Sorry please ingonre these 2 lines:
P5DX DB0AAA -10
DB0AAA P5DX R-14 QRZ
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Adrian Fabry wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> with these 3 bits we can have 8 combinations, actually 7 usable, one is by
> default (let's say 000) for current messages types (standard of free)
Hi all,
with these 3 bits we can have 8 combinations, actually 7 usable, one is by
default (let's say 000) for current messages types (standard of free).
I would propose to use 1 combination (001) for DXpedition mode:
- 001 when CQ or QRZ in DXpedition mode. This will instruct callers to
spread i
Thanks, everyone for the discussion.
The biggest takeaway for me is that I shouldn't use the wide graph to determine
the quality of the signal, which helps.
I do have a waterfall display on my IC-7300, but it has nowhere near the
resolution of the wsjt-x wide graph so it’s not very helpful ei
If you throw attenuation at the signal and the issue goes away, the cause is
most likely on the receive side. It also helps to have a panadapter available
(something that isn't tied into the AF chain). The waterfall itself should not
be used to determine signal quality.
73,
Jim S.
N2ADV
If you want to see what your signal looks like use hamspots.net to see who is
receiving your signal. This will indicate if they are using JTAlert.You can
then search for their callsign on hamspots.net to see if they are
transmitting...which would mean they are sitting at their rig.
Then use JTA
Thanks, Bill (and Gary in the previous reply)!
I’m pretty sure my receive is fine - IC-7300 into my mac using USB connection,
AGC off, notch filter off, noise blanker off, noise reduction off, IP+ off, and
RF Gain/USB AF Output level adjusted to 30 db with no signals present. There
is no adjus
On 2017-07-11 12:12 PM, Tim Carlson wrote:
Use one of the extra bits to indicate my desire for signal feedback.
Email address for my callsign could be looked up from ???
I am fairly sure that FT8 uses the same message encoding as JT65, in
which case FT8 also has the ability to send an arbitra
On 11/07/2017 19:12, Tim Carlson wrote:
Would you consider that the first signal on the left is being
overdriven somewhat? Or is that just a consequence of a stronger
signal? Or is it some atmospheric condition causing the signal to spread?
Hi Tim,
hard to tell but it is all too common for
> On Jul 11, 2017, at 12:12 PM, Tim Carlson wrote:
>
> Would you consider that the first signal on the left is being overdriven
> somewhat? Or is that just a consequence of a stronger signal? Or is it some
> atmospheric condition causing the signal to spread?
This could also be caused by mu
W9MDB
*From:* Alexandre Moleiro via wsjt-devel
*To:* WSJT software development
*Cc:* Alexandre Moleiro
*Sent:* Friday, July 7, 2017 11:49 AM
*Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Suggestions for three extra bits in FT8
Hi!
3 extra bits can potent
, July 7, 2017 11:49 AM
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Suggestions for three extra bits in FT8
Hi!
3 extra bits can potentially create 5 new FT8 "submodes" with just these
constraints:
-15 second T/R period-72 bits of payload each period
This can open a whole new world of qso sequences,
Hi!
3 extra bits can potentially create 5 new FT8 "submodes" with just these
constraints:
-15 second T/R period-72 bits of payload each period
This can open a whole new world of qso sequences, multi-pass decoding, TX power
adjustment, beaconing, etc.
We can look at "most requested" features (port
I think this might have been might missed in the fury of activity yesterday.
Is there a write-up of the protocol anywhere for deeper understanding?
Best,
Jordan
KN4CRD
On Jul 6, 2017, 12:22 PM -0400, Jordan Sherer , wrote:
> Thanks for the insight, Bill. Is there a writeup of the protocol anywhe
Thanks for the insight, Bill. Is there a writeup of the protocol anywhere
for deeper understanding?
One idea I had after playing around with PSK & FSQ these past few days is
to leverage an extra bit to allow for a QSO centered around freeform
messaging on HF. Specifically, one of those bits to be
On 06/07/2017 14:26, James Lemley wrote:
After discarding the idea of encoding eight humorous messages, and
without studying the rest of the protocol to see if these are already
implemented, here are my suggestions for the three extra bits with a
transmit frame:
HI James,
adding extra ad hoc
After discarding the idea of encoding eight humorous messages, and without
studying the rest of the protocol to see if these are already implemented,
here are my suggestions for the three extra bits with a transmit frame:
Bit 0: Must this message be acknowledged? Some people get worked up about
16 matches
Mail list logo
