[600MRG] WSQ2 operations in EU

[Steve]

>I was interested to read this by Wolf DL4YHF in his manual for his QSO 
>version of WSQ, where he talks about how it is (or might be) used in 
>Europe:




''By default (or "convention" amongst MF users in Europe), tune your 
receiver to 474.2 kHz in USB, and leave the 'base frequency' (=audio 
frequency of the lowest WSQ tone) set to 1000 Hz. That way, you can have 
WSQ, WSPR, and JT9 (WSJT-X) running on the same PC, connected to the same 
receiver."




>I see no problem with this for NA users of WSQ2, especially now that the 
>default tone spacing is the same 1.46xxx hertz that WSQCall uses, which 
>yields a signal width of only 50 hz.





>Can JT9, FT8, and WSQ all share the same 800-1350 hz area on our 630m band? 
>If not, why not ?? Just a question for friendly discussion.





>Thanks for ur thoughts....


>73
Neil, w0yse, CN85rq
Vancouver, WA



>Can JT9, FT8, and WSQ all share the same 800-1350 hz area on our 630m band? 
>If not, why not ??  Just a question for friendly discussion.

Perhaps in rural regions or other areas where nearby local activity is not 
present but here in the greater Vancouver region (VE7), there are presently 
6 VERY active stations on 630. The ONLY way that we can work weak signals is 
to co-operatively work together, and that means that we all work hard at 
transmitting only on the odd-minute sequence for two-way work. There is 
little hope for any of us hearing weak signals if any of the other locals 
are transmitting as, thanks to the amazing groundwave on this band, everyone 
is S9+++ at each others location!

This would still be fine if WSQ were a non-random tx mode but having two-way 
work on WSQ would mean that the 'tx on odd' rule that is our present 
salvation, would no longer be possible. Our own locals would be shut-out of 
two-way work using this mode, should they want to maintain the co-operative 
and presently well-working local protocols here in the VE7 region. Even when 
the earlier WSQ experiments were rolled-out way up at the top end of the 
band, there was still significant audio harmonic fallout from these very 
strong signals, spread out throughout the JT9 / WSPR segment but they were 
not strong enough that one could not pick a hole between them to use.

Respectfully, I would strongly urge that any precedent for establishing a NA 
two-way WSQ window be kept as high in the band as possible and definitely 
not in the JT9 / WSPR region as in a high signal environment (that may 
eventually come to your region as well), the two modes are certainly not 
compatible.

Steve  73



WEB - "The VE7SL Radio Notebook":  http://qsl.net/ve7sl/

VE7SL BLOG - "Homebrewing and Operating Adventures From 2200m to Nanowaves": 
http://ve7sl.blogspot.ca/