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

Re: [wsjtgroup] Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests

Expand Messages
  • Joe Taylor
    Hi Robert, I ll reply to the list, since it appears that your message was intended to go there. A 5 W limit would be fine. It has the advantage that it s the
    Message 1 of 5 , Jan 3, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Robert,

      I'll reply to the list, since it appears that your message was intended
      to go there.

      A 5 W limit would be fine. It has the advantage that it's the same as
      the usual limit for "QRP class" in other contests.

      The important thing, in my opinion, is that an HF JT65 contest should be
      a QRP (or QRPP) event. JT65 is supposed to be used with *weak* signals.

      -- 73, Joe, K1JT

      TF3TTY wrote:
      > Hi all.
      >
      > Make it 5 watts, Because most radios has 5 watts minimum power when the knob
      > is turned all the way down…
      >
      > Reading 1 watt on a meter is also not very good.
      >
      > 73’s robert tf3tty
      >
      > _____
      >
      > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
      > Of Joe Taylor
      > Sent: 2. janúar 2008 14:35
      > To: Andrew O'Brien; DIGITALRADIO; WSJT
      > Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Comments on the JT65A and Olivia contests
      >
      > Hi Andy and all,
      >
      > Andrew O'Brien (K3UK) wrote:
      >
      >> Both Olivia and JT65A contests were considered "tough". Activity was,
      >> according to early reports, higher in the JT65A mode .
      >>
      >> Several JT65A WSJT users had difficulty handing a "pile-up " (There
      >> are some advanced features within WSJT where you can decode several
      >> signals at once, but perhaps people do not know this).
      >> ...
      >> As for the comments that the contest was "tough", that was expected.
      >> The experimental contests take a lot of patience.
      >>
      >> JT65A as implemented in WSJT is not at all designed for conventional
      >> contesting. Today's results are helpful for analyzing how contests
      >> with JT65A could be conducted in the future (if at all!).
      >
      > At the risk of stating the obvious: JT65 was designed for EME and EME
      > contests -- another mode that most people would consider "tough".
      >
      > In the EME contest world, a sustained QSO rate of 8-10 per hour (which
      > is possible with JT65) is very good. Somewhere around 200 users had
      > great fun with JT65 in the recent ARRL EME contest, in many cases
      > working well over 100 stations.
      >
      > JT65 was intended for use with extremely weak signals -- cases where CW
      > (or other, faster digimodes) will fail.
      >
      > To me, the only interesting HF contest using JT65 would be one in which,
      > say, the maximum permitted power would be 1 Watt.
      >
      > -- 73, Joe, K1JT
    • Dave hartzell
      Yes, lets do it again QRP (1-5 watts)! I only had RX capability on Jan 1, but I saw WSJT activity with my ft-817 and a whip antenna! 73, Dave n0tgd
      Message 2 of 5 , Jan 3, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Yes, lets do it again QRP (1-5 watts)!

        I only had RX capability on Jan 1, but I saw WSJT activity with my
        ft-817 and a whip antenna!

        73,

        Dave
        n0tgd


        On Jan 3, 2008 1:00 PM, Joe Taylor <joe@...> wrote:

        > A 5 W limit would be fine. It has the advantage that it's the same as
        > the usual limit for "QRP class" in other contests.
      • agm54uk
        Hi All Where are the advanced features within WSJT (JT65A) where you can decode several signals at once, I have looked but could not find. This feature would
        Message 3 of 5 , Jan 13, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi All

          Where are the advanced features within WSJT (JT65A) where you can
          decode several signals at once, I have looked but could not find.

          This feature would be very useful If I could find it !!.

          Andy
          G8RZA


          --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com, Joe Taylor <joe@...> wrote:
          >
          > Hi Andy and all,
          >
          > Andrew O'Brien (K3UK) wrote:
          >
          > > Both Olivia and JT65A contests were considered "tough".
          Activity was,
          > > according to early reports, higher in the JT65A mode .
          > >
          > > Several JT65A WSJT users had difficulty handing a "pile-up "
          (There
          > > are some advanced features within WSJT where you can decode
          several
          > > signals at once, but perhaps people do not know this).
          > > ...
          > > As for the comments that the contest was "tough", that was
          expected.
          > > The experimental contests take a lot of patience.
          > >
          > > JT65A as implemented in WSJT is not at all designed for
          conventional
          > > contesting. Today's results are helpful for analyzing how contests
          > > with JT65A could be conducted in the future (if at all!).
          >
          > At the risk of stating the obvious: JT65 was designed for EME and
          EME
          > contests -- another mode that most people would consider "tough".
          >
          > In the EME contest world, a sustained QSO rate of 8-10 per hour
          (which
          > is possible with JT65) is very good. Somewhere around 200 users
          had
          > great fun with JT65 in the recent ARRL EME contest, in many cases
          > working well over 100 stations.
          >
          > JT65 was intended for use with extremely weak signals -- cases
          where CW
          > (or other, faster digimodes) will fail.
          >
          > To me, the only interesting HF contest using JT65 would be one in
          which,
          > say, the maximum permitted power would be 1 Watt.
          >
          > -- 73, Joe, K1JT
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.