+1 for JTDX. The advantages are all on JT65 for HF, not JT9, though.
73,
Ed W0YK
On May 28, 2017 3:05 AM, Barry Murrell ZS2EZ <zs2ez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> John, you may want to try JTDX, a derivative of WSJT-X optimised exclusively
> for HF by UA3DJY.
> Unlike WSJT-X (which unless you are prepared to compile your own version is
> updated VERY infrequently - last release version is 1.7.0, while the
> "Developer" team talk about 1.7.1 with major improvements which are not
> generally available) JTDX is constantly updated and includes it's own mode
> (JT10) which is becoming quite popular.
>
> I find that JTDX is considerably more sensitive on receive (hearing a number
> of weak stations much better than WSJT-X) and have regularly managed QSOs at
> around -28 and -30!!!
>
> The latest JTDX can be downloaded at :
> https://cloud.mail.ru/public/N4qQ/7RrTSrusu ; and more info can be found at
> http://www.qrz.lt/ly3bg/JTDX/jtdx1.html
> It works with JTAlert too!!
>
> Well worth trying!!
>
> 73 de BARRY MURRELL ZS2EZ
> KF26ta - Port Elizabeth, South Africa
> EPC#0558 DMC#1690 WCC#030 30MDG#4081
> DXCC(mixed)#41,146 DXCC(RTTY)#1,916
> DXCC(phone)#34,990 DXCC(CW)#11,714
> DXCC 40m,30m,20m,17m,15m,12m,10m
> WAS Triple Play #492 WAS(RTTY)#538 WAZ(RTTY)#185 WAE-I(mixed)#72
> WAZS(mixed)#214 AAA#1569
> AS ZR6DXB: VUCC(50MHZ)#1,334 UKSMG WAE(Silver)#75 UKSMG AFRICA#22 WAC
> (Satellite)
> website : www.zs2ez.co.za
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Barber
> Sent: Saturday, 27 May 2017 6:16 PM
> To: 'W4GKM' <w4gkm@xxxxxxxxxxx>; rtty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>
> If you are already set up for another data mode, using AFSK, it's simple. I
> started by downloading JT65-HF, set it up and watched the results. On most
> HF bands the radio is set to .076 dial frequency.
> JT65-HF was disappointing in the user interface and facilities, so I tried
> the JT65-HF HB9HQX-Edition improved version, which has been excellent.
> John GW4SKA
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: RTTY [mailto:rtty-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of W4GKM
> Sent: 27 May 2017 14:58
> To: rtty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
>
> I have never tried these modes, but I would like to, where do I start.
>
> Nick
> W4GKM
>
>
> On 5/26/2017 9:37 AM, Don AA5AU wrote:
> > JT65 and JT9 and excellent modes. I have over 144 entities worked on
> > JT65
> alone and have worked all states on 10-80 meters (need only DE & RI on 160
> and AK, HI & ME on 6 meters.
> > Last night I worked two Japanese stations on 6 meter JT65 running 80
> > watts
> to a 4-element yagi (3 element SteppIR with passive element added) and this
> morning JH0INP confirmed our QSO via LotW. There's lots of activity on 6
> meter JT65 in the summer.
> > I really like JT modes on 160 meters because I seem to be able to work
> > new
> ones I can't hear on CW. I highly recommend JT65 & JT9.
> > Don AA5AU
> >
> > From: Bill Turner <dezrat@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: RTTY Reflector <rtty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 9:11 AM
> > Subject: Re: [RTTY] Information please
> >
> > ------------ ORIGINAL MESSAGE ------------(may be snipped)
> >
> > On Fri, 26 May 2017 09:20:25 +0100, you wrote:
> >
> >> You could think about using the other data modes. With low power and
> >> poor propagation, PSK can work a lot better than RTTY.
> >> The ultimate move across to the dark side is JT65. I started using
> >> JT65 about 10 days ago and have 60+ countries in the log, operating
> >> just a couple of hours a day.
> >> Very low power is all you need, but it's a horrible slow process with
> >> no skill required. My only motivation is to get to 100 DXCC then back
> >> to
> RTTY!
> >> John GW4SKA
> > REPLY:
> >
> > Even better than JT65 is JT9. A fraction of the bandwidth and
> > according to the author, about 2 dB better with weak signals. The
> > protocol is the same. Give it a try, you'll like it.
> >
> > 73, Bill W6WRT
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RTTY mailing list
> > RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
>
> _______________________________________________
> RTTY mailing list
> RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|