Return-Path: Received: from post.thorcom.com (post.thorcom.com [195.171.43.25]) by klubnl.pl (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-8+deb8u2) with ESMTP id w86BReI6011053 for ; Thu, 6 Sep 2018 13:27:41 +0200 Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 4.14) id 1fxsNG-0001VU-Vx for rs_out_1@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 12:22:58 +0100 Received: from [195.171.43.32] (helo=relay1.thorcom.net) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 4.14) id 1fxsN8-0001VL-Ns for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 12:22:50 +0100 Received: from mail-wm0-x22b.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c09::22b]) by relay1.thorcom.net with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.91_59-0488984) (envelope-from ) id 1fxsN6-0005QN-Ff for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 12:22:49 +0100 Received: by mail-wm0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id y139-v6so10944329wmc.2 for ; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 04:22:48 -0700 (PDT) X-DKIM-Result: Domain=gmail.com Result=Good and Known Domain DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=shkar/yI2ycnu/lW47/ty7/jRjqmpfY6limCDtVXuvo=; b=m+uYlNhbYwtnqY/wUsi5Butzlf5cNDvOXbZ0xa7mTvQlOx3NMsIg7n/hvl6HMtydIk bqfNpAdWFiVz3bxxK08mTVi/6LGxMCAY5j/1OVwwWCnTQTvBb5JolBAPBQ4irEcot0Nr 0agJ2Xw83eCT6TPzMJk/Fw0Q6EZvn/7Z3l1PDNLsR4VSHAiw3jI2MfvgRdIRGqHsUpHW /QaRmU4dBk5QWujTZrmT4wXHhltJdhtC3fQFcu5osHWORcPVMAPfxt2Zf8lAuNJk8et8 a4eDsA+fRnZupfRFuoVilWZdjxNvq7ztbwvRbFG+TK3iS6YptCkftsoXHrbJBTAi0w5m PHrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:reply-to:message-id:to:subject :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=shkar/yI2ycnu/lW47/ty7/jRjqmpfY6limCDtVXuvo=; b=TfAMDpG6gLjUbnpqjbA2LO7UYdvFHUs2EDmaLgSc9BIZGMpWQJzNPNowzEJQfIe35i 10Prlxu8anosyIne6Fv/O8YkY/phVMlQ79yNpLCT8FP/2b/7sv5hLcqyzGEVQuaOKVEc SwnFpFrzGcxHbOCEzyj6vklilS5f6DDWrmLlw1uHyeb/rlY7ICEZBFjjB+QX0YMWLx5s JFArP6/0CA/ovNm1xdoYZfq5DvWF2gPg5KPowWIZF7IC9eFwzsiOU7vhHWh/KDJl432w uMFL8XND/i8FKXdEcmaignvbt3cFr4kFnUt5l8e+ETfeVJue11ZlShHDMG3EH+bstv4a tEWA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DyELjifz34IYyXWozlih89MpVty4kTVgb71F9sFy5z5Qmwk+nX ecjLiCjh7EMPoWyEhVKTBSpRGUJA X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdZDIL0hXZU844/XZe4pS0Mt5fyYk10yHplJh/vDSDoXr01JtE0VqdRrTtqXluejdQ5TBV1zuQ== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:3503:: with SMTP id c3-v6mr1747658wma.46.1536232967483; Thu, 06 Sep 2018 04:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from OfficeWin7.lan (82-70-254-222.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk. [82.70.254.222]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id c3-v6sm6626810wrm.56.2018.09.06.04.22.46 (version=TLS1 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 06 Sep 2018 04:22:46 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2018 12:22:45 +0100 From: Chris Wilson X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <338687671.20180906122245@gmail.com> To: N1BUG In-Reply-To: References: <165a8bb827e.marcocadeddu@tin.it> <5B8F9291.7090601@posteo.de> <2f2c5632-b82a-91c7-3502-d88b7657d038@n1bug.com> <1536142926551.20983@kuleuven.be> <5B8FCCD1.4080604@posteo.de> <1536157866579.38003@kuleuven.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "relay1.thorcom.net", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Hello Paul, Version 0.8 r3058 on WSPR15 runs for days on end here on Windows 7 pro 64 Bit, no memory leaks nothing, just keeps on keeping on! As you know I have tried asking on the WSJT-X forum for sub modes, but they seem adamant it isn't going to happen :( [...] Content analysis details: (0.0 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [2a00:1450:400c:c09:0:0:0:22b listed in] [list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (dead.fets[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid X-Scan-Signature: 75bd9e83b9a4dd6aff3296cebc5bb885 Subject: Re: LF: Slow JT9 modes... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on post.thorcom.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.8 required=5.0 tests=PRIORITY_NO_NAME autolearn=no version=2.63 X-SA-Exim-Scanned: Yes Sender: owner-rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: rs_out_1@blacksheep.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No; SAEximRunCond expanded to false Hello Paul, Version 0.8 r3058 on WSPR15 runs for days on end here on Windows 7 pro 64 Bit, no memory leaks nothing, just keeps on keeping on! As you know I have tried asking on the WSJT-X forum for sub modes, but they seem adamant it isn't going to happen :( Thursday, September 6, 2018, 12:03:09 PM, you wrote: > On 09/05/2018 10:31 AM, Rik Strobbe wrote: >> Another alternative would be to revive the longer JT9 modes >> (JT9-2 or even JT9-5). JT9-2 would allow a QSO in +/- 10 minutes, >> about 3dB advantage over JT9-1. To get the same I would need to >> pump up the power from 350 to 700W or increase the antenna height >> from 14m to 20m. JT9-5 will even be about 7dB better compared to >> JT9-1, but there might be issues with doppler effect and/or >> multipath propagation. Does anyone have a WSJT-X version that >> supports these modes? Or even better: could we convnice the WSJT >> team to include at least JT9-2 in the newest version of WSJT-X? > Hello Rik and all LFers, > I wish we could convince the developers to bring back JT9-2, JT9-5 > and JT9-10 at least! I would even like to see JT9-30 supported. I > believe these slow modes would allow for many more 137 kHz QSOs over > long distances. At least some of these sub-modes should be useful on > 475 kHz also. Unfortunately it seems these and WSPR15 have been > completely abandoned. > Maybe if enough people would ask the developers? It's worth a try, > but I doubt it. They are too busy with 'mainstream' modes for HF use > now to care about LF and MF. > I have been trying for almost a year to get WSJT-X 0.95 to run under > Windows 10 but it keeps crashing. Unfortunately I do not have a PC > with an older version of Windows I can try. I do not know if Windows > 10 is the problem or whether 0.95 was simply never stable. I also > don't know if the 0.95 I have is an 'official' release or something > modified from source by a third party. It has *only* the JT9 modes, > which makes me wonder. I cannot find any solid information about > this old version, nor can I find any other old versions which have > the slow JT9 modes. Even if I could get 0.95 to stay running, QSO > partners would be limited. I know that others have tried and failed > with this version. > As I see it we are in bad shape for long distance QSO modes on LF. > EbNaut may eventually prove to be a solution for those who can > afford stations capable of handling it... but not much help for the > rest of us. > I guess we are stuck with DFCW. Old school still works but I would > like some other alternatives. > 73, > Paul N1BUG -- Best regards, Chris mailto:dead.fets@gmail.com