Hi! Yes, I agree with the usefulness of combining a switch for the FT4 / FT8. I find in this addition the usefulness of the function! Unfortunately, there may be an inconvenience in synchronization: the RX FT8 may be different from the RX FT4 (i it had such an RX-SWL). This fact should be noted in Help to FT4 / FT8. My 73! TNX!
9 августа 2019, 09:53:19, от "F6BHK" < [email protected] >: Hi Joe, Thank you for your answer. Cheers Serge On 09/08/2019 00:36, Joe Taylor wrote: > Hi Serge, > > On 8/8/2019 17:31, Serge F6BHK wrote: >> at the dawn of WSJT-X we had the choice to decode JT65+JT9 under the >> same combo value. I remember I found it very useful. When I >> double-clicked a JT65 signal then I was sending using JT65, same for >> JT9. >> >> would'nt it be nice to have a FT8+FT4 combo value that decode both of >> the protocols and set the Xmit side of WSJT-X accordingly? > > Because their T/R sequence lengths are different, FT4 and FT8 are not > amenable to the convenient dual-mode decoding scheme that was useful > for JT65 and JT9. > > -- 73, Joe, K1JT > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- 73, de Serge F6BHK, ex-VR2LL, G5BHT, FM5GC DEYRAS, JN24IX, ARDECHE _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel -- Good Luck! Best DX's! 73! de Sergio fm Kharkov BYE-Poka!
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
