![]() ![]() It kind of sounded like one of the higher bandwidth modes like MFSK16 but the trace was only around 60hz wide like a BPSK31. Last night, somewhere on the lower side of the 40 meter band, I think I found an MFSK signal that sounded almost exactly like what is demonstrated on this website: I downloaded a couple of websites that provide examples of various data modes, provide a waterfall example, and even a short sound clip of each mode. There are no dumb questions when you are truly trying to learn something.ħ3 (best wishes in ham lingo), Dave K4EET Be sure to look up some of the history and technical aspects of the mode while you are at it to give you a well-rounded understanding of each mode (why it was first developed, what/when it is best used for, etc.).Įnjoy your travels and don't hesitate to ask questions if needed. While those modes are not really complete conversations like CW, RTTY and PSK31 would be, they are known for getting a minimal amount of information through quickly in a narrow bandwidth under less than optimal radio frequency (RF) conditions.īut like what was said before, focus on a single mode and perfect identifying and copying that mode before moving on to the next. You might also be interested in WSJT-X ( ) by Joe Taylor, K1JT, who developed FT-8 among other protocols like JT9 and JT65. Keep at it and you'll be an expert in no time.įLDigi is a good program. Yup, CW ops have their own shorthand to keep actual words per minute (WPM) higher. This command though, this would definitely be a special case as it allows for long arguments.I got a chuckle out of your post and I'm still giggling. So I rather like the idea of supporting commands that we see in the wild. wfview’s rigctld server (thank you Phil!!!) is a more advanced method of control compared to the pseudo-term, because we can properly rate-limit traffic to the radio and cache recent results (recent being a few ms). Our implementation of rigctld is interesting, we’re trying to support common commands although there are many (such as thins one) that we hadn’t encountered yet. ![]() Your screenshot is good, this will be helpful to others trying to make this connection. Is sending CW via typing in CQRLog a fairly common thing people do? How does the experience compare to sending via fldigi’s modulated CW? This is very interesting indeed! I’m not a CW op (yet?), so let me see if I understand the mode of operation correctly: You send CQ (or other CW traffic) by sending the characters to the radio over CI-V, and then the radio keys the characters at the prescribed rate? Is this correct? I’m sorry to be so uninformed about it. No need for external keyers or any of that jazz for the 7300 and siblings. Just thought I would share these options for anyone trying to set computer keying up. A keyer-speed knob would be nice though! Thanks devs, this is fantastic software. ![]() Hopefully wfview’s rigctld will eventually get the option of sending cw, but this alternative works fine for now. In my view, keying CW should be the responsibility of the logger anyway, so this works fine. Note that “port number” there is for CQRLog’s version of rigctld, so can’t be the same as the rigctld port wfview is listening on. Settings here: Imgur: The magic of the Internet I am able to send CW on my IC-7300 with the following command: /usr/bin/rigctl -m 373 -r /home/pi/rig-pty1 b CQ However, it works fine if you use hamlib with wfview’s virtual serial port. Hamlib does this, but the "RigCtld emulation function of WFView does not appear to do this yet. This is good because it doesn’t rely on good timing by the computer, doesn’t tie up the serial port for more than a few milliseconds, and uses the rig’s keyer speed setting. ![]() FYI, CI-V on many radios permits sending CW with the rig’s keyer. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |