that certainly does. a contest is in cw easier than ragchewining, esp at high speed as most of the things to exchange are 'known values'.
On Mon, Jul 22, 2019 at 11:18 PM Larry B. via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > However, 59 or 599 serves the human brain as a very good synchronizing > sound, so that we can easily copy the "real" exchange that come after it. > At least it does for me, especially on CW. > > 73 -- Larry -- W1DYJ > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Ed Muns > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 16:32 > To: 'John Kludt' > Cc: 'WSJT-Dev' > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Contest confusion > > Hi John. > > Excellent question! In most instances today RST is meaningless, whether > contesting, DXing or everyday operating. However, there are still some of > us old-timers who learned ham radio with true RST reports. We were > educated > about the meaning of each number and tried to apply the appropriate RST to > each report which was a key part of the first transmission in each QSO. > > Over the ensuing decades RST has evolved to a perfunctory '599' in most > QSOs. Sometimes we're too embarrassed to send '599' when we're struggling > to finish a weak DX QSO and we will sent '559' or '229' or whatever. > Mostly, it is a mindless '599'. Now, with WSJT-X we have true, accurate > SNR > and it's still mindless, in the sense that we don't have to think about > it. > The software determines the correct SNR. > > Thus, ham radio has a free opportunity to return to its roots when RST was > meaningful and exchange meaningful SNR reports. Readability and Tone > don't > have much value in the WSJT-X modes, but signal strength adds interest and > some substance to each QSO. I'm a strong advocate of supporting SNR in > WSJT-X QSOs. > > Ed W0YK > > -----Original Message----- > From: John Kludt <johnnykl...@gmail.com> > Sent: 22 July, 2019 03:34 > To: e...@w0yk.com > Cc: WSJT-Dev <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Contest confusion > > Ed, > > I have only one question - what is so sacred about a signal report? Most > are bogus, anyway. Our old section manager used to laugh about "You are > 59 > or 599" frequently followed by "again, again." > > John > > Sent from my Verizon Motorola Smartphone > On Jul 22, 2019 00:01, Ed Muns <e...@w0yk.com> wrote: > > > > Great tip, Laurie. > > > > This is a good technique if one can reasonably assume that the majority > of > > QSO partners sending a signal report will not complete the QSO, or log > it, > > if the contester only sends a Grid Square. > > > > IOW, if a contester set to NA VHF Contest mode connects up with a > > "non-contester" set to normal mode (Special Activity unchecked), and both > > are configured for Auto Seq, then the QSO will complete without any > > operator > > intervention. However, the contester will not have sent a signal report > > to > > the non-contester. That may be an issue, because the non-contester may > > continue to send his SNR message, hoping to elicit an SNR in return. > Or, > > he > > may not log the contact because he never received an SNR from the > > contester. > > This may not be a problem for the contester, because the non-contester is > > unlikely to submit a Cabrillo log, so the contester will avoid a NIL. > > > > Back to your tip of setting up two instances of WSJT-X, one with NA VHF > > Contest mode enabled and one with Special Activity unchecked. This is a > > good technique for the contester to get another QSO in the log that > > otherwise would not happen, IF the assumption is the majority of "mixed" > > QSOs as described above will not complete successfully because the > > non-contester is concerned that he didn't receive a signal report. > > > > The contester has to decide whether to power through the QSO in the NA > VHF > > Contest mode, or to on-the-fly switch to his "SNR Configuration" that > uses > > the standard non-contest message sequence and indeed sends an SNR > message > > to > > the non-contester. > > > > Ed W0YK > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Laurie, VK3AMA <_vk3a...@vkdxer.net> > > Sent: 21 July, 2019 16:04 > > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Contest confusion > > > > On 22/07/2019 7:16 am, Jim Brown wrote: > > > so I quickly switched out of contest mode to work him. :) > > > > > > What I WOULD like is to able to do this without going to Settings > > > Advanced. All those clicks loses a TX cycle. > > > > > > 73, Jim K9YC > > > > Simple and only requires a single mouse click. Setup two configurations > > in WSJT-X, one for you desired contest and the other non-contest. Once > > setup, it is a single click using the "Configuration" menu to switch > > between contest and non-contest. > > > > de Laurie VK3AMA > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wsjt-devel mailing list > > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > wsjt-devel mailing list > > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel > > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel >
_______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
