ONCE MORE: As soon as possible after December 10, and certainly by January 1, 2019, everyone should be using WSJT-X 2.0 or a compatible v2.0 version of derivative programs such as JTDX or MSHV. As of today, PSKreporter statistics show roughly 3000 users of WSJT-X versions older than v1.9.1, 9500 users of v1.9.1, and 3000 users of v2.0-rc#. Please, everyone, help us to spread the word that upgrading to v2.0 after December 10 is very important. There will be no looking back!
ROTFL! Well, I tried Ver 2.0.0-RC3 on 40m on Wednesday evening. Admittedly, it was only 28th November but there were more than 40 stations using the Ver 1 protocols and not a single one using Ver 2.
You’re repeating yourself Walt, you already said this a couple of posts ago. I agree that the current situation is that more people are currently using the old mode - whether from v 1.91, 2.00 RC1,2 or 3. From the piece Phil posted it looks like the target date for the release version of 2.000 is December 10th. The hope of course is that those using the old protocol will upgrade then and not become QRM causers on the bands, for those doing as Joe K1JT has asked and moved to the latest version.
Good for you posting the update info. I have been testing V2 rc4 and now rc5. I was on air this evening on 40 m.
It addresses most of the whinges people had about V1.9 - expanded call signs, not being able to call CQ SOTA, wider range of colors to denote different categories of station worked, better decoding on some modes etc.
To continue using V1.9 is a bit like choosing to continue with DOS 6. I liked DOS 6 and lamented the introduction of Windows. However the greater capability had me upgrading soon after.
Yes the number of people using V2 is small at present - they are the Beta testers - but there will be a significant uptake of the public release before New Year.
If you can figure out how to use V1.9 then you can use V2 It is not complicated.
Many self inflicted problems are caused by people not reading the release notes or even the pop-up that comes on screen every time V2 rc4 is started. The same dumb questions get asked several times a day and a couple of patient souls spend time answering them.
Some don’t even understand RTFM!
Yes some will persist with V1.9 but it will be abandoned by the serious DX people.
I am not. A couple of posts ago I said I had tried RC3 on 20m. In my latest post, I said I had tried it on 40m.
I believe I am entitled to use whatever digital mode or protocol I choose, in accordance with the IARU Band Plans, without being accused of being a “QRM causer”.
I’m a fairly serious DX person Walt and a keen user of FT8 since I got set up for it in February. How long my enthusiasm for the mode will last remains to be seen, but I’m enjoying using it so far… I have decided to cease using FT8 V1.9 on 09 December and restart using V2.0 on 15 December. I’ll give the mode a rest for a week and then restart all anew.
I see many UK stations using this machine mode, many are serious “big gun” DXers, and there are also many of the called “little pistols” using it with a fair degree of success.
Thank you for the 60m FT8 QSO we had on 05 April 2018.
Hi Walt,
Perhaps QRM causer - was a little strong, however as Joe taylor has pointed out, the old software will no longer be compatible with the new and people using old versions will cause users with the latest software problems (and vice versa). I would see it similar to operating LSB SSB on 20m or USB SSB on 40m - both are “legal” but doing so would cause some operators issues.
Now if V 2.00 FT8 were to use a different frequency - as was requested of those testing the 77-bit mode in the first RCs to have it, we wouldn’t have this problem. I wonder why that is not the case.
Lifting the conversation here a little I hope - has anyone worked out a SOTA exchange to work with the expanded 77 bit protocol yet?
Well, my acceptance of the concept of “a serious DX person” died many years ago with the advent of DX Clusters.
As for FT8, it has become apparent that most of the deriders of the FT8 mode are the “big guns” who have had it their own way for years with their acres of real-estate and enormous towers and beams. They are now indignant and jealous of the fact that DX-ing has become far too easy for the “little pistols” using FT8 with their pocket-handkerchief gardens, lower power and modest wire antennas.
Yes, it was nice to catch you on 60m FT8. I quite often see G5LP on the waterfall as well.
I quite agree. However, irrespective of which protocol is being used, the fact is that we have already passed the point where a single 2.7 kHz “channel” is enough to accommodate the sheer volume of traffic that now exists on FT8, certainly on the 20m and 40m bands. There is no reason why alternative base frequencies could not be used in order to spread out the activity a bit, but everyone sticks doggedly to the default base frequencies for each band, as programmed into the software when supplied. I have tried using frequencies just above and just below the conventional 2.7 kHz slot, but I hardly ever encounter any activity there.
At present, we often have the situation where upwards of 100 audible FT8 signals are crammed into a space that can only accommodate 50 without mutual QRM, so it becomes a power battle.
Sadly, the real demise of “serious DX persons” died with the advent of the RBNgate or whatever it’s called this week. A few years ago, I read a thread where an activator was mortified because Reverse Beacon Network was down and what was he going to do!!!
With the introduction of the RBN, it appears Chalies and Qubecs were removed from the Morse alphabet…
FB Walt, I’ve been using DX Clusters since they were on VHF/UHF before moving to the internet and helped set up links for them in Yorkshire in the 1990s. I think the cluster is brilliant and yes it has made working up to DXCC Honour Roll that much easier - it can be likened to SOTAWatch, which as we know has its own cluster as well run my Sysop and MT member Andy MM0FMF. I use it as do others, and its gaining in popularity with several bugs recently being ironed out:
It will be interesting to see what the thoughts of Tom Wylie GM4FDM are regarding the use of FT8. He couldn’t be called a big gun as such but is known to be a good operator who has worked hard on DXCC. Tom stills need two DXCC Countries to reach the top of Honour Roll. As a member of Chiltern DX Club Tom has been one the proudly anti FT8 brigade, up until the last few weeks that is. He won’t mind me saying that here I know. Tom took part in the A35EU DXpedition to Tonga earlier this month - the four man team of GM4FDM, PA3EWM, PA4WM and EI5IX completed 17098 contacts with 7240 unique calls on 160m through to 12m. Out of the 17098 contacts 3360 were on FT8 and I know Tom, despite his comments earlier in the year deriding the mode, was operating using it - indeed it was he who I worked myself using FT8 - the only QSO I made with the team, and I was using a wire antenna.
FT8 and modes like it are here to stay I reckon, unless the ARRL decide to discount these modes for DXCC - which I think is highly unlikely now they are in the scheme.
For MIke 2E0YYY - I’ve never got into using the RBN for DX working - I’ve never looked at it - but I appreciate its use in SOTA both as a chaser and activator when we get the spots coming in from a summit that may have no mobile access at 0700z on a cold morning when there are few stations looking for SOTA QSOs, the propagation is dire and all one wants to do is qualify the summit and move on!
I believe Tom Wylie is GM4FDM. The following statement appears on GM4FDM’s QRZ.com page:
" PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME A CARD FOR FT8 CONTACTS AS I DO NOT CONSIDER FT8 EXCHANGES BETWEEN COMPUTERS TO BE WORTHY OF CALLING THEM A QSO".
So I wish you luck in getting a QSL for your contact with A35EU !
And for the record, I have absolutely no time for DX Clusters, RBN, etc … and even less for the Mutual Admiration Society to which you made reference. But each to his own …
I opted out of having my activations spotted on RBN-Gate a long time ago.
Thank for correcting my error Walt - I remember Chris GM4FAM well also and met him once. He was very active in SOTA and was an outstanding signal as I recall.
Yes, Chiltern DX Club can be a bit like that I agree. I gave up membership about 2009 but rejoined 2 years ago. After I rejoined I wanted to sell some radio gear and found several buyers via their For Sale / Wanted page. The bi-monthly magazine edited by G3MXJ (who is now F5VHY and lives in France) is excellent though. I believe the organisation is worth supporting and the subscription is good value.
Yes, Cris (G4FAM) was a personal friend of mine. I met him many times when I lived in the London area, before he moved permanently to Scotland. It was very sad when he became SK.
I have been invited several times to become a member of CDXC but I have always declined … for the same reason that I resigned from FOC many years ago. I used to be FOC no. 747.
I’m amused by the anti-FT8 folk. I think they don’t understand that ham radio got very, very far behind the state of the art. We are only now catching up.
In my first job out of university, I wrote a software simulation of a V.29 decoder. That is the same kind of modulation that PSK31 uses. That was in 1981 on a PDP-11/70.
I date the beginning of modern digital protocols to the invention of the Viterbi decoder in 1970.
So ham radio was 30 to 40 years behind. With the JT modes and the work on FreeDV, we are actually doing good, new work, like when hams experimented with SSB in 1947.
There’s a difference between catching up and introducing a kindergarten mode. Experienced opertators will still make DX contacts using ssb and cw in poor conditions.
