[Moon] EA9LZ 6cm

Tue Oct 10 17:16:23 CEST 2017

Hi John and all
First of all a big thanks to Zdenek to be active on so many bands and alone , remarkable !Nevertheless I was happy to contact him on 3cm cw.
Secondly I am in the same situation than our friend John , I was unable to set up correctly QRA64  and I did not see any signal on the screen !!Of course I checked my own echoes I received them  without problems .
I will take any information .
73 AndreF1PYR

      De : John Lambo via Moon <moon at moonbounce.info>
 À : moon at moonbounce.info 
 Envoyé le : Mardi 10 octobre 2017 16h31
 Objet : Re: [Moon] EA9LZ 6cm

Hello all lunatics.
Maybe  a idea Charlie or someone else that you can put somethings on 
Youtube or a other cannel??
How you have the setting or tricks to use QRA64 beter??
I am what we say here in PA0 a ( digibeet )
So i am not that good with computers ;-)
As some know i did have problems here that i did not work EA9LZ on any band.
But the next expidition will also use QRA64 on 6 and 3cm.
For me it is not so easy to work with it.
In CW you only need  key ;-)
Again i like to say a big thank you to Zdenek that he was active on so 
many bands and this all with only one person !!!!!

73  John  PA7JB

Op 10-10-2017 om 12:46 schreef G3WDG via Moon:
> Hi John
>
> There are a number of factors that could have been at play here.
>
> VK7MO and I did an extensive comparison of QRA64 and JT4F some time ago,
> and published the results in Dubus 3/17.  These involved the use of both
> simulation and lots of on-air testing (on 3cm).  The conclusions showed a
> clear advantage for QRA64, for libration spreading values of up to about
> 200Hz. Yesterday on 6cm we were well below this spreading.
>
> One of the things we learnt from the study was the need to look at large
> numbers of test files (thousands) to reduce effects of statistical
> variations - small sample sizes can easily give misleading results.
>
> The performance of QRA64 is also dependent to some extent on the settings
> used.  There is a link in the User Guide at the end of Section 8.4 that
> describes some of these factors.  The linked document also describes how
> to set up the waterfall to be more like WSJT10's, which makes seeing the
> tones somewhat easier than with the default waterfall settings in WSJT-X,
> but this of course does not affect decoding performance.
>
> A common reason for failure to decode is when you are tuned so that the
> lowest (leftmost) tone of the QRA64 signal falls outside the range of Ftol
> you have selected. Choosing a low value for Ftol, while this can sometimes
> help decode very weak signals, does increase the requirement for tuning
> precision.  You commented on the logger that you could hear the tones
> audibly.  In this case QRA64 in our experience has no trouble whatsoever
> in decoding.
>
> When comparing the performance of QRA64 and JT4 when no prior knowledge of
> callsigns is available, QRA64 has an even larger advantage.  Hence it
> really comes into its own for random operation.  With JT4 running with
> correlation decoding (Deep Search) and a small sample size the difference
> may not be so apparent.
>
> By 'above the line' on WSJT10, are you referring to the difference between
> a single line decode and a decode obtained by averaging?  QRA64 does not
> have an averaging capability, at present.
>
> When the JT4 decoder needs to use correlation to obtain a decode, the
> decoded text includes a quality factor.  Smaller numbers mean that the
> decoder had less confidence that the decode was a correct one, and if you
> see a ? in the decode then it is normal practice to wait for another
> decode to see if it is the same, after which you can be more confident
> that the decode was a correct one.  With QRA64 it is our 100% experience
> that you can rely on a decode being correct.
>
> 73
>
> Charlie
>
>
>
>> Hi Zdenek, well done! Great to finally get to you on 6cm last night for a
>> second band.
>> Only sorry I screwed up the day for 13cm as we would have made it 3 bands.
>>
>> Your decision to switch to JT4F  was inspirational!
>>
>> I was running both WSJT10 (RX) and WSJT-X (RX and TX) in parallel during
>> the JT4F QSO and at no time did I either of the softwares fail to decode
>> you, whereas with QRA64D I got just 2 decodes in the hour or so of trying!
>> That said you did seem stronger when you were running JT4F. Maybe our
>> minor
>> tracking errors just got "in synch" for the JT4F QSO.
>>
>> Having slept on it, I wondered if it might have been the deep search in
>> JT4G, but all the decodes were "above the line" on the WSJT10 screen. I
>> don't know enough about Joe's excellent software to know if that really
>> means it was a pure decode without deep search? Maybe one of our digimode
>> experts may be able to tell me or have a view on their experiences
>> comparing the two modes at really low levels? I was expecting QRA64 to be
>> much better.
>>
>> 73 John
>>
>>
>> On 10 October 2017 at 08:34, Zdenek SAMEK-OK1DFC via Moon <
>> moon at moonbounce.info> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi EME gang, "game is over" , last evening I have loged 20 QSOs. Looks
>>> that
>>> everybody who was interesting have EA9, has EA9. Now will wrap up all
>>> the
>>> stuff and tomorrow morning I have ferry back to Spain. Then only drive
>>> 3000
>>> km and looking forward to see my sweet home.  Thanks to all of you for
>>> QSOs,
>>> many very nice emails and looking forward to meet you again via Moon.
>>> 73!
>>>
>>> --
>>> Zdenek - OK1DFC
>>> www.ok1dfc.com
>>> QRV EME 144 MHz - 10 GHz
>>> WAC 432 - 1296 - 2320 MHz
>>> WAZ #9 - WAS 432 #29
>>> DXCC 432 - 1296 MHz
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Moon mailing list
>>> Moon at moonbounce.info
>>> /mailman/listinfo/moon
>>>
>>> Join eQSL.cc  https://eqsl.cc/qslcard/Index.cfm
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Moon mailing list
>> Moon at moonbounce.info
>> /mailman/listinfo/moon
>>
>> Join eQSL.cc  https://eqsl.cc/qslcard/Index.cfm
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moon mailing list
> Moon at moonbounce.info
> /mailman/listinfo/moon
>
> Join eQSL.cc  https://eqsl.cc/qslcard/Index.cfm
>

_______________________________________________
Moon mailing list
Moon at moonbounce.info
/mailman/listinfo/moon

Join eQSL.cc  https://eqsl.cc/qslcard/Index.cfm