[Moon] [Moon-Net] Q65 30A ON 144Mhz

[Serge Szpilfogel]

True Ed & Paul random qso's are important but Q65 will be like JT65B for operating. The fact is even with JT65B there is few random QSO. People use the reflector to announce their Freq. Most of the time I call CQ hoping to work new initials & if you look at CQ live you can see where people are. Even in the CW EME years back we use to make skeds on 20 meters on 14.345 every weekend which would be passed on to the rest of the folks concerned. For very small stations folks need to know where to call & who to call to at least have people looking for them. I am a medium size station but I enjoy trying to work smaller stations when I can & that is not always easy for me being only horizontal. So random QSO's are very rare in our time at least on 144Mhz!!!
Ed sorry to hear about your 2M situation hope you get back this spring. I have had some issues here it is always software issues & I fortunately have friends helping me. One thing I did this fall is replaced my 2relays CX 600 with one relay with good isolation & so far so good
All the Best Paul & Ed
Serge VE1KG

-----Original Message-----
From: Edward R Cole <kl7uw at acsalaska.net> 
Sent: Thursday, February 18, 2021 20:33
To: Paul Andrews <paulmandrews1 at gmail.com>; Serge Szpilfogel <ve1kg at eastlink.ca>
Cc: moon at moonbounce.info; Moon-Net <moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com>
Subject: Re: [Moon-Net] Q65 30A ON 144Mhz

Paul and Serge,

No chance to try Q65 on eme (main 2m array dismantled for rebuild in Spring; backup array of two KLM-11 has high SWR in cables 45-feet above ground).  My attempt last weekend with rented man-lift thwarted by high winds.  I will try again in a couple weeks if wx cooperates.

If you note wsjt-x has a JT9/JT65 mode which apparently detects which mode is in use.  To have JT65/Q65 do the same it would probably require modification the program - not user determined or controllable.

I suspect Q65-60 will become the default for day-to-day eme.  Reason is JT65 is 60-minute tx sequencing and in densely populated EU they do cooperative sequencing to avoid interfering with each other.  Q65-60 will be able to run in non auto-sequence so the operator has decision control of what is transmitted.  30 and 15 second sequence modes happen too fast for that to be done very well.  Most FT8 is run in auto.

If there is much variation of mode usage then some kind of sub-band segregation might happen (??).

Random operation has nothing to do with whether you can see traces.  Auto-seq is random if not spotted or pre-coordinated on a logger or by sked.  Just not as much fun as the computer takes over decision making.  The computer has no preconception of call sign if window is left blank.  I'm not as familiar with the inner working of Q65 so this is a guess.  My understanding Deep Search is not active for Q65.

Interesting discussion.

73, Ed - KL7UW
QRT-eme temporarily (hard to do repairs in winter).

At 08:33 AM 2/18/2021, Paul Andrews via Moon-net wrote:


	Serge,
	
	There has already been a lot of testing on Q65 before v2.4 rc1 was released.   The dev team will now be collecting comments from rc1 users and will add as many bug fixes and upgrades as they can before v2.4 general release.
	
	You have a good point about mode confusion.   I'm wondering out loud if it is possible to identify a digital mode?  It's clear that Q65 will replace JT65 and future versions of WSJT-X may not include JT65.   I think it's important to retain the possibility of random QSOs where frequency and mode is not announced on the internet.
	
	In the future, Q65-30, Q65-60 and Q65-120 may all be used simultaneously on the same band.   In addition modes A, B, C, D, etc are options.  Maybe bands will be segmented with shorter period transmissions on the lower frequencies and longer period on higher frequencies.   Much like CW bands, where high speed and low speed OPs usually congregate on opposite ends of the band allocation.
	
	In many cases, Q65 makes low S/N EME QSO possible with nearly no visible signal on the waterfall.  Yes - sync will be visible even when no trace on the waterfall are present.  Will random QSOs be possible when signals can not be heard or seen? These weak signals can be randomly decoded "IF" you knew the weak DX QRG and Mode?  Spotters?  Nearly all FT8 QSOs on HF are random.  I don't want to lose the ability to make random QSOs via the moon.
	
	I think there is a lot of experimentation that still needs to be done.  This is so much fun.
	
	73 - Paul - W2HRO
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	
	On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 12:06 PM Serge Szpilfogel via Moon-net < moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com <mailto:moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com> > wrote:
	


		Last night I had my first EME QSO with DL9DBJ using 30A with AUTO SEQ selected you really have nothing to do just watch the QSO taking place. I did not have the WIDE GRAPH set up so could not see the decode.  Q65A 30A would be great for contest
		
		
		The only problem is going to be with so many modes available it is going an organize confusion for a while. It is really important to follow Joe’s quick guide to get started. I also would like to try Q65 60A & compare it to JT65B.
		
		
		Our hobby calls for experimentation  just not plug & play at least for me!!!
		
		
		See you soon on Q65A or JT65B.
		
		
		Serge VE1KG
		
		
		Â 
		
		_______________________________________________
		
		Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html <http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html> 
		
		

	_______________________________________________
	Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions are at http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html <http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html> 

73, Ed - KL7UW
  http://www.kl7uw.com
<http://www.kl7uw.com/> Dubus-NA Business mail:
  dubususa at gmail.com