FWIW: I still use JT9 regularly using milliwatts of power for experiments and get stomped on by JS8 constantly.
> On Apr 28, 2019, at 11:51 AM, Bill Somerville <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 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
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
