What can JT65 do that PSK31 can't do? What can JT9 do that JT65 can't do?

Discussion in 'Working Different Modes' started by KC0BUS, Oct 14, 2016.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: Left-2
ad: L-Geochron
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
  1. KC0BUS

    KC0BUS Ham Member QRZ Page

    What can JT65 do that PSK31 can't do? What can JT9 do that JT65 can't do?
    Thanks
     
  2. W4KJG

    W4KJG Subscriber QRZ Page

    JT65 and JT9 are essentially identical from an operating standpoint. Actually, if you are using WSJT-X and have it set for simultaneous use of JT-9 and JT-65, the only difference you will see is the signal bandwidth on the waterfall display.

    JT is basically only for exchanging and confirming locations and signal strengths. PSK-31 allows real time QSOs, just like you could have on RTTY using a keyboard and display. JT is limited to 13 characters per transmissions in 1 minute increments. PSK31 doesn't have length or time restraints.
     
  3. KC0BUS

    KC0BUS Ham Member QRZ Page

    I see. If RTTY does the same job that PSK31 does, then why did we need PSK31 invented?
     
  4. W0BTU

    W0BTU Ham Member QRZ Page

    JT's Web site says ... JT65 is for VHF and above. JT9 is better below about 17 meters.

    Also, JT65 takes up 10 times the bandwidth of JT9.
     
  5. AG6QR

    AG6QR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    PSK uses a tiny fraction of the bandwidth used by RTTY. It carries better for a given power level and antenna, as well as making more efficient use of spectrum.
     
  6. KE0CAA

    KE0CAA Ham Member QRZ Page

    This is a good site to visually differentiate the different digital modes http://www.sigidwiki.com/wiki/Database On there you can both see and hear the difference between RTTY, psk31, JT65, JT9 and darn near every other type of transmission that has ever been identified.

    RTTY
    [​IMG]
    PSK31
    [​IMG]
    JT65
    [​IMG]
    JT9
    [​IMG]
     
    N6IXZ and N5ABI like this.
  7. N5SMO

    N5SMO Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    Work across the pond reliably on 10-20w when pretty much nothing else will get through. Decode signals at -28 to -30db that you can't even hear. Best of all, it avoids chats and prolonged QSOs LOL!
     
    N6IXZ likes this.
  8. N5SMO

    N5SMO Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    While that was true originally when it was designed for moon bounce ops, that is not the case today with the HF versions available.
     
    K2NCC likes this.
  9. W0BTU

    W0BTU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Respectfully, that's hard to believe. The author of both modes (Joe Taylor, K1JT) clearly states otherwise on http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/ :

    WSJT-X implements JT9, a new mode optimized for weak-signal communication on the LF, MF, and HF bands. JT9 is about 2 dB more sensitive than JT65 and uses less than 10% of the bandwidth. http://physics.princeton.edu/pulsar/K1JT/wsjtx.html
     
    KQ0J likes this.
  10. W9FTV

    W9FTV Ham Member QRZ Page

    Take a look around. JT-65 is far more popular on HF than JT-9 is.
     

Share This Page