FWIW ... Joe put together the original QSO protocol which effectively shows six (6) transmissions, three (3) from the station calling CQ, and three (3) from the station answering the CALL over what is effectively a six minute period.
The 5th minute of the QSO is the CQ station sending RRR, which is a final acknowledgement that all information for the QSO has been transmitted and received. The ONLY transmission in that protocol that requires a 73, is the final transmission (6th minute0 by the answering station which is effectively saying thanks for the QSO, over and out. There is no need for the calling station to do anything after that, but call CQ for another QSO. The use of the RRR 73 or RR73 really does NOT save any time, and really tends to confuse users of WSJT-X who merely click on the decoded transmission. The program (as well as the JT65-HF clones) is not expecting that, and has no idea on what to do next. My six bits ... Neil Z KN3ILZ On 08/24/15 05:09 pm, Chris Sullivan wrote: > I think the answer to this is simple. All it requires is that all JT mode > programs print "RRR 73" when (sending and) receiving the standard RRR > message. It's just a sequence of bits after all, and not the actual text > RRR. Then the calling station could feel happy that they've sent 73 to the > responding station and not done one of (a) finished the QSO with a clinical > RRR before sending the next CQ, or (b) squandering another 2 minutes send a > fourth transmission to give the tradition ham radio signoff. > > As far as I can tell people send RR73 or RRR73 or something similar just > because they want to be polite. Being Canadian I understand completely. Mind > you, getting everyone to update their versions would be a challenge. > > (What really drives me nuts though is the CQ station responding to my call > with R-xx, which sometimes tricks me into sending RRR if I don't notice) > > 73, > Chris VE3NRT > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Ockert - ND0B [mailto:n...@ockert.us] > Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 4:40 PM > To: WSJT software development <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer > > Jay, > > I do not view it as harsh. Harsh was when I went off HF JT modes completely > for well over a year > because of it. I am one of about five stations in ND that are on JT HF > modes, one > of about three on both JT HF modes and LOTW and one of one on JT HF modes, > LOTW > and 12 and 160 meters. I get on about twice a year to help folks with > WAS, I am > not a fan of HF period so it is generally not an enjoyable experience and I > get a resentful when folks start counting teeth... I already know I am > about ready for McDonalds or the glue factory. > > Both the WSJT and WSJTX manual clearly state what is considered a minimal > QSO > and I am in complete agreement with it. A QSO is complete when all of the > essential elements of if are complete and that includes one station > receiving an RRR. > > If others choose to use a different format that is purely their business > just as it is mine to choose not to accept less than the published minimal > contact. > At one point > I had a much more lenient policy about that which included sending TX3 a > second time then emailing the station letting them know what the issue was > and offering a > retry. However I was point blank told that I had no right to tell other > stations what > to transmit, I capitulated completely and now have a policy where I > terminate the contact immediately upon deviation from the minimal QSO and do > not offer a retry. > The person > who was doing the complaining called me a crazy old ^&%$#$% when I made the > change so it must have been exactly the right thing to do. > > As a personal side note I was hoping to make it to 60 before that happened > but oh well... > > I believe if there is going to be an auto sequencer one of its functions > should be to > enforce the minimal QSO and not facilitate less than minimal QSOs. That is > > both > for integrity of the QSO reasons and because it would be a pain to program > all of the > variations that are floating around out there. The only question mark > there should > be for an auto sequencer is how to gracefully shut down the contact. There > is a catch 22 in the logic to handle 73's that I believe is handled > reasonably well in the WSJT ISCAT auto sequencer that I hope to move over > the WSJTX. > > For those users who feel otherwise they can always override the auto > sequencer and advance if they feel the auto sequencer was being too strict. > > 73 de Bill ND0B > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Hainline > Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 2:13 PM > To: WSJT software development > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer > > Not logging it? That seems a little harsh. The sequencing was correct up to > that point. He had already received my R-signal report from me and just > bunched the RR73 into one transmit sequence. All I wanted to do was send the > 73 transmission but for QSO purposes, it was complete at that point. I did > manually send the 73 sequence and the QSO was logged. > > 73 Jay > > Jay Hainline KA9CFD > Colchester, IL EN40om > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Ockert - ND0B > Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 15:54 > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer > > The auto sequencer, while it should not have gone back to TX2, actually > acted in a benign manner compared to what I would have done manually, namely > ended the contact without the benefit of logging it. > > 73 de Bill ND0B > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jay Hainline > Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 6:56 AM > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer > > I had a small issue this morning working a station on 6 meters using > WSJTX-devel r5808 using JT9H mode and auto sequencing. The station I was > running with sent calls followed by RR73 programmed in the TX4 message > button. The auto sequencer on my end got confused by this and went back to > TX2 to send the report again. I was wondering if this is something where the > auto sequencer can be programmed to be a little more flexible? I think if I > copy either RRR or RR73, it should go to transmit TX5 which I have as > sending calls and 73. > > The station I ran with says he is using version r5803 and claims RR73 was > pre-set for TX4 inside that particular version he downloaded. My WSJTX 1.6.1 > copy has always had TX4 programmed with calls and RRR. > > 73 Jay > > Jay Hainline KA9CFD > Colchester, IL EN40om > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
