I've been using JT since its advent in early 2000's (I began with
JT44 in 2003 using my HB psk-31 computer interface).
I only had 110w on 2m using a MOT repeater PA so lucky to get 80w to
antennas. But I was using four 10-element yagis, which was
considered minimum for CW eme in 1998 if
Carl,
you tell that to Joe Taylor, who himself has said he uses the power it
takes to make the contact, especially on EME and Meteor Scatter. It is
not a low power mode. For some people using 500w from California
results in a - 19 report from Israel. That is a weak signal.
You use what
, 02 January, 2019 15:19
To: elecraft@mailman.qth.net
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Ideas for an FT8 Radio
On 1/2/2019 2:56 PM, Carl J. Denbow wrote:
> While it's legal to run maximum power on FT8, or any other weak signal
> mode, it's certainly not in the spirit of the weak signal mode ethos
>
I thought I would look through the high power QSOs in my log for
Los Gatos, CA to find what I do, instead of what I think I do. I
found that I use high power for:
The Elecraft SSB net: I frequently need a relay to reach Chicago.
DXpeditions: Minimizing the time for my QSO lets others make
On 1/2/2019 2:56 PM, Carl J. Denbow wrote:
While it's legal to run maximum power on FT8, or any other weak signal
mode, it's certainly not in the spirit of the weak signal mode ethos
Most weak-signal mode enthusiasts pride themselves on the worldwide
contacts they can make with low wattage.
Dito Carl, well said. I agree 100%
Bill KC4IM
> On Jan 2, 2019, at 5:56 PM, Carl J. Denbow wrote:
>
> While it's legal to run maximum power on FT8, or any other weak signal mode,
> it's certainly not in the spirit of the weak signal mode ethos Most
> weak-signal mode enthusiasts pride
While it's legal to run maximum power on FT8, or any other weak signal
mode, it's certainly not in the spirit of the weak signal mode ethos
Most weak-signal mode enthusiasts pride themselves on the worldwide
contacts they can make with low wattage. Many feel that 100 watts is
QRO on these
Rick, Thanks for this. Some people seem to think FT8 is a low power mode. It’s
a weak signal mode.
73, K8NU
> On Jan 1, 2019, at 11:56 PM, Rick Bates (WA6NHC) wrote:
>
> You run the amount of power required to make the contact, up to the legal
> limit. If you wish to operate QRP, that’s
You were wrong, but it's a common misconception.
Wes N7WS
On 1/1/2019 9:42 PM, Ken wrote:
Geesh, how much power are people running? I've always thought 50 watts was
excessive for digital modes!
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
The short answer for issues of obsolescence is the same for
computers as it is for RF components: modularization. I replaced
the synthesizers in my K3 when better ones came out. I would
expect to do the same for the computer, whether it is integrated
into the radio package or separate.
I
You run the amount of power required to make the contact, up to the legal
limit. If you wish to operate QRP, that’s your choice.
I remind you that RTTY is also digital and full legal limit is common; FT8 is
semi-automated RTTY with complex pattern but improved reception. High power is
also
Geesh, how much power are people running? I've always thought 50 watts
was excessive for digital modes!
As for the concept of a dedicated FT8 radio, what's going to happen when
FT9 becomes the latest craze? How many people operate Olivia (or even
JT-65) now?
Ken WA8JXM
On 12/29/18 5:23
They can put it on a separate module. There's space for at least a
Raspberry Pi Zero in there, so it could be put on a dedicated board of its
own. That way, it wouldn't be software in the main system firmware, it'd be
a separate, optional module with its own license. THAT can be GPL. You can
sell
As long as the developer is using any part of the WSJT-X code it cannot
be added to closed source firmware. It doesn't matter that it can be
done.
It would be in violation of the GPL
Neil, KN3ILZ
On 12/30/2018 8:59 PM, John Harper wrote:
Here's the thread - scroll down to message #27527:
That explains the complete and utter failure of the K1 and KX1 to gain
any popularity.
73, Dennis NJ6G
Happy New Year!
On 12/30/2018 17:56, Devin Butterfield wrote:
I also agree that a one-mode radio wouldn’t be of interest for very long.
—
Regards, Devin / K6DRS
Digests are from the early 90s. Totally unnecessary in this day and age.
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 30, 2018, at 11:15 PM, Jim Brown wrote:
>
>> On 12/30/2018 7:36 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
>> For the life of me I don't know what all of the hand-wringing is about with
>> OT posts.
>
> I
On 12/30/2018 7:36 PM, Wes Stewart wrote:
For the life of me I don't know what all of the hand-wringing is about
with OT posts.
I suspect that the complaints come from those who choose to read a
digest, or who don't use a decent email client. My delete key has always
worked quite well.
73,
When a post has "FT8" in the subject line, it's an automatic delete. I only
opened this one because Bob wrote it.
BTW, I too use Thunderbird, but don't use any filters etc. I find that I'm
perfectly capable of deleting unwanted posts by myself. For the life of me I
don't know what all of
My interest is already diminished to zero.
73
Bob, K4TAX
On 12/30/2018 7:56 PM, Devin Butterfield wrote:
I also agree that a one-mode radio wouldn’t be of interest for very long.
__
Elecraft mailing list
Home:
Here's the thread - scroll down to message #27527:
https://groups.io/g/QRPLabs/topic/no_ft8_in_the_upcoming_qsx/27317246?p=,,,20,0,0,0::recentpostdate%2Fsticky,,,20,2,0,27317246
John AE5X
https://ae5x.blogspot.com
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 7:56 PM Devin Butterfield <
One of the potential issues no one has mentioned is that JT and friends
released the code for FT8 under the GNU GPL license. This means if you link
this into any proprietary closed device or firmware, you would violate the
terms of the license.
You would have to either:
1. Write a cleanroom
The upcoming QSX kit from G0UPL may have FT8 capability. Hans announced
that it will run PSK31, WSPR and RTTY natively, ie on firmware within the
rig. Another ham, a Latvian I believe, asked "Why not FT8 too?"
Hans offered him a free QSX if he could write the code for FT8 capability
to exist
That is key. In a little while FT8 will fall out of favor as amateurs move on
to the next digital mode, a cycle that has repeated for the entire history of
digital modes.
An FT8 specific radio wouldn’t interest, but an “infinitely flexible” digital
mode platform with integral computer might.
If the radio was basically a Pi Hat then upgrading the computer would be
relatively easy.
and using a standard, commonly available computer means that you
could run useful modes, and modes that have yet to be invented, not just
FT8.
73 -- Lynn
On 12/30/2018 1:38 PM, Todd wrote:
Have a
Have a look at some of OH8STN's you tube videos. He's done a lot of
portable FT8 ops and has
a lot of neat ideas...
Later,
Todd KH2TJ
Doug Millar via Elecraft wrote:
Ok, I am going out on a limb. I have been trying to imagine an FT8 all in one
radio.
Two words, “WSJT-X 2.0”. :-)
With five year old software, you wouldn’t be running any kind of FT8.
I worked on software for test and measurement instruments at HP. Even twenty
years ago, software was moving out of the box into general purpose computers.
wunder
K6WRU
Walter Underwood
CM87wj
hi Don - Indeed. I had a line in there about being mindful of bluetooth
delays but it somehow disappeared. ;) 73 jeff wk6i
On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 12:55 PM Don Wilhelm wrote:
> Jeff,
>
> Concept is good, but ignores the latency problem with Bluetooth. I
> think that would be a "killer" for
Jeff,
Concept is good, but ignores the latency problem with Bluetooth. I
think that would be a "killer" for data modes like FT8 which need rather
precise timing.
To get an idea about the latency of Bluetooth, try monitoring your CW
with a Bluetooth headset - unless you are a slow operator,
On 12/30/2018 11:20 AM, Walter Underwood wrote:
> So after five years, the radio will still be competitive, but the computer
> might not even run current software.
But then again, why update the software when it's doing the job that it
was intended for. A close friend runs his very successful
Unless there is enough demand for someone to make it happen.
Sent from my iPad
> On Dec 30, 2018, at 2:26 PM, Jeff Stai wrote:
>
> Hmmm... as long as you use a generic tablet with a KX2, you're going to
> have a box and wires. You could go tablet to USB box and then maybe find
> wireless
Hmmm... as long as you use a generic tablet with a KX2, you're going to
have a box and wires. You could go tablet to USB box and then maybe find
wireless solutions from there. I see there are chargeable bluetooth audio
receivers, for example. I've never seen a simple USB wireless extension,
One issue with an all-in-one is that computer technology improves much, much
faster than radio technology. So after five years, the radio will still be
competitive, but the computer might not even run current software.
wunder
K6WRU
Walter Underwood
CM87wj
http://observer.wunderwood.org/ (my
Hi Jeff, Good ideas all around. Of course i was thinking of the KX2 and a
tablet. I actually went portable in the with that setup. What I didn't like was
all the wires and the USB box. If I could get straight from the KX2 to the
tablet with audio and rig control that might do the trick. What do
Well, since we are dreaming about things that probably won't happen...;) An
all in one appeals because it is portable, perhaps even trail ready.
There are plenty of good mini keyboard/trackpads units already out there,
so use one of those. Since you are using an external keyboard, skip the
50-70 watts out is fine, that will provide adequate drive for most amps to run
their full rated power out. If you don’t want that much, turn it down.
Rick WA6NHC
Smell Czech correction happen
> On Dec 29, 2018, at 1:54 PM, Bill Rowlett wrote:
>
> 25 watts out max.
>
> KC4IM Bill
>
>
>>
25 watts out max.
KC4IM Bill
> On Dec 29, 2018, at 4:16 PM, Doug Millar via Elecraft
> wrote:
>
> Ok, I am going out on a limb. I have been trying to imagine an FT8 all in one
> radio. How about this- A radio that is 6 by 10" or so with a screen that lays
> flat on top and swivels up for
Ok, I am going out on a limb. I have been trying to imagine an FT8 all in one
radio. How about this- A radio that is 6 by 10" or so with a screen that lays
flat on top and swivels up for use. Mouse but only and an optional keyboard
since the programs are primarily mouse driven. The computer
37 matches
Mail list logo
