Date   

locked Re: Idea for Text Message Users

HamApps Support (VK3AMA)
 

On 12/11/2020 11:26 am, WB8ASI Herb wrote:
Laurie,   I'm a big fan of using the Decodes Window, and like being able to have recent option of reducing my Display Lines to zero.  I would still like to see if my QSO partner is using Text Messaging, but now I don't see the "underline".   Not exactly sure where best to show it?   I still use the Log Fields view, so maybe an underline or green spot on callsign for those online chat?   Or some indicator on the Decodes Window for those available for an online Test Message thank-you.  73, Herb WB8ASI

Here you go...

From the release notes of the next JTAlert release...
  New Features:

    - Decodes Window Online Indicators: Callsigns that are online for text message
       receipt will be shown with an underline, the same as the main JTAlert
       Callsigns display. A new online indicator, a filled circle, can be shown
       in the top-right corner of the Callsign display cell.  

    - Text Messages: Can now be initiated via the Callsign right-click context menu
       of the Decodes Window.

    

de Laurie VK3AMA


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Here is my latest test with
JTalert ver 2.16.15
WSJT ver 2.2.2
F/H mode
30 meters

235315 Tx 1114 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

235330 -14 -0.3 349 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -04

235345 Tx 349 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235415 Tx 649 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235445 Tx 649 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235500 -14 -0.3 349 ~ EA2KB 7Q7RU -09

235515 Tx 649 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235545 Tx 649 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235600 -14 -0.3 349 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -04

235615 Tx 349 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-14

235630 -9 -0.3 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -04

235645 Tx 289 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-09

235700 -11 -0.3 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -04

235715 Tx 289 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-11

235730 -9 -0.3 289 ~ CQ 7Q7RU KH67

235745 Tx 589 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-11



sent into never never land

2nd try

JTalert ver 2.16.15
WSJT ver 2.2.2
F/H mode TURNED OFF
30 meters



005830 -4 0.0 289 ~ CQ 7Q7RU KH67

005845 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

005900 -6 -0.1 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -01

005915 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-06

005930 -6 -0.1 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU RR73

005945 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF 73

010000 -8 -0.2 289 ~ CQ 7Q7RU KH67






On Monday, November 16, 2020, 5:09:11 PM CST, ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1@...> wrote:


Laurie,


Has the F/H protocol changed since WSJT-X 2.0?


73,

W9RF - Joe




On Monday, November 16, 2020, 5:04:14 PM CST, Jim Cooper <jtalert@...> wrote:


Their website says they are using WSJT-X v2.0
which is very old and might explain some of the
oddities of operation ...

graphic

One would think that, embarking on such a long-distance and
expensive DXpedition, they would be sure to have the most
up to date version of all their software ...  but apparently not.   Apparently Malawi is the safest place in the world to be this week, so we do owe a lot of thanks for them to follow thru on the DXpedition.

jim  w2jc

On 16 Nov 2020 at 17:24, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX
> and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV or
> JTDX?
>
> Some of the clones do not implement
> the F/H protocol correctly but do
> allow for multiple simultaneous
> QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is using
> one of the incompatible software
> packages and using the *NON F/H* mode
> in WSJTX is the correct way to
> operate!

  


locked Re: Callsigns get cleared before I can see them

AB8WD-Willie
 

screenshot shows how to delay screen closure on jtalert


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Jim,


Their call/call back/confirm (if that's how you explain it) is absolutely terrible, I would guess lees that 5%

I've been trying with ver 2.2.2 WSJT but they are only working nostly JA's for now.


73,

W9RF - Joe








On Monday, November 16, 2020, 5:04:14 PM CST, Jim Cooper <jtalert@...> wrote:


Their website says they are using WSJT-X v2.0
which is very old and might explain some of the
oddities of operation ...

graphic

One would think that, embarking on such a long-distance and
expensive DXpedition, they would be sure to have the most
up to date version of all their software ...  but apparently not.   Apparently Malawi is the safest place in the world to be this week, so we do owe a lot of thanks for them to follow thru on the DXpedition.

jim  w2jc

On 16 Nov 2020 at 17:24, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX
> and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV or
> JTDX?
>
> Some of the clones do not implement
> the F/H protocol correctly but do
> allow for multiple simultaneous
> QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is using
> one of the incompatible software
> packages and using the *NON F/H* mode
> in WSJTX is the correct way to
> operate!

  


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Laurie,


Has the F/H protocol changed since WSJT-X 2.0?


73,

W9RF - Joe




On Monday, November 16, 2020, 5:04:14 PM CST, Jim Cooper <jtalert@...> wrote:


Their website says they are using WSJT-X v2.0
which is very old and might explain some of the
oddities of operation ...

graphic

One would think that, embarking on such a long-distance and
expensive DXpedition, they would be sure to have the most
up to date version of all their software ...  but apparently not.   Apparently Malawi is the safest place in the world to be this week, so we do owe a lot of thanks for them to follow thru on the DXpedition.

jim  w2jc

On 16 Nov 2020 at 17:24, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX
> and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV or
> JTDX?
>
> Some of the clones do not implement
> the F/H protocol correctly but do
> allow for multiple simultaneous
> QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is using
> one of the incompatible software
> packages and using the *NON F/H* mode
> in WSJTX is the correct way to
> operate!

  


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Jim Cooper
 

Their website says they are using WSJT-X v2.0
which is very old and might explain some of the
oddities of operation ...

graphic

One would think that, embarking on such a long-distance and
expensive DXpedition, they would be sure to have the most
up to date version of all their software ...  but apparently not.   Apparently Malawi is the safest place in the world to be this week, so we do owe a lot of thanks for them to follow thru on the DXpedition.

jim  w2jc

On 16 Nov 2020 at 17:24, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:

> Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX
> and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV or
> JTDX?
>
> Some of the clones do not implement
> the F/H protocol correctly but do
> allow for multiple simultaneous
> QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is using
> one of the incompatible software
> packages and using the *NON F/H* mode
> in WSJTX is the correct way to
> operate!

  


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Björn SM7IUN
 

Since WSJT-X is open source even the garbage clones use Joe's decoder so decoding performance should be equivalent.

If the DX systematically fails to complete QSO this means there is QRM in the listening slots on the DX's frequency.

Björn SM7IUN

Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 23:44 skrev ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io>:

Joe,


I'm pretty much convinced of that.

Since you have reminded me, that's what I remember about the clones, no F/H but appears to be in F/H mode.

I am running an older version of WSJT but Laurie suggested I upgrade to the newest one.

Going to do that and test a little more tonight.


You are right about the garbage clones they might be using, could be why you see 10-20 calls moved down to the 0-500 slot then never get answered..


73,

W9RF - Joe





On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:24:32 PM CST, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:



Joe,

Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV
or JTDX?

Some of the clones do not implement the F/H protocol correctly but
do allow for multiple simultaneous QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is
using one of the incompatible software packages and using the
*NON F/H* mode in WSJTX is the correct way to operate!

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-11-16 5:12 PM, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
>  Laurie,
>
>
>
> I suppose it could be but did the parameters for F/H change since 2.1.2?
> I'll upgrade and see what happens
>
>
> 73,
> W9RF - Joe
>
>
>
>
>      On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:05:42 PM CST, Laurie, VK3AMA <hamapps.support@...> wrote:


>
> On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
>> There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with
>> the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)
>>
>> 9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not
>> coincidence.
>>
>>
>> I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode
>> (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.
>>
>>
>
> Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
> 2.1.2 is rather dated.
>
> de Laurie VK3AMA
>








locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Björn SM7IUN
 

As long as you stay above 1000Hz you will not hurt anybody by 
running vanilla FT8 with a F/H DX station so if you find it works for you, 
nobody can complain.

The original idea of FT8 to reserve the lowest 1000Hz in the passband for 
concluding QSO was a good idea in theory but unfortunately Joe et al underestimated 
the effect LIDS would have on the model. On bad days I wish there was some hidden flag 
in the Fox transmission that would block WSJT-X from manually transmitting within 500Hz 
of such a carrier...

Björn

Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 22:50 skrev ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io>:

Bjorn,


There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)

9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not coincidence.


I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.




213430 -10 0.1 289 ~ CQ 7Q7RU KH67

213445 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

213500 -15 0.1 348 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -06

213515 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-15

213530 -16 0.1 348 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -06

213545 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-16

213600 -11 0.1 288 ~ W9RF RR73; K8SIX <7Q7RU> -04

213615 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-16

213630 -11 0.1 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU RR73

213646 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF 73



73,

W9RF - Joe



On Monday, November 16, 2020, 3:24:37 PM CST, Björn SM7IUN <bjorn@...> wrote:


It's not the DX that pulls you down in frequency. It's the logic in your WSJT-X just following the F/H protocol.

The fact that you succeeded just meant they could decode you correctly and has nothing to do with F/H or not. 
Or software compatibility for that matter.

If there are lots of LIDS using plain FT8 calling on or around the DX' frequency, you will struggle 
to make QSO with F/H since the frequency you move to (i.e. the carrier of the responding stream) 
is clobbered. If you are unlucky, the secondary (random but below 1000Hz) frequency the software 
moves you to after three failed attempts may still be that of a LID. 

Björn SM7IUN

Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 21:22 skrev ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io>:
Roger,




For what it's worth here is another update on my unsuccessful confirmation with 7q7ru in F/H mode.

Yesterday evening the problem on 30 meters F/H mode was remedied buy switching out of F/H mode.


Same thing happened to me today.

While calling them at 18.095 F/H mode I was answered with a +1 report both ways and after a few exchanges I was thrown up to the 500+ slot and they began calling other calls.

I took Jtalert/WSJT-X out of F/H mode and called again with plain FT8 at 1325, third try they answered me, did NOT pull me down to their freq, and after 2 exchanges they gave me a confirmation (RR73)


SO, if anyone is having the same problem I have been experiencing I would suggest giving a plain FT8 a try.


I feel the only answer is software incompatibility at some level.

and before anyone asks, this is what I understand to be F/H  mode.

182145 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

182200 1 0.1 286 ~ K4PX RR73; NB2P <7Q7RU> -10

182200 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182215 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182230 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182245 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182300 6 0.1 286 ~ W9RF RR73; W1KG <7Q7RU> -04








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 9:07:50 PM CST, ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Roger,


I finally worked him just now on 10.131 but I was NOT in f/h mode, although he is in f/h mode, unless he switched on the fly, go figure??

Called him at 1500 and he did not call me to his freq but we exchanged reports and got a RR73 from him..


73,

W9RF - Joe








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 6:52:45 PM CST, Roger M via groups.io <ac6bw=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Joe,
OK, fair enough. Yes, it does seem strange.
All I can suggest is keep trying. Are you using WSJT-X, or JTDX? I recently switched over to JTDX, because it has better decode sensitivity, as well as some other features that I like. If you have both programs installed, perhaps you can try one or the other in F/H mode, and see if that makes a difference.
Also, it's possible that something is not configured correctly on the Fox end, but I wouldn't know exactly what. There are a lot of settings that the Fox can enable.
--
73,
Roger
AC6BW


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Joe,


I'm pretty much convinced of that.

Since you have reminded me, that's what I remember about the clones, no F/H but appears to be in F/H mode.

I am running an older version of WSJT but Laurie suggested I upgrade to the newest one.

Going to do that and test a little more tonight.


You are right about the garbage clones they might be using, could be why you see 10-20 calls moved down to the 0-500 slot then never get answered..


73,

W9RF - Joe





On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:24:32 PM CST, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@...> wrote:



Joe,

Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV
or JTDX?

Some of the clones do not implement the F/H protocol correctly but
do allow for multiple simultaneous QSOs.  It may be that 7q7ru is
using one of the incompatible software packages and using the
*NON F/H* mode in WSJTX is the correct way to operate!

73,

    ... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-11-16 5:12 PM, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
>  Laurie,
>
>
>
> I suppose it could be but did the parameters for F/H change since 2.1.2?
> I'll upgrade and see what happens
>
>
> 73,
> W9RF - Joe
>
>
>
>
>      On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:05:42 PM CST, Laurie, VK3AMA <hamapps.support@...> wrote:


>
> On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
>> There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with
>> the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)
>>
>> 9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not
>> coincidence.
>>
>>
>> I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode
>> (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.
>>
>>
>
> Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
> 2.1.2 is rather dated.
>
> de Laurie VK3AMA
>








locked Re: Callsigns get cleared before I can see them

HamApps Support (VK3AMA)
 

On 17/11/2020 9:13 am, John Peck wrote:
I am running current versions of WSJT and JTAlert. My issue is that JTAlert clears the callsigns before I can click on them or even read them! To make it more frustrating, the nice lady announces that there is a station there that I am looking for, but then I can't access it! 

Am I missing a setting somewhere? 

What versions of WSJT-X and JTAlert? Quote the actual numbers, "current versions", tells me nothing.

de Laurie VK3AMA


locked Re: Callsigns get cleared before I can see them

Jim Cooper
 

On 16 Nov 2020 at 14:13, John Peck wrote:

I am running current versions of
WSJT and JTAlert. My issue is that
JTAlert clears the callsigns before
I can click on them or even read them!
To make it more frustrating, the
nice lady announces that there is a
station there that I am looking for,
but then I can't access it!

Am I missing a setting somewhere?
use the "Decodes" window ... it keeps
a history of all the decoded stations.

JTalert can't display the calls until WSJT-X
has completed the decode process and passed
the calls to JTalert via UDP ... if your cpu is
loaded or 'slow' then it will eat up the time
for display before the next cycle.

fwiw, I had similar problems with a cheap
$100 win10 desktop that I was using ... it seemed
to do everything ok EXCEPT the cpu would get
maxed at times and the decodes would be slow;
not to mention that I could watch the waterfall
and see the decode 'pause' at times when the
cpu didn't quite keep up with the incoming audio .....

Moved my FT8 stuff to a much 'better' PC and
now there are no dropouts and no decode or
display delays ... it DOES make a difference.

Jim w2jc


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

wc3w
 

I definitely believe what you are saying is true—I cannot get my band activity screen to scroll when changing to F/H….I can hear the signals coming in but it refuses to decode!

Mark
WC3W

On Nov 16, 2020, at 3:24 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV <lists@subich.com> wrote:


Joe,

Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV
or JTDX?

Some of the clones do not implement the F/H protocol correctly but
do allow for multiple simultaneous QSOs. It may be that 7q7ru is
using one of the incompatible software packages and using the
*NON F/H* mode in WSJTX is the correct way to operate!

73,

... Joe, W4TV


On 2020-11-16 5:12 PM, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
Laurie,
I suppose it could be but did the parameters for F/H change since 2.1.2?
I'll upgrade and see what happens
73,
W9RF - Joe
On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:05:42 PM CST, Laurie, VK3AMA <hamapps.support@vkdxer.com> wrote:
On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with
the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)

9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not
coincidence.


I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode
(4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.

Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
2.1.2 is rather dated.
de Laurie VK3AMA






locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe Subich, W4TV
 

Joe,

Are you sure 7q7ru is using WSJTX and not a [garbage] clone like MSHV
or JTDX?

Some of the clones do not implement the F/H protocol correctly but
do allow for multiple simultaneous QSOs. It may be that 7q7ru is
using one of the incompatible software packages and using the
*NON F/H* mode in WSJTX is the correct way to operate!

73,

... Joe, W4TV

On 2020-11-16 5:12 PM, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
Laurie,
I suppose it could be but did the parameters for F/H change since 2.1.2?
I'll upgrade and see what happens
73,
W9RF - Joe
On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:05:42 PM CST, Laurie, VK3AMA <hamapps.support@vkdxer.com> wrote:
On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with
the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)

9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not
coincidence.


I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode
(4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.

Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
2.1.2 is rather dated.
de Laurie VK3AMA


locked Callsigns get cleared before I can see them

John Peck
 

I am running current versions of WSJT and JTAlert. My issue is that JTAlert clears the callsigns before I can click on them or even read them! To make it more frustrating, the nice lady announces that there is a station there that I am looking for, but then I can't access it! 

Am I missing a setting somewhere? 


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Laurie,



I suppose it could be but did the parameters for F/H change since 2.1.2?

I'll upgrade and see what happens



73,

W9RF - Joe





On Monday, November 16, 2020, 4:05:42 PM CST, Laurie, VK3AMA <hamapps.support@...> wrote:




On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
> There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with
> the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)
>
> 9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not
> coincidence.
>
>
> I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode
> (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.
>
>

Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
2.1.2 is rather dated.

de Laurie VK3AMA







locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Laurie, VK3AMA
 

On 17/11/2020 8:49 am, ray cathode via groups.io wrote:
There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)

9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not coincidence.


I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.

Could it be your very old WSJT-X version?
2.1.2 is rather dated.

de Laurie VK3AMA


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Bjorn,


There might be some validity in your reasoning BUT I will stick with the PLAIN FT8 (at least for 7q7ru)

9 times of making contact then getting put up to the 500_ slot is not coincidence.


I just made another qso on 20 meters with 7q7ru in PLAIN FT8 mode (4'th call) fairly bad signal reports.




213430 -10 0.1 289 ~ CQ 7Q7RU KH67

213445 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

213500 -15 0.1 348 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -06

213515 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-15

213530 -16 0.1 348 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU -06

213545 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-16

213600 -11 0.1 288 ~ W9RF RR73; K8SIX <7Q7RU> -04

213615 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R-16

213630 -11 0.1 289 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU RR73

213646 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF 73



73,

W9RF - Joe



On Monday, November 16, 2020, 3:24:37 PM CST, Björn SM7IUN <bjorn@...> wrote:


It's not the DX that pulls you down in frequency. It's the logic in your WSJT-X just following the F/H protocol.

The fact that you succeeded just meant they could decode you correctly and has nothing to do with F/H or not. 
Or software compatibility for that matter.

If there are lots of LIDS using plain FT8 calling on or around the DX' frequency, you will struggle 
to make QSO with F/H since the frequency you move to (i.e. the carrier of the responding stream) 
is clobbered. If you are unlucky, the secondary (random but below 1000Hz) frequency the software 
moves you to after three failed attempts may still be that of a LID. 

Björn SM7IUN

Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 21:22 skrev ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io>:
Roger,




For what it's worth here is another update on my unsuccessful confirmation with 7q7ru in F/H mode.

Yesterday evening the problem on 30 meters F/H mode was remedied buy switching out of F/H mode.


Same thing happened to me today.

While calling them at 18.095 F/H mode I was answered with a +1 report both ways and after a few exchanges I was thrown up to the 500+ slot and they began calling other calls.

I took Jtalert/WSJT-X out of F/H mode and called again with plain FT8 at 1325, third try they answered me, did NOT pull me down to their freq, and after 2 exchanges they gave me a confirmation (RR73)


SO, if anyone is having the same problem I have been experiencing I would suggest giving a plain FT8 a try.


I feel the only answer is software incompatibility at some level.

and before anyone asks, this is what I understand to be F/H  mode.

182145 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

182200 1 0.1 286 ~ K4PX RR73; NB2P <7Q7RU> -10

182200 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182215 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182230 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182245 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182300 6 0.1 286 ~ W9RF RR73; W1KG <7Q7RU> -04








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 9:07:50 PM CST, ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Roger,


I finally worked him just now on 10.131 but I was NOT in f/h mode, although he is in f/h mode, unless he switched on the fly, go figure??

Called him at 1500 and he did not call me to his freq but we exchanged reports and got a RR73 from him..


73,

W9RF - Joe








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 6:52:45 PM CST, Roger M via groups.io <ac6bw=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Joe,
OK, fair enough. Yes, it does seem strange.
All I can suggest is keep trying. Are you using WSJT-X, or JTDX? I recently switched over to JTDX, because it has better decode sensitivity, as well as some other features that I like. If you have both programs installed, perhaps you can try one or the other in F/H mode, and see if that makes a difference.
Also, it's possible that something is not configured correctly on the Fox end, but I wouldn't know exactly what. There are a lot of settings that the Fox can enable.
--
73,
Roger
AC6BW


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Björn SM7IUN
 

It's not the DX that pulls you down in frequency. It's the logic in your WSJT-X just following the F/H protocol.

The fact that you succeeded just meant they could decode you correctly and has nothing to do with F/H or not. 
Or software compatibility for that matter.

If there are lots of LIDS using plain FT8 calling on or around the DX' frequency, you will struggle 
to make QSO with F/H since the frequency you move to (i.e. the carrier of the responding stream) 
is clobbered. If you are unlucky, the secondary (random but below 1000Hz) frequency the software 
moves you to after three failed attempts may still be that of a LID. 

Björn SM7IUN

Den mån 16 nov. 2020 kl 21:22 skrev ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io>:

Roger,




For what it's worth here is another update on my unsuccessful confirmation with 7q7ru in F/H mode.

Yesterday evening the problem on 30 meters F/H mode was remedied buy switching out of F/H mode.


Same thing happened to me today.

While calling them at 18.095 F/H mode I was answered with a +1 report both ways and after a few exchanges I was thrown up to the 500+ slot and they began calling other calls.

I took Jtalert/WSJT-X out of F/H mode and called again with plain FT8 at 1325, third try they answered me, did NOT pull me down to their freq, and after 2 exchanges they gave me a confirmation (RR73)


SO, if anyone is having the same problem I have been experiencing I would suggest giving a plain FT8 a try.


I feel the only answer is software incompatibility at some level.

and before anyone asks, this is what I understand to be F/H  mode.

182145 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

182200 1 0.1 286 ~ K4PX RR73; NB2P <7Q7RU> -10

182200 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182215 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182230 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182245 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182300 6 0.1 286 ~ W9RF RR73; W1KG <7Q7RU> -04








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 9:07:50 PM CST, ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Roger,


I finally worked him just now on 10.131 but I was NOT in f/h mode, although he is in f/h mode, unless he switched on the fly, go figure??

Called him at 1500 and he did not call me to his freq but we exchanged reports and got a RR73 from him..


73,

W9RF - Joe








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 6:52:45 PM CST, Roger M via groups.io <ac6bw=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:


Joe,
OK, fair enough. Yes, it does seem strange.
All I can suggest is keep trying. Are you using WSJT-X, or JTDX? I recently switched over to JTDX, because it has better decode sensitivity, as well as some other features that I like. If you have both programs installed, perhaps you can try one or the other in F/H mode, and see if that makes a difference.
Also, it's possible that something is not configured correctly on the Fox end, but I wouldn't know exactly what. There are a lot of settings that the Fox can enable.
--
73,
Roger
AC6BW


locked Re: unsuccessful contacts with 7q7ru

Joe - W9RF
 

Roger,




For what it's worth here is another update on my unsuccessful confirmation with 7q7ru in F/H mode.

Yesterday evening the problem on 30 meters F/H mode was remedied buy switching out of F/H mode.


Same thing happened to me today.

While calling them at 18.095 F/H mode I was answered with a +1 report both ways and after a few exchanges I was thrown up to the 500+ slot and they began calling other calls.

I took Jtalert/WSJT-X out of F/H mode and called again with plain FT8 at 1325, third try they answered me, did NOT pull me down to their freq, and after 2 exchanges they gave me a confirmation (RR73)


SO, if anyone is having the same problem I have been experiencing I would suggest giving a plain FT8 a try.


I feel the only answer is software incompatibility at some level.

and before anyone asks, this is what I understand to be F/H  mode.

182145 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF EM57

182200 1 0.1 286 ~ K4PX RR73; NB2P <7Q7RU> -10

182200 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182215 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182230 1 0.1 346 ~ W9RF 7Q7RU +01

182245 Tx 1325 ~ 7Q7RU W9RF R+01

182300 6 0.1 286 ~ W9RF RR73; W1KG <7Q7RU> -04








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 9:07:50 PM CST, ray cathode via groups.io <ray_cathode1@...> wrote:


Roger,


I finally worked him just now on 10.131 but I was NOT in f/h mode, although he is in f/h mode, unless he switched on the fly, go figure??

Called him at 1500 and he did not call me to his freq but we exchanged reports and got a RR73 from him..


73,

W9RF - Joe








On Sunday, November 15, 2020, 6:52:45 PM CST, Roger M via groups.io <ac6bw@...> wrote:


Joe,
OK, fair enough. Yes, it does seem strange.
All I can suggest is keep trying. Are you using WSJT-X, or JTDX? I recently switched over to JTDX, because it has better decode sensitivity, as well as some other features that I like. If you have both programs installed, perhaps you can try one or the other in F/H mode, and see if that makes a difference.
Also, it's possible that something is not configured correctly on the Fox end, but I wouldn't know exactly what. There are a lot of settings that the Fox can enable.
--
73,
Roger
AC6BW


locked Re: States-Wanted Boxes Auto-Untick?

Jim N6VH
 


On 11/15/2020 11:51 PM, Patrick Hung wrote:
Laurie,

Thanks for the very clear explanation; I've chosen to require confirmation prior to deleting a State alert. There are three checkboxes to the right of "Confirmation": Card, eQSL, LoTW - with all three checked to mean that any of the three would suffice?
--
Patrick - W2TAR
_._,_._,_


Patrick,

If you are interested in the ARRL WAS (or DXCC, etc) award, then don't tick "eQSL". The eQSL confirmations are not valid for ARRL awards. If you are interested in the eQSL awards, that's a different matter.

Incidentally, getting WAS confirmed on LOTW is fairly easy. I have 8 band WAS, all confirmed on LOTW.

73,

Jim N6VH

2261 - 2280 of 34381