[Dxspider-support] bands.pl

[IZ2LSC]

Hi,
this change is quite easy to implement in bands.pl
I'm not so expert on FT8. Do we really want to block the whole range?
I mean, i.e, for ft8 on 20m is it better to block only 14074 or from 14074
to 14077 ?

Andrea

-->


Il giorno sab 12 ott 2024 alle ore 19:15 Kin via Dxspider-support <
dxspider-support at tobit.co.uk> ha scritto:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> Good idea, Keith.
>
> I'm busy with other things at the moment, but I'll make a note of it in
> case no one else is up for it.
>
>
>
> 73 de Kin EA3CV
>
>
>
>
>
> *De:* Dxspider-support <dxspider-support-bounces at tobit.co.uk> *En nombre
> de *Keith Maton via Dxspider-support
> *Enviado el:* sábado, 12 de octubre de 2024 16:01
> *Para:* The DXSpider Support list <dxspider-support at tobit.co.uk>
> *CC:* Keith Maton <g6nhu at me.com>
> *Asunto:* Re: [Dxspider-support] bands.pl
>
>
>
> I’ve been helping a number of my users to filter out FT8 spots and I’ve
> been setting up frequency segments for them because setting rej/spot
> filters for data doesn’t seem to work very well with FT8 spots getting
> through.
>
>
>
> Looking at bands.pl, I think it’s clear why, a lot of bands don’t have
> the FT8 frequency specified in the data entry.
>
>
>
> For example, the main FT8 frequency on 30m is 10,131.000 kHz but bands.pl
> has 10141, 10149.  I’m not sure if these are spot frequencies or a range
> from 10141-10149.
>
>
>
> 17m lists 18101,18108 but the main FT8 frequency for that band is 18100.
>
>
>
> 12m lists 24920,24929 but the main FT8 frequency is 24915
>
>
>
> I know bands.pl was updated earlier this year but I think we need some
> more entries in for FT8/FT4, etc.  If the entries are ranges then it should
> be straightforward to add additional ones for FT8 and FT4.
>
>
>
> My suggestions for the primary HF bands.
>
>
>
> FT8:
>
> 1840,1843
>
> 3573,3576
>
> 7074,7077
>
> 10131,10134
>
> 14074,14077
>
> 18100,18103
>
> 24915,24918
>
> 28074,28077
>
>
>
> FT4:
>
> 3575,3578
>
> 7047,7051
>
> 10140,10143
>
> 14080,14083
>
> 18104,18107
>
> 21140,21143
>
> 24919,24922
>
> 28180,28183
>
>
>
> I appreciate that there’s slight overlap on some of these and that it
> won’t stop spots for DXpeditions that operate outside the normal
> frequencies but if we can get all these added to bands.pl as part of the
> data segments, it’ll really help us.
>
>
>
> 73 Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 19 Apr 2024, at 12:11, Kin EA3CV via Dxspider-support <
> dxspider-support at tobit.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> It is true that there are users who limit themselves to the exclusive use
> of the BandMap, but others apply filters from their log/test sw, and these
> are generally those of the cluster used. We must not forget those who still
> use the command interface.
>
>
>
> For a long time banding has evolved very slowly, but lately we have more
> bands. I would opt for a mixed model, that is, using the IARU band plan and
> rigorously adapting it to the de facto use of some that have carved out a
> niche for themselves in the spectrum. To answer, the same.
>
>
>
> Now I have a first version of the plan for Region I, and it would be
> interesting if other users could contribute II and III Region. It is recast
> into a single one and we designate the typical segments.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Kin EA3CV
>
>
>
>
>
> Enviado desde Outlook para Android <https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dxspider-support mailing list
> Dxspider-support at tobit.co.uk
> https://mailman.tobit.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dxspider-support
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dxspider-support mailing list
> Dxspider-support at tobit.co.uk
> https://mailman.tobit.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/dxspider-support
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.tobit.co.uk/pipermail/dxspider-support/attachments/20241013/aa16604b/attachment.htm>