A couple recent comments on Fox/Hound mode have me perplexed.
Aren’t major efforts (those we expect to use F/H) frequencies pre-coordinated
and published in advance of the trip?
Do holiday-style trips really need F/H?
Major dxpeditions should never operate in the standard watering holes, right?
Isn’t there advice about this in the manual?
So, why would operators looking to maximize QSO count need additional band
monitoring displays? Shouldn’t they concentrate on answering the calls headed
their way? Clearing contacts would seem to be the goal, not searching a pileup
for a multiplier or rare one, right?
I grant you, DQRM or operator error can wreak havoc. Wouldn’t this show up in
the fox’s completion rate and thus raise suspicion by an experienced operator?
For hounds not willing to set up a profile, why? It is extremely easy and
affords you the ability to enter the Dxpeditions published frequencies, switch
between them nearly instantly, and keep some semblance of order by not editing
your normal frequency list. Is there an advantage I am missing?
Hound mode allows full passband monitoring capability, check-box on the main
screen. Is this insufficient to check band activity before jumping in? I
thought the receive side of hound mode looks and acts like “normal” FT8.
In the event of multi-signal operation from non-WSJT-x operations (perhaps in
the watering holes), why would there be interest in switching to hound mode?
Standard FT8 works perfectly in this situation. Identifying the mode of
operation takes little time - if you see someone above 1000 Hz complete a
contact, it’s not F/H. Or am I confused?
I appreciate the group’s indulgence and patience.
George J Molnar, KF2T
Arlington, Virginia, USA
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
