Re: [wsjt-devel] Fox sends "DUPE" instead of "+rpt" in DX pedition mode

Hi Reino, Thank you for your response. I am glad to see your response is not matter of questions which I asked. Yes, this comes from unavoidable and inherent FT8 down-link budget design i.e. 50% success rate which DX-peditioners should more pay attention to. I was surprised to know recent

Re: [wsjt-devel] Fox sends "DUPE" instead of "+rpt" in DX pedition mode

. BTW, this proposal is quite different topic from “Fox Mode Indication to Hound Users on the Air” which I uploaded at the same time. I am waiting the response soon. Regards, take de JA5AEA Windows の メール<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> から送信 差出人: Tsutsumi Takehiko<m

[wsjt-devel] Fox sends "DUPE" instead of "+rpt" in DX pedition mode

Hi, Concerning the following protocol item 13, I understand WSJT-X developers decided so respecting on traditional DX-pedition practice about logging behavior. --Page 5 of FT8 DX-pedition Mode User

[wsjt-devel] Fox Mode Indication to Hound Users on the Air

Hi, I still see the confusion of DX-pedition operations caused by two different software existence i.e. WSJT-X and MSHV. To solve this issue, would you consider to add the automatic function to beacon when periodical CQ message is sent during the queue is empty, such as “CQ HO” indicating

Re: [wsjt-devel] Relocation of the JA domestic 40m band FT8 frequency and IARU Mission

, take de JA5AEA Windows の メール<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> から送信 差出人: Tsutsumi Takehiko<mailto:ja5...@outlook.com> 送信日時: Thursday, February 3, 2022 4:16 PM 宛先: WSJT software development<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 件名: RE: Relocation of the JA dom

Re: [wsjt-devel] Relocation of the JA domestic 40m band FT8 frequency and IARU Mission

FSK441 1 Windows の メール<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> から送信 差出人: Tsutsumi Takehiko<mailto:ja5...@outlook.com> 送信日時: Wednesday, February 2, 2022 7:50 PM 宛先: WSJT software development<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 件名: Relocation of the JA domestic 40m

[wsjt-devel] Relocation of the JA domestic 40m band FT8 frequency and IARU Mission

Grant, Thank you for your contribution for the future bandplan in IARU. I understand the following topic is not related to the subject which we discussed last year at this reflector but it embarrassed Japanese WSJT community by the reason that IARU had never disclosed with us in advance and

Re: [wsjt-devel] 40m IARU Proposal for Narrowband Data

All; Thank you for providing the response to my inquiry. After reading each response, I changed my mind and I will not insist existing experience for the candidate of the band plan. I interpret our duty is to help Grant to finish his goals ASAP and then we will talk local regulation body to

[wsjt-devel] 40m IARU Proposal for Narrowband Data

Hi, ARRL Letter on 09/23/2021 titled “IARU Regio 3 Considers Significant Expansion of HF Digital Segments” triggered the dialog among JA WSJT users about the recent activities of IARU bandplan proposal. It is the great movement establishing “time-synchronized transmission mode capacity

Re: [wsjt-devel] JA will operate on 160m and 80m at WSJT Default Frequency from Today

quency from Today > On Apr 21, 2020, at 01:54, Tsutsumi Takehiko wrote: > > Today, Japanese radio regulation authority officially published the expansion > of 160m and 80m That’s great news, Take! Thank you for passing it along to us. Gary - AG0N

[wsjt-devel] JA will operate on 160m and 80m at WSJT Default Frequency from Today

Hi Bill, Today, Japanese radio regulation authority officially published the expansion of 160m and 80m band plan to be able to operate WSJT-X in National gazette today. I believe you will listen many JA FT8 signals on 1.840kHz from tonight. By this expansion, I noticed that JA FT4 stations

[wsjt-devel] New FOX Downlink Prposal

Hi all, I drafted the subject proposal. Please see the attachment in the following link. https://sites.google.com/site/ja5aea/hf/new-fox-downlink-proposal I welcome your review and provide your comments or suggestion. Regards, take de JA5AEA ___

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode

de JA5AEA Windows 10 版のメール<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>から送信 差出人: Tsutsumi Takehiko 送信日時: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 6:18:07 PM 宛先: WSJT software development 件名: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode ---This is n

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode

ink/?LinkId=550986>から送信 差出人: Tsutsumi Takehiko 送信日時: Friday, March 30, 2018 1:54:29 PM 宛先: WSJT software development 件名: Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode Hi, In this thread, I see a few comments related to JA spectrum allocation. T

[wsjt-devel] FT8 diversity patch

Hi Iztok, greeting from JA. It passed about a half year after hearing your noise about “diversity reception” proposal and I am glad you changed the noise to the real signal today. Unfortunately, I am under the transition from six year old dual core to six core Desktop PC and I could not

Re: [wsjt-devel] Why73 - RRR or RR73 ---isn't it a waste of time ?

Hi Bill, I am always like to see your comments which inspire deep consideration for the readers. Attached reference indeed requires the confirmation of QSO but it does not say express consensus method such as “73-RRR-RR73”. Then, I understand it allows to use “implied” method without

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Nico, I leave my reply to you to suggest to look into 802.11 PAR template as an example but I wish to hand this discussion and conclusion to Igor who stated in his previous memo as “I do not believe any new mode outside WSJT-X is a good idea, it would be more efficient to keep going in the

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

of the QSO? 73 Nico / IV3NWV 2018-09-06 4:41 GMT+02:00 Tsutsumi Takehiko mailto:ja5...@outlook.com>>: Nico, It sounds Igor’s proposal as futuristic but the callsign abbreviation and subscriber profile exchange practice via control signal plane can be seen anywhere in network proto

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Nico, It sounds Igor’s proposal as futuristic but the callsign abbreviation and subscriber profile exchange practice via control signal plane can be seen anywhere in network protocols. Internet example is DHCP protocol, which makes the connection possible more than 4,294,967,296 devices with

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Hi, I will make another noise from the floor as Iztok wrote as follows, “Commenting contribution by Take, Igor etc:” Two topics, hashing and diversity technologies has been repeatedly on the topics from the readers of this mailing list in the past and are willing to adopt by the development

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

-08-31 14:04 GMT+02:00 Tsutsumi Takehiko mailto:ja5...@outlook.com>>: Hi Nico Greeting from JA, And, here is another noise from floor expecting your comments. To mitigate the dilemma of message size and required power you and Joe described, It is a common practice to provide the variable code rat

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Hi Nico Greeting from JA, And, here is another noise from floor expecting your comments. To mitigate the dilemma of message size and required power you and Joe described, It is a common practice to provide the variable code rate feature (from current FT8 fixed r=0.5). The benefit of this

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Hi Nico Greeting from JA, And, here is another noise from floor expecting your comments. To mitigate the dilemma of message size and required power you and Joe described, It is a common practice to provide the variable code rate feature (from current FT8 fixed r=0.5). The benefit of this

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol Take-san, I was reading that it was a whole new protocol that would take the same 13-14 second time slice, and had nothing to do with WSPR which takes roughly 110 seconds, or FT8. Neil, KN3ILZ On 8/12/2018 8:29 PM, Tsutsumi Takehiko wrote: Hi, al

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X 2.0 possible new mode/protocol

Hi, allow me to make a comment (always noisy one) from the floor before going to dev teams. 1. WSJT-X has actually two distinctive message formats, WSPR (50bits) and FT-8 (75bits). 2. I have the impression that the proposal from Igor belongs to (two-way) WSPR message protocol. (See

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

Joe, Thank you for your response. I will not count any synch words reduction for my calculation. Regards, take de JA5AEA Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Tsutsumi Takehiko Sent: Friday, July 6, 2018

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

te you to prepare some code that demonstrates your assertion. 73, Steve k9an On Jul 5, 2018, at 10:39 PM, Tsutsumi Takehiko mailto:ja5...@outlook.com>> wrote: Hi Steve, This is a result of my searching “modulation theory book” in my shelves. See the attached copy and Figure 1.1 in Japanese.

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

ows 10 From: Tsutsumi Takehiko Sent: Thursday, July 5, 2018 1:09:38 PM To: WSJT software development Subject: RE: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode Joe, It is good to hear from you to increase your calculation about my additional gain proposal from +(1~8) dB to +(1.5

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

ink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Joe Taylor Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2018 11:27:08 PM To: WSJT software development Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode Hi Take, On 7/4/2018 9:20 AM, Tsutsumi Takehiko JA5AEA wrote: > C

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

Steve, Thank you for your comments. Ok, I understand what is the disagreement between us. First, I do not fully understand the point why you object my +4dB gain but I need to find modulation theory book in my book sheves (never opened for more than 20 years) and check about “ *bit* SNR,

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

Hi Steve, I am glad I have received a memo from Urbana-Champaign. I am sorry I confused you by the misuse of the terminology about FTXX and QRAXX. I meant QRAXX as “Q-ary Repeat-Accumulate Codes for Weak Signal Communications” in Nico’s literature but I do not have any intent to modify

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Joe Taylor Sent: Tuesday, July 3, 2018 10:24:56 PM To: WSJT software development; Tsutsumi Takehiko Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode Hi Grant, Take, and a

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

d free text to control their pile more – but blocking people calling as proposed by others here until certain preconditions are met – based on my observations of the traffic patterns I don’t see it helping the situation at all. From: Tsutsumi Takehiko [mailto:ja5...@outlook.com] Sent: Monday,

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

Grant, Allow me to write my comment on your topic as I have same topic interest writing “FOX adaptive power control” in this thread. Concerning your proposal, i.e.“to have the setting of number of channels vs the number of active channels maintain a constant PER CHANNEL TX power” My comment

Re: [wsjt-devel] Observation on Expedition Mode

Joe and all Dx Pedition Mode developers, I am with Joe about the share of modes which he raised in the statistics. Congratulations and I hope FT8 will soon beat the rest of the modes. FT8 gives me a new joy about Dx pedition hunting while listening my favorite music and writing e-mails to

[wsjt-devel] FOX Adaptive Power Control

Hi, this is a thought working with KH1/KH7Z to avoid continuous TX3 repeats when their sig is so weak such as -20. It was actually happed for my 15m unsuccessful QSO. In the below table, my proposal is to increase the power of sequence 7 for example 6 dB, to make sure W9XYZ receives RR73

Re: [wsjt-devel] DxPediton Mode Development utilizing Weak signal favorites Resource

From: Joe Taylor<mailto:j...@princeton.edu> Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2018 9:07 AM To: WSJT software development<mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] DxPediton Mode Development utilizing Weak signal favorites Resource Hello Take, On 5/14/2018 7:14 PM, Tsuts

[wsjt-devel] DxPediton Mode Development utilizing Weak signal favorites Resource

es, the only difference other than message content is the use of one of the three spare payload bits added when FT8 was initially developed. 73 Bill G4WJS. On 13/05/2018 23:31, Tsutsumi Takehiko wrote: > Hi Dave, > > I do not have any intention to hijack your mail but I hope you allow > m

Re: [wsjt-devel] Signal variation during latest test

Hi Dave, I do not have any intention to hijack your mail but I hope you allow me to state again that we should not concede "signal would drop around 12dB when 3 channels were used" as weak signal favorites. By my simple spread sheet calculation, we can achieve 4-3dB degradation range at 5

Re: [wsjt-devel] Second Public Test of FT8 DXpedition Mode: April 7, 1400-1600 UTC

/wiki/Single-carrier_FDMA I interpret the principle is unchanged from the analog age to modern 4G and it can be sharable for us. Regards, take de JA5AEA Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Tsutsumi Takehik

Re: [wsjt-devel] Second Public Test of FT8 DXpedition Mode: April 7, 1400-1600 UTC

Hi Bill and Robin, So, we stay at single carrier architecture along with 5x clock for the purpose to maintain the encoder and decoder codes. Regards, take de JA5AEA Hi Take-san, the output when NSlots >1 is not a simple distribution of the Tx power between tones, the reason for this is

Re: [wsjt-devel] Second Public Test of FT8 DXpedition Mode: April 7, 1400-1600 UTC

Saku, I thought your measurement of 5 carriers should be around -8dB – 10log (5)=-15dB but your measurement was much worse. Regards, take de JA5AEA 1. Here in KP01 / OCF dipole: W7/KH7Z , if 1 carrier, is loud abt -8dB, but 2. 5 carriers -19 .. -22dB and mostly useless (gets rolled by

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode

Hi Richard G4DYA, Thank you for providing the information as “1800-1810 KHz is allocated to the radiolocation service om ITU Region 1”. Now, I checked ITU RR and confirmed “Region 1” is allocated to solely “RADIOLOCATION” and “AMATEUR” is not allocated. Does this mean that co-sharing is

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode

table, but is not it a peaceful approach instead of crashing with CW guys? Any comments? Regards, take de JA5AEA Sent from Mail<https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> for Windows 10 From: Tsutsumi Takehiko<mailto:ja5...@outlook.com> Sent: Friday, March 30, 2018 1:54

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSJT-X v1.9.0-rc3: Testing of FT8 DXpedition Mode

Hi, In this thread, I see a few comments related to JA spectrum allocation. Thus, I summarized the status as follow for your reference. 1907.5-1912.5KHz (total 5kHz) is allocated to narrow band digital. Therefore, both daily WSJT-X and DX pedition would be split mode. Daily FT-8 split QSO

Re: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies?

Gary ZL2iFB, Yes, I agree with your proposal to discuss the required spectrum based on scientific approach you described and several FT-8 statistics gathered. I am sure a few of wsjt-x technical group members have such talent to support the activity. I hope the group will be set up soon.

Re: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies?

Hi, I support ZL2iFB Gary’s proposal to setup a separate small group to discuss about default frequencies of wsjt-x from the productiveness. Regards, take de JA5AEA Sent from Mail for Windows 10

Re: [wsjt-devel] Does 3Y0Z FT8 Band Plan Violate IARU and Local Bandplans?

z 2 144.144 MHz (EME) On 11/27/2017 12:07 AM, Tsutsumi Takehiko wrote: Hi, I found an interesting 3Y0Z bandplan scheduled to operate in early 2018 and I wonder they may violate IARU and local (JA) bandplans and it may create trouble for us. For example, on 20m, it say that 3Y0Z tran

Re: [wsjt-devel] Does 3Y0Z FT8 Band Plan Violate IARU and Local Bandplans?

24.955 MHz 24.912MHz 24.912 MHz 10 28.023 MHz 28.485 MHz 28.080 MHz 28.067 MHz 6 50.190 MHz (EME) 50.316 MHz 2 144.144 MHz (EME) On 11/27/2017 12:07 AM, Tsutsumi Takehiko wrote: Hi, I found an interesting 3Y0Z bandplan scheduled to operate in early

[wsjt-devel] Does 3Y0Z FT8 Band Plan Violate IARU and Local Bandplans?

Hi, I found an interesting 3Y0Z bandplan scheduled to operate in early 2018 and I wonder they may violate IARU and local (JA) bandplans and it may create trouble for us. For example, on 20m, it say that 3Y0Z transmits TX= 200-400Hz on QRG=14.067MHz and we are instructed to transmit

Re: [wsjt-devel] Feature Request of FT8 TX Frequency limitation less than 2kHz

Hi, Thank you very much for providing so many additional comments to my request. However, these comments are not directly related to my proposal. I included the fact that members are interested in JT65 phase out policy and it should be decided by the owner of wsjt-x and then reflect to the

Re: [wsjt-devel] Feature Request of FT8 TX Frequency limitation less than 2kHz

Hi Black, Gary, Libor, Richard, Eric, Thank you for your comments to my proposal. I updated my proposal based on your comments as follow. - Please

[wsjt-devel] Feature Request of FT8 TX Frequency limitation less than 2kHz

Hi all, It is great to observe the popularity of FT8 format among non-wsjt-x experience in the past and I have a proposal to add the following feature for these. If I miss any consideration to my proposal, I welcome your comments. Regards, take de JA5AEA

[wsjt-devel] 80m default frequencies

Hi Richard, I missed your original mail but I am the person who requested 80m default frequency change on this reflector and I have the same feeling along with the GA release to complete the transition (compatibility with derivatives) and continue the optimization of WSJT-X bands by

Re: [wsjt-devel] RX/TX lock in FT8

Hi Bill, I am wondering why FT8 does not support "CQ XXX" and "QSY 50.280" sequences which MSK144 supports concerning "split operation" topic discussed in this thread. I believe above two sequences intentionally bring the split operation to out-band, which is beneficial for DX-peditionners.

Re: [wsjt-devel] WSPR frequency on 80 meters

Hi Lloyd, 80m default frequency change including WSPR is addressed in the following memo from Joe on July 08 on this reflector. - Previous 80 m use of JT modes has done a disservice to

Re: [wsjt-devel] FT8: IMPORTANT NOTICE

Joe, Bill and all members, I sincerely appreciate the kindness and genericity to accept my proposal on 80m transition knowing the painful burden to the rest of the world. I believe this transition will provide the window to access to the world for all JA station on 80m and will ultimately