[Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"

[Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT]

But apparently, according to other posts on this list, DXing and CW is 
Amateur Radio, and if you don't have fun doing that, you aren't really a 
ham.

Oh well.

73 -- Lynn

On 7/12/20 6:32 PM, Lynn W. Taylor, WB6UUT wrote:
> I was trying to remember JS8CALL -- thanks for the reminder.
> 
> The best thing about this hobby is that there are so many options and so 
> many different things you can do.
> 
> David, in my off-list message, I was thinking of JS8CALL.
> 
> 73 -- Lynn
> 
> On 7/12/20 6:18 PM, Lyn Norstad wrote:
>> Enter JS8Call.
>>
>> All the technology of FT8, plus all of the conversationality of CW, 
>> RTTY and SSB rolled into one.
>>
>> If you haven't tried it, you really should.  It's developer, Jordan 
>> Sherer (KN4CRD) has done a terrific job with it and I am honored to 
>> have been a part of the beta team almost since day one.
>>
>> http://js8call.com/
>>
>> 73
>> Lyn, W0LEN
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net 
>> [mailto:elecraft-bounces at mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of David Gilbert
>> Sent: Sunday, July 12, 2020 7:40 PM
>> To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net
>> Subject: [Elecraft] FT8 - was "On Second Thought, I'll Take The Stairs"
>>
>>
>> Well, the fact is that the coding and processing behind modes like FT8
>> doesn't have to be as rigid as is implemented in WSJT-X.  It only
>> requires that information be sent and received in time frames, and those
>> time frames are simply a function of three variables ... bandwidth,
>> rate, and number of characters in the message frame.  It would be
>> possible to change any of those, such as widening the bandwidth to
>> increase the number of characters for the same time frame.
>>
>> It would also be possible to send text but have it converted to CW on
>> the other end.  Or even to key CW that gets converted to text before
>> transmission ... i.e., CW to CW except with significantly better S/N
>> performance.  If the user was willing to live with a narrow bandwidth
>> single conversation format, clock synchronization isn't even really
>> needed.   And if we were willing to live with a single conversation
>> format, there would be no point in cramming everyone into 2.4 KHz and we
>> could spread out like we do for every other mode.
>>
>> I'm no expert, but I think that the coding could have enough error
>> checking to allow busted message frames to be printed (or converted to
>> CW) ... although of course with errors.  The extra error processing
>> would reduce the character count, though, all other things being equal.
>>
>> The point is that the digital signal processing behind FT8 is extremely
>> powerful and could be adapted to other user formats with a lot more
>> flexibility than we have with FT8.  The hams who just dismiss FT8 out of
>> hand really don't understand the broader weak signal applicability of it.
>>
>> 73,
>> Dave   AB7E
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:Elecraft at mailman.qth.net
> 
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> Message delivered to kx3.3 at coldrockshotbrooms.com