Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+FT8\s+discussion\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+FT8\s+discussion\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 09:51:46 -0800; All - I think most of the issues around the FT8 spectrum use - and CW QRM have been aired. I think most of use have gotten used to seeing carriers on our spectrum displays up around 1838-1840 - and g; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00190.html (6,400 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: Mike Waters <mikewate@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:25:29 -0600; Well said. Just a few weeks ago, someone made the point that we should be thankful that there is activity up there. The gist of it was that during the year, much of the time the only activity on 160m; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00197.html (7,242 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: Chuck Dietz <w5prchuck@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 19:09:19 -0600; I know this has been Discussed Out, but I just want to ask why the window is in the 1840 area instead of the 1990 area? They are asking for QRM at 1840. It will be a losing battle during contests. Ju; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00209.html (7,213 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: k8gg@voyager.net; Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 21:09:46 -0500 (EST); Ladies and Gentlemen, Isn't it time to just stop the discussion?? 73, George, K8GG _________________ Topband Reflector Archives - http://www.contesting.com/_topband; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00213.html (6,875 bytes)
5. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 05:54:24 -0600; Actually the problem with the alleged QRM and FT8 is more about simply identifying ham computerized modes of digital transmission and reception and separating them out from the rest of the noise gene; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00216.html (8,374 bytes)
6. Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: "Roger Kennedy" <roger@wessexproductions.co.uk>; Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:10:12 -0500; I agree totally that a good place for an FT8 segment on Top Band would be up around 1.990 Mhz . . . However, many parts of the world (including a lot of Europe) aren't licensed to use that part of th; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00220.html (6,636 bytes)
7. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: DXer <hfdxmonitor@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2017 09:11:12 -0500; With a 1 minute cycle, where only 46 seconds of it is payload, like in JT65 and JT9, a CW id is possible, and indeed available, to those that want to activate it. Not feasible with a 15 seconds cycle; /archives//html/Topband/2017-11/msg00222.html (8,377 bytes)
8. Re: Topband: FT8 discussion (score: 1): Author: "VK3HJ" <vk3hj_luke@barefoothorse.com.au>; Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2017 22:51:54 +1100; Many people on Top Band want to work DX. Some use digital modes. Remember there are countries outside the USA (that have different band plans). Not everyone has the full 1800 - 2000 kHz to use. For e; /archives//html/Topband/2017-12/msg00002.html (7,705 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]