Menu
▾
▴
Re: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies?
|
From: <rj...@gm...> - 2018-03-23 15:07:46
|
I would concede that in Europe it is a problem. My antennas are beamed to Europe most of the time but there aren't many strong band openings these days. I have also heard grumbling among the PSK31 and Olivia crowd that FT8 is interfering with them. They can move but when we move it may cause conflict. WinLink and Pactor may expand, especially if the new Technician privilege proposal is approved by the FCC. So any change has to be considered carefully and with the understanding that we may just not get what we want. 73 Ria N2RJ On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Andras Bato <ha6...@gm...> wrote: > It's only you Ria! > All FT8 subbands are much too crowded, even in the WARC bands. > We badly need the higher bands like 21, 24 and 28 MHz but it takes several > years when > there will be regular openings on those bands. > I am terribly surprised when you are living in the USA where there are ARRL, > IARU HQ, > and Administrative Council members like K1ZZ and the president is a > Canadian. > Is it a problem to ask them for their opinion and propose new band plans > which would precisely devide e.g. the digital band portions > to RTTY, PSK, FT8, JT65, JT9 subbands? > gl de ha6nn > Andras > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 2:00 PM, rj...@gm... <rj...@gm...> > wrote: >> >> I don't think there needs to really be more room. There are several >> bands that we can use. I prefer to use WARC bands because I have my >> fill of DX on 20 meters but WARC bands offer additional opportunities. >> Especially 30 meters where I have gain antennas. >> >> 73 >> Ria, N2RJ >> >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 6:51 AM, Andras Bato <ha6...@gm...> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > let me repeat a URL which is to be read and someone is to call the >> > attention >> > of members of IARU Administrative Council. >> > http://www.iaru.org/administrative-council-meetings.html >> > I guess it's the high time for them to meet asap! >> > gl de ha6nn >> > Andras >> > >> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:48 AM, David Alloza <da...@al...> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> I would like to add something to the discussion. >> >> >> >> At my location (JN25UE) at maximum propagation ( near noon) , the FT8 >> >> band's noise floor on the 30M is 5db higher than on the rest of the 30M >> >> band. >> >> >> >> The concentration of traffic on the narrow 2.5khz (certainly at >> >> excessive >> >> power) causes a significant rise in the noise floor and therefore >> >> reduces >> >> the performance of this mode. >> >> >> >> I think this is something that needs to be considered for the future of >> >> these digital mode. >> >> >> >> My 73, >> >> >> >> David, F4HTQ. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> De : ga...@is... [mailto:ga...@is...] >> >> Envoyé : vendredi 23 mars 2018 00:41 >> >> À : 'WSJT software development' >> >> Objet : Re: [wsjt-devel] New FT8 Frequencies? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> “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 >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >> >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> wsjt-devel mailing list >> >> wsj...@li... >> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >> > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >> > _______________________________________________ >> > wsjt-devel mailing list >> > wsj...@li... >> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >> > >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most >> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot >> _______________________________________________ >> wsjt-devel mailing list >> wsj...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most > engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsj...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > |
