Matthew, It is an interesting question. We are going to stick with the *.080 frequency recommendations. We have suggested that the CW boys and girls try using their notch filters and "yes" technology marches on and they will loose a little tiny piece of spectrum.
John On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 7:43 PM Matthew Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > Interesting, that's another different data-point for frequencies to use > (I'm not familiar with that groups.io but I think that site is where I > had seen talk of checking "the standard frequencies"). > > And just today there was a big fuss on the repeater a number of guys > saying how "digital especially FT8 is jamming and spamming over CW stations > down in the CW part of the band"...so I know I have to be rather careful > being able to cite why I pick where to use. > > Yes - the club I'm in arranges how many stations will be doing what, > they've got "generally" stations one SSB and one CW per band, and then I'm > tasked with "digital modes" open ended no band restrictions (well, within > the field day rules). I have done RTTY and PSK31 in years past, this year > I'm hoping to do better with FT8. Nobody has complained about interference > from me in the past...but the CW stations always obliterate my digital > reception and sometimes kill SSB too. > > I guess I'll try and build a configuration in WSJTX that has the standard > frequencies as well as the ones listed in this thread and on the site you > linked...shame there doesn't seem to be more coordination as to where to > operate for field day. > > -Matt / KK4NDE > > -----Original Message----- > From: Matt Power [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 8:30 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Proposed FT8 Frequencies for ARRL Field Day > > > Was there any more recent info on frequencies for field day? > > https://groups.io/g/FT8-Digital-Mode/message/2202 has a different plan > with (for example) 14130 instead of 14080. That might be a better place for > discussion, because Field Day frequencies for this year probably won't have > a direct effect on WSJT-X development. > > https://www.arrl.org/files/file/Field-Day/2019/2019-Rules-RevA.pdf > says a club may operate on 20 FT8, 20 CW, and 20 SSB simultaneously (6.3, > 6.7). Depending on equipment, antenna spacing, and the relative skills of > the 20 SSB and 20 CW operators, a 20 FT8 signal might interfere with 20 SSB > more than with 20 CW, Or vice versa. > > One question is whether the 14130-versus-14080 choice is important to the > more common case of clubs who plan to operate 2 (not 3) stations on 20m at > the same time. For example: > > Many clubs have a station tuning around all of 20 SSB (14150 and up) to > look for new QSOs throughout the daytime. They do this every year. > Their station isn't big enough to call CQ and run stations on 20 SSB. > This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very > frequently on 14130. Would that often be a realistic conflict? > > Conversely, a club may be historically successful with S&P on 20 CW. > This year, someone wants to add a second 20m station that transmits very > frequently on 14080. Is it realistic that they'll make substantially fewer > CW QSOs on the high end of 20 CW? > > Matt, KA1R > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
