Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

donate to eham
   Home   Help Search  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: FT8 DX Epedition white paper  (Read 3072 times)
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 645




Ignore
« on: October 28, 2017, 07:37:07 AM »

I posted this yesterday probably in the wrong Subject in the digital forum.
Here's the link about r8188
https://sourceforge.net/p/wsjt/wsjt/8188/tree//branches/wsjtx/lib/DXped_Operations.txt

Bill, AA2UK
Logged
KC0W
Member

Posts: 396




Ignore
« Reply #1 on: October 29, 2017, 12:16:45 PM »

 This has absolutely nothing to do with DXing..................K1JT is blabbing about some cryptic "Fox & Hounds" blah, blah, blah. 

                                                                       Tom KC0W  
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 12:22:29 PM by KC0W » Logged
AA6YQ
Member

Posts: 2747


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #2 on: October 29, 2017, 01:33:21 PM »

This has absolutely nothing to do with DXing..................K1JT is blabbing about some cryptic "Fox & Hounds" blah, blah, blah.  

I strongly disagree. K1JT is addressing a serious problem: as typically configured, WSJT-X will likely fold under the weight of the traffic generated by an in-demand DXpedition. If this can mitigated with a recommended WSJT-X configuration, great; if it will require extensions to WSJT-X, then the sooner this is recognized and the extensions are implemented, the better.

FT8 has rapidly become popular since being released in early July. Michael G7VJR of Club Log reports that more FT8 QSOs were uploaded during the month of September than CW and SSB QSOs combined.

K1JT's "fox and hounds" terminology may be non-standard DX-wise, but it's the concepts that matter. I'm glad to see that the WSJT-X team is tackling this problem.

Quote
The old-timer quickly set down his coffee mug as he caught sight of a beady-eyed QRP'er steaming up the hill; this one looked loaded for bear. Before the old-timer could even say "good morning", he was blasted with "What's all this talk of foxes and hounds?..."
« Last Edit: October 29, 2017, 01:39:41 PM by AA6YQ » Logged
KC0W
Member

Posts: 396




Ignore
« Reply #3 on: October 29, 2017, 02:19:29 PM »

 So the "Fox" is the DX station & the "Hounds" are those in the pileup. Rather than using cute little words K1JT should have just said the "DX Station" & the "Callers".  

                                                                         Tom KC0W
Logged
WO7R
Member

Posts: 2712




Ignore
« Reply #4 on: October 29, 2017, 02:21:30 PM »

Actually, I like the terminology.  It is a good analogy and is less of a mouthful.
Logged
AA2UK
Member

Posts: 645




Ignore
« Reply #5 on: October 30, 2017, 06:14:15 AM »

If you read the entire document Joe does ref the DX station and those calling the DX station. It's a primer for FT8 use by DXpeditions or DX stations and how multiple calls can be managed.
Bill
Logged
KI5LP
Member

Posts: 16




Ignore
« Reply #6 on: November 01, 2017, 03:01:04 PM »

I do like Joe’s implicit acknowledgement that a 73 packet after a 73 packet is redundant and disrupts the flow of the QSO.
Logged
K0YQ
Member

Posts: 1320




Ignore
« Reply #7 on: November 01, 2017, 05:39:10 PM »

Glad to see the team working on an FT8 DXpedition protocol.  I can absolutely see FT8 supplanting RTTY as the main DXpedition digital mode.
Logged
VA3VF
Member

Posts: 1259




Ignore
« Reply #8 on: November 04, 2017, 10:11:02 AM »

Actually, I like the terminology.  It is a good analogy and is less of a mouthful.


If you factor in the on-air behaviour sometimes, it should be poachers and wild animals.  Grin
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!