I asked via e-mail to qrz and my reply was, We follow the .ADIF standards and we are waiting for them to make a decision about whether it will be listed as a mode or a "submode." I know it sounds like splitting hairs but we need to know this in order for our system to interface with LOTW and other logging programs.</p> I know in Italy it is in their qrz log mode because I have some waiting to confirm and their page has it listed.
Folks...FT4 does not exist as far as the ADIF protocol is concerned. Any serious website will follow the ADIF protocol for logging. The mode may not even become permanent. It's a test. Once the final production release of WSJT-X is available, then the ADIF commitee will add the mode for sure. Not only this, but give other developers some time to catch up. Some people are already hounding the JTAlert and JTDX developers. They had no advanced access to the FT4 code, and even if they had, K1JT asks that others wait for the final version, a sensible request. You contacts are not going anywhere. Go take a tranquilizer and relax.
Each webmaster, logging software developer, etc. is free to do whatever they want with their 'product'. It may also be a 'side effect' of how the software/webpage works. For example: DX Keeper does not have FT4 available as a mode, it has not been updated yet, but it imported the mode fine from the WSJT-X ADI file. The point is, why hurry when it's not known yet whether the mode will survive or not. The beauty about standards is that there so many to choose from. I prefer we 'stick' with the ADI Protocol, and wait for the ADI Committee to do its job. Even if only a name change happens, it would be a significant inconvenience. It has happened already, FT8Call became JS8Call. JT10 became T10. Just as a thought experiment: What if every site and/or software developer added FT4 to their 'products', and the FT4 developers decided to change the mode name? No good deed goes unpunished in this hobby. By the way, JTAlert is now supporting basic FT4 functions. I'm monitoring to see how long before somebody says "why bother if it's not fully compatible?" The discussion is also happening in the JTDX list. My suggestion there was that if FT4 is confirmed as a contesting only mode, JTDX should not add it to its list of available modes. The main reason being, it'll likely be added to N1MM by way of a special module, just like MMTTY, MMVARI, FLDIGI, etc. have been. This, the special module idea for N1MM, is from K1JT himself.
Initially I thought I was doing something wrong logging after seeing a couple Italian stations using FT-4 as a mode. Thanks for clearing it up. 73
Hi guys i'm using ft4 in 20 mt at 14.080 anyone knows what another freq. I can use it like 17 mt and 2mt? kind regards
Did you try the frequencies in the pulldown menu? If they don't show up, right click on the frequency table, and click reset. If they still don't show up, the .INI file needs to be deleted. Please note this means re-configuring WSJT-X from scratch. That said, and propagation may be part of it, the number of signals seems to have gone down.
What's stopping you? Get on 75m any evening and call CQ and yak with someone. Or 20m any afternoon. Or 7112 CW.... I do these things nightly on my Eico 753, Henry Radio Tempo One, or Globe Scout 680 with HQ-180 and neither FT4 nor FT8 impedes me in any way whatsoever from having nice contacts. FT modes are NOT the "death of amateur radio" - I really get tired of that endless mantra. Dave W7UUU
I don't have WSJT-X installed right now, as my FT4 testing is complete. The spots on Hamspots show the following (+/-): 3575 7048 10140 14080 18104 21075 21140 28180