Magnificent summary.  Bravo!

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Taylor [] 
Sent: Wednesday, March 7, 2018 12:28 PM
To: WSJT software development <>
Subject: [wsjt-devel] DXpedition Mode Test Results

Hi all,

Here are a few highlights of results from last night's public test of
FT8 DXpedition Mode:

  - The overwhelming majority of participating Hounds operated as intended,
and according to instructions.  I copied 190 unique Hound callsigns during
the 2300 hour (when I was acting as Fox on 20m) and 330 unique callsigns
during the whole four hours.  I suppose that we had at least 400-500
participants, maybe more.

- Fox's multi-signal capability worked very well at the tested values,
NSlots = 3, 4, and 5.  This feature is surely a "keeper", and I see no
reason not to use NSlots = 5 -- especially if Fox is running power.

  - In the four test hours the number of "QSOs" logged by Foxes on 20, 30,
40, and 80m was 320, 189, 454, and 351.  However, a regrettable program bug
was preventing deletion of Hound callsigns from Fox's "QSO-in-Progress" list
after a QSO had been logged.  As a result, many repeated "RR73" messages
were sent, many dupe QSOs were logged, and the QSO-in-Progress list kept
growing.  As another consequence, some QSOs took up to ~20 min to complete,
and a number of Hounds who had been sent a report never received their
QSO-confirming "RR73".

- AA7A actually worked 120 unique calls in the 40m hour, and the other Foxes
worked comparable slightly lower numbers.  When this program bug is
corrected, hourly QSO in the 300-400 range should certainly be achievable.

- Of course, some Hounds did not operate as intended.  Several kept trying
to raise Fox by calling below 1000 Hz.  (Most of these that I noticed were
from non-English speaking countries.  We will probably need translations of
the FT8 DXpedition Mode User Guide.)  A few would-be Hounds were not
obviously not using v1.9.0-rc2, and were calling Fox "blind" in 1st
sequence.  A few Hounds tried using compound callsigns, which is not
supported -- and which needs to be made more clear in the instructions.

- Nearly everybody noticed the XE1GK calling CQ on the low-end Fox frequency
and working people these.  Please don't be too hard on
Ignacio: he obviously misunderstood what was supposed to be happening, and
how to operate in the test run.  He sent me an abject apology. 
Anyway, his signal helped us to evaluate how well we can cope with QRM and

Two operating hints that should be used as needed, but in general were not:

  - Hounds should manually reset their Tx frequency as needed to evade QRM.

  - Fox may decide to use the randomizing feature to vary his own Tx

I list here some relatively minor bugs and other things that came to 
light during the test run:

  - Spurious "Callsign mismatch" warning messages were displayed to the 
Fox operator.

  - Fox's log window should automatically scroll to the bottom.  Or 
maybe it should simply show the most recent ~10 QSOs logged.

  - I'm not sure that Fox's "Max Calls" parameter worked as designed.

  - Sometimes Fox sent RR73 to the same station in more that one slot, 
in the same transmission.

  - The dreaded "Blue Decode" button was seen by some.

  - Hounds sometimes send a spuriously low signal report to Fox, even 
when Fox is loud.

  - If Hound hits "Enter" with the DX Call box empty, a blank message 
can be transmitted.

  - It a random station (not Fox) calls a Hound, it can trigger a Hound 
transmission just as if Fox had called.

  - Previously decoded Hound calls can sometimes reappear in Fox's left 
window, when they should not.

Finally, let me outline a few new features we may decide to implement.

  - At least for debugging, and possibly as an option, offer a display 
window that shows the Fox operator the contents of all active queues.

  - Limit the number of QSOs in progress to no more than NSlots.

  - Option to suppress display of the waterfall timestamp.

  - Have Fox call CQ in one slot at least once every few (1 or 2?) minutes.

  - Should Hound's Tx3 frequency be re-randomized for each repeat try?

I'm sure there is more to be said, but that will do for now.  Depending 
on programming progress and on my own travel schedule, we may schedule 
another public test within a few weeks.

        -- 73, Joe, K1JT

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
wsjt-devel mailing list

Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites,!
wsjt-devel mailing list

Reply via email to