- Just found the WSJX. So I may be on the wrong place to write.
I am on 1.838; left the defaults and called CQ @+1500.
At the end of my minute there was a carrier which made me think of WSPR,
on +1200 ... when it finished, my JT9 decoded, or displayed
0801 10 -5 0.1 1194.61 0.00 000AAA 000AAA RA90 :
0811 10 -4 0.2 1194.96 0.00 000AAA 000AAA RA90
later on the tone came on, seemed to go for two minutes, and the decode
was the same other than time
RA90 isn't a call sign so I guess this is just JT9 rendering of whatever
the WSPR station was doing. It was not PSK31 however.
- Also, when I load the 00000 sync wav, and have my two jt9 windows the
same as the example, I get no decode. I do see the trace is exact with
the two minor peaks around 1500 ... and the light vertical WF type
coloring is the same near 1500. Just no decode. I imagine this means I
have incorrect settings.
- Hi Bob--I've been following WSJX on the RSGB Low-Band reflector. Experimentation is ongoing in EU on 136KHz (window) as well as a couple of 600M/630M frequencies. K1JT has visited that reflector several times and says updates and bug fixes are ongoing and a number of additional needed changes have been identified. People on that reflector are reporting different experiences--apparently depending on computer specifics or maybe setup. Everytime I try WSJX out I also check the WSJT download site to make sure I have the latest version.One thing I noticed was that some of people who have tried -1 and -2 seemed to be having better luck making JT9-2 work than JT9-1 at the moment.My adventure this afternoon is trying to get the PTT working properly. Com7 drives my RIGBlaster for WSJT9.3, as it did for 9.02 and other purposes. Can select it on JT9 but it doesn't shut off after 2 min (on JT9-2). Will continue to play with settings etc.; have an on-air sked in a few minutes to assess functionality.Seems to be an extremely promising development for its intended purposes. Love those sensitivity figures!73,Jim, VE1JF
- Hi everyone!
I am interested in experimenting with the new modes available in wsjtx.
Most of the current work seems to be on the LF and VLF frequencies. I'm
not ready to put up a VLF antenna yet, so I'd like to find out if there
is any activity on 160m or if there are people who would like to create
some activity there.
Is there any consensus about frequencies? It seems to me that the
narrow-band modes offered in wsjtx are more similar to wspr and qrss
than they are to jt65. Is there some way to fit wsjtx operation in near
the wspr frequencies? Maybe just below the wspr frequencies would be
good since wspr seems to be relative to 1500 Hz above dial frequency and
wsjtx seems to be relative to 1000 Hz above dial frequency.
Any and all discussion is welcome and I'm ready to do monitoring,
beaconing, and/or QSOs.
- On Thursday (WA8EJH) sent, on a straight key:
> Hi everyone!There are a handful of Ops, globally it seems, who have been
> I am interested in experimenting with the new modes available in wsjtx.
>......... so I'd like to find out if there
> is any activity on 160m
quasi-coordinating testing of WSJT-X amongst themselves. The following
few links will take you to the most likely Places on which we see if
anyone might be able to listen for, or reply to the JT9-x modes.
HamSpots Chat: http://hamspots.net/wsjt/
K3UK Skeds Chat: http://www.obriensweb.com/sked/index.php?board=digitalradio
ON4KST Low Band Chat:
........ON4KST you will arrive on Index page; Select Low-Band/VLF
Ping-Jockey JT65 Terrestrial:
Sometimes you end up on the M/S page. Select Upper-right, JT65A:
The latter one although higher-volume sometimes, I find quite annoying to
try and type on. It has the propensity to all-of-a-sudden place your
cursor/pointer at the bottom of the line-by-line display of incremental
I, for one, am unable to stare at a monitor and also type on keyboard.
Also it's possible to hit the backspace key and have your last Post
entered into the Add-comments text-box as well as to resend that.
There is a lot of activity actually ON the WSJT/JT65 frequencies. There
is likewise a LOT of coordination going on nearly 24 hours a day and
somebody to aim a CQ at. Most enjoyable indeed!
> Is there any consensus about frequencies?That is going to be a good one for argument. Any settling on one is well
above my Clearance-Level.
On 160m last night, I was crashed upon by some JT65hf users thus
rendering the entire spectrum I saw totally useless to some very weak
(due to propagation) stations I was trying to QSO via JT9-1 at the time.
Other Bands and I have been phased-out by both RTTY, WeFax and PSK who,
at the time, had either incredible High-Power Ant/Amp or a
- Greetings all!
Although it may not sound like it at first, this really is about weak
signal digital communication.
I recently returned from visiting some of our country's most amazing
national parks in Utah. The land is mostly high desert (with deep
canyons!) and the ground is either rocky or sandy. Off the paths, in
the sandy areas, the ground looks like just a layer of crusty sand, with
nothing going on except the occasional cactus or scrubby green thing.
In short, it looks inert or dead.
However in some parks there are signs posted warning people not to walk
off the rocky surfaces or the designated paths onto the sand since,
despite its appearance, this sandy area is full of life and the system
that supports the life is very delicate. People sometimes tromp across
the sand anyway either because they don't care, or they see only dead
sand, or they didn't read the sign. Regardless of the reason, the harm
So, what does this have to do with weak signal work? Think about how
the small sub-bands we use are viewed by hams who have no familiarity
with what we're doing. If they don't look very closely, all they see is
the noise level, similar to seeing that "dead" layer of sand. They have
no awareness that just at the surface and even beneath the surface there
is activity. Any of us who has tried to do weak-signal digital work
during a CW or RTTY contest knows what it is like when a visitor to our
delicate ecosystem "tromps across the sand".
As with the park visitors, the owner of the invading signal may not
care, but most likely simply doesn't see (or hear) anything there. Many
have simply not "read the sign", meaning they haven't heard or read
anything about our modes and where we hang out. I suspect most of the
problem comes from lack of knowledge. I have asked a RTTY station to
QSY from a jt65 sub-band before and received an immediate "I'm sorry"
and the person moved. That person really did care.
The real problem then is that there are too few "signs" posted. Every
time there is a major contest that takes place in the parts of the bands
that we use, we get tromped upon. The excitement of the contest takes
over and people are constantly looking for what appears to be an open
frequency. Our operation is not part of their awareness.
I would like to propose that we ask the "park service", the ARRL and
other organizations that sponsor contests and serve as information
sources for hams, to post more "signs". In their online and print
publications, they could regularly list the frequencies commonly used
for various modes. This would help other hams avoid mistakes and
increase awareness of, and possibly interest in, what we are doing.
Additionally, they should put a list of vulnerable sub-bands to avoid in
the rules for each contest that has the potential to adversely affect
these sub-bands. There is no reason why this information cannot be
included and it would help promote harmony and understanding among all
of us who share the bands.
I intend to ask the ARRL to do this. I intend to ask the same of other
major sponsors of contests. It only takes a moment to send a polite
email with this request. If we all write to them and request this it
might actually happen!
It shouldn't be too hard to find contact information for these
organizations. Just start with the websites that list upcoming
contests and their sponsors.
73 and thanks for reading this.