Thanks Joe,
much appreciated.
Björn SM7IUN
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 10:20 PM Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel <
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Hi Björn,
>
> Thanks for your report. Of course you are correct about the cause of
> this bug. The issue was reported in January, and supposedly co
Bjorn,
Ref your recent question - "Has anyone else experienced this?"
Short answer - no.
I recently returned to Virginia from spending time in Hawaii. I was on the Big
Island and had unbelievable six meter band conditions which repeated for four
or five days in a row in March. [great Februa
Hi Björn,
Thanks for your report. Of course you are correct about the cause of
this bug. The issue was reported in January, and supposedly corrected
in bug release 2.6.1. Alas, it was corrected in only one of two
necessary places.
It will be fixed in the next release.
-- 73, Joe,
Hi Björn,
Thanks for your report. Of course you are correct about the cause of
this bug. The issue was reported in January, and supposedly corrected
in bug release 2.6.1. Alas, it was corrected in only one of two
necessary places.
It will be fixed in the next release.
-- 73, Joe, K1J
Same here on the macOS version. Just now. 106 decodes of people frantically
calling DX0NE and bang!
This is what the error message was:
WSJT-X
Fortran runtime error: Index ‘106’ of dimension 1 of array ‘dt0” outside of
expected range (100:1)
73,
Clarke K1JX
> On May 2, 2023, at 1:51 PM
Decoding the DX0NE pile-up repeatedly crashes WSJT-X 2.6.1. There are a lot
of decodes. From what it seems, over 100.
My guess is that the array mentioned in the crash report simply runs out
because nobody thought there
would ever be more than 100 decodes in a cycle.
Has anyone else experienced t
Seems like we are all just “splitting” hairs over this :) Pun intended…
Thanks for all that everyone brings to a great tool for us Hams to use!!
Tim
WB5OTR
On May 2, 2023 at 12:38:41 PM, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel (
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net) wrote:
Hi Reino,
As I answered Adrian in a pr
Hi Reino,
As I answered Adrian in a private reply, these were meant as rhetorical
questions used to point out the incongruous use of the word SPLIT within the
context of WSJT-X.
You actually presented a great answer to one of the questions : "#Class, if
your RIT or XIT is tuned more than the use
Hi Sam, Adrian and the Experts,
Before I can answer some of the questions, I need to repeat my understanding
how SPLIT should be defined. I use two different ‘splits’ that can be used at
the same time or independently.
#Class: the classical split simply means you are using a different radiated
On 2/5/23 23:33, Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hi,
Having followed this thread from the beginning and being a small part
of it (in the beginning) I do have some questions regarding the use of
the
word SPLIT as it pertains to WSJT-X versus its classical meaning on
the HF Bands in CW and SSB
Hi,
Having followed this thread from the beginning and being a small part of it (in
the beginning) I do have some questions regarding the use of the word SPLIT as
it pertains to WSJT-X versus its classical meaning on the HF Bands in CW and
SSB, i.e. UP 5 or UP 10 etc.
First, I would you all agre
What you're calling "Software AHS" is not just for harmonic suppression. It
also allows you to transmit outside your bandpass (virtually). So even though
your rig may only have 2400Hz of width you can still transmit at 2900Hz -- you
just can't receive there. It also helps avoid signal loss at
Experts ?
On 2/5/23 15:13, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
Jim, Mike and all experts,
___
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
"used by many hams who knew just enough about radio to pass a multiple-guess
exam"
I see no reason to use a disparity in expertise or knowledge between
yourself and any other member of the group to make your, or any point.
Just add your knowledge and expertise please and forget the disparagement
On 5/1/2023 10:13 PM, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote:
2# Limiting the usage of the split word to that most probably was a logical
decision to prevent mixing it to the 'split working', hi! Well, in reality
WSJT was designed for various weak signal modes especially EME and there is
(was) no nee
Alan, Yes all good, you said it well.
My explanation was within the radio before modulation, regarding RF
frequency shift on TX to accommodate a quality center passband audio
modulation frequency.
Everyone else is talking about the resultant transmitted signal
frequency agreed being the sum
Interesting discussion but I find it a bit confusing so I've gone back to
basics:
The transmission is in the form of amplitude modulation using single
(upper) sideband suppressed carrier. That means the RF may not be a single
frequency but a band of frequencies with the bandwidth defined by t
17 matches
Mail list logo
