Topics

Affecting the use of digital modes... #qrm

 

Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit

https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Andrew O'Brien
 

I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”, especially since the development team requested feedback on the suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk 

Andy


On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US <nw7us.heliophile@...> wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit

https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Matthew Chambers NR0Q
 

Personally I think they should have moved upwards rather than downwards as the x.070 to x.074 slice is still sometimes occupied by older narrowband digital modes such as PSK31 and it's variants and narrower versions of Olivia, along with MFSK. Why couldn't FT8 occupy x.074 to say x.078 with an overlap with FT4 from x.076 to x.078 and FT4 only up to x.080 for example. I recall that JT65 and JT9 had an overlap area with JT65 occupying the lower half and JT9 the upper half of the spectrum which worked well. A contiguous block of spectrum would make more sense for FT8/FT4 due to the nature of how those modes operate where we decode the whole swatch of spectrum at once. And with newer SDR technology, we could have a digital-USB bandpass that is 4-6 kHz wide vs the 2.8 kHz of most traditional radios, allowing us to see the whole FT8/FT4 suband at once. I'm not sure if the direction they were moving would allow for that contiguous block. As the number of digital modes is only going to continue to increase, finding ways for modes to share spectrum is going to need to become a higher priority.

Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:21 AM Tomas, NW7US <nw7us.heliophile@...> wrote:
Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit

https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Chaplain Dave Sparks
 

How feasible is it to allot each new mode their own EXCLUSIVE slice of spectrum? It seems like we'd eventually run out.

73

--
Chaplain Dave Sparks - Callsign: AF6AS

Mailtrack Sender notified by
Mailtrack 06/01/20, 12:25:58 PM


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM Andrew O'Brien <andrewobrie@...> wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”, especially since the development team requested feedback on the suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk 

Andy


On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US <nw7us.heliophile@...> wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit

https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Matthew Chambers NR0Q
 

Impossible for each mode to have a slice, but like-modes like JT65, JT9, FT8, FT4 and WSPR are compatible with each other and could share spectrum, modes like RTTY, Olivia, MT63, and Hell could share all the space above FT8 outside the Winlink subband and keep a 4 kHz slice for narrowband key-board modes like PSK, Thor, Throb, MFSK, etc.

If I were to arrange digital for 20m,
14.000 to 14.070 CW Only
14.070 to 14.074 Narrowband keyboard-keyboard (PSK31, Thor, MFSK, etc)
14.074 to 14.080 JT65, JT9, FT8, FT4, etc
14.080 to 14.095 Wideband keyboard-keyboard (RTTY, Olivia, MT63, etc)
14.095 to 14.112 (minus the DX Beacon window) Winlink Digital
14.112 to 14.150 Wideband keyboard-keyboard

but to me that would make too much sense probably

Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 2:28 PM Chaplain Dave Sparks <dsparks@...> wrote:
How feasible is it to allot each new mode their own EXCLUSIVE slice of spectrum? It seems like we'd eventually run out.

73

--
Chaplain Dave Sparks - Callsign: AF6AS

Mailtrack Sender notified by
Mailtrack 06/01/20, 12:25:58 PM

On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM Andrew O'Brien <andrewobrie@...> wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”, especially since the development team requested feedback on the suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk 

Andy


On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US <nw7us.heliophile@...> wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit

https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Ev Tupis
 

The problem is that "once it's exclusive, it's always perceived as that way".  Example: FM Repeater spectrum.  How cool would it be to re-farm 147.000-148.000 MHz (in North America) for mid-speed mesh networking and build some real backhaul capability into amateur radio!

Heck...since all of the repeaters use PL and are so rarely used anyway...we probably could and nobody would notice.  Never mind...I gotta go call my contacts at Ubiquiti.  Be right back. Lol.

Ev, W2EV

On Monday, June 1, 2020, 03:29:15 PM EDT, Chaplain Dave Sparks <dsparks@...> wrote:





How feasible is it to allot each new mode their own EXCLUSIVE slice of spectrum? It seems like we'd eventually run out.

73

--
Chaplain Dave Sparks - Callsign: AF6AS


         Sender notified by  
  Mailtrack   06/01/20, 12:25:58 PM    


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM Andrew O'Brien <andrewobrie@...> wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”, especially since the development team requested feedback on the suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk 

Andy


On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US <@NW7US> wrote:


  
Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df


  
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW


  
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.



  
73 de Tomas, NW7US dit dit


  
https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
+ Space weather and radio propagation editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine, and The Spectrum Monitor magazine. 
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter:  @NW7US = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US):  https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):  https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

 

That will not work Matthew.

JS8 is active and occupies the space between FT8 and FT4.

73, tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 11:11 AM, Matthew Chambers NR0Q via groups.io wrote:
Personally I think they should have moved upwards rather than downwards as the x.070 to x.074 slice is still sometimes occupied by older narrowband digital modes such as PSK31 and it's variants and narrower versions of Olivia, along with MFSK. Why couldn't FT8 occupy x.074 to say x.078 with an overlap with FT4 from x.076 to x.078 and FT4 only up to x.080 for example. I recall that JT65 and JT9 had an overlap area with JT65 occupying the lower half and JT9 the upper half of the spectrum which worked well. A contiguous block of spectrum would make more sense for FT8/FT4 due to the nature of how those modes operate where we decode the whole swatch of spectrum at once. And with newer SDR technology, we could have a digital-USB bandpass that is 4-6 kHz wide vs the 2.8 kHz of most traditional radios, allowing us to see the whole FT8/FT4 suband at once. I'm not sure if the direction they were moving would allow for that contiguous block. As the number of digital modes is only going to continue to increase, finding ways for modes to share spectrum is going to need to become a higher priority.
Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
*M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC*
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620
www.mchambersradio.com <http://www.mchambersradio.com/>
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:21 AM Tomas, NW7US <@NW7US <mailto:@NW7US>> wrote:
Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all
digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great
points made in this discussion.
73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit
+ https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
+ Space weather and radio propagation
<http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine
<http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor
<http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> =
https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):
https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us
..

 

I do not remember the WSJT-X team asking on any of the non WSJT-X forums Andy. Like the Olivia and Contestia groups or the JS8 groups.

Yes, we can operate where ever but 1) most of the modes have common calling frequencies or watering holes, and 2) one is not likely to get an answer to a CQ away from where others expect to find the mode.

73, tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 9:55 AM, Andrew O'Brien wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”, especially since the development team requested feedback on the suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk
Andy

On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US <@NW7US> wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit

+ https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
+ Space weather and radio propagation <http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine <http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor <http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> = https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page): https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

 

That is what we had in the "gentleman's agreement." And no, not exclusive. Just that when FT8 or FT4 moves it overwhelms everyone else. Already I am getting FT8 starting at 14071 and 7071 dial stomping on QSOs underway. For quite a while there has been upside down FT8 which I presumed was new users in LSB mode or those using DSB transmitters which is really not polite. Now am seeing upright FT8. ( yes, I run WSJT-X in parallel to fldigi so I can note call signs of LIDS. )

73, tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 12:27 PM, Chaplain Dave Sparks wrote:
How feasible is it to allot each new mode their own EXCLUSIVE slice of spectrum? It seems like we'd eventually run out.
73
--
Chaplain Dave Sparks - Callsign: AF6AS
Mailtrack <https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&> Sender notified by
Mailtrack <https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&> 06/01/20, 12:25:58 PM
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM Andrew O'Brien <andrewobrie@... <mailto:andrewobrie@...>> wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”,
especially since the development team requested feedback on the
suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4 operations
make clustered operations sensible , it’s like fishing with a net .
However I still like the idea of fishing with a single pole and hook
and thus think we should cast wherever we feel like it , within the
band plan .
Andy K3uk
Andy

On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US
<@NW7US <mailto:@NW7US>>
wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all
digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great
points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit

+ https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
+ Space weather and radio propagation
<http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine
<http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor
<http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> =
https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):
https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

 

You have left out JS8 Matthew. It sits now between FT8 and FT4. de tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 12:49 PM, Matthew Chambers NR0Q via groups.io wrote:
Impossible for each mode to have a slice, but like-modes like JT65, JT9, FT8, FT4 and WSPR are compatible with each other and could share spectrum, modes like RTTY, Olivia, MT63, and Hell could share all the space above FT8 outside the Winlink subband and keep a 4 kHz slice for narrowband key-board modes like PSK, Thor, Throb, MFSK, etc.
If I were to arrange digital for 20m,
14.000 to 14.070 CW Only
14.070 to 14.074 Narrowband keyboard-keyboard (PSK31, Thor, MFSK, etc)
14.074 to 14.080 JT65, JT9, FT8, FT4, etc
14.080 to 14.095 Wideband keyboard-keyboard (RTTY, Olivia, MT63, etc)
14.095 to 14.112 (minus the DX Beacon window) Winlink Digital
14.112 to 14.150 Wideband keyboard-keyboard
but to me that would make too much sense probably
Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
*M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC*
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620
www.mchambersradio.com <http://www.mchambersradio.com/>
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 2:28 PM Chaplain Dave Sparks <dsparks@... <mailto:dsparks@...>> wrote:
How feasible is it to allot each new mode their own EXCLUSIVE slice
of spectrum? It seems like we'd eventually run out.
73
--
Chaplain Dave Sparks - Callsign: AF6AS
Mailtrack
<https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&>
Sender notified by
Mailtrack
<https://mailtrack.io?utm_source=gmail&utm_medium=signature&utm_campaign=signaturevirality5&>
06/01/20, 12:25:58 PM
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 9:55 AM Andrew O'Brien <andrewobrie@...
<mailto:andrewobrie@...>> wrote:
I don’t think I would call the WSJTX move a “frequency grab”,
especially since the development team requested feedback on the
suggested frequencies . The very nature of FT8 and FT4
operations make clustered operations sensible , it’s like
fishing with a net . However I still like the idea of fishing
with a single pole and hook and thus think we should cast
wherever we feel like it , within the band plan .
Andy K3uk
Andy

On Jun 1, 2020, at 7:21 AM, Tomas, NW7US
<@NW7US
<mailto:@NW7US>> wrote:


Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving
all digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
More parts to follow...
Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are
great points made in this discussion.

73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit

+ https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
+ Space weather and radio propagation
<http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine
<http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor
<http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
+ YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
+ Social Media:
    - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> =
https://Twitter.com/NW7US
    - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
    - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):
https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
    - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us

..

Matthew Chambers NR0Q
 

But isn't JS8 a keyboard to keyboard mode, why couldn't it slide down to just below the FT8 allocation say to 14.073-14.074, it would fit in alongside PSK?
Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620


On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 8:19 PM Tom W7SUA <tom@...> wrote:
That will not work Matthew.

JS8 is active and occupies the space between FT8 and FT4.

73, tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 11:11 AM, Matthew Chambers NR0Q via groups.io wrote:
> Personally I think they should have moved upwards rather than downwards
> as the x.070 to x.074 slice is still sometimes occupied by older
> narrowband digital modes such as PSK31 and it's variants and narrower
> versions of Olivia, along with MFSK. Why couldn't FT8 occupy x.074 to
> say x.078 with an overlap with FT4 from x.076 to x.078 and FT4 only up
> to x.080 for example. I recall that JT65 and JT9 had an overlap area
> with JT65 occupying the lower half and JT9 the upper half of the
> spectrum which worked well. A contiguous block of spectrum would make
> more sense for FT8/FT4 due to the nature of how those modes operate
> where we decode the whole swatch of spectrum at once. And with newer SDR
> technology, we could have a digital-USB bandpass that is 4-6 kHz wide vs
> the 2.8 kHz of most traditional radios, allowing us to see the whole
> FT8/FT4 suband at once. I'm not sure if the direction they were moving
> would allow for that contiguous block. As the number of digital modes is
> only going to continue to increase, finding ways for modes to share
> spectrum is going to need to become a higher priority.
>
> Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
> Owner/Engineer
> *M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC*
> PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
> Mobile (660)415-5620
> www.mchambersradio.com <http://www.mchambersradio.com/>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:21 AM Tomas, NW7US <nw7us.heliophile@...
> <mailto:nw7us.heliophile@...>> wrote:
>
>     Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue involving all
>     digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
>     Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
>     Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
>     More parts to follow...
>     Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are great
>     points made in this discussion.
>
>     73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit
>
>     + https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
>     + Space weather and radio propagation
>     <http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine
>     <http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor
>     <http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
>     + YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
>     + Social Media:
>          - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> =
>     https://Twitter.com/NW7US
>          - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
>          - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):
>     https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
>          - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us
>
>     ..
>
>



 

Hi Matthew,

I do not think of JS8 as a normal keyboard to keyboard mode like psk31 or Olivia. There is rather a community of users that use the features of the JS8Call program. The program uses a derivative combination of the WSJT-X FT8 modem and the chatting, relay and messaging features of the FSQCall program. Has robustness of the FT8 modem and multiple decoding but also has multiple speeds that let you trade speed and width versus robustness, program decodes all the speeds at the same time, allows you to relay via intermediate stations that are left on to provide a service, lets you issue a "heartbeat" to see whose station can hear you, and so on. You have a common USB dial frequency then many narrow band stations chat in the 2-3KHz above that dial frequency. Sometimes joining in ad hoc nets.

PSKreporter's map includes JS8 and most JS8 users do spot other stations.

I take it you have not tried JS8? Please go to js8call.com and read the documents then download the program. Just like WSJT-X you pick a band and the program tunes to the common dial frequency for that band. Also has several other features like relay and messaging.

Would be incompatible I think trying to put the JS8 watering hole where psk31 and Olivia et al stations are expecting to find space for operating. Thus the chosen area where the WSKT-X users had mostly left.

73, tom w7sua

On 6/1/2020 6:33 PM, Matthew Chambers NR0Q via groups.io wrote:
But isn't JS8 a keyboard to keyboard mode, why couldn't it slide down to just below the FT8 allocation say to 14.073-14.074, it would fit in alongside PSK?
Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
Owner/Engineer
*M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC*
PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
Mobile (660)415-5620
www.mchambersradio.com <http://www.mchambersradio.com/>
On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 8:19 PM Tom W7SUA <@w7sua <mailto:@w7sua>> wrote:
That will not work Matthew.
JS8 is active and occupies the space between FT8 and FT4.
73, tom w7sua
On 6/1/2020 11:11 AM, Matthew Chambers NR0Q via groups.io
<http://groups.io> wrote:
> Personally I think they should have moved upwards rather than
downwards
> as the x.070 to x.074 slice is still sometimes occupied by older
> narrowband digital modes such as PSK31 and it's variants and
narrower
> versions of Olivia, along with MFSK. Why couldn't FT8 occupy
x.074 to
> say x.078 with an overlap with FT4 from x.076 to x.078 and FT4
only up
> to x.080 for example. I recall that JT65 and JT9 had an overlap area
> with JT65 occupying the lower half and JT9 the upper half of the
> spectrum which worked well. A contiguous block of spectrum would
make
> more sense for FT8/FT4 due to the nature of how those modes operate
> where we decode the whole swatch of spectrum at once. And with
newer SDR
> technology, we could have a digital-USB bandpass that is 4-6 kHz
wide vs
> the 2.8 kHz of most traditional radios, allowing us to see the whole
> FT8/FT4 suband at once. I'm not sure if the direction they were
moving
> would allow for that contiguous block. As the number of digital
modes is
> only going to continue to increase, finding ways for modes to share
> spectrum is going to need to become a higher priority.
>
> Matthew Chambers, CBT, NR0Q
> Owner/Engineer
> *M Chambers Communications Engineering LLC*
> PO BOX 855, Moberly, MO 65270
> Mobile (660)415-5620
> www.mchambersradio.com <http://www.mchambersradio.com>
<http://www.mchambersradio.com/>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 6:21 AM Tomas, NW7US
<@NW7US <mailto:@NW7US>
> <mailto:@NW7US
<mailto:@NW7US>>> wrote:
>
>     Please see my two articles regarding an urgent issue
involving all
>     digital modes on HF, including FT8 / FT4.
>     Part 1: https://g.nw7us.us/3dnf6df
>     Part 2: https://g.nw7us.us/2yQFGfW
>     More parts to follow...
>     Be sure to read the comments left on each post, as there are
great
>     points made in this discussion.
>
>     73 de Tomas, NW7US <http://nw7us.us> dit dit
>
>     + https://QRZ.com/db/NW7US
>     + Space weather and radio propagation
>     <http://SunSpotWatch.com> editor for CQ Amateur Radio Magazine
>     <http://www.cq-amateur-radio.com/>, and The Spectrum Monitor
>     <http://www.thespectrummonitor.com/> magazine.
>     + YouTube: https://YouTube.com/NW7US <https://youtube.com/NW7US>
>     + Social Media:
>          - Twitter: @NW7US <https://Twitter.com/NW7US> =
> https://Twitter.com/NW7US
>          - Facebook (As NW7US): https://fb.me/NW7US
>          - Facebook (As Space Weather and Radio Propagation Page):
> https://fb.me/spacewx.hfradio
>          - Blog: https://blog.nw7us.us
>
>     ..
>
>