Hi Conrad I'm not sure there is any need to change the program with urgency. If you take the messages that are generatied automatically and don't manually change them, then the RRR and 73 messages are transmitted with base calls and the program recognises this and decodes the RRR and 73 with full AP ie max decoding sensitivity.
73 Charlie DL3WDG On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 at 18:09, Conrad PA5Y via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > Thanks Bill, you can imagine for marginal QSOs such as this when Lance is > expecting RRR it could be an issue, he is there right now. Any chance that > this can be fixed as a matter of some urgency please > > > > 73 > > > > Conrad PA5Y > > > > *From:* Bill Somerville via wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > *Sent:* 18 October 2021 15:02 > *To:* wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > *Cc:* Bill Somerville <g4...@classdesign.com> > *Subject:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Compound call behaviour Q65 > > > > On 18/10/2021 11:09, Conrad PA5Y via wsjt-devel wrote: > > Hello team. > > > > Last night I was attempting to work FO/W7GJ on Q65-60A. My question is > about the population of TX4 and TX5. > > > > When I Generate standard messages, I see TX1-3 are correct. > > > > TX1 <FO/W7GJ> PA5Y JO21 > > TX2 <FO/W7GJ> PA5Y -27 > > TX3 <FO/W7GJ> PA5Y R-27 > > > > However, the compound call is omitted from TX4 and TX5 > > > > TX4 W7GJ PA5Y RRR > > TX5 W7GJ PA5Y 73 > > > > Is this expected behaviour? I can see that it does not affect the validity > of a QSO as all the necessary information has already been passed. However, > I noticed last night the following. > > > > 0307 -8 0.0 699 : FO/W7GJ <...> RRR > > > > Obviously tropo but in this TX4 example the compound call appears to have > been transmitted, whereas in my case above it is not. > > > > Regards > > > > Conrad PA5Y > > Hi Conrad, > > that appears to be a defect. Tx4 and Tx5 should be generated using hash > codes rather than base callsigns. As you point out it is not too serious in > this case as the full calls without hashing are exchanged earlier in the > QSO. That is not the case with non-standard calls that are not compound so > the issue needs repairing. > > 73 > Bill > G4WJS. > _______________________________________________ > 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
