all started when the 17 meter PSK frequency was claimed as the FT8 anchor frequency and it's been going down hill ever since. The developers of new modes make efforts to try and fit into band plans, a near impossible task BTW, but can't always satisfy everyone. Face facts, the FT8 users would be equally upset if someone moved into their segment and started operating RTTY or some other digital mode. PSK uses a total of about 2 KHz per band; how about a little respect for that tiny wedge. I will agree the situation on 17m is unfortunate and probably my fault for which I apologize, sorry. For sure some time in the next 10 years when we might get some decent global propagation back on the HF bands it needs resolving. Mike WM4B 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
If people don't understand the term "hijack", and consider being "DX" the right to trash existing digital watering holes, above all other considerations, then I have no idea what more I can contribute to this conversation, but I'll try, one last time. Indeed, no one "owns" a frequency, but conventions were established to protect the individual digital modes, so things didn't turn into a free for all, and the merits of the modes, not to mention the enjoyment of using them, could be explored. DXp ignores these conventions...*and certainly there are situations and justifications for doing just that.* Overuse of this "feature", however, will be a scourge on the digital sub-bands. Don't get me wrong, I love FT8. I think DXp is one of the neatest ideas I've ever seen. But the indifferent disregard of established norms, creating a mode of operation that is CERTAIN to cause major issues ...and then walking away with "warning not to misuse it", or relegating the problems caused by this to "Amateur Radio Societies"...irresponsible. I'm done with thisas a wise person once said to me "If you have no shame, do whatever you like." 73, N0AN Otherwise, it's not a mode. It's a virus. Hasan On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:25 AM, James Shaver wrote: > Hi Bill - they're not just "testing" they're trouncing on existing digital > mode watering holes without any real regard to anyone around them. The > lack > of consideration to others is simply astounding. > > I've said my peace on this. > > Jim S. > > > -Original Message----- > From: Bill Somerville [mailto:g4...@classdesign.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:13 AM > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow > > On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: > > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. > > Hi Jim, > > why not? > > https://ty2018dx.wordpress.com/ > > and check their QRZ.COM page. > > They are not some random OM playing with FT8 DXpedition mode on the normal > FT8 sub-bands. Benin may not be in the top 10 most wanted list but that's > fine. If a DXpedition team want to try out FT8 DXpedition mode and are > fully > aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them > etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature of > WSJT-X is fine. They may lose some QSOs as a result but they may well > provide valuable feedback. It is a little unfortunate that their operation > dates coincide with a version of WSJT-X > (v1.9.0-rc2) that has several known defects, picked up in the public tests > recently, that have been fixed but not yet released. > > With respect to Uwe's disappointment, I'm not sure if the F6KOP team have > limited power or are just starting cautiously with only one Tx slot. They > can still potentially complete 120 QSOs/hr with one slot. > Note that using N slots greater than one means reduced power per QSO with > signals being ~14dB down with N slots equal to five. I note in their blog > post that they are having success with FT8 DXpedition mode but find they > are > hearing callers better than they are being heard, possibly as a result of > trying N slots > 1. > > 73 > Bill > G4WJS. > > > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging > tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Hello Mr. Molnar, maybe our predecessors were fighting together for freedom here in Hungary. A large port of the problem is jamming by operators of certain countries, mainly in South-Europe. Something has to be done against their bullying style. I'm sure it helps! GL de HA6NN Andras On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:03 PM, George Molnar wrote: > Have to agree with Jim, N2ADV. An expedition should NOT be using a > mode-in-development. It is a near-guarantee of confusion. > > That said, DXpedition mode is something of a Pandora’s Box. Once opened, > the developers have no control over who uses it or when. It would be more > than a little naive to assert that all users will a) read the instructions, > and b) follow them. > > For good or ill, it’s out there. All we can do is plead for good operating > sensibilities and consideration for others. Fox/Hound mode is too alluring > a prospect for contesters and special event stations to willingly forgo its > use. > > *George J Molnar* > Washington, DC, USA > KF2T - @GJMolnar > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > ___ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Thanks Bill... but the point is people are NOT being respectful of others. And for the record, I never claimed that anyone 'owned' any give frequency, but we have lived by a gentleman's agreement for all of the 43 years I have been a ham - and people mostly respected that agreement. That's all we ask. As for national organizations, the ARRL has sold out on us and are totally worthless. And even if they weren't, what power do they have to fix it? The point is not to complain, but to try to draw attention to the fact that there is a problem. If it's not brought to the attention of the people who use the mode (and develop the software), how will it every get fixed. This all started when the 17 meter PSK frequency was claimed as the FT8 anchor frequency and it's been going down hill ever since. Face facts, the FT8 users would be equally upset if someone moved into their segment and started operating RTTY or some other digital mode. PSK uses a total of about 2 KHz per band; how about a little respect for that tiny wedge. Mike WM4B On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 8:31 AM, Bill Somerville wrote: On 14/03/2018 12:24, mwbese...@cox.net wrote: "and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature" And yet these 'brave' DXers landed smack on top of the PSK band. Great job, geniuses. Mike WM4B Hi Mike, no one "owns" a given frequency. I will agree that attracting callers to a busy part of the spectrum may be unwelcome but do not forget that FT8 signals are nominally only 50Hz wide and if everyone takes care to only transmit on a clear frequency then we should all be able to co-exist and share the rather limited digital band allocations. Complaining here will not get you far, complaints should be converted to requests in the direction national societies and others responsible for band planning. Clearly at the moment digital usage exceeds capacity at peak times, if this trend is going to continue that the band plans need to be adjusted. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
And torquing off a lot of people in the process. Not good PR for the FT8 mode. Unintended consequences sometimes will bite you in the butt. Mike WM4B On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 8:25 AM, James Shaver wrote: Hi Bill - they're not just "testing" they're trouncing on existing digital mode watering holes without any real regard to anyone around them. The lack of consideration to others is simply astounding. I've said my peace on this. Jim S. -Original Message- From: Bill Somerville [mailto:g4...@classdesign.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:13 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Hi Jim, why not? https://ty2018dx.wordpress.com/ and check their QRZ.COM page. They are not some random OM playing with FT8 DXpedition mode on the normal FT8 sub-bands. Benin may not be in the top 10 most wanted list but that's fine. If a DXpedition team want to try out FT8 DXpedition mode and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature of WSJT-X is fine. They may lose some QSOs as a result but they may well provide valuable feedback. It is a little unfortunate that their operation dates coincide with a version of WSJT-X (v1.9.0-rc2) that has several known defects, picked up in the public tests recently, that have been fixed but not yet released. With respect to Uwe's disappointment, I'm not sure if the F6KOP team have limited power or are just starting cautiously with only one Tx slot. They can still potentially complete 120 QSOs/hr with one slot. Note that using N slots greater than one means reduced power per QSO with signals being ~14dB down with N slots equal to five. I note in their blog post that they are having success with FT8 DXpedition mode but find they are hearing callers better than they are being heard, possibly as a result of trying N slots > 1. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
On 14/03/2018 12:24, mwbese...@cox.net wrote: "and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature" And yet these 'brave' DXers landed smack on top of the PSK band. Great job, geniuses. Mike WM4B Hi Mike, no one "owns" a given frequency. I will agree that attracting callers to a busy part of the spectrum may be unwelcome but do not forget that FT8 signals are nominally only 50Hz wide and if everyone takes care to only transmit on a clear frequency then we should all be able to co-exist and share the rather limited digital band allocations. Complaining here will not get you far, complaints should be converted to requests in the direction national societies and others responsible for band planning. Clearly at the moment digital usage exceeds capacity at peak times, if this trend is going to continue that the band plans need to be adjusted. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Hi Bill - they're not just "testing" they're trouncing on existing digital mode watering holes without any real regard to anyone around them. The lack of consideration to others is simply astounding. I've said my peace on this. Jim S. -Original Message- From: Bill Somerville [mailto:g4...@classdesign.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 8:13 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Hi Jim, why not? https://ty2018dx.wordpress.com/ and check their QRZ.COM page. They are not some random OM playing with FT8 DXpedition mode on the normal FT8 sub-bands. Benin may not be in the top 10 most wanted list but that's fine. If a DXpedition team want to try out FT8 DXpedition mode and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature of WSJT-X is fine. They may lose some QSOs as a result but they may well provide valuable feedback. It is a little unfortunate that their operation dates coincide with a version of WSJT-X (v1.9.0-rc2) that has several known defects, picked up in the public tests recently, that have been fixed but not yet released. With respect to Uwe's disappointment, I'm not sure if the F6KOP team have limited power or are just starting cautiously with only one Tx slot. They can still potentially complete 120 QSOs/hr with one slot. Note that using N slots greater than one means reduced power per QSO with signals being ~14dB down with N slots equal to five. I note in their blog post that they are having success with FT8 DXpedition mode but find they are hearing callers better than they are being heard, possibly as a result of trying N slots > 1. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
"and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature" And yet these 'brave' DXers landed smack on top of the PSK band. Great job, geniuses. Mike WM4B On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Bill Somerville wrote: On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Hi Jim, why not? https://ty2018dx.wordpress.com/ and check their QRZ.COM page. They are not some random OM playing with FT8 DXpedition mode on the normal FT8 sub-bands. Benin may not be in the top 10 most wanted list but that's fine. If a DXpedition team want to try out FT8 DXpedition mode and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature of WSJT-X is fine. They may lose some QSOs as a result but they may well provide valuable feedback. It is a little unfortunate that their operation dates coincide with a version of WSJT-X (v1.9.0-rc2) that has several known defects, picked up in the public tests recently, that have been fixed but not yet released. With respect to Uwe's disappointment, I'm not sure if the F6KOP team have limited power or are just starting cautiously with only one Tx slot. They can still potentially complete 120 QSOs/hr with one slot. Note that using N slots greater than one means reduced power per QSO with signals being ~14dB down with N slots equal to five. I note in their blog post that they are having success with FT8 DXpedition mode but find they are hearing callers better than they are being heard, possibly as a result of trying N slots > 1. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
On 14/03/2018 10:24, James Shaver (N2ADV) wrote: TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Hi Jim, why not? https://ty2018dx.wordpress.com/ and check their QRZ.COM page. They are not some random OM playing with FT8 DXpedition mode on the normal FT8 sub-bands. Benin may not be in the top 10 most wanted list but that's fine. If a DXpedition team want to try out FT8 DXpedition mode and are fully aware of the caveats about making sure that callers know how to work them etc. then their brave attempt to try out an as yet unpolished feature of WSJT-X is fine. They may lose some QSOs as a result but they may well provide valuable feedback. It is a little unfortunate that their operation dates coincide with a version of WSJT-X (v1.9.0-rc2) that has several known defects, picked up in the public tests recently, that have been fixed but not yet released. With respect to Uwe's disappointment, I'm not sure if the F6KOP team have limited power or are just starting cautiously with only one Tx slot. They can still potentially complete 120 QSOs/hr with one slot. Note that using N slots greater than one means reduced power per QSO with signals being ~14dB down with N slots equal to five. I note in their blog post that they are having success with FT8 DXpedition mode but find they are hearing callers better than they are being heard, possibly as a result of trying N slots > 1. 73 Bill G4WJS. -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Have to agree with Jim, N2ADV. An expedition should NOT be using a mode-in-development. It is a near-guarantee of confusion. That said, DXpedition mode is something of a Pandora’s Box. Once opened, the developers have no control over who uses it or when. It would be more than a little naive to assert that all users will a) read the instructions, and b) follow them. For good or ill, it’s out there. All we can do is plead for good operating sensibilities and consideration for others. Fox/Hound mode is too alluring a prospect for contesters and special event stations to willingly forgo its use. George J Molnar Washington, DC, USA KF2T - @GJMolnar smime.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
...but, they DO QRM others, that is why DXp is reserved for legitimate full blown DXpeditions, not just rare DX Stations, but Full DXpeditions. Otherwise, any time a "rare" dx station comes on, DXp mode destroys the entire segment that it has hijacked from some other digital mode that is used to running there. It is selfish, boorish and poor operating practice to use DXp when you aren't a high demand full blown DXpedition. Look at my posting in the WSJT-X group and you will see the difference. 73, N0AN Hasan On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 6:34 AM, Charles Suckling < char...@sucklingfamily.free-online.co.uk> wrote: > Jim > > > > I don’t think the test was on the designated FT8 frequency for 40m, or am > I mistaken? > > > > In which case I thought “private” tests were OK provided they don’t QRM > users of other modes? > > > > The answer to why the station is only transmitting to one station at a > time is because Nslots would have been set to 1, I think. > > > > 73 > > > > Charlie G3WDG > > > -- > > *From:* James Shaver (N2ADV) [mailto:n2...@windstream.net] > *Sent:* 14 March 2018 10:25 > *To:* WSJT software development > *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow > > > > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. > > > > Jim S. > > N2ADV. > > > On Mar 14, 2018, at 5:15 AM, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote: > > Hi, > > Today I’ve had my first real-life experience with the new DXpedition mode. > TY7C was the fox, the frequency was 7.070 MHz. The station came in with a > rather stable signal around -12dB, and most stations (with exception of one > Italian and one Romanian and a few others…) were following the instructions > for DXpedition mode. > > However, I was somehow disappointed: > > - Although about five to ten hounds were calling TY7C simultaneously (in > the correct range 1000 – 4000 Hz), in most cases TY7C sent his reply only > to one station each. Means that number of QSOs per minute was nearly the > same as in normal mode. As sometimes up to four stations occurred in the > rage 300 – 900 Hz, there must have been more than one QSO in the queue. Why > did that happen? > > - Fox disappeared and reappeared suddenly without any notice, leaving many > stations alone who were then finally trying to call Fox in his rage. I > don’t know whether there were some troubles with power supply, but all in > all it was quite unsatisfactory. > > I don’t know either what might be improved. However, I wanted to share > this experience with you. For the purpose of further analysis: here is > traffic in Fox’s range (two times I activated Rx All Freqs): > > 40m > > 064730 -10 -0.1 298 ~ F6GCP TY7C RR73 > > 40m > > 064830 -10 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C +13 > > 40m > > 064900 -12 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C +13 > > 40m > > 064930 -11 -0.5 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C RR73 > > 40m > > 065000 -11 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C RR73 > > 40m > > 065030 -8 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin > > 40m > > 065100 -10 -0.1 298 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin > > 40m > > 065130 -11 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin > > 40m > > 065200 -9 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin > > 40m > > 065230 -10 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin > > 40m > > 065345 5 0.2 419 ~ TY7C F8BUO -04 > > 065345 2 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 > > 065345 -6 -0.8 588 ~ TY7C DL5MFS -09 > > 065345 7 0.1 1838 ~ TY7C F8DZU R-17 > > 40m > > 065415 5 0.2 419 ~ TY7C F8BUO -04 > > 065415 0 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 > > 065415 -8 -0.8 688 ~ TY7C DL5MFS JN58 > > 065415 -16 0.1 995 ~ TY7C KU4XO EM84 > > 065415 9 0.1 1838 ~ TY7C F8DZU R-17 > > 40m > > 065430 -3 -0.2 298 ~ N6ML TY7C +05 > > 40m > > 065500 -11 -0.2 297 ~ N6ML RR73; ON6SM +03 > > 40m > > 065530 -11 -0.3 297 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 > > 40m > > 065600 -10 -0.2 297 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 > > 40m > > 065630 -8 -0.2 298 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 > > 40m > > 065645 -4 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 > >
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Besides the fact that it has been stated at least a dozen times by the Development Team that the functionality is not yet ready for use, the reasons are clearly outlined here in this group. Search the group for the past week and you'll have your answer. Also, take a look at the laundry list of issues you noted in your original e-mail, many of which were discussed at length after the public test of the DXPedition Mode and these all point to the fact that the DXPedition Mode is not ready for use beyond just the occasional public tests. Jim S. N2ADV -Original Message- From: jarmo [mailto:oh1...@nic.fi] Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2018 7:24 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow Wed, 14 Mar 2018 06:24:30 -0400 "James Shaver (N2ADV)" kirjoitti: > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. > > Jim S. > N2ADV. And why not? For me TY is quite DX... Jarmo -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Jim I don't think the test was on the designated FT8 frequency for 40m, or am I mistaken? In which case I thought "private" tests were OK provided they don't QRM users of other modes? The answer to why the station is only transmitting to one station at a time is because Nslots would have been set to 1, I think. 73 Charlie G3WDG _ From: James Shaver (N2ADV) [mailto:n2...@windstream.net] Sent: 14 March 2018 10:25 To: WSJT software development Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. Jim S. N2ADV. On Mar 14, 2018, at 5:15 AM, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote: Hi, Today I've had my first real-life experience with the new DXpedition mode. TY7C was the fox, the frequency was 7.070 MHz. The station came in with a rather stable signal around -12dB, and most stations (with exception of one Italian and one Romanian and a few others.) were following the instructions for DXpedition mode. However, I was somehow disappointed: - Although about five to ten hounds were calling TY7C simultaneously (in the correct range 1000 - 4000 Hz), in most cases TY7C sent his reply only to one station each. Means that number of QSOs per minute was nearly the same as in normal mode. As sometimes up to four stations occurred in the rage 300 - 900 Hz, there must have been more than one QSO in the queue. Why did that happen? - Fox disappeared and reappeared suddenly without any notice, leaving many stations alone who were then finally trying to call Fox in his rage. I don't know whether there were some troubles with power supply, but all in all it was quite unsatisfactory. I don't know either what might be improved. However, I wanted to share this experience with you. For the purpose of further analysis: here is traffic in Fox's range (two times I activated Rx All Freqs): 40m 064730 -10 -0.1 298 ~ F6GCP TY7C RR73 40m 064830 -10 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C +13 40m 064900 -12 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C +13 40m 064930 -11 -0.5 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C RR73 40m 065000 -11 -0.1 298 ~ IK8DNJ TY7C RR73 40m 065030 -8 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin 40m 065100 -10 -0.1 298 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin 40m 065130 -11 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin 40m 065200 -9 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin 40m 065230 -10 -0.1 297 ~ CQ TY7C JJ16 ~Benin 40m 065345 5 0.2 419 ~ TY7C F8BUO -04 065345 2 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 065345 -6 -0.8 588 ~ TY7C DL5MFS -09 065345 7 0.1 1838 ~ TY7C F8DZU R-17 40m 065415 5 0.2 419 ~ TY7C F8BUO -04 065415 0 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 065415 -8 -0.8 688 ~ TY7C DL5MFS JN58 065415 -16 0.1 995 ~ TY7C KU4XO EM84 065415 9 0.1 1838 ~ TY7C F8DZU R-17 40m 065430 -3 -0.2 298 ~ N6ML TY7C +05 40m 065500 -11 -0.2 297 ~ N6ML RR73; ON6SM +03 40m 065530 -11 -0.3 297 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 40m 065600 -10 -0.2 297 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 40m 065630 -8 -0.2 298 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 40m 065645 -4 0.2 500 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 065645 -7 -0.8 687 ~ TY7C DL5MFS -08 065645 -18 0.1 995 ~ TY7C KU4XO EM84 40m 065700 -8 -0.2 297 ~ ON6SM TY7C +03 40m 065730 -11 -0.2 297 ~ F6EQZ TY7C -01 40m 065800 -12 -0.2 297 ~ F6EQZ RR73; DG2YCB -17 40m 065830 -9 -0.2 297 ~ DG2YCB TY7C -17 40m 065900 -10 -0.2 297 ~ DG2YCB TY7C -17 40m 065930 -13 -0.1 297 ~ DG2YCB RR73; F8DZU -10 40m 065945 5 -0.0 557 ~ CQ IZ1BII JN44 ~Italy 065945 -20 0.1 995 ~ TY7C KU4XO EM84 40m 07 -16 -0.2 298 ~ DG2YCB RR73; ON6SM -04 40m 070030 -13 -0.2 298 ~ F8DZU TY7C -10 40m 070100 -15 -0.2 298 ~ ON6SM TY7C -04 40m 070115 -10 0.3 501 ~ TY7C ZL1AIX -06 070115 -10 -0.7 592 ~ TY7C DL5MFS -08 070115 -24 0.1 997 ~ TY7C KU4XO EM84 40m 070130 -15 -0.2 297 ~ F8DZU TY7C -10 40m 070145 4 -0.0 467 ~ CQ IZ1BII JN44 ~Italy 070145 -19 -0.7 592 ~ TY7C DL5MFS -08 -
Re: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition mode: dissapointed somehow
Wed, 14 Mar 2018 06:24:30 -0400 "James Shaver (N2ADV)" kirjoitti: > TY7C should not have even been using DXPedition Mode. > > Jim S. > N2ADV. And why not? For me TY is quite DX... Jarmo -- Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
