Hi Bill,
could it be implemented it such that, if set, "Skip Tx 1" is simply
ignored if the dx call is a compound callsign?
In fact the whole Tx1/RR73 thing might be boiled down to a more generic
option, like "minimal", or "optimise", or similar - i.e. attempt to use
the least number of exch
Hi Neil,
but doesn't that mean you have to redo the logic used by the double
click to change the current function from seeing RR73 as a grid, ...
The change in logic is minimal.
I'm also guessing that you would have to make this band specific so its
not used with MS/EME/etc modes which would
Hi Neil,
despite your comments and their validity, it has become common practice
to end QSOs with an RR73 grid message. Because of this it is fairly
essential that WSJT-X knows to not treat such a message as a standard
grid message, extending that to handling such a message as a logging
promp
Bill (G4WJS),
but doesn't that mean you have to redo the logic used by the double
click to change the current function from seeing RR73 as a grid, and
overwriting, then sending a -XX signal report?
I'm also guessing that you would have to make this band specific so its
not used with MS/EME/e
On 20/07/2017 21:52, Alessandro Gorobey via wsjt-devel wrote:
for a my error I notice that with a CAT error program go to select
configuration, not to the radio CAT of current configuration.
Is it wanted ?
It is simple to simulate turning off radio.
Tested only with 1.8.0 and 1.7.1 > r7920
Hi,
for a my error I notice that with a CAT error program go to select
configuration, not to the radio CAT of current configuration.
Is it wanted ?
It is simple to simulate turning off radio.
Tested only with 1.8.0 and 1.7.1 > r7920
--
73
Sandro
IW3RAB
I have been testing rc2 today. As I reported previously (when testing an
earlier release) there is an issue where Tx5 (the 73 line) appears blank on an
apparently random basis maybe 10% of the time. I have not been able to pin-down
if any particular sequence of events causes this problem. Mike
I took a look at the pskpost entries.
There are 3 places where this occurs and only one of the three has any
protection against early posts.
I'm thinking what's best is to have a m_bandStart and m_bandEnd that gets set
on audio recording start/end.That way you check those two to ensure that the
> On Jul 20, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Seb wrote:
>
> Or how about RR 73. Would this not be saved as the grid in your logging
> program?
I suggested this long ago. Didn’t seem to go anywhere at all. RR 73 or RR-73
seems reasonable.
Gary - AG0N
On 20/07/2017 17:27, Bill Turner wrote:
How about R-73 to avoid confusion with grids RR-73?
Hi Bill,
that defeats the purpose of RR73, it is because it is a valid grid that
two complete callsigns can be sent with it as a standard message. You
suggestion would require a free text message with
I wouldn't worry about anyone ever being active in grid RR73. It is a water
grid in the Russian Arctic region. $100 to the first guy to work a legitimate
maritime mobile station on FT8 from grid RR73 :-). Its a non-problem.
73,
Rich - K1HTV
> On July 20, 2017 at 12:29 PM Bill Somerville wrote:
On 20/07/2017 18:23, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
The problem I think that can occur is when you use, for example,
JTAlert to tell you who you need.
If you enter a QSO but don't get a QSL I think JTAlert will still show
it as a B4 entry which, if you don't have B4's being show, you won't
Or how about RR 73. Would this not be saved as the grid in your logging
program?
I realize there is nobody living in the grid RR73, but bad data is bad data.
Bad data should never be accepted as a quick fix, IMHO.
On HF, grids (at this time) are pretty much meaningless, but having this
abili
The problem I think that can occur is when you use, for example, JTAlert to
tell you who you need.If you enter a QSO but don't get a QSL I think JTAlert
will still show it as a B4 entry which, if you don't have B4's being show, you
won't see on JTAlert call slots. So if you confirm, but your pa
How about R-73 to avoid confusion with grids RR-73?
Bill, W4WNT
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Rich - K1HTV wrote:
G4WJS.
Bill,
Regarding the use of "RR73", I believe that it should be formalized as an
option to the present "73" TX5 message.
On 20/07/2017 17:19, AB1NJ wrote:
I see the discussion on the RR73, but possibly more important is a
easy way to skip TX1 message, in order to send a report (normally TX2)
on first reply to CQ instead of grid. A checkbox would be obvious
solution. Thoughts?
Hi Rob,
I am considering it. Lik
I see the discussion on the RR73, but possibly more important is a easy
way to skip TX1 message, in order to send a report (normally TX2) on
first reply to CQ instead of grid. A checkbox would be obvious
solution. Thoughts?
Rob AB1NJ
--
G4WJS.
Bill,
Regarding the use of "RR73", I believe that it should be formalized as an
option to the present "73" TX5 message.
Let's look at this senario regarding when a QSO is assumed to be complete:
Station #1 sends Station #2 a report.
Station #2 sends either "RRR" or "RR73" because he
On 20/07/2017 14:27, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote:
although if autoseq detects the RR73 as the prompt to log means they
likely have logged it already which I think is not what should be done.
HI Mike,
there seems to be an aversion to logging a QSO before your QSO partner
can, I don't se
Since I don't send RR73 right now can only speak as one who has received them...
I have always interpreted the RR73 to mean "I don't intend on sending a 73
after you send 73" although if autoseq detects the RR73 as the prompt to log
means they likely have logged it already which I think is not wh
If I were Cqing, the way I operate JT65 with JTDX which has the option of RR73,
is that I do assume my sending of RR73 is the end of the QSO unless I receive
more from the QSO partner. So, I send RR73 and would expect 73 but, if nothing
received, would start with another station that had previou
Bill,
I'm sure I'm not alone, but I require some acknowledgement of receipt of
signal report. I'm not hard over about what that is, be it 73 or RR73.
Personally I like a 73 term from both stations but I think it's logical for
the original CQ station to terminate the QSO with RR73. At that point c
Hi All,
we are looking at changing the WSJT-X logic such that a grid message of
the form:
" RR73"
is treated as a sign off message.
This has several implications and I need some clarification so that I
can adjust the code. For now I will put aside any potential issues for
holders of compo
Your right Bill, wasn't thinking straight, another senior moment.
73 DE VK2RT Bruce
Sent from my SAMSUNG Galaxy S7 edge on the Telstra Mobile Network
Original message From: Bill Somerville
Date: 20/7/17 8:20 pm (GMT+10:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [ws
On 20/07/2017 02:50, Bruce wrote:
It would be more convienent if that slider actually did adjust the
audio level.
Hi Bruce,
how would you propose that a slider adjust the audio level?
73
Bill
G4WJS.
--
Check out the
25 matches
Mail list logo
