Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [wsjtgroup] JT65A protocol

Expand Messages
  • Peter Frenning [OZ1PIF]
    ... Graeme, Chris et al It has (in record time, I might add) become customary to adhere to something close too: Answer CQ: hiscall mycall rpt (where report
    Message 1 of 4 , Jul 15, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Chris Cox, N0UK skrev:
      > Graeme,
      >
      > I can't comment on what is the norm onm HF. The exchanges you describe
      > are what are correct AND USED when using JT65 for its originally intended
      > purpose of narrowband terrestrial DX & EME contacts on the VHF bands. It
      > is amended from the standard EME protocol and reading abouyt that will
      > give an understanding of the meaning of each of the exchanges in the
      > sequence.
      >
      > In my (perhaps jaded) view, many HF operators do not exchange sufficient
      > information for what would constitute a valid contact traditionally.
      > i.e. both stations send and receive the pair of callsigns, some piece of
      > unknown information (signal report/grid square/shoe size/etc) and then
      > confirmation of such receipt. It is not uncommon on HF - especially in a
      > contest to not even send your own callsign on each and every contact.
      > Hence, it does not really surprise me that the "rules" as written aren't
      > followed using this mode either.
      >
      > Chris
      >
      Graeme, Chris et al
      It has (in record time, I might add) become customary to adhere to
      something close too:

      Answer CQ: hiscall mycall "rpt" (where report is taken from the "dB"
      column in WSJT, and can be f.eks. "-07")
      Reply to previous message: hiscall mycall R"rpt" (replaces the "RO" in
      EME usage)(can as an example be "R-11")
      When you have complete calls, report and "R" you send: hiscall mycall RRR
      And finally a lot of creativity in how you structure your 13 chars in
      the customary final "73" message, I often send "TU 73 20W PIF" to say
      thank you, 73, power used and identification, all in one short message.

      You may say that this has been caused by the mode's extreme
      effectiveness in getting messages across, even in high QRM/low signal
      strength conditions!

      A few final words to the newbie: Do tune to the other station's carrier
      QRG when responding to a CQ, it rapidly gets weird if you are even a few
      hundred Hz away, and other stations call too!
      Generally 250Hz separation between QSOs will work just fine allthough
      closer seems to work in certain conditions as well.

      Good luck with a very exiting DX-mode

      --
      Vy 73 de OZ1PIF/5Q2M, Peter

      ** CW: Who? Me? You must be joking!! **
      email: peter(no-spam-filler)@...
      http://www.frenning.dk/oz1pif.htm
      Ph. +45 4619 3239
      Snailmail:
      Peter Frenning
      Ternevej 23
      DK-4130 Viby Sj.
      Denmark
      ***********************************
    • Joe Taylor
      Graeme -- The information provided by WSJT under Help - What message to send? (F5) and Help - Examples of minimal JT65 QSOs (Shift+F5) is based on
      Message 2 of 4 , Jul 16, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Graeme --

        The information provided by WSJT under "Help -> What message
        to send?" (F5) and "Help -> Examples of minimal JT65 QSOs"
        (Shift+F5) is based on standard EME practice. When making
        EME QSOs operators are do not consider a contact to be valid
        until a minimum of both callsigns and a signal report (or
        some other information) and acknowledgments have been exchanged.

        Recently many people have been having fun with JT65A on the
        HF bands, and some have not learned (or do not wish to
        follow) these conventions.

        In "minimal EME" language: "O" (sometimes written "OOO",
        since in EME everything is usually repeated many times) is a
        signal report. It means that signals are good enough that
        both callsigns have been copied, and it is not sent until
        that is the case. When you have copied both callsigns and
        "O" from the other station you send "R" (perhaps combined
        with "O", if you have not previously sent your report).

        So no, it is NOT conventional for both stations to send OOO.
        The convention for a minimal QSO is like the example given
        in WSJT:

        ##############################################################
        Station #1 Station #2
        -----------------------------------------------
        CQ K1JT FN20
        K1JT DL3XYZ JO61
        DL3XYZ K1JT FN20 OOO
        RO
        RRR
        73
        ##############################################################

        In this minimal QSO, both stations have copied two
        callsigns, a report, and an acknowledgment that all has been
        copied.

        In HF usage the second QSO format shown in the WSJT example
        is more common, I believe, and I recommend it. Recently it
        is becoming more common in EME work, as well.

        ##############################################################
        Station #1 Station #2
        ----------------------------------------------------------
        CQ K1JT FN20
        K1JT VK7ABC QE37
        VK7ABC K1JT -22
        K1JT VK7ABC R-23
        VK7ABC K1JT RRR
        TNX JOE 73
        ##############################################################

        Of course, there is no reason that you MUST follow any
        particular convention ... especially when signal levels are
        not really marginal.

        -- 73, Joe, K1JT

        zl1gbb wrote:
        > Can anyone give me a bit of advice re what is the correct way to
        > carry out a JT65A contact? I have been following the advice in the
        > Help section regarding what is a contact. This is what the Help says:
        >
        > ...less than both calls, send both calls and your grid locator.
        > ...both calls, send both calls, your grid locator, and 000.
        > ...both calls and 000, send R0.
        > ...R0, send RRR.
        > ...RRR, the QSO is complete. However, the other station may not know
        > this, so it is conventional to send 73 to signify that you are done.
        >
        > My problem is that no-one seems to stick to this. I sit there waiting
        > for a '000' and the next thing I get is '73'. Surely BOTH parties
        > send '000'? And, BOTH parties send 'R0'? What do these mean, anyway?
        >
        > It also says that you can send sig. reports as substitutes for Grid
        > Locators. At some time in the QSO, grid locators are needed for the
        > log. So which grid locator can you substitute with sig. report? I
        > mean, if I reply to someone calling CQ, surely I should NOT subtitute
        > as it will be the only time that I will be sending my grid locator.
        >
        > 73 Graeme zl1gbb
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.