[50mhz] Here goes

Mon Jul 11 15:36:55 EDT 2011

I wasn't sure if I wanted to comment here having lived through some of the crap
on moon-net and I hope this thread doesn't degenerate to that level....the "moonies"
have managed to drive a lot of good ops off the moon and decreased their possibilities
of new contacts in any mode.

The main problem I see with JT65 is the use of "deep search", looking for possible
calls in a database. It's the same as a contester using Super Check Partial, sort of
guessing at a call and not exactly what you copied, was that an "I" or an "E" ? 
Either
you or the software copied it correctly or you didn't.....ask for a repeat and don't
depend on a database if you're not sure, simple as that.

Now if you haven't tried JT65 please do before you get all wound up in the trivia.
Try it on HF, there's an excellent program out there that's much easier to get
started with than WSJT.....JT65-HF. Once you see the capabilities it may change
your mind about using it. There's quite an active group and plenty of DX to work.
How about A65, 17m, 10 watts to a wire from EN10?  Or better yet Sweden and
France with 20 watts to the same wire.....on 160m !!!  I've only been on 160 since
last August and 9 states short for WAS....all JT65.  The last 6m opening I worked
5 states in the hour I had to play.....no SSB to be found and the beacons I could
hear were just out of the noise.  One request if you decide to try JT on HF, keep the
power down please....it doesn't take much, 20 watts can be QRO.

Anyone know how to get my spark tx on 6m :)  That's only humor in case you missed the
smiley....

73,
Ron
K0IDT
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Lance Collister, W7GJ" <w7gj at q.com>
To: "r miles" <greenacres113 at charter.net>
Cc: "6m" <50mhz at mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Monday, July 11, 2011 11:19 AM
Subject: Re: [50mhz] Here goes

> Hello!
>
> Thanks for sharing your thoughts on the weak signal digital modes.  I appreciate 
> that
> everybody has a different opinion, and I certainly don't intend to get into a debate
> here.  However, there appear to be some misunderstandings or misconceptions 
> regarding
> weak signal modes, and I just want to set the record straight so others are not
> misinformed regarding the facts.
>
> On 7/11/2011 3:18 PM, r miles wrote:
>>
>> Into the breach....
>>
>> As an HF DXer of the old school I see these exotic modes  differently.
>> I have no problem with RTTY, PSK or some of the other digital modes.
>
> Yes, all those are approximately the same sensitivity as CW, and are what I wukk 
> call
> "strong signal modes".
>
>> What I see as not  right is when only the PC  hears the signal. If  it's
>> a zillion DB below the human ear copying but the PC is decoding it I
>> think that's not a QSO.
>
> Well, I know you really weren't serious about a ZILLION db, but JT65A is copyable
> 10-15 dB below a CW signal strength.  One of the reasons it varies depends on the
> type of DSP audio filtering you have, as well as the sensitivity of your ears ;-)
>
> I know a number of us (I guess I am starting to be classed as an OT too - HI) have
> difficulties with our hearing, and are not as good as we used to be.  In fact, back
> in the days before digital (even when I was NOT such an OT), I was amazed when W3EP
> stopped by for a visit, and operated my 2m EME station.  He decoded CW signals that 
> I
> could just barely tell were there - and he was not familiar with the callsigns,
> either! His ears alone are certainly better than mine!  And I know there were people
> with specialized computer processing filters that provided audio that enabled them 
> to
> copy CW by ear even down to what is just barely detectable to me as a signal in the
> headphones.
>
> Having operated 2m EME since the 70's, I sure got a lot of experience trying to
> listen to very weak CW signals. (Maybe that is what ruined my hearing!)  What was
> amazing, though, was WATCHING the waterfall display on the screen when such programs
> as Spectran became available in the 1990's.  Even barely detectable CW signals left 
> a
> really bright visual trace on the screen.  It sure was frustrating to have one
> particular sense (eyes) detect the signals, but another ears (ears) fail.  It seemed
> like there should be some way to capture those weak signals that kept staring me in
> the face!
>
> Well, K1JT came along and utilized some of today's standard technology for signal
> processing to develop some weak signal modes that ARE able to do something with the
> signals that are visible to our eyes on the screen.
>
> If only the PCs are copying each  other is that
>> a QSO? Why even  be in the shack? Just set software to detect a signal&
>> reply. When you physically enter the radio room  your PC can tell you
>> what 'you' worked.
>
> Actually, the computer does NOT make the contact.  The operator must use his 
> senses -
> primarily his EYES - to watch the waterfall, compare what he sees with what the
> computer processes, and select messages to exchange with the other station in a very
> rigorous contact protocol.  The operator needs to be integrally involved, and well
> trained and experienced.  Actually, it becomes quite an art to properly use this 
> weak
> signal software properly.
>
>> This is ONLY my opinion. Don't go  off if you disagree. We all see
>> things differently. I'm not saying  you  are wrong. We just see things
>> in  a different  way.
>>
>> Good DX
>>
>> K9IL
>
> So, I am not going off on you, and appreciate the fact that you enjoy operating
> strong signal modes.  However, please also appreciate that there are those of us who
> are interested in utilizing the most sensitive means possible to decode messages
> required for two operators (not computers) to complete a DX contact.  Weak signal
> work is certainly not for everyone, but others should not criticize it until they
> have actually TRIED it, and better understand what is involved.
>
> As for me, I will use whatever modes are appropriate for the particular situation 
> and
> propagation.  I look forward to contacting you on 6m using either CW or SSB when we
> have a strong Es opening, and wish you success in your pursuit of your personal 
> goals.
>
> VY 73, Lance
>
>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> 50mhz mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/50mhz
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:50mhz at mailman.qth.net
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Lance Collister, W7GJ
> (ex WA3GPL, WA1JXN, WA1JXN/C6A, ZF2OC/ZF8, E51SIX, 3D2LR, 5W0GJ)
> P.O. Box 73
> Frenchtown, MT   59834-0073
> USA
> TEL: (406) 626-5728
> QTH: DN27ub
> URL: http://www.bigskyspaces.com/w7gj
> Windows Messenger: W7GJ at hotmail.com
> Skype: lanceW7GJ
> 2m DXCC #11/6m DXCC #815
>
> Interested in 6m EME?  Ask me about subscribing to the Magic Band EME
> email group, or just fill in the request box at the bottom of my web
> page (above)!
> ______________________________________________________________
> 50mhz mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/50mhz
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:50mhz at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 