Re: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies?

[<ga...@is...>]

*	“There is no doubt that with the super success of the FT8 mode, it is imperative that additional frequency “Channels” within each HF band be identified for not only the new DXpedition mode, but more importantly for normal day to day FT8 operations.”

 

On the contrary, Rich, it is plainly evident that in normal use we can successfully pack in loads of FT8 signals sharing the present fairly narrow slices of the HF bands.  Don’t get me wrong, I fully support the idea of monitoring trends and projecting forward but, as things stand, I see very little hard evidence of an impending crisis.  Just because there are few obvious clear columns on the waterfall does not mean the band segment is “full”, since in practice FT8 is extremely good at separating overlapping signals.  So I refute your assertion that “there is no doubt” that additional frequences are needed.  There most certainly is doubt, hence I disagree that expansion is “imperative”.  

 

A more scientific way to address issue this would be to gather and analyze data, objectively, rather than us simply asserting and refuting stuff, subjectively.  So what data would be needed?  How would it be gathered and analyzed?  By whom?  These questions are worth exploring.

 

If the data indicate impending crisis, there are other concerns about the options for avoiding or resolving it.  Aside from the problems making/taking/stealing space from other modes to allow for more FT8, being able to monitor all the FT8 activity on one screen at once is a major advantage of the current arrangement, whereas splitting it up across additional band segments will make things harder.  It could prove counterproductive.

 

Having said that, though, I agree there clearly are incompatibilities and conflicts between normal everyday FT8 activity and the new DXpedition fox-n-hounds mode, so I would agree with the suggestion to make more space for DXpedition use, specifically.

 

I’d therefore like to make a suggestions: how about we designate a digimode DXpedition zone on each of the HF bands without specifying the digimode?  That way, the same chunk of band can be used for RTTY, PSK, FT8, JT9, JT65, CW or whatever the DXpeditioners choose, and revert to being a multimode segment when no DXpeditions are using it.  It would be a good place to experiment with new modes and variants, for instance.

 

There will still be occasional conflicts if multiple DXpeditions attempt to use the area at the same time, which suggests they might need to slice the zone more thinly and stick to narrowmode digimodes with tighter pileups, or agree amongst themselves some sort of schedule, or simply check that the area is clear before transmitting – standard practice for polite DXers.

 

73

Gary  ZL2iFB

 

PS  This thread is not really about WSJT-X software development, hence we should probably shift over to the other WSJT-X reflector.

 

From: Rich - K1HTV <k1...@co...> 
Sent: Friday, 23 March 2018 10:18 a.m.
To: WSJT <wsj...@li...>
Subject: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies?

 

As we all know, when bands are open, it is not unusual to find the standard FT8 frequencies packed, end-to-end with stations. The waterfall is full of dozens of QSOs and many more dozens of stations calling others. There is no doubt that with the super success of the FT8 mode, it is imperative that additional frequency “Channels” within each HF band be identified for not only the new DXpedition mode, but more importantly for normal day to day FT8 operations. Although the number of JT65 users has greatly dwindled, there are still many of them using the mode on HF, so these frequencies and their JT65 users should be left alone.

 

The same holds for PSK31 and its army of Hams who like its rag chew capabilities that the FT8 and JT65 modes can’t provide. Then there is, on a normal weekday, a vast wasteland of the 14.080 to 14.099 RTTY band. When you tune across that frequency range during the week, rarely do you hear more than a few RTTY signals, while at the same time, packed into 2 KHz, many dozens of FT8 stations can be heard working each other. The only times that the RTTY band comes alive is during weekend RTTY contests and during DXpeditions to countries that RTTY users need to work for digital DXCC. DXpeditions usually operate around the upper 10 KHz of the RTTY frequencies. There are around a dozen major RTTY contests spaced throughout the year, all scheduled over weekend days.

 

A proposal needs to be made to the community of RTTY operators, most of whom probably already use FT8, to see if there would be a serious problem if some of the present RTTY frequencies could be shared with FT8. These might consist of the 4 KHz at the low end of each of the presently used HF RTTY bands. Floating the idea on the ‘rttycontesting.com’website would be a good place to start.

 

The frequencies above the NCDXF HF beacons flagged for digital use, but as ‘Packet’ where you probably will find Winlink transmissions, so those frequencies probably should be left alone.

 

Of course, the final additional FT8 frequencies chosen must adhere to Regions 1, 2 & 3 band plans.

 

So, where do we start? Time is flying by and the number of FT8 users are quickly growing.

 

Comments?

73,

Rich – K1HTV