So, the Geminids peak is here again. I've been trying out 144MHz meteor scatter for the first time over the past few days, which has taken me to interesting and sometimes not so nice places.
Using WSJT-X, I was getting a reasonable number of decodes, but also missing a lot, even with DF opened out to 200Hz. As the first evening progressed, I was getting fewer decodes.
Always reluctant to use new software and the potential for driver and other conflicts that can arise, I anyway chose to try MSHV, to see what it could achieve.
 |
Well, initially MSHV was also not decoding many pings. But this software allows the DF to be opened out to 400Hz. At about 300Hz, it was decoding practically every tiny peak that appeared.
Inevitably, reporting my success with MSHV on the 144MHz Europe FB page resulted in a few rabid disagreements with my finding that it was better than WSJT-X. But those were seriously outnumbered by those agreeing with my experience.
As you will (perhaps critically) note, I was using a 15s cycle at the time. Most people seem to use 30s, but this is also the topic of rabid debates online. I tend to agree strongly with the more progressive opinion that 15s cycles are more efficient in many cases. In the end, there is no law being broken, whichever cycle one uses, and there are clearly hypocrites around who argue for one thing online, but do something entirely different when a grid they want suddenly appears on the screen and they feel an immediate respose, regardless of cycle period or duration, is what is needed to 'put him in the log'.
I called a lot of CQ, and was clearly being heard strongly across Europe. But I found waiting for a response, or that decoded station to ever appear again on the waterfall, highly frustrating and, for me at least, a real waste of time. I'm not a band-and-grid-collecting obsessive, so other than the pure beauty of making a QSO by MS, there is no real aim or motivation for me. Taking an hour to complete a QSO by random reflections isn't something I really want to understand, to be honest. 6m is a much better option for the simple joy of MS.
Still, an interesting introduction to 2m MS and a new software. Always something new to learn, though I won't ever be a MS fanatic, I think!
It has been last summer I was testing with MSHV. I found it much better on MS. I used it on 4m a lot since at the end of the ES season it appears to be the only way to work a few new DXCC. But on 144 MHz? Well, it would be a nice experiment when I'm retired....nice to read your efforts though. 73, Bas
ReplyDelete