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

Re: [wsjtgroup] ISCAT and JT6M

Expand Messages
  • Steinar Aanesland
    Hey Joe I think the answer is simple. Radio amateurs are a conservative bunch, a bit afraid to try new things. We are still playing with RTTY even though many
    Message 1 of 8 , Apr 4, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Joe

      I think the answer is simple. Radio amateurs are a conservative bunch, a
      bit afraid to try new things. We are still playing with RTTY even though
      many modes have proved to be RTTY totally superior.

      LA5VNA S


      On 04.04.2011 18:24, Joe Taylor wrote:
      > This is a request for some specific feedback from WSJT users.
      >
      > As I understand things the JT6M mode is still widely used in EU, despite
      > having been replaced (in WSJT 9.0) by ISCAT -- a mode with significantly
      > better performance.
      >
      > 1. Is my understanding correct?
      >
      > If so, I hope some users will offer their explanations of why this might
      > be so. For example:
      >
      > 2. Are some users skeptical of my statement that ISCAT has
      > "significantly better performance"?
      >
      > 3. Has it been hard to get people to change, because they like a
      > familiar way of doing things?
      >
      > 4. Something else?
      >
      > I ask these questions, in part, because ISCAT should be a superb mode
      > for making inter-continental QSOs on 6 and 4 meters under marginal
      > propagation conditions likely to be more common in coming months.
      >
      > One good example: recently SV8CS worked ZS6WAB on 70 MHz using ISCAT,
      > via TEP.
      >
      > Another example of an unexpected and very fruitful use of ISCAT: VK7MO
      > and VK3KH have been making 500+ km QSOs at 10 GHz, using aircraft scatter.
      >
      > ISCAT is a powerful mode. In a number of ways its capabilities are
      > complementary to FSK441, JT65 and JT4. Under all relevant propagation
      > circumstances I've been able to document, ISCAT performs better than JT6M.
      >
      > Soooo..., once again, can someone please clarify the ISCAT-vs-JT6M
      > situation in Europe for me?
      >
      > Am I misinformed? Is a transition to ISCAT simply taking longer than I
      > might have expected? Or are there other considerations that I should
      > know about, but don't?
      >
      > -- 73, Joe, K1JT
      >
    • CT1EKD
      Hello Jonh and all I tried several times to do ISACT QSO s on 6m, never got a correspodent. sems almost all still using JT6M.. ANYONE  FOR ISCAT IN EUROPE?
      Message 2 of 8 , Apr 4, 2011
      • 0 Attachment

        Hello Jonh and all

        I tried several times to do ISACT QSO's on 6m, never got a correspodent.
        sems almost all still using JT6M..
        ANYONE  FOR ISCAT IN EUROPE?

        73'S

        Pedro - CT1EKD



        Citando Joe Taylor <joe@...>:

         

        This is a request for some specific feedback from WSJT users.

        As I understand things the JT6M mode is still widely used in EU, despite
        having been replaced (in WSJT 9.0) by ISCAT -- a mode with significantly
        better performance.

        1. Is my understanding correct?

        If so, I hope some users will offer their explanations of why this might
        be so. For example:

        2. Are some users skeptical of my statement that ISCAT has
        "significantly better performance"?

        3. Has it been hard to get people to change, because they like a
        familiar way of doing things?

        4. Something else?

        I ask these questions, in part, because ISCAT should be a superb mode
        for making inter-continental QSOs on 6 and 4 meters under marginal
        propagation conditions likely to be more common in coming months.

        One good example: recently SV8CS worked ZS6WAB on 70 MHz using ISCAT,
        via TEP.

        Another example of an unexpected and very fruitful use of ISCAT: VK7MO
        and VK3KH have been making 500+ km QSOs at 10 GHz, using aircraft scatter.

        ISCAT is a powerful mode. In a number of ways its capabilities are
        complementary to FSK441, JT65 and JT4. Under all relevant propagation
        circumstances I've been able to document, ISCAT performs better than JT6M.

        Soooo..., once again, can someone please clarify the ISCAT-vs-JT6M
        situation in Europe for me?

        Am I misinformed? Is a transition to ISCAT simply taking longer than I
        might have expected? Or are there other considerations that I should
        know about, but don't?

        -- 73, Joe, K1JT

      • Jim and Hannelore Fisher
        de VE1JF I have personally been impressed by 6M ISCAT performance in limited tests, although I didn t have previous experience with JT6M as I was concentrating
        Message 3 of 8 , Apr 4, 2011
        • 0 Attachment

          de VE1JF

           

          I have personally been impressed by 6M ISCAT performance in limited tests, although I didn’t have previous experience with JT6M as I was concentrating on EME.

           

          Over the weekend, I got on the ON4KST 50/70 MHz site (non-EME) and announced an interest in establishing a practice of aiming EU on ISCAT. Asked for an appropriate freq and was advised 50235; fine. I monitored for several hours, checking periodically for decodes, and sent a number of CQs as I passed through the house and by the transmitter. However, nobody indicated they were looking at 50235 ISCAT and one very accomplished long-distance JT6M op indicated I was unlikely to get much business and should probably try JT6M on 50230 even though he personally believes that ISCAT probably offers better S/N ratio. I am NOT flaming this individual—outstanding and open to new possibilities—but it appears he was right that at the moment it is surprisingly difficult to rustle up EU business on 50235 ISCAT.

           

          I am still interested in establishing a pattern of monitoring 50235 ISCAT beaming EU/ME and sending CQ (advertised on ON4KST) when I am around to control the transmitter. I am closer to EU than most and have a pretty good path to EU from my QTH (called “the dream QTH of VE1JF” by ON4UN). In our HF contesting days, we were known as a band-opening/closing station.

           

          Here’s my offer: I will set up my RX on 50235 ISCAT, beaming EU, in the morning. Am usually gone during the day these days, campaigning for my candidate and Party until Canada’s totally-unnecessary elections on 2 May, but will peruse results and report if and as the band begins to open for Es and hopefully F. When I can be around to control the transmitter, I will announce and carry out CQs. If I am successful in decoding or hopefully working EU stations, I will report it to try to drum up activity.

           

          73,

           

          Jim

        • Barry Garratt
          I concur with what Jim says. Last year I could not get any activity in EU or SA for that matter with ISCAT. No one in Japan seemed interested either, but, JT6M
          Message 4 of 8 , Apr 4, 2011
          • 0 Attachment

            I concur with what Jim says. Last year I could not get any activity in EU or SA for that matter with ISCAT. No one in Japan seemed interested either, but, JT6M was useful to the extent I worked 4X using it along other contacts in EU and Japan. John W5UWB also works a lot of EU with JT6M. I don’t know how successful he’s been with ISCAT though.

             

            Barry KS7DX

             

             

            From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jim and Hannelore Fisher
            Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 1:05 PM
            To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: ISCAT and JT6M

             

             

            de VE1JF

             

            I have personally been impressed by 6M ISCAT performance in limited tests, although I didn’t have previous experience with JT6M as I was concentrating on EME.

             

            Over the weekend, I got on the ON4KST 50/70 MHz site (non-EME) and announced an interest in establishing a practice of aiming EU on ISCAT. Asked for an appropriate freq and was advised 50235; fine. I monitored for several hours, checking periodically for decodes, and sent a number of CQs as I passed through the house and by the transmitter. However, nobody indicated they were looking at 50235 ISCAT and one very accomplished long-distance JT6M op indicated I was unlikely to get much business and should probably try JT6M on 50230 even though he personally believes that ISCAT probably offers better S/N ratio. I am NOT flaming this individual—outstanding and open to new possibilities—but it appears he was right that at the moment it is surprisingly difficult to rustle up EU business on 50235 ISCAT.

             

            I am still interested in establishing a pattern of monitoring 50235 ISCAT beaming EU/ME and sending CQ (advertised on ON4KST) when I am around to control the transmitter. I am closer to EU than most and have a pretty good path to EU from my QTH (called “the dream QTH of VE1JF” by ON4UN). In our HF contesting days, we were known as a band-opening/closing station.

             

            Here’s my offer: I will set up my RX on 50235 ISCAT, beaming EU, in the morning. Am usually gone during the day these days, campaigning for my candidate and Party until Canada’s totally-unnecessary elections on 2 May, but will peruse results and report if and as the band begins to open for Es and hopefully F. When I can be around to control the transmitter, I will announce and carry out CQs. If I am successful in decoding or hopefully working EU stations, I will report it to try to drum up activity.

             

            73,

             

            Jim

          • Keith Morehouse
            JOE: I have a few comments. I use WSJT extensively, both during contests and outside of them. Mostly, I use FSK441 for M/S but I occasionally fallen back on
            Message 5 of 8 , Apr 5, 2011
            • 0 Attachment
              JOE:

              I have a few comments. I use WSJT extensively, both during contests and outside
              of them. Mostly, I use FSK441 for M/S but I occasionally fallen back on JT6M
              when pings are long on 6M.

              ISCAT is, as it's name states, mainly designed for ionscatter. That is also
              where I mostly used JT6M. For this propagation mode, we want maximum weak
              signal detection. I have not done any definitive tests between the two, but
              will take you at your word that ISCAT is more sensitive. So, THAT is what I
              would use.

              As far as 'hearing' the information is concerned, I have a problem with someone
              calling this a disadvantage. The whole idea behind ISCAT and JT65x is to be
              able to copy signals down in the noise. If a signal is that weak, what is there
              to hear by ear ? If you can HEAR a signal, work the station on CW - it's MUCH
              faster ! If we're talking about 'hearing' short pings on M/S, you are using the
              wrong mode again - use FSK441.

              Joe, serious users feed problems back to software authors. They do not get on
              their 'blog' sites and complain. We all know there is a small group of WSJT
              haters out there. Might some of this negative info be attributed to them ?

              Jay W9RM

              Keith J. Morehouse
              RF Specialists Inc
              PO Box 849
              Hampshire IL 60140
            • Omar Shabsigh
              Dear Joe: I share with you your sentiments. I do believe that the reason for not moving to ISCAT can be answered by your third question. Has it been hard to
              Message 6 of 8 , Apr 5, 2011
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Joe:
                 
                I share with you your sentiments. I do believe that the reason for not moving to ISCAT can be answered by your third question. Has it been hard to get people to change, because they like a familiar way of doing things?
                 
                People mostly tend to stick to what they are familiar with.
                 
                So please just wait and you will see more activity with ISCAT.
                 
                With all my respects to you.
                 
                Best 73
                 
                Omar YK1AO
                 
                 
                 
                ----- Original Message -----
                Sent: Monday, April 04, 2011 6:24 PM
                Subject: [wsjtgroup] ISCAT and JT6M

                 

                This is a request for some specific feedback from WSJT users.

                As I understand things the JT6M mode is still widely used in EU, despite
                having been replaced (in WSJT 9.0) by ISCAT -- a mode with significantly
                better performance.

                1. Is my understanding correct?

                If so, I hope some users will offer their explanations of why this might
                be so. For example:

                2. Are some users skeptical of my statement that ISCAT has
                "significantly better performance"?

                3. Has it been hard to get people to change, because they like a
                familiar way of doing things?

                4. Something else?

                I ask these questions, in part, because ISCAT should be a superb mode
                for making inter-continental QSOs on 6 and 4 meters under marginal
                propagation conditions likely to be more common in coming months.

                One good example: recently SV8CS worked ZS6WAB on 70 MHz using ISCAT,
                via TEP.

                Another example of an unexpected and very fruitful use of ISCAT: VK7MO
                and VK3KH have been making 500+ km QSOs at 10 GHz, using aircraft scatter.

                ISCAT is a powerful mode. In a number of ways its capabilities are
                complementary to FSK441, JT65 and JT4. Under all relevant propagation
                circumstances I've been able to document, ISCAT performs better than JT6M.

                Soooo..., once again, can someone please clarify the ISCAT-vs-JT6M
                situation in Europe for me?

                Am I misinformed? Is a transition to ISCAT simply taking longer than I
                might have expected? Or are there other considerations that I should
                know about, but don't?

                -- 73, Joe, K1JT

              • Joe Taylor
                I am presently working on various improvements to the ISCAT mode in WSJT 9.0. I m looking for recordings of ISCAT signals that might help me in making further
                Message 7 of 8 , Apr 14, 2011
                • 0 Attachment
                  I am presently working on various improvements to the ISCAT mode in WSJT
                  9.0.

                  I'm looking for recordings of ISCAT signals that might help me in making
                  further enhancements to the decoder. The best files for this purpose
                  are those with weak signals close to the decoding threshold...
                  especially ones that you think should have decoded, but did not; or
                  perhaps they partially decoded. If you have some examples of such *.wav
                  files, please send them to be as email attachments. Be sure to include
                  an indication of band and propagation mode.

                  Many thanks!

                  -- 73, Joe, K1JT
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.