Well.. I have at times wondered why at least while using FT8 one or more of
the "extra bits" couldn't be used in conjunction with NA contest mode being
selected to indicate that a call has "/R" appended to it.
I suspect you are correct that this would be a significant change (even if it
was possible.) It would be nice to have if it was possible. Providing a means
to send "/R" with every message (at least while using FT8 in NA contest mode)
would be a major step forward in my view. I'll continue to work with the
software as is for the time being and will have to consider the Type 1 /R
suffix issue in more detail.
Also I do appreciate the efforts of the WSJT-x team and do enjoy using the
software.
73
Mark S
VE7AFZ
mark@alignedsolutions.com
604 762 4099
> On Jun 13, 2018, at 11:18 AM, "k2drh@frontiernet.net" <k2drh@frontiernet.net>
> wrote:
>
> Yeah Id like that too Mark but the current message format precludes the /R in
> every seq and from what I understand the code would have to be radically
> changed to the point that it would be like starting over to accomplish that.
> That may be in the future but right now making the /R a Type 1 suffix would
> go a very long way to making things much better and would be relatively easy
> from what I'm told. But I'm not a programmer
>
> 73 de Bob2
>
>
> On Wednesday, June 13, 2018 12:41 PM, Mark Spencer
> <mark@alignedsolutions.com> wrote:
>
>
> Nice post.
>
> Re the Rover situation. At this point I am going continue to work with the
> current WSJT-x system, but in my view / opinion it would be nice if:
>
> 1) All messages to and from Rovers included both calls.
>
> 2) All rover calls were sent with "/R"
>
> I'd suggest any petitions re rover functionality at least propose this as an
> end state if possible. That being said I do realize the current system could
> probably be enhanced a bit.
>
> Re the TX1 vs TX3 full call issue I felt being able to send:
>
> DE VE7AFZ/R R CN99
>
> For example was helpful at times as it included my full call with the "/R" a
> R (for roger) and my grid all in one message. This seems to convey a lot of
> helpful information in one message.
>
> Like I said in a prior post I am still working thru the optimal way to use
> the software (especially in crowded bands) and appreciate all suggestions.
>
> 73
>
> Mark S
> VE7AFZ/R
>
> mark@alignedsolutions.com
> 604 762 4099
>
> > On Jun 13, 2018, at 10:00 AM, "k2drh@frontiernet.net"
> > <k2drh@frontiernet.net> wrote:
> >
> > I'm gonna try one more time -- even in plain text mode it didn't pick up
> > the carriage returns arrgh_____Hopefully this will be less jumbled all
> > together and be more readable
> > -------
> >
> > Very well written and thought out Marshall. Thanks for that and for
> > opening the discussion of FT8 use during a VHF contest. With a Flex 6700 I
> > run a separate panadapter and RX slices that monitor both MSK144 and FT8
> > all the time with multiple instances of WSJT-X decoding them. Here are
> > some thoughts, experiences and maybe some different perspectives for
> > further discussion.
> >
> > ------
> >
> > 1.There is no doubt of the value of having this tool for when the band is
> > “closed” to CW/SSB or at least unavailable for most stations (i.e. without
> > large antenna arrays). It definitely takes advantage of marginal Es
> > conditions and short bubbles like no other can. ------
> >
> > 2.It is however most useful for signals that are steady or slowly fading up
> > and down. It becomes upset and will not decode when there are sudden
> > changes like meteor pings, doppler, rapid fading from ionoscatter,
> > multipath and a host of other propagation anomalies often found on 6M. As
> > such it can be very frustrating causing traces to appear and disappear with
> > few if any decodes. I believe some of these anomalies are responsible for
> > the “one and done” type decodes we often get.
> > -----
> >
> > 3. The Contest Mode needs to be better documented in the manual. It may be
> > obvious to us but the checkbox for contest mode does not even appear in the
> > FT8 window unless you have Enable VHF, UHF and Microwave features checked
> > in the settings. This is not discussed in the FT8 section of the manual nor
> > is it mentioned in the section that discusses these features.
> > -------
> >
> > 4.There is a pop up prompt that asks you if you should be in contest mode
> > when you are in the “normal” report mode and receive a “funny number” grid.
> > If you say yes it will put you in contest mode for that QSO and advance
> > normally, but it will revert back for the next one. I’m not sure why
> > stations just don’t say yes or just fail open on this. Maybe they just
> > don’t understand what it means. I suspect since the program can detect
> > this it could be made to “force” contest mode, but the developers
> > apparently d I'm gonna try one more time -- even in plain text mode it
> > didn't pick up the carriage returns arrgh_____Hopefully this will be less
> > jumbled all together and be more readable
>
> > -------
> >
> > Very well written and thought out Marshall. Thanks for that and for
> > opening the discussion of FT8 use during a VHF contest. With a Flex 6700 I
> > run a separate panadapter and RX slices that monitor both MSK144 and FT8
> > all the time with multiple instances of WSJT-X decoding them. Here are
> > some thoughts, experiences and maybe some different perspectives for
> > further discussion.
> >
> > ------
> >
> > 1.There is no doubt of the value of having this tool for when the band is
> > “closed” to CW/SSB or at least unavailable for most stations (i.e. without
> > large antenna arrays). It definitely takes advantage of marginal Es
> > conditions and short bubbles like no other can. ------
> >
> > 2.It is however most useful for signals that are steady or slowly fading up
> > and down. It becomes upset and will not decode when there are sudden
> > changes like meteor pings, doppler, rapid fading from ionoscatter,
> > multipath and a host of other propagation anomalies often found on 6M. As
> > such it can be very frustrating causing traces to appear and disappear with
> > few if any decodes. I believe some of these anomalies are responsible for
> > the “one and done” type decodes we often get.
> > -----
> >
> > 3. The Contest Mode needs to be better documented in the manual. It may be
> > obvious to us but the checkbox for contest mode does not even appear in the
> > FT8 window unless you have Enable VHF, UHF and Microwave features checked
> > in the settings. This is not discussed in the FT8 section of the manual nor
> > is it mentioned in the section that discusses these features.
> > -------
> >
> > 4.There is a pop up prompt that asks you if you should be in contest mode
> > when you are in the “normal” report mode and receive a “funny number” grid.
> > If you say yes it will put you in contest mode for that QSO and advance
> > normally, but it will revert back for the next one. I’m not sure why
> > stations just don’t say yes or just fail open on this. Maybe they just
> > don’t understand what it means. I suspect since the program can detect
> > this it could be made to “force” contest mode, but the developers
> > apparently decided not to do that.
> >
> > -----
> >
> > 5.VHF Contest mode is NOT used in Europe only NA. The manual says in
> > section 17 that it should not be used when there is international DX
> > involved and its due to the due the reciprocal grid square kludge they had
> > to use to make contest mode work (it was an afterthought). Using contest
> > mode all the time on 6M and above could really mess up working DX. Worse
> > there are Eurocentric knockoff programs that also decode FT8 like FTDX that
> > don’t even HAVE contest mode since it is of no use to Europeans or HF
> > stations. Apparently a lot of domestic stations are using these knockoffs.
> > -----
> >
> > 6.Unlike Marshall’s crew some stations continue to call on FT8 even when
> > the band is open. This is not productive. Crowding of several strong
> > signals into one RX bandwidth will cause most receivers to overload and
> > WSJT to fail to decode all the signals in the passband.
> > -----
> > 7.Not sure why some seem to insist that you reply on their offset but I saw
> > that too. It’s actually better not to since if several stations reply at
> > once they will QRM each other. The program will actually stop you from
> > TXing if it sees you on the same offset when it decodes another station
> > working him. Section 7 of this operating guide addresses this.
> > https://www.physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/FT8_Operating_Tips.pdf
> >
> > ----
> >
> > 8.Rovers do have difficulty using /R. Right now it can be ambiguous who
> > the rover is calling/working. Receiving some TX messages from a rover now
> > can make the auto sequencing advance on stations that are NOT working the
> > rover. Some ambiguity can be alieved by changing the Settings for type 2
> > compound call holders from the default of Full Call in TX3 to Full Call in
> > TX1.
> > ------
> > 9.Most of the /R problem could be eliminated by making the /R a Type 1
> > suffix in the software so the /R is only used in TX1 and TX6 which should
> > be sufficient since in contest mode it normally skips over TX2 anyway
> > (unless of course you double click TX1 and make the program shortcut right
> > to TX2 which would not have the /R appended – nothing is perfect sigh) .
> > I think we should petition the developers to make this change. You’d have
> > to be sharp enough to catch the /R in any case (but you should be OPERATING
> > anyway, not in drone mode like so many seem to be).
> >
> > ----
> >
> > 10.My pet peeve is that once stations go to FT8 they don’t bother to tune
> > 2M or 6M analog for CQs or CQ there anymore. Unlike Marshall who has much
> > less activity on 2M and above in his part of the country I see lots of
> > locals with 2, 3 or more bands CQ all day on 6M FT8 and its difficult to
> > pry them away from their computer screens to QSY to 2M and work some real
> > radio. FT8 on 6M seems as addictive as crack. My 2M and up totals really
> > suffered from this behavior. The ARRL thumping the drum about the wonders
> > of FT8 in a VHF contest without going into the problems we all saw (see the
> > latest contest newsletter) isn’t helping much either.
> >
> > ----
> > 11.There are ways to get stations to QSY to 2M in the 13 character TX5 free
> > message but it’s hard and takes up a lot of time. I tried a few different
> > ones:
> > ---- a. Just sending QSY 2M? or even WB#xxx QSY 2M (exactly 13 – spaces
> > count) resulted in fail open most of the time or at best a free message
> > back that said “Where?” or “Freq?” and took a lot of time. Am I wrong or
> > do we have a CALL frequency on 2M where you can CALL another station?
> > Seemed obvious to me but …
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> > b. Sending QSY 144xxx was also inefficient and wasted time while it was
> > processed (who, me?). I also kept hoping that maybe multiple locals would
> > see it and try to make a few more Qs too, but I guess it never occurred to
> > them to try.
> >
> > -----
> >
> >
> > c. Sending WB#nnn 144210 (also 13) worked the best since the other guy sees
> > his call in RED in the windows, knows it’s for him, knows where and can
> > respond yea or nay – best response being K2DRH QSY or K2DRH 2M or even
> > K2DRH NO 2M since it directs it at me. Still takes a while though.
> >
> > ----
> >
> >
> > 12. On ON4KST the 205 Group in the mornings we have been very successful
> > using FT8 on 2M 144.174 for 300-500 mile and even longer contacts.
> > Sometime there are several stations on at once. I saw none of this going
> > on during the contest. This has some real potential.------
> > Well I guess that’s my 12 step program for FT8 operating. Your mileage may
> > vary.
> > ------
> > 73 de Bob K2DRH
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > VHFcontesting mailing list
> > VHFcontesting@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
>
>
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting
|