Re: FT8 performance (or, lack of) on 432


Keith Morehouse
 

John, sometimes one signal, sometimes 2.  I'm familiar with what aircraft look like on 432 beacons and this is sure what I remember.  Good idea about FT4.  The guys I couldn't work were NOT weak - FT4 would have done it easily.

And yes, the old standby of CW would solve all problems but good luck with getting the 'new breed' to QSY to that mode.  They won't even go to SSB...

-W9RM

Keith J Morehouse
Managing Partner
Calmesa Partners G.P.
Olathe, CO


On Sat, Aug 1, 2020 at 7:56 PM John Klem <klemjf@...> wrote:
Do you see just one (shifting) FT8 signal on 432, or more than one?  I'm
wondering if you also see a stationary signal.  If it's aircraft, I'd
also expect that it would eventually disappear, or sometimes you might
even see more than one.  There are ways to track planes online so you
might be able to correlate what you see with what's flying.

I don't know enough about ISCAT to guess about the utility of that,
but...don't shoot...have you considered FT4?  The TX period is nearly 3x
shorter, and tone spacing about 4x that of FT8.  This suggests the
decoder could be a lot more tolerant of frequency drift, if you can live
with the S/N penalty.  At that point you're probably also in the
ballpark of being able to use CW, right?

John AA5PR





Join main@nmvhf.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.