A NEW FT8 with QSO and Rag Chew capabilities called FT8CALL

Hello Fellow Ham operators

Yes indeed there is a NEW FT8, in which you can have a QSO!!! (Called FT8CALL)

This is what we have been waiting for, at least for those who desire to have a QSO rather than just signal exchange!

This inventor for FT8CALL, is Jordan T Shere, (KN4CRD), we can thank him! FT8CALL has the same performance as FT8 (-24dB), but having a QSO.

It is brand new and still under development....But we can use the program (FT8CALL),

FT8CALL Very similar as WSJTX, but a separate platform, however, you will see the same layout, even the same icon

Here is the document (You may just have to google FT8CALL, and join the Google Group)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/159S4wqMUVdMA7qBgaSWmU-iDI4C9wd4CuWnetN68O9U/edit

https://groups.io/g/ft8call/wiki/FT8Call-Latest-Release-Download-Links


The frequencies are set, for example 20 meters, is 14.080..(In the manual it has suggested all the frequencies for each band)

I am using HRD/DM780, I just selected HRD (In FT8CALL)...and i was off and running

For those who use FT8 (WSJTX), you will have no issues with FT8CALL


This should take off like wild fire!


C U on the Bands

NN2X..

Tom

 

Happy to answer any questions y'all might have. Cheers.

Jordan / KN4CRD

 

Does it..

Break up...

Your ragchew...

Into several....

Concatenated...

QSOs?

NNNNNNNN

I think we need to realize that there is always a tradeoff between information content length and bandwidth/SNR. How is the SNR degraded compared to conventional FT8?

 

Technically. You see it come in in blocks at a time like Olivia and displayed in a stream like PSK / FSQ.

Example:

 

Jordan,

This sounds interesting and highly useful, but unless you are espousing novelty of a totally new modality, its a stretch to label you as an 'inventor' of this. Improving is important, but novelty defines invention.

How does this differ from FT8? Are you using more bandwidth? Are you time concatenating? What is the tradeoff?

Words like SNR/ bandwidth/channel capacity/time length; and so on. These are really helpful.

Assume I know nothing about Olivia, or Newton-John, or Juice Newton.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Thanks Chip. FYI... I neither called nor labeled myself as the inventor.

FT8Call is a derivative of the WSJT-X application, restructured and redesigned for keyboard-to-keyboard message passing, similar to PSK/FSQ/Olivia/etc. It uses FT8 modulation as the transport. But, it does not use FT8 encoding for the delivery of the text. That part is original. It is a variable encoding and packing scheme to allow greater than 13 characters per transmission cycle (up to 23 actually). It touts the same benefits of FT8, but with greater flexibility for long-form message passing.

You can read more about that in the document linked above.

 

So ... these QSOs will occur above or below the normal FT8 frequency/band?


AND - added - how does this differ from, say, FSQ?

FSQ - http://www.qsl.net/zl1bpu/MFSK/FSQweb.htm

 

Everybody has a VFO. You can place your signal anywhere you'd like, simliar to if you were operating PSK w/ Fldigi. The app does have default starter frequencies above or below the FT8 sub-band.

 

Thanks Jordan.

Sounds like a really useful hybridization.

73
Chip W1YW

 

Glad I could convince you Feel free to join the group and check it out. It's pretty fun and gaining popularity quickly thanks to folks talking about it in forums like this (i.e., not me blasting it out there )

Nowhere near FT8 (I don't expect it to be) but here is what PSKReporter has to say via https://pskreporter.info/cgi-bin/pskstats.pl

 

What I'm seeing there looks like several minutes for each transmission. Not surprising since FT8 only equals about 10 wpm.

 

Possibly. There are obvious delays between transmissions while deciding what to reply.

The variable character encoding brings it somewhere between 10 & 15 WPM depending on the composition of the sentence (each character takes a different amount of "time" to send). 12WPM is about average. What you get for that speed is theoretical sensitivity down to 24dB below the noise floor in only 50Hz bandwidth. It may "work" when other modes won't.

But, if you have a good, noise "free" propagation path, you should likely be using a mode with a higher throughput (FSQ 3 is about 30WPM at -16dB, Olivia 4/500 is about 40WPM at -10dB).

 

I thought that FT8 was for those of us that weren't in the mood to have a conversation......

 

It's pretty easy to not have a conversation using any mode

 

To KN4CRD - Jordan!....

I am happy you joined this Thread!

I did my best to promote the FT8Call (I posted on EHAM, QRZ and any other place I could find)...

In my humble opinion I believe this mode (FT8Call) will out pace the rest of the (QSO) Digital Modes for two reasons..

1. It is similar to FT8, and branding name "FT8Call" was brilliant, as Ham operators know of this mode

2. Even at 10 wpm (FT8Call) to be able to decode at -24dB below the noise floor blows away anything else, including CW...(I love Olivia 500/8) but it is only able to decode at -13db, at 30 wpm, I am willing to let go 20 wpm, to have -24dB decoding abilities !

Jordan thank you for creating this program.

NN2X, Tom