Return to KLUBNL.PL main page

rsgb_lf_group
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: LF: JT9 buggy issues

To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: LF: JT9 buggy issues
From: Joe Taylor <[email protected]>
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2012 15:25:43 -0400
In-reply-to: <CAHAQVWO7X9AKEtFPnCY+coRQhUGSdSbsdjRnJyof223u1KWSbw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAHAQVWO7X9AKEtFPnCY+coRQhUGSdSbsdjRnJyof223u1KWSbw@mail.gmail.com>
Reply-to: [email protected]
Sender: [email protected]
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:9.0) Gecko/20111222 Thunderbird/9.0.1

Hi Roger,

After about 1 minute or so, the program just closes itself and disappears
from the PC screen.

Please open a command-prompt window and start the program from there. For example,

C:\> cd \wsjtx
C:\> wsjtx

When the program dies, send me any error message left in the command-prompt window.

I am using a SignalLink VOX controlled sound card interface that I use for
WSPR. Also, when I reload the program I have to reload my callsign, grid
etc.every time.

This makes it sound like you may have ignored the installation advice in the Quick-Start Guide: "Under Vista or Windows 7 be sure to install WSJT-X into its own directory (the suggested default is c:\wsjtx) rather than C:\Program Files\wsjtx." Please confirm.

Although I very much hope to use the mode for QSOs please do not
underestimate the value of a weak signal beaconing function with an
internet database. This has proved extremely valuable on WSPR as people
sometimes leave a RX and PC running to monitor when they are busy and not
available for QSOs. There will be far more people able to receive and
report than TX on MF/LF. This is especially true on 136kHz.

Yes, I understand these points, and beacons have their place. WSPR would not be there if I did not believe this.

The question in my mind is the degree to which beacon-like features should be mixed with a mode designed for making QSOs. If beaconing behavior is desired, why not use WSPR? If it's important to have, say, 10 dB better sensitivity than WSPR, then maybe a "slow WSPR" mode should be developed and used, rather than JT9.

        -- 73, Joe, K1JT


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>