Hello guys..
According this theme I'd like to ask about expanding the band possibility. FT8
seems to be very popular these days and there are some DXpeditions operating
there, so 2 kHz is not enough space for all that traffic. The extreme is 40 and
20m, but when propagation allows, the other bands too (on higher bandsis not
possible to see most of EU traffic, from DX side it must be crazy :-)
I'd suggest add another kHz lower. Lots of newer radios got 3kHz filter, so it
is possible to hear whole band easily. Beginning of band should be used by DX
stations (expeditons) using fixed freq. while using split operation (for
transmit are freq. bellow 200Hz and above 2.4kHz practicaly unusable). For JT65
users then should be less possibility of intrusion and there will be more space
for non-dx operations too.
Example:
Expedition tunes in VFO B 14072kHz, audio sets between approx. 1100-1300. VFO-A
for RX tunes 1kHz higher 14073 and sets 3kHz filter. Sets Hold TX freq.
CQ message "CQ UP DX1DX square".
RR73 should be a standard in this case.
User, normaly set on 14073 should see expedion calling betwen 100-300Hz, what
is readable, but difficult to transmit there directly, but can use 300-2400Hz
for call easily, if sets split on the radio, can easily use up to approx.
2930Hz, still readible by expedition. And voila: 14073000+2930+60Hz =
14075990Hz. So intrusion to JT65 band is solved.
The only expedition was using radio split was 5T5OK - used UP2 - but it was
unfortunately in JT65 band. Extending band by 1000Hz lower could help a bit.
I don't know the details of earlier mentioned developed DX mode in this
discussion, so for today's conditions it is possible solution without some SW
development (except overwrite freq. list in future)
It's theme for discussion. FT8 started revolution in digital modes, and is much
more popular now, than PSK31 was.
The JT65 was not popular for me, due looong time procedure of the QSO, if it
was DX there, it was for several coffies, until got QSO. It's still not as fast
as RTTY or PSK, but there is no space for macros, most users use on PSK
(Everybody seen the QSO, while complete PC and SW setup, WX, age and lots of
rubbish was send on PSK), so waiting for the qso was also sometimes boring.
So, lets discuss.. :-)
73 Libor OK2ZO
----- Original Message -----
From: Black Michael via wsjt-devel
To: WSJT software development
Cc: Black Michael
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 3:05 PM
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Feature Request of FT8 TX Frequency limitation less
than 2kHz
Although FT8 has "intruded" on the lower part of the normal JT65 spot I don't
see it as a problem.
There aren't that many JT65's out there...and, in the past, I've seen plenty
of JT65's "intruding" on the JT9 area.
It's quite natural to bump up the 2kHz limit when the band is crowded. ALl
has to do with the average bandwidth of a receiver typically being 2400 and
higher. So far don't think I've seen any FT8's above 2500.
The only reason WSPR is excluded is because the same people that wrote WSPR
also wrote WSJT-X...otherwise it probably would not be excluded (e.g. there are
other JT65 programs that don't excluded the WSPR area ).
de Mike W9MDB
On Monday, November 20, 2017, 11:10:15 PM CST, Tsutsumi Takehiko
<ja5...@outlook.com> wrote:
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
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please add the feature to limit FT8 TX frequency less than 2kHz.
Reasons are stated as follow.
1. The working frequency table was and is designed and planned that the width
of FT8 is 2kHz. However, the limitation feature of 2kHz to the operator has not
implemented to wsjt-x software.
2. Recently we observe above 2kHz communication practice by operators who
does not know above design concept and the interference to adjacent wsjt-x
channel such as JT65 is created.
3. Such TX frequency limitation practice is implemented to JT65 operation at
30m to protect WSPR channel in wsjt-x software.
Some may object the implementation by the recent FT8 traffic expansion. But
my position is that these traffic un-balanced problem should be separately
solved by the optimization work of the working frequency table in near future.
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org!
http://sdm.link/slashdot_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
