FWIW....... JS8 does not use the first 500Hz of the JT9 slices to make
sure there is clear space for JT9 users.
On 4/28/19 12:57 PM, James Shaver wrote:
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]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
_______________________________________________
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
