>From my viewpoint, all these Digital Modes are Channelized operation, much >like Repeaters, except it takes longer to recognize a signal.
You don't just tune the band looking for FT8 or FT4 signals. Given the time constraints needed to decode precludes that. This brings back memories of the beginnings of Repeater operation. For a while it was the "Wild West", until the FCC stepped in and "suggested" we clean up our act before they did. That may not happen today, given the Federal Budget constraints, so it will be interesting to see how this develops. Also, the proliferation of Digital Modes (just look at the drop down table in HRD's DM-780 program) makes the Tower of Babel look calm !! In the meantime, I'll just get a bigger Amp !! HI HI 73, Dick, W1KSZ Sent from Outlook<http://aka.ms/weboutlook> ________________________________ From: Bill Somerville <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 28, 2019 8:51 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] FT4 Frequencies On 28/04/2019 16:07, Richard Solomon wrote: Since roll-out is imminent, have we an agreement on which frequencies to use ? 73, Dick, W1KSZ Hi Dick, not yet. There are many claims on the frequencies we have proposed, a few with suggested alternatives but mostly just asking us to go elsewhere. Getting to an acceptable set of suggested frequencies for FT4 even for occasional contest periods is difficult and it is made even harder if we assume, not unreasonably, that FT4 may be used for general DXing as well. One option is not to recommend any frequencies and let the community sort it out, then add the resulting frequencies to the default recommendations later as/if they converge. Unfortunately I don't think that will achieve the desirable global coordination, nor is it likely to converge on the best choices. The only good attribute would be that the developers can say "we didn't choose that frequency, don't blame us for QRM" which is a bit of a cop out, and we will still be blamed anyway. Another option is to sacrifice the JT9 slots in favour of FT4. Clearly that is not straightforward given that JS8CALL has made a claim on that bandwidth too. Personally I would love to see JT9 get more use, it is a great mode for HF and I miss working the world with a few mW on the HF bands. Given the lack of truly free globally available slots in the narrow band digital mode band plans, I suspect that no more than one 2 kHz slot per band for FT4 should be an aim. By that I mean that if there is a contest using FT4 then it should use those frequencies and non-contest participants should defer. This is based on the premiss that FT4 has been designed with contests in mind. This would need somewhat smarter logic in WSJT-X to try and avoid chaos when non-contest participants inadvertently get involved in contest QSOs. Of course each contest's organizers can elect to suggest different slots which may be acceptable if the traffic volumes are low enough. Suggestions are still welcome, nothing is set in stone just yet. 73 Bill G4WJS.
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
