A NEW FT8 with QSO and Rag Chew capabilities called FT8CALL

Ok, he's using an Raspberry Pi with a Samsung Tab as the interface. He compiled FT8Call for ARM Linux? Running it directly on the Tab Active would be far more efficient.

 

FT8Call has an ARM version for Debian Stretch. There's not an Android version. One benefit to a Pi... your touchscreen isn't connected to the radio, so it's a little more ergonomic.

 

I do pack a mini netbook with builtin mouse eraser when I work in the field. My hand held receiver from 10 years ago is still in my Faraday safe along with 2 laptops, the mini netbook, radios, solar charge controllers, etc... only need one working Sat to read the time in debug data using old school hand held or your own TTL serial UBlox GPS module now less then $20.

With no power running WWV isn't going to work long. Many plan to use FSQ type modes and Olivia type modes in such a case. This seems like an FSQcall feature set with FT8 modulation.

 

Heavily inspired by FSQCall. A bit slower, but has been shown to work where WSQ and FSQ can't because of the FT8 sensitivity. Cool description here about a comparison test on 630m: http://njdtechnologies.net/081518/

 

THERE are still a lot of us who use RTTY .. i really do NOT think 14.080 was a good freq to pick. .078 would have been better maybe.
73 Tony

 

I tried my best to finding space for a narrow bandwidth digital mode to avoid unnecessary QRM within our shared spectrum. I am willing to modify the suggested frequencies in the application. But, I need suggested alternatives and appreciate that you took the time to offer one

 

You keep underlining shared like not respecting boundaries and crowding people out of frequencies is an example of sharing. It's not

I posted a listing of the FT8, JT65, PSK31 and RTTY frequencies for you. There are a lot of frequencies that are not those that you can choose from.

FT8 shows that you can't share a specific frequency with a popular mode. It crowds everything else out. It also shows that the "suggested" frequencies end up being the frequencies used

 

At a mere 48 Hz bandwidth per QSO, I find it incredible anyone would ask such a question. That means 56 slots for two-way communications are available for the same typical 2,700 Hz bandwidth occupied by a SSB QSO. That is high efficiency spectrum use to minimize QRM. The stone age is over friend - no need to torch the neighbor's village. Band allocation is shared, not owned or allocated to a single mode.

 

Please leave as is..(The freq)..It is next to FT8 which is great.. The bandwidth is only 50 HZ per TX carrier...All very good...The other modes are no near as popular as FT8. This is natural move to have FT8CALL next to FT8...C U on the bands..NN2X, Tom

 

most of the boys are using FT8 right now and not a lot of RTTY but that will change during contests. you have the right ideal . look at the band plan. ft8 is using .073 to .076 now. they have spread out from .074. Rtty is .080 and up. i think JT65 is using .077 and .078. not sure if .071 and .072 are being used ? i am sure there are others on here that could give you a heads up on that.. Good Luck. Thanks
73Tony

 

I really haven't used FT8 in the past. I have never been attracted to it, because I wanted something I could rag chew in, and have always wanted a digital mode that relied less on the internet. People can enjoy it, and I am happy for them. However, I still have this odd personal quirk that makes me feel a mode is of less interest to me, if it requires on "outside help" from the internet. For a mode to be palatable to me, I need it to work on its own... a computer is OK, but I would want it to work in a situation where someone were in the wild, and where there were no satellites or internet to rely on, for any reason.

Please explain something for me... does FT8Call rely on a properly-timed internet clock? Is FT8Call different in that I could be in a shack "off the grid" with no internet, and pick it up after several days of non-use, and it would just work? Or does it rely on outside internet information (such as timing, etc) to work properly?

Not saying I wouldn't play with FT8Call, but I'm just seeking perspective.

Thanks.

 

I'm working on a signal detector for timing recovery without the need for an accurate timing reference. However, currently you need an accurate clock. But, that accurate clock doesn't need to be internet connected. A GPS dongle would work well (a number of portable ops are using this today). A manual sync like this http://vtenn.com/Blog/?p=1319 would also work.

 

About RTTY and others.

Just look at PSK Reporter, over the last 2 hours there has been nearly 2000 QSOs for FT8CALL (Not even commissioned yet), while RTTY has 9 QSO

FT8CALL has been bouncing around 2nd place and 3rd place. I will predict, when FT8 is fully commissioned this will be solid 2nd place on activities on Ham bands...

Here is the URL to confirm

https://pskreporter.info/cgi-bin/pskstats.pl

Cheers

NN2X,

 

Tom. as of right now you are correct but during contest you are wrong. ft8call can go down in freq it does not have to go up. popular or not does not make a difference to the guy who uses a mode be it ft8,psk or rtty. to him the mode he likes is great. what your suggesting is going to cause problems and start hard feelings towards those who use ft8call. just taking a freq before you research the band plan does not make for happy campers.
i started swling in the mid 50's got my ticket in 62 and have seen this happen before. just think you should put a little more thought and time in picking a freq.
Good luck
73 Tony WA4JQS / VP8BZL

 

About accurate clock..

Down load http://www.thinkman.com/dimension4/

There are million of the them, take 2 minutes, and presto, your clock is perfect and makes FT8 and FT8CALL good to go...