The documentation
http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/k1jt/FT4_Protocol.pdf says,
re S+P: "Here “best potential QSO partner” means “New Multiplier” (1st
priority) or “New Call on Band” (2nd priority)."
Now it seems to me that "New Call" implies "New Call on Band", and so
should qualify as a potent
On 03/05/2019 01:27, Morris Wideman via wsjt-devel wrote:
Why would I want to call another station on top of someone else. If
the TX/RX freqs are suppose to locked together thats what they should
do, I do sometimes operate split but I try not to get on top of
another station. 73 WA4MIT Morris
Why would I want to call another station on top of someone else. If the TX/RX
freqs are suppose to locked together thats what they should do, I do sometimes
operate split but I try not to get on top of another station. 73 WA4MIT Morris
On Thursday, May 2, 2019, 5:44:44 PM CDT, Ron Koenig
Why would you want to TX on his frequency ?
On Thu, 2 May 2019 at 15:30, Morris Wideman via wsjt-devel <
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Many thanks to the development team for sharing FT4 with us all. This
> faster FT should really help the DXpeditions and Contesters I think it
> work
Hi!
Yes, TO19A F/H is quite a confusion.
As nonstandard call, they can not send proper report.
Luckily, my call is short enough, so I get -1? report.
190502_11144521.078 Tx FT8 0 0.0 1710 S52D JN76
190502_11150021.078 Rx FT8 0 0.1 690 S52D TO19A -1
190502_11151521.078 T
On 02/05/2019 21:27, Topher Petty wrote:
I tried to post wav files and a screenshot to back up my observations,
but the message was rejected by the moderator.
Hi Topher,
this list limits the size of messages. You will have to post the file
somewhere publicly visible and send a link.
73
Bill
.wav files are pretty big and it may cause issues for people with limited
bandwidth internet connections who participate via email. Perhaps host the
.wav files via a third party site like SoundCloud, DropBox, or the like?
73,
Jim S.
N2ADV (ex KD2BIP)
> On May 2, 2019, at 4:27 PM, Topher Pett
I tried to post wav files and a screenshot to back up my observations, but
the message was rejected by the moderator.
I do hope someone will look at the files, and they didn't just get lost to
the aether. I'd hate to think the information I attempted to provide would
go unused.
On Thu, May 2, 201
Hi Bill,
Thanks for info.
Will pass them a message that there is no Joy.
Have a good night.
73, Patrick 9A5CW
čet, 2. svi 2019. 21:57 Bill Somerville je napisao:
> On 02/05/2019 20:47, Patrick 9A5CW wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Anyone could check if this Callsign Tango Oscar one nine Alpha -FR
> > Reuni
On 02/05/2019 20:47, Patrick 9A5CW wrote:
Hi,
Anyone could check if this Callsign Tango Oscar one nine Alpha -FR
Reunion isl. comply with the FT8 2.0 callsign pfx rules?
A DXped op called me if i can help them to setup F/H beacuse they had
and still have problems with Dxped mode to answer cal
Hi,
Anyone could check if this Callsign Tango Oscar one nine Alpha -FR Reunion
isl. comply with the FT8 2.0 callsign pfx rules?
A DXped op called me if i can help them to setup F/H beacuse they had and
still have problems with Dxped mode to answer callers.
Automatic station picking doesnt work ...
On May 2, 2019, at 3:46 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
On 02/05/2019 03:44, false via wsjt-devel wrote:
> Hi, folks, hoping to get some help with this issue. I searched the Yahoo
> group archives and then sent this request to the group ~4 hours ago, have not
> received a response yet.
>
> I rena
Hi Chris,
On 5/2/2019 12:52 PM, Topher Petty AI8W wrote:
... I don't believe it's available processor power, or RAM availability.
With only WSJT-X, TQSL, and Chrome (six tabs open) running, the T410 has
more than enough processor (24 threads) to handle these decodes, yet
they're not being deco
I've noted situations similar to this.. though I'm not running JTDX. There
have been multiple times where a reply was strongly visible in the
waterfall, yet nothing was decoded on that AF, and it took another TX/RX
cycle to get the reply to decode a message.
At first, I thought it was because I was
On 02/05/2019 17:20, Doug Jones wrote:
Does this the Qt version include the fix for the bug causing audio
level resets to max (WSJT-X 2.1.0 for Win64)?
Thanks, Doug AF4T
Hi Doug,
no it is scheduled for v5.12.4, currently targetted for release on 30th
May. v5.12.3 came in one day late so
No...it's fixed in 5.12.4
https://bugreports.qt.io/browse/QTBUG-75024?jql=text%20~%20%22audio%22%20ORDER%20BY%20created%20DESC
de Mike W9MDB
On Thursday, May 2, 2019, 11:24:44 AM CDT, Doug Jones
wrote:
Does this the Qt version include the fix for the bug causing audio level
rese
Does this the Qt version include the fix for the bug causing audio
level resets to max (WSJT-X 2.1.0 for Win64)?
Thanks, Doug AF4T
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
On 02/05/2019 15:56, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
Well yeahbut I would assume somebody would want to look at a
signal that seems to have sufficient SNR to decode. Not enough info
in his snapshot to tell where JTDX decoded it or what else may have
happened.
Seems to me a worthwhile
Well yeahbut I would assume somebody would want to look at a signal that
seems to have sufficient SNR to decode. Not enough info in his snapshot to
tell where JTDX decoded it or what else may have happened.
Seems to me a worthwhile exercise to ensure something pathological isn't going
on...
On 5/2/2019 10:07 AM, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote:
I’ve just made my first QSO with JTDX while running WSJT-X in parallel.
And believe me or not: It happened exactly that what I noted in my first
email. Look at the following screenshot: JTDX got the full QSO, but
WSJT-X missed F5NK’s “+05” reply. Means w
Hi Mike,
signal strength alone does not guarantee successful decoding, for
example a sender might change the transmitted messages twice during the
transmission at, say 1/3 and 2/3 of the transmission length, there's no
way that signal will be decoded in any of its three forms with normal
deco
Trying new features with FT4 and noticed that when S+P is active during
non-CQ (receive only) operation, it will pounce on stations using directed
calls such as CQ DX WB5JJJ EM35. In a contest situation, which FT4 is
designed for, this would be fine since there will not be any directed CQ's
typica
On 02/05/2019 15:07, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote:
I’ve just made my first QSO with JTDX while running WSJT-X in
parallel. And believe me or not: It happened exactly that what I noted
in my first email. Look at the following screenshot: JTDX got the full
QSO, but WSJT-X missed F5NK’s “+05” reply. Means wi
Are you saving WAV files where you can send that WAV file to the group?If not,
please turn on "Save/All" and when yoy get another like that one send it in.
Seems like there's some problem if it's not seeing a signal at the -06 level.
Can't tell from your screen shot what pass# JTDX decoded it.
d
Loaded question.
You'll get numerous replies to this question...
Personally I use the idea of checking hamspots.net to see what my signal
reports look like. If the majority of sig reports are < 0dB I figure I'm OK.
The nice part of FT8 and such modes is they really don't interefer with anybod
On 02/05/2019 14:32, Mark James wrote:
4) I can't see that this change will possibly help with robot
operators. Since this is open-source software, all the bad guys have
to do is to fork it and make a build without these changes. And unless
all the "clone" makers go along with the change, the r
Probably more a question for the WSJTGroup list rather than the Dev list - for
what it’s worth, there are dozens of threads on this topic there already that
are searchable. :)
73,
Jim S.
N2ADV
> On May 2, 2019, at 9:40 AM, Topher Petty wrote:
>
> I'm simply curious about one thing...
>
>
I'm simply curious about one thing...
What TX power levels does everyone run while working FT-8?
I don't own an amplifier, and generally run at around 50W output on an
IC-718. I know I *CAN* push it to 100W (50% duty cycle) but I like to leave
some "headroom" to keep the radio cool while working
I think some things here need to be addressed:
1) The implication that there might be only one person affected by this
doesn't make sense. You don't distribute something and then wait to see how
many blind people have problems before you see there's an issue.
2) "we are branded as anti-accessibili
For what it’s worth, I’m not seeing any difference with my 6300 and DAX/SSDR
3.0.19 between 2.0.1 and 2.1.0 RC5. ‘
Your 6600 must be defective - send it to me for, uh, proper disposal. ;).
73,
Jim S.
> On May 2, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Bill Somerville wrote:
>
>> On 02/05/2019 12:55, Al wrote:
I've got an ANAN 100 and I don't see any difference in power level between the
32-bit and 64-bit versions.
You can use Audacity to record what's coming out of the WSJT-X audio to see if
it's different between the two.
de Mike W9MDB
On Thursday, May 2, 2019, 7:21:43 AM CDT, Bill Somervil
Hi again,
Another bug, actually happen earlier with 2.0.1 but appear second time with
2.1.0.
Earlier I work Slovenian S57AT on FT4 - and got contest report on my "log
qso" window, even S57AT did not send such, location goes to Spain.
550003JN01VR
I just work VK1HX and I got again contest report
On 02/05/2019 12:55, Al wrote:
(Flex 6600, SSDR&DAX 3.0.19, Wsjt 2.1.0-rc5, Win10 )
I have noted the the TX output level from WSJT-x v2.1.0-rc5 64bit (
all modes ) is 8db lower than in v2.0.1. The 32 bit version of
2.1.0-rc5 produces the same TX output level as v2.0.1.
It's not an operationa
(Flex 6600, SSDR&DAX 3.0.19, Wsjt 2.1.0-rc5, Win10 )
I have noted the the TX output level from WSJT-x v2.1.0-rc5 64bit ( all
modes ) is 8db lower than in v2.0.1. The 32 bit version of 2.1.0-rc5
produces the same TX output level as v2.0.1.
It's not an operational problem form me as I can compe
On 5/2/19 11:47 AM, DG2YCB, Uwe wrote:
Hi Uwe & all,
Even when in JTDX decoder sensitivity is reduced
to “use low thresholds” JTDX is still ahead regarding the number of decodes.
So, my question is: What can I do (or can be done by the development
team) to increase the decoding sensitivity o
Thanks Bill,
He is using NVDA under Windows 10.
If you want, he has agreed to allow TeamViewer access if you need to see
the issues and possible solutions. But you can download the reader and
attempt to re-create the problem yourself.
https://www.nvaccess.org/
Many thanks
73
Ria
N2RJ
On Thu,
On 02/05/2019 03:44, false via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hi, folks, hoping to get some help with this issue. I searched the
Yahoo group archives and then sent this request to the group ~4 hours
ago, have not received a response yet.
I renamed my old installation and installed the rc5 version; the
i
On 02/05/2019 01:55, rjai...@gmail.com wrote:
Apart from ADA stuff it simply isn't working for blind hams. Besides,
the autobots have gotten advanced now to the point where they are
simply modifying source code and bypassing all manual input.
Not sure what can be done other than maybe invalida
On 02/05/2019 01:52, rjai...@gmail.com wrote:
I was helping a blind ham set up WSJT-X 2.1.0-rc5 today and it was
apparent that this new arrangement to thwart robots simply isn't
working for blind hams who rely upon screen readers and other
accessibility technologies. There is no way for his scree
39 matches
Mail list logo
