A local amateur, OZ5AR has started taking the challenge of low power seriously. I should do the same.
He started building a simple circuit, yes, it is just an attenuator. The output (and therefore the attenuation has not yet been measured, and he did not tell me the value of the series resistor part, so I do not yet know how low his power was. Calibration needed.
The signal went from about S5 down to an easily readable CW signal with practically no S-meter output.
We have both tested the lowest power output of our standard rigs, the IC-7300 and the IC-7600, and measured it to be between 700 and 1500mW. A more precise measurement is needed.
The distance between us is almost exactly 2km. My challenge is to see the minimum power necessary to make a contact, and preferably go below 1mW. A contact like this would actually qualify for an award: The 1000 miles per Watt Award. Just for the fun of it.
The initial test is on 28.322MHz, a frequency to which a "standard" crystal oscillator is available. The frequency (+/- the tolerance of the oscillators) is also used by Italian stations for very low power QRSS transmissions.I do have attenuators available to reduce the power from 1.25W to approximately 1mW. More when I have had the time to find everything. The next few days are quite busy with going on and receiving visits.
Yes, we will test as many bands as we can, but the experiments will have to finish some time next year. For some bands, like 472kHz a transmitter needs to be built.
I would like to do the experiments with home brew transmitters (and, over time, receivers), just for the fun of it
Yes, yes, never running out of ideas ...
2019-12-27
2019-12-25
Idea Box: QRSS With Simple Home Made Equipment.
Some years ago, while living in the Netherlands, I made a few experiments in receiving QRSS (very slow morse) with a receiver and a computer running the SpectrumLab software under Wine in Linux.
Despite living in an apartment I had some success, but when I moved everything was dismantled.
I have still been following the developments in the QRSS activity, and I should like to get going again. Running a so-called Grabber (QRSS receiver does not take too much time out for other activities, because the spectrograms are simply up-loaded to a website for all to see.
QRSS provides a quite good weak signal performance, so it is usable for propagation monitoring, provided that there are some QRSS transmitters active.
Last time I was running a QRSS Grabber was before the time of the low cost Raspberry Pi single board computer, but these days it is an excellent candidate for running grabber software.
Now, what about receivers ? I was thinking of running a very simple, low cost receiver to begin with, e.g. a modifies Pixie kit.
The Pixie is an extremely simple 40m single frequency CW transceiver, mostly supplied with a 7023kHz crystal. On 40m it just might be capable of running a grabber on 7040kHz. The "IF" will be 17kHz, that should be within the capabilities of spectrum analysis programs for the Raspberry Pi. Alternatively, a different crystal, say 7030, 7035 or even 7038kHz crystal could be used, substantially bringing the "IF" down. If the missing image selectivity becomes a problem, a simple, single crystal filter with a 7040kHz crystal filter could be used.
To be fair, the Pixie is very low cost, a kit can be had for less than $5, so it is an excellent candidate for experiments. The design, however, is probably quite reliable, but certainly not high performance.
In the coming year I hope to have room for some experiments with QRSS, but a higher priority is getting a signal through the QO100 satellite.
Despite living in an apartment I had some success, but when I moved everything was dismantled.
I have still been following the developments in the QRSS activity, and I should like to get going again. Running a so-called Grabber (QRSS receiver does not take too much time out for other activities, because the spectrograms are simply up-loaded to a website for all to see.
QRSS provides a quite good weak signal performance, so it is usable for propagation monitoring, provided that there are some QRSS transmitters active.
Last time I was running a QRSS Grabber was before the time of the low cost Raspberry Pi single board computer, but these days it is an excellent candidate for running grabber software.
Now, what about receivers ? I was thinking of running a very simple, low cost receiver to begin with, e.g. a modifies Pixie kit.
The Pixie is an extremely simple 40m single frequency CW transceiver, mostly supplied with a 7023kHz crystal. On 40m it just might be capable of running a grabber on 7040kHz. The "IF" will be 17kHz, that should be within the capabilities of spectrum analysis programs for the Raspberry Pi. Alternatively, a different crystal, say 7030, 7035 or even 7038kHz crystal could be used, substantially bringing the "IF" down. If the missing image selectivity becomes a problem, a simple, single crystal filter with a 7040kHz crystal filter could be used.
To be fair, the Pixie is very low cost, a kit can be had for less than $5, so it is an excellent candidate for experiments. The design, however, is probably quite reliable, but certainly not high performance.
In the coming year I hope to have room for some experiments with QRSS, but a higher priority is getting a signal through the QO100 satellite.
2019-12-24
More Solar Cycle 25 Sunspots.
More sunspots from the new solar cycle 25 have appeared on the sun.
Today Spaceweather.com announced that two spots from cycle 25 have appeared showing in the solar disk.
This is the first time this cycle, and suggests that the Maunder minimum sometimes predicted in solar activity is not imminent. The Maunder Minimum was a period of decades without sunspots occurred in the 17th century.
This quickening appears to show a normal cycle 25, with a predicted maximum in mid-2025. The current minimum is, however, considered a "deep minimum", usually occurring once a century.
I am very much looking forward to more sunspots and therefore bettewr propagation on the higher bands.
Christmas present from the sun ? ;)
Today Spaceweather.com announced that two spots from cycle 25 have appeared showing in the solar disk.
This is the first time this cycle, and suggests that the Maunder minimum sometimes predicted in solar activity is not imminent. The Maunder Minimum was a period of decades without sunspots occurred in the 17th century.
This quickening appears to show a normal cycle 25, with a predicted maximum in mid-2025. The current minimum is, however, considered a "deep minimum", usually occurring once a century.
I am very much looking forward to more sunspots and therefore bettewr propagation on the higher bands.
Christmas present from the sun ? ;)
2019-12-23
Construction Style For Home Made Radio Equipment.
We are approaching the Winter Solstice holiday season, and I do not expect to be blogging much in that period.
Therefore, I will take the opportunity to wish you all Happy holidays, Merry Christmas. Happy Hanukkah, or whichever holidays you may want to celebrate at this time of the year.
Now for a little bit of radio:
I was watching some Youtube videos on home made TRXs, by ZL2CTM. He has a very neat style of home building using modules built on strip boards, then mounting on the copper clad side of a un-etched PCB (single or double sided). This should make for some quite good RF construction practice, at least on the HF bands, maybe on the lower VHF bands.
He uses old fashioned non-SMD style components, but actually surface mounted on the strip board. There is no reason that it could not be adapted for SMD style components, too, if space is at a premium, or for higher frequencies.
I have a good amount of strip boards ("Vero Boards"), some "island" boards, and some blank PCBs, so it is possible to start.
I also have some "island" experimental boards with a ground plane on the other side, this could potentially be used for higher VHF, and maybe, just maybe for some 432MHz experiments. This should prove an interesting experiment. Some RF shielding would be in order, though.
So what should happen here in the holiday season and next year ?
Now, I need to finish some projects and get my stock of components and PCB modules in better order. This process has started, but it needs to continue.
Then, I should probably start this by use the construction style mentioned above for the QO100 control boxes, outdoors and indoors. Will need a shielded box or two, too, though. After all, some of the frequencies of the system are in the 100s of MHz range.
Therefore, I will take the opportunity to wish you all Happy holidays, Merry Christmas. Happy Hanukkah, or whichever holidays you may want to celebrate at this time of the year.
Now for a little bit of radio:
I was watching some Youtube videos on home made TRXs, by ZL2CTM. He has a very neat style of home building using modules built on strip boards, then mounting on the copper clad side of a un-etched PCB (single or double sided). This should make for some quite good RF construction practice, at least on the HF bands, maybe on the lower VHF bands.
He uses old fashioned non-SMD style components, but actually surface mounted on the strip board. There is no reason that it could not be adapted for SMD style components, too, if space is at a premium, or for higher frequencies.
I have a good amount of strip boards ("Vero Boards"), some "island" boards, and some blank PCBs, so it is possible to start.
I also have some "island" experimental boards with a ground plane on the other side, this could potentially be used for higher VHF, and maybe, just maybe for some 432MHz experiments. This should prove an interesting experiment. Some RF shielding would be in order, though.
So what should happen here in the holiday season and next year ?
Now, I need to finish some projects and get my stock of components and PCB modules in better order. This process has started, but it needs to continue.
Then, I should probably start this by use the construction style mentioned above for the QO100 control boxes, outdoors and indoors. Will need a shielded box or two, too, though. After all, some of the frequencies of the system are in the 100s of MHz range.
How soon will I finis the next project ? We shall see.
2019-12-21
Idea Box: QSOs With Very Simple Home Made Equipment ?
Making QSOs with modern manufactured equipment is fun, but what about doing it with home made equipment? (maybe not making your on components, such as capacitors, but using existing available components, and maybe sometimes modules. More fun ? I think so.
I have made my own direct conversion receiver for 80m, and later a simple VXO-transmitter for 40m. Making a few QSOs with that TX was absolutely fun. But what about making QSOs with fully home mad transmitter/receivers. Even more fun.
I have got the idea of trying to make at least one QSO on as many bands as possible, with homemade or at least modified surplus modules or equipment, as simple as possible.
On a few bands there are excellent simple options:
With ceramic resonators (CR) it should be possible to build relatively simple transmitters with the resonators "pulled" like it is done with crystals in VXOs, and then keying the buffers/amplifiers.
Many people have done this. As someone once said "a transmitter is 'just' an amplifier". Yes, but one of the stages is unstable, and oscillates ;)
But what about receivers ?
Direct conversion reception is often done with simple CW transmitter/receivers, but could it be even more simple ?
Today I was watching a video by VK3YE. He demonstrated a QSO made with a CR controlled transmitter on 40m (80m easily done, too, with CRs available). and here is the trick: He was using a simple regenerative receiver, set just above the point of oscillation. That makes it possible to listen to CW/SSB signals with a 3-transistor receiver (using an earphone). This is quite well known as well, but the regenerative receiver can be very critical and is considered a "two-hand" receiver. One hand on the tuning, the other on the regeneration control potmeter.
I consider this type of receiver as a direct conversion receiver with a self-oscillating mixer, although it is not classically considered as such.
VK3YE's trick was using a CR for controlling the frequency of the regen-receiver. The result is a far less critical regeneration control, and a far better frequency stability. How about a receiver with no coils to wind? Here it is.
On one of his videos he demonstrated a DX QSO with a CR controlled 30W TX and the above mentioned RX.
Doing this does mean that it is necessary to go "back in time" and use separate frequency tuning for the TX and RX, and having a "spot" function, so the TX frequency (just the oscillator) can be heard in the receiver.
No, I would **not** build such a set with vacuum tubes, though I know that it is quite possible. I do not like high voltages.
So many ideas, so little time, but it is a tempting project to try out after a few other things I would like to finish. Beginning projects is a lot easier than finishing ;)
I have made my own direct conversion receiver for 80m, and later a simple VXO-transmitter for 40m. Making a few QSOs with that TX was absolutely fun. But what about making QSOs with fully home mad transmitter/receivers. Even more fun.
I have got the idea of trying to make at least one QSO on as many bands as possible, with homemade or at least modified surplus modules or equipment, as simple as possible.
On a few bands there are excellent simple options:
With ceramic resonators (CR) it should be possible to build relatively simple transmitters with the resonators "pulled" like it is done with crystals in VXOs, and then keying the buffers/amplifiers.
Many people have done this. As someone once said "a transmitter is 'just' an amplifier". Yes, but one of the stages is unstable, and oscillates ;)
But what about receivers ?
Direct conversion reception is often done with simple CW transmitter/receivers, but could it be even more simple ?
Today I was watching a video by VK3YE. He demonstrated a QSO made with a CR controlled transmitter on 40m (80m easily done, too, with CRs available). and here is the trick: He was using a simple regenerative receiver, set just above the point of oscillation. That makes it possible to listen to CW/SSB signals with a 3-transistor receiver (using an earphone). This is quite well known as well, but the regenerative receiver can be very critical and is considered a "two-hand" receiver. One hand on the tuning, the other on the regeneration control potmeter.
I consider this type of receiver as a direct conversion receiver with a self-oscillating mixer, although it is not classically considered as such.
VK3YE's trick was using a CR for controlling the frequency of the regen-receiver. The result is a far less critical regeneration control, and a far better frequency stability. How about a receiver with no coils to wind? Here it is.
On one of his videos he demonstrated a DX QSO with a CR controlled 30W TX and the above mentioned RX.
Doing this does mean that it is necessary to go "back in time" and use separate frequency tuning for the TX and RX, and having a "spot" function, so the TX frequency (just the oscillator) can be heard in the receiver.
No, I would **not** build such a set with vacuum tubes, though I know that it is quite possible. I do not like high voltages.
So many ideas, so little time, but it is a tempting project to try out after a few other things I would like to finish. Beginning projects is a lot easier than finishing ;)
2019-12-20
Idea Box: Simplest Possible Transmitter Construction.
Here are some thoughts on the simplest possible transmitter designs.
How well (or not) they work will have to be tested some time. Simple designs are sometimes too simple.
Designed for CW only, single frequency.
A single canned crystal oscillator generally available for some amateur radio bands. Examples:
3.579MHz
3.686MHz
1.843MHz
14.318MHz
28.322MHz
I also have some on 14.296, 14.300MHz and 21.175MHz, but I am not sure those are easy to find. The first 5 are, sometimes found in old computer boards.
I have another one on 28.321, not sure where that one came from.
In a surplus shop in The Hague I found one on 28.339MHz.
The absolutley simplest design consists of simply connecting the canned oscillator output to 2 wires, acting as an antenna, and see if any range at all can be seen. The CW keying is simply done by keying the (5V) DC voltage of the oscillator.
Especially on the higher frequencies I would the resulting signal to have chirp, and maybe clicks, when keying this way, but maybe, just maybe the lower (1843 and 3579 kHz) will not have an excessive amount of chirp.
This is a simple enough experiment to make.
The output impedance of this type of oscillator is probably not correct for a 50 ohm antenna, but a simple impedance transformer made with a toroid core could be made, when used for testing it should have a fair amount of taps in the winding, but then, a 2 component transmitter could be fun, just trying to make a QSO.
The other part is the waveform from the oscillator. If it is a computer part, I would expect to see square waves, so harmonics should be filtered out. With the extremely low power, a quick experiment could probably be done, if a local station is available, but if more experiments are done, a simple low pass filter will have to be made. Also, I expect a decoupling capacitor for the power supply will be advantageous.
I have been talking to a local ham (distance 3km/2mi), about making some tests with extreme low power, so this could be one way to try this out.
I suspect that for a decent sounding signal a bit more effort has to be made, but maybe, just maybe, the component count can be kept down to 10.
Anyone out there having tried this ? If so, what is your simplest transmitter tested for a QSO?
How well (or not) they work will have to be tested some time. Simple designs are sometimes too simple.
Designed for CW only, single frequency.
A single canned crystal oscillator generally available for some amateur radio bands. Examples:
3.579MHz
3.686MHz
1.843MHz
14.318MHz
28.322MHz
I also have some on 14.296, 14.300MHz and 21.175MHz, but I am not sure those are easy to find. The first 5 are, sometimes found in old computer boards.
I have another one on 28.321, not sure where that one came from.
In a surplus shop in The Hague I found one on 28.339MHz.
The absolutley simplest design consists of simply connecting the canned oscillator output to 2 wires, acting as an antenna, and see if any range at all can be seen. The CW keying is simply done by keying the (5V) DC voltage of the oscillator.
Especially on the higher frequencies I would the resulting signal to have chirp, and maybe clicks, when keying this way, but maybe, just maybe the lower (1843 and 3579 kHz) will not have an excessive amount of chirp.
This is a simple enough experiment to make.
The output impedance of this type of oscillator is probably not correct for a 50 ohm antenna, but a simple impedance transformer made with a toroid core could be made, when used for testing it should have a fair amount of taps in the winding, but then, a 2 component transmitter could be fun, just trying to make a QSO.
The other part is the waveform from the oscillator. If it is a computer part, I would expect to see square waves, so harmonics should be filtered out. With the extremely low power, a quick experiment could probably be done, if a local station is available, but if more experiments are done, a simple low pass filter will have to be made. Also, I expect a decoupling capacitor for the power supply will be advantageous.
I have been talking to a local ham (distance 3km/2mi), about making some tests with extreme low power, so this could be one way to try this out.
I suspect that for a decent sounding signal a bit more effort has to be made, but maybe, just maybe, the component count can be kept down to 10.
Anyone out there having tried this ? If so, what is your simplest transmitter tested for a QSO?
2019-12-16
QO100 Reception Report.
Today was mostly listening to QO100 with the new set-up with the IC-R7000 receiver.
Compared to the previously used AR-8600 this is a pleasure to use. I now have the inclination to tune the band to listen for signals.
The S-meter readings of the IC-R7000 is much more conservative than the AR-8600, and probably much more accurate. Signals have a good quality audio, and in spite of the 100Hz tuning steps all signals are sufficiently well readable.
Today became a test of the receiver sensitivity:
OE7DBH was running QSOs on the satellite, running just 50mW, and the signal was not strong, but fully readable. During a few QSOs I heard him reduce power further, down to approximately 5mW, as he said, to test the receiver side. His 5mW signal was just audible, with a few words just readable in the noise.
Running my simple system with the reference input modified LNB and the back-end receiver, with a 60cm offset dish, I consider my receiving system adequate. I do have a larger dish, but I would probably use that for the transmit side, as I expect to have just 2W from a BU-500 transmit converter. It will be possible to increase that to about 3.5W with a Chinese "8W" amplifier, and then place the transmit converter indoors.
The second LNB, in the mast, without dish, is now connected , supply voltage ("Bias-Tee") and all, to the AR-8600 receiver, so I can listen simultaneously to the satellite and the simple set-up for local beacon and rain scatter monitoring in the narrow band segment of the 10GHz band. As usual, the local beacon about 36km from here is always audible.
Update: I just added receiver #2 for QO-100. From the signal splitter there is one more output available. This is intended to be used with a RTL-SDR receiver, so the band spectrum as such can be monitored visually. Yes, it is possible to add a speaker to the computer. Is it is necessary? That remains to be seen, I might want to use one of the wideband receivers tied up by the system, for other bands.
I continue my slow progress in the microwave bands. Only drawback is the cold and rainy weather, not fun for outdoor work. Better for indoor work, and there is more than enough to do.
Compared to the previously used AR-8600 this is a pleasure to use. I now have the inclination to tune the band to listen for signals.
The S-meter readings of the IC-R7000 is much more conservative than the AR-8600, and probably much more accurate. Signals have a good quality audio, and in spite of the 100Hz tuning steps all signals are sufficiently well readable.
Today became a test of the receiver sensitivity:
OE7DBH was running QSOs on the satellite, running just 50mW, and the signal was not strong, but fully readable. During a few QSOs I heard him reduce power further, down to approximately 5mW, as he said, to test the receiver side. His 5mW signal was just audible, with a few words just readable in the noise.
Running my simple system with the reference input modified LNB and the back-end receiver, with a 60cm offset dish, I consider my receiving system adequate. I do have a larger dish, but I would probably use that for the transmit side, as I expect to have just 2W from a BU-500 transmit converter. It will be possible to increase that to about 3.5W with a Chinese "8W" amplifier, and then place the transmit converter indoors.
The second LNB, in the mast, without dish, is now connected , supply voltage ("Bias-Tee") and all, to the AR-8600 receiver, so I can listen simultaneously to the satellite and the simple set-up for local beacon and rain scatter monitoring in the narrow band segment of the 10GHz band. As usual, the local beacon about 36km from here is always audible.
Update: I just added receiver #2 for QO-100. From the signal splitter there is one more output available. This is intended to be used with a RTL-SDR receiver, so the band spectrum as such can be monitored visually. Yes, it is possible to add a speaker to the computer. Is it is necessary? That remains to be seen, I might want to use one of the wideband receivers tied up by the system, for other bands.
I continue my slow progress in the microwave bands. Only drawback is the cold and rainy weather, not fun for outdoor work. Better for indoor work, and there is more than enough to do.
2019-12-15
Old ICOM Receivers and a Transceiver.
I have some old ICOM equipment that needs to get used again.
This concerns the IC-R7000, the IC-R7100 multimode receivers and the IC-451 70cm transceiver.
The reason is that I was growing a bit weary of using my AR-8600 for receiving QO100 signals from a PLL-LNB with reference frequency stabilization. The 8600 has poor SSB filters and a not-so-good audio quality, too.
The IC-R7100 had been standing unused for a while, as it did not switch on. I suspected the missing connector at the back, after waiting some months, finally I checked, and yes, indeed. the connector is used as power-through for the built-in power supply.
The IC-7100 clearly has better filters and a much better speaker/AF-amp, and the tuning is a lot more convenient than the much smaller (clicking) knob of the AR-8600. Even with its 100Hz tuning steps, the IC-R7000 it ia a vast improvement in use over the 8600. Now I have the inclination to tune the satellite band. With the AR-8600 it felt like winding up an old clock ;)
However, in all three sets, the built-in power supply is a substantial source of heat, so I will prefer using an external power supply for all of them.
Fortunately, the connector looks like it is exactly the same used in older 5 1/4 and 3 1/2" harddisks, so I needed to find a few of those. I found a few in an old unused ATX power supply, and I can most probably find more in an old computer I have lying around.
Update: The harddisk connector is not mechanically identical to the one used in the radios, but they can be modified. It just takes a bit of filing one end of the connector in a triangular shape, and not (more or less) rectangular one.
Further, during a modification attempt some time ago I blew an IC in the IC-R7000, the wideband FM demodulator. This needs to be replaced, though the radio can be used with SSB and NBFM without the repair.
The IC-451 seems to have been in a smokers home before I got it, and the least I have to do, is using an external power supply for reducing the heat. Yes, the heating up makes the radio smell of smoke, it is that bad.
Yet more tasks to do with my station. I do expect parts of this to be done this year.
Let us face it: I do have a sufficient amount of radios, but not enough antennas. I will have to do something about additional antennas and/or a more efficient use of the existing antennas.
If I get enough done, there may be another post this year.
This concerns the IC-R7000, the IC-R7100 multimode receivers and the IC-451 70cm transceiver.
The reason is that I was growing a bit weary of using my AR-8600 for receiving QO100 signals from a PLL-LNB with reference frequency stabilization. The 8600 has poor SSB filters and a not-so-good audio quality, too.
The IC-R7100 had been standing unused for a while, as it did not switch on. I suspected the missing connector at the back, after waiting some months, finally I checked, and yes, indeed. the connector is used as power-through for the built-in power supply.
The IC-7100 clearly has better filters and a much better speaker/AF-amp, and the tuning is a lot more convenient than the much smaller (clicking) knob of the AR-8600. Even with its 100Hz tuning steps, the IC-R7000 it ia a vast improvement in use over the 8600. Now I have the inclination to tune the satellite band. With the AR-8600 it felt like winding up an old clock ;)
However, in all three sets, the built-in power supply is a substantial source of heat, so I will prefer using an external power supply for all of them.
Fortunately, the connector looks like it is exactly the same used in older 5 1/4 and 3 1/2" harddisks, so I needed to find a few of those. I found a few in an old unused ATX power supply, and I can most probably find more in an old computer I have lying around.
Update: The harddisk connector is not mechanically identical to the one used in the radios, but they can be modified. It just takes a bit of filing one end of the connector in a triangular shape, and not (more or less) rectangular one.
Further, during a modification attempt some time ago I blew an IC in the IC-R7000, the wideband FM demodulator. This needs to be replaced, though the radio can be used with SSB and NBFM without the repair.
The IC-451 seems to have been in a smokers home before I got it, and the least I have to do, is using an external power supply for reducing the heat. Yes, the heating up makes the radio smell of smoke, it is that bad.
Yet more tasks to do with my station. I do expect parts of this to be done this year.
Let us face it: I do have a sufficient amount of radios, but not enough antennas. I will have to do something about additional antennas and/or a more efficient use of the existing antennas.
If I get enough done, there may be another post this year.
2019-12-06
Log Upload Trouble, And A Work-Around Solution.
My Electronic log has been updated with more information. The log now covers:
- All QSOs from 2015 - present
- All VHF-UHF QSOs from I received the license in 1973 till the end of 1980.
More is in the works.
For my logging, I use Linux and the native program called XLog. This is a simple logging program with mostly manual entry. The program runs in the Debian based Ubuntu distribution, which installs a version from 2017 as default. I like the simplicity of entering the data, I find it quite convenient in general use.
Recently I uploaded the present 3000 QSOs in the log to QRZCQ, and I made a registration with eQSL The log file must be uploaded in the (amateur radio) standard format, ADIF, and here the trouble starts.
There are different versions of ADIF, the later ones supporting more operating modes (of course). Recently I started using FT8 quite a bit, I have several hundred QSOs in the log already.
When attempting to upload the log to QRZCQ, however, no FT8 QSOs showed up in the log on the website. What happened (?), I had to find out. Did the website log not support FT8? Not likely, others had entered FT8 QSOs. Here is what happened:
I made a test with a short log file having "old modes" and FT8, and looked at the log file. It is a simple text file, easily visible in a text editor, and the file showed all QSOs, including the FT8 one. No surprise there.
Then I exported the file, and looked at the ADIF file. All QSOs **except** the FT8 one were present in the ADIF format (XML) file. Ah! now I knew why it did not upload the FT8 QSOs. They were simply not there. Why?
The version of XLog I am using is not the latest from the developer. It only supported exports in the ADIF 2.x.x format which does not support FT8. Support for ADIF 3.x.x was needed. That takes some time to enter into the Debian/Ubuntu package repository. This leaves two possible solutions:
- Upgrade the program to the latest version. This would entail compiling the program from source, and make sure that the correct dependencies (software libraries) are there. This can get hairy, as I am not really a Linux wizard.
- Make a work-around to edit the files to get the desired result: Uploading the FT8 QSOs along with all the others. A few hundred of those were already in the log file.
I decided to test the work-around, doing the following:
- Edit the log file (*.xlog) to change the mode from FT8 to something supported by ADIF 2.x.x, and a mode that I am very unlikely to use for amateur radio. I decided to use FAX, since it is a "3-letter mode" just like FT8 (this is relevant, because the ADIF format tags contain the number of characters in the data). Here the text editor and the Search-and-Replace function comes in. I replaced every instance of "FT8" (one in the test file) with "FAX" and opened the file in XLog.
Nice! The file was correctly opened.
- Now the log file had to be exported to the ADIF format. All looks good when opening the file in the text editor, and the "FAX" shows up as the mode.
- Another Search-and-Replace in the file replacing "FAX" with "FT8" in the ADIF file, and saving it with a different name. Now comes the interesting moment, see if it works:
- Uploaded the file to eQSL, and the FT8 QSO showed up as it should do.
- Now the above procedure repeated for the full log file (yes, I backed up every file in the .xlog directory before all this).
Voila ! All the FT8 QSOs show up on the eQSL site, the operation was successful.
What to do in the future, until the XLog program is updated? Rather simple:
- Every FT8 QSO will be entered in the log as using the FAX mode in stead of FT8
- export the file to ADIF when I need to update the online log
- run the text editor on the file, replacing every "FAX" with "FT8"
- upload the file
This is, of course, not an ideal solution, but I can live with it, until the XLog program is upgraded in my Linux distribution.
My log, as it is in electronic form, can now be found on the QRZCQ and eQSL web sites.
I will be working slowly through the entering of old paper logs into the computer log, and make updates to the online logs when new stuff is coming in.
Two things remain in my online logging efforts:
- I will get the eQSL certified
- I need to get my logs on ARRL's Logbook of the World
Further, I may have to find a logging program suitable for entering QSOs made on more than one band, e.g. satellite QSOs and crossband QSOs. In my time I have made a substantial amount of 10m/6m crossband QSOs before we got permits extended to 6m transmitting in most of Europe.
I am, indeed, keeping myself busy, this is a long term project, I expect it to take a year or more. After all, I have to do other things than just typing logs into the computer ;)
- All QSOs from 2015 - present
- All VHF-UHF QSOs from I received the license in 1973 till the end of 1980.
More is in the works.
For my logging, I use Linux and the native program called XLog. This is a simple logging program with mostly manual entry. The program runs in the Debian based Ubuntu distribution, which installs a version from 2017 as default. I like the simplicity of entering the data, I find it quite convenient in general use.
Recently I uploaded the present 3000 QSOs in the log to QRZCQ, and I made a registration with eQSL The log file must be uploaded in the (amateur radio) standard format, ADIF, and here the trouble starts.
There are different versions of ADIF, the later ones supporting more operating modes (of course). Recently I started using FT8 quite a bit, I have several hundred QSOs in the log already.
When attempting to upload the log to QRZCQ, however, no FT8 QSOs showed up in the log on the website. What happened (?), I had to find out. Did the website log not support FT8? Not likely, others had entered FT8 QSOs. Here is what happened:
I made a test with a short log file having "old modes" and FT8, and looked at the log file. It is a simple text file, easily visible in a text editor, and the file showed all QSOs, including the FT8 one. No surprise there.
Then I exported the file, and looked at the ADIF file. All QSOs **except** the FT8 one were present in the ADIF format (XML) file. Ah! now I knew why it did not upload the FT8 QSOs. They were simply not there. Why?
The version of XLog I am using is not the latest from the developer. It only supported exports in the ADIF 2.x.x format which does not support FT8. Support for ADIF 3.x.x was needed. That takes some time to enter into the Debian/Ubuntu package repository. This leaves two possible solutions:
- Upgrade the program to the latest version. This would entail compiling the program from source, and make sure that the correct dependencies (software libraries) are there. This can get hairy, as I am not really a Linux wizard.
- Make a work-around to edit the files to get the desired result: Uploading the FT8 QSOs along with all the others. A few hundred of those were already in the log file.
I decided to test the work-around, doing the following:
- Edit the log file (*.xlog) to change the mode from FT8 to something supported by ADIF 2.x.x, and a mode that I am very unlikely to use for amateur radio. I decided to use FAX, since it is a "3-letter mode" just like FT8 (this is relevant, because the ADIF format tags contain the number of characters in the data). Here the text editor and the Search-and-Replace function comes in. I replaced every instance of "FT8" (one in the test file) with "FAX" and opened the file in XLog.
Nice! The file was correctly opened.
- Now the log file had to be exported to the ADIF format. All looks good when opening the file in the text editor, and the "FAX" shows up as the mode.
- Another Search-and-Replace in the file replacing "FAX" with "FT8" in the ADIF file, and saving it with a different name. Now comes the interesting moment, see if it works:
- Uploaded the file to eQSL, and the FT8 QSO showed up as it should do.
- Now the above procedure repeated for the full log file (yes, I backed up every file in the .xlog directory before all this).
Voila ! All the FT8 QSOs show up on the eQSL site, the operation was successful.
What to do in the future, until the XLog program is updated? Rather simple:
- Every FT8 QSO will be entered in the log as using the FAX mode in stead of FT8
- export the file to ADIF when I need to update the online log
- run the text editor on the file, replacing every "FAX" with "FT8"
- upload the file
This is, of course, not an ideal solution, but I can live with it, until the XLog program is upgraded in my Linux distribution.
My log, as it is in electronic form, can now be found on the QRZCQ and eQSL web sites.
I will be working slowly through the entering of old paper logs into the computer log, and make updates to the online logs when new stuff is coming in.
Two things remain in my online logging efforts:
- I will get the eQSL certified
- I need to get my logs on ARRL's Logbook of the World
Further, I may have to find a logging program suitable for entering QSOs made on more than one band, e.g. satellite QSOs and crossband QSOs. In my time I have made a substantial amount of 10m/6m crossband QSOs before we got permits extended to 6m transmitting in most of Europe.
I am, indeed, keeping myself busy, this is a long term project, I expect it to take a year or more. After all, I have to do other things than just typing logs into the computer ;)
2019-12-03
Surprise Tropo On 2m. Update.
Today has been a bit of a surprise to me.
Late afternoon a GW was detected on 2m FT8, all with my Big Wheel omni antenna.
Near midnight local time there were a few G stations (G4KUX and M0NPT worked), and GM4FVM, also worked.
It was unexpected because most of the day we have had rain. Further, this is a rather poor direction for me on VHF/UHF.
Ah, well, this just shows that more is possible than we sometimes expect.
Update:
More tropo propagation in the morning of 2019-12-04:
Several German stations into the middle of the country, and 1 SP, 1 PE, and UT1FG/MM in JO94. Still with the Big Wheel antenna, 150W at the antenna. I am pretty happy.
Update #2:
This afternoon brought another SP, a SM3 and 2 OH1 stations (up to about 800km), and I tried working with the omni on 70cm with less than 10W at the antenna. the 70cm test yielded SP1NEN at about 300km.
Update #3:
One more new country on 2m (since I moved back to Denmark): YL2CZ.
All in all more than 40 QSOs in less than 24 hours.
You will hear no complaints from me today.
Late afternoon a GW was detected on 2m FT8, all with my Big Wheel omni antenna.
Near midnight local time there were a few G stations (G4KUX and M0NPT worked), and GM4FVM, also worked.
It was unexpected because most of the day we have had rain. Further, this is a rather poor direction for me on VHF/UHF.
Ah, well, this just shows that more is possible than we sometimes expect.
Update:
More tropo propagation in the morning of 2019-12-04:
Several German stations into the middle of the country, and 1 SP, 1 PE, and UT1FG/MM in JO94. Still with the Big Wheel antenna, 150W at the antenna. I am pretty happy.
Update #2:
This afternoon brought another SP, a SM3 and 2 OH1 stations (up to about 800km), and I tried working with the omni on 70cm with less than 10W at the antenna. the 70cm test yielded SP1NEN at about 300km.
Update #3:
One more new country on 2m (since I moved back to Denmark): YL2CZ.
All in all more than 40 QSOs in less than 24 hours.
You will hear no complaints from me today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)