Or have a computer (or computers) but don't have access to wifi or cellular data.. I could go on re this but I'll just say that in my limited experience / opinion these newer modes can be a handful t
My observations during the recent September and January VHF contests leave me with the impression that a number of operators in my region are shifting at least some of their focus on 50 MHz to FT8. G
Based on my experiences in the September contest (to be transparent I was running an earlier version of the software) I share the concerns about sending "/R" My manual work around was complex for me
Yep.. Having both roved (while running FT8) and having sat at home running FT8 one one band while running SSB and CW on another I will confess to having had similar thoughts. Still I expect to rove i
I seem to recall suggesting to the developers that perhaps one of the "extra" bits in the protocol could be used to indicate either "/R" or just provide an option flag (or flags if they want to use m
Yep... It says so in the second paragraph. Nice catch Marshall. http://www.arrl.org/january-vhf 73 Mark S mark@alignedsolutions.com 604 762 4099 _______________________________________________ VHFcon
At first glance I'm thinking such a rule change would create more incentive to run higher power levels and / or bigger antennas (so one could complete as many SSB QSO's as possible over a given path)
Re roving. I'd suggest that we look for digital modes that easily explicitly suppose the "/R"'suffix or consider removing the requirement to use the "/R" suffix. Mark Spencer Aligned Solutions Co. ma
Sorry I hit send a bit to fast on my iPhone. Anyways I did spend some time this morning trying what I believe is the latest version of WSJT-x with FT8 (with two computers and two radios) and I'm pers
FSK441 does however allow longer messages than MSK144 which IMHO has some advantages for VHF and up contesting (ie. Sending 6 Character grids.) As a general comment I believe the VHF and up contestin
To be transparent re the "/R" issue and WSJT-x, I can see how some operators might be ok with the current functionally vis a vis "/R". That being said I'm not enthused about it and I don't really wan
Hi Steve: My take on the rules is that sending "/R" is a requirement for Rovers. Hence my interest in the "/R" issue vis a vis me using digital modes while Roving. 73 Mark S VE7AFZ mark@alignedsoluti
Hi Steve: I should preface my remarks by saying I may have missed something in my testing and use of WSJT-x over the last several months. You can add a "/R" to your call in WSJT-x via the general tab
For 50 MHz I've enjoyed using my IC7300 while roving. The band scope is nice and only covering one VHF band isn't that much of a issue for me. (I find having a radio on 50 MHz all the time helps capi
If anyone in the PNW / Vancouver lower mainland area wants to try something along these lines let me know. Based on my experiences over the last few years on a path from CN89 to CN94 on 144 MHz I am
I would also receive messages such as VE7AFZ/R 73 I don't believe it is particularly helpful to not send both calls with each message. In particular I see this as potentially causing issues when runn
Yes I also have to thank Bart for his response to issues issues. I also had a different log submission issue and got a very prompt response from Bart. 73 Mark S VE7AFZ mark@alignedsolutions.com 604 7
Interesting.. Apparently I'm not the only one working thru these issues. With my Icom radios I like to intercept the PTT line from the microphone, route the PTT line thru a sequencer, then key the ra
On my to do list is to figure out if I can safely wire a foot switch (or maybe a hand held pistol grip style PTT switch) in parallel with the PTT lead(s)from the microphone(s). I'm not 100 percent ce
Interesting. I'd be curious in hearing more about this (I also have an HTX 100 earmarked for use as an IF radio, but I ended up using an Icom 735 as the IF radio for my 222 transverter, I already own