Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Matthew, It is an interesting question. We are going to stick with the *.080 frequency recommendations. We have suggested that the CW boys and girls try using their notch filters and "yes" technology marches on and they will loose a little tiny piece of spectrum. John On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 7:43 PM Matthew Miller wrote: > Interesting, that's another different data-point for frequencies to use > (I'm not familiar with that groups.io but I think that site is where I > had seen talk of checking "the standard frequencies"). > > And just today there was a big fuss on the repeater a number of guys > saying how "digital especially FT8 is jamming and spamming over CW stations > down in the CW part of the band"...so I know I have to be rather careful > being able to cite why I pick where to use. > > Yes - the club I'm in arranges how many stations will be doing what, > they've got "generally" stations one SSB and one CW per band, and then I'm > tasked with "digital modes" open ended no band restrictions (well, within > the field day rules). I have done RTTY and PSK31 in years past, this year > I'm hoping to do better with FT8. Nobody has complained about interference > from me in the past...but the CW stations always obliterate my digital > reception and sometimes kill SSB too. > > I guess I'll try and build a configuration in WSJTX that has the standard > frequencies as well as the ones listed in this thread and on the site you > linked...shame there doesn't seem to be more coordination as to where to > operate for field day. > > -Matt / KK4NDE > > -Original Message- > From: Matt Power [mailto:mhpo...@mit.edu] > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 8:30 AM > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day > > > Was there any more recent info on frequencies for field day? > > https://groups.io/g/FT8-Digital-Mode/message/2202 has a different plan > with (for example) 14130 instead of 14080. That might be a better place for > discussion, because Field Day frequencies for this year probably won't have > a direct effect on WSJT-X development. > > https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Field-Day/2019/2019-Rules-RevA.pdf > says a club may operate on 20 FT8, 20 CW, and 20 SSB simultaneously (6.3, > 6.7). Depending on equipment, antenna spacing, and the relative skills of > the 20 SSB and 20 CW operators, a 20 FT8 signal might interfere with 20 SSB > more than with 20 CW, Or vice versa. > > One question is whether the 14130-versus-14080 choice is important to the > more common case of clubs who plan to operate 2 (not 3) stations on 20m at > the same time. For example: > > Many clubs have a station tuning around all of 20 SSB (14150 and up) to > look for new QSOs throughout the daytime. They do this every year. > Their station isn't big enough to call CQ and run stations on 20 SSB. > This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very > frequently on 14130. Would that often be a realistic conflict? > > Conversely, a club may be historically successful with S on 20 CW. > This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very > frequently on 14080. Is it realistic that they'll make substantially fewer > CW QSOs on the high end of 20 CW? > > Matt, KA1R > > > ___ > 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] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Interesting, that's another different data-point for frequencies to use (I'm not familiar with that groups.io but I think that site is where I had seen talk of checking "the standard frequencies"). And just today there was a big fuss on the repeater a number of guys saying how "digital especially FT8 is jamming and spamming over CW stations down in the CW part of the band"...so I know I have to be rather careful being able to cite why I pick where to use. Yes - the club I'm in arranges how many stations will be doing what, they've got "generally" stations one SSB and one CW per band, and then I'm tasked with "digital modes" open ended no band restrictions (well, within the field day rules). I have done RTTY and PSK31 in years past, this year I'm hoping to do better with FT8. Nobody has complained about interference from me in the past...but the CW stations always obliterate my digital reception and sometimes kill SSB too. I guess I'll try and build a configuration in WSJTX that has the standard frequencies as well as the ones listed in this thread and on the site you linked...shame there doesn't seem to be more coordination as to where to operate for field day. -Matt / KK4NDE -Original Message- From: Matt Power [mailto:mhpo...@mit.edu] Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 8:30 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day > Was there any more recent info on frequencies for field day? https://groups.io/g/FT8-Digital-Mode/message/2202 has a different plan with (for example) 14130 instead of 14080. That might be a better place for discussion, because Field Day frequencies for this year probably won't have a direct effect on WSJT-X development. https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Field-Day/2019/2019-Rules-RevA.pdf says a club may operate on 20 FT8, 20 CW, and 20 SSB simultaneously (6.3, 6.7). Depending on equipment, antenna spacing, and the relative skills of the 20 SSB and 20 CW operators, a 20 FT8 signal might interfere with 20 SSB more than with 20 CW, Or vice versa. One question is whether the 14130-versus-14080 choice is important to the more common case of clubs who plan to operate 2 (not 3) stations on 20m at the same time. For example: Many clubs have a station tuning around all of 20 SSB (14150 and up) to look for new QSOs throughout the daytime. They do this every year. Their station isn't big enough to call CQ and run stations on 20 SSB. This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very frequently on 14130. Would that often be a realistic conflict? Conversely, a club may be historically successful with S on 20 CW. This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very frequently on 14080. Is it realistic that they'll make substantially fewer CW QSOs on the high end of 20 CW? Matt, KA1R ___ 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] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
> Was there any more recent info on frequencies for field day? https://groups.io/g/FT8-Digital-Mode/message/2202 has a different plan with (for example) 14130 instead of 14080. That might be a better place for discussion, because Field Day frequencies for this year probably won't have a direct effect on WSJT-X development. https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Field-Day/2019/2019-Rules-RevA.pdf says a club may operate on 20 FT8, 20 CW, and 20 SSB simultaneously (6.3, 6.7). Depending on equipment, antenna spacing, and the relative skills of the 20 SSB and 20 CW operators, a 20 FT8 signal might interfere with 20 SSB more than with 20 CW, Or vice versa. One question is whether the 14130-versus-14080 choice is important to the more common case of clubs who plan to operate 2 (not 3) stations on 20m at the same time. For example: Many clubs have a station tuning around all of 20 SSB (14150 and up) to look for new QSOs throughout the daytime. They do this every year. Their station isn't big enough to call CQ and run stations on 20 SSB. This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very frequently on 14130. Would that often be a realistic conflict? Conversely, a club may be historically successful with S on 20 CW. This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very frequently on 14080. Is it realistic that they'll make substantially fewer CW QSOs on the high end of 20 CW? Matt, KA1R ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Was there any more recent info on frequencies for field day? When I did some google-searches this evening I didn't find anything other than a couple old posts where people in random forums said they planned to check the usual frequenciesI'd like to try and figure out a plan by this weekend so I can get all my gear tested and packed up in advance of the big weekend... -Matt / KK4NDE -Original Message- From: Bill Frantz [mailto:ae...@arrl.net] Sent: Sunday, June 02, 2019 1:24 AM To: WSJT software development Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day On 5/30/19 at 11:17 AM, wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net (Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel) wrote: >I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I >publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day"group on Facebook, and >elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first >practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that >RTTY usage in FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with >these? >1840 >3580 >7080 >14080 >21080 >28080 >50318 >144174 >Tim N6GP Here is the digital breakdown from WVARA (K6EI) last year: Band Mode QSOs 3.5 FT8 2 3.5 PSK322 7 FT8 13 7 PSK358 14 FT8 11 14 PSK350 14 RTTY17 21 PSK324 50 FT8 6 144 FT8 1 I think the RTTY ops will figure out a place to operate, probably about xx.084 on most bands. We expect that FT8 will almost completely take over from PSK31. With FT8, we won't see, "PLEASE COPY SEVEN ALPHA MISSISSIPPI" coming in in text. 73 Bill AE6JV --- Bill Frantz| Can't fix stupid, but duct | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | tape can muffle the sound... | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | - Bill Liebman | Los Gatos, CA 95032 ___ 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] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
On 5/30/19 at 11:17 AM, wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net (Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel) wrote: I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day"group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? 1840 3580 7080 14080 21080 28080 50318 144174 Tim N6GP Here is the digital breakdown from WVARA (K6EI) last year: Band Mode QSOs 3.5 FT8 2 3.5 PSK3 22 7 FT8 13 7 PSK3 58 14 FT8 11 14 PSK3 50 14 RTTY 17 21 PSK3 24 50 FT8 6 144 FT8 1 I think the RTTY ops will figure out a place to operate, probably about xx.084 on most bands. We expect that FT8 will almost completely take over from PSK31. With FT8, we won't see, "PLEASE COPY SEVEN ALPHA MISSISSIPPI" coming in in text. 73 Bill AE6JV --- Bill Frantz| Can't fix stupid, but duct | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | tape can muffle the sound... | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | - Bill Liebman | Los Gatos, CA 95032 ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
As previously stated the unique format for exchanges of FD messages would cause extreme frustration for those that don't know what's going on. Thus the migration to other frequencies is a very logical decision which should be supported by both sides. As Gary said, there is a large group that could care less about FD ops. Just listen to them on the voice segments. At least in voice, you have the option to quickly give the proper response and move on. This is not so easy, on purpose, with FT8 and future FT4 ops. I have created a CONFIGURATION that is for "other" uses such as DXPeditions and rare DX. I have all of those special frequencies in these configurations. With a couple of mouse clicks, I can get in or out of any configuration and some even come up in F/H mode automatically. When done, the same procedure returns me to normal FT8. WB5JJJ - George On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:16 PM Gary wrote: > Let’s not, please. Not everyone wants to participate in Field Day. The > suggested frequencies that Tim provided look good to me. > > > > 73 de Gary – W9BS > > > > *From:* Matthew Miller [mailto:mmill...@mail.umw.edu] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 30, 2019 8:48 PM > *To:* 'WSJT software development' > *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day > > > > Why not just use the normal expected FT8 frequencies for FT8? > > > > -Matt/KK4NDE > > > > *From:* Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel [mailto: > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] > *Sent:* Thursday, May 30, 2019 2:17 PM > *To:* wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > *Cc:* Tim Goeppinger > *Subject:* [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day > > > > I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I > publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day" > > group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first > practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in > FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? > > > > 1840 > 3580 > 7080 > 14080 > 21080 > 28080 > 50318 > 144174 > > > > Tim N6GP > ___ > 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] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Let’s not, please. Not everyone wants to participate in Field Day. The suggested frequencies that Tim provided look good to me. 73 de Gary – W9BS From: Matthew Miller [mailto:mmill...@mail.umw.edu] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 8:48 PM To: 'WSJT software development' Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day Why not just use the normal expected FT8 frequencies for FT8? -Matt/KK4NDE From: Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 2:17 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Tim Goeppinger Subject: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day" group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? 1840 3580 7080 14080 21080 28080 50318 144174 Tim N6GP ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Tim, I think these are good. They will help separate the FD FT8 operations from the casual FT8 operations. Important as we all know the exchanges are different. If everyone is one the same frequency (usual FT8 frequencies) everyone gets frustrated. John K4SQC North Fulton Amateur Radio League 6m Band Captain On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 2:22 PM Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I > publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day" > group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first > practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in > FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? > > 1840 > 3580 > 7080 > 14080 > 21080 > 28080 > 50318 > 144174 > > Tim N6GP > ___ > 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] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
Why not just use the normal expected FT8 frequencies for FT8? -Matt/KK4NDE From: Tim Goeppinger via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2019 2:17 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Tim Goeppinger Subject: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day" group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? 1840 3580 7080 14080 21080 28080 50318 144174 Tim N6GP ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
[wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day
I would like to finalize my list of Field Day frequencies, before I publish them in the "FT8 For Field Day"group on Facebook, and elsewhere. 7080 seemed good during our first practice. These freqs were selected based on the fact that RTTY usage in FD is almost non-existent. Any major problems with these? 1840 3580 7080 14080 21080 28080 50318 144174 Tim N6GP ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
