Hi Joe,
Conrad may know more than I do, but the short answer is yes, Lance has been
making QSOs with his compound call despite issue #3, and yes, he does have some
intermittent internet access - he's been on the ON4KST EME chat today, and also
on email. Whether his internet is good enough to download an installation
package, I don't know.
73
Chris
G4IFX
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Taylor via wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Sent: 19 October 2021 18:56
To: Conrad PA5Y via wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
Cc: Joe Taylor <j...@princeton.edu>
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Compound call behaviour Q65
Hi Conrad,
What is the status of the FO/W7GJ expedition? Is Lance making 6m EME QSOs as
planned? I am concerned that he may not have adequately tested use of a
compound callsign in JT65 and Q65 modes with WSJT-X 2.5.0.
We have identified four problems that are likely affecting Lance's operation as
FO/W7GJ:
1. In JT65 mode, when either MyCall or DxCall is a compound call the
automatically generated Tx2 message is incorrectly formatted.
2. In Q65 mode, the hashed forms of "MyCall" and "DxCall" are not properly
initialized on program startup. If either of these hash codes is received
before the corresponding full callsign is decoded, the result is displayed as
<...>.
3. In Q65 mode the automatically generated messages for Tx4 and Tx5 are "W7GJ
PA5Y RRR" and "W7GJ PA5Y 73". They should instead be of the form "FO/W7GJ
<PA5Y> RRR" and "FO/W7GJ <PA5Y> 73".
4. In Q65 mode, decodes of type "q3" are not produced for messages containing a
compound or nonstandard callsign.
In spite of defect #1, JT65 QSOs can be completed in the usual way, using
shorthand messages, if you manually edit the Tx2 field to be equal to Tx1 but
with an appended " OOO".
Defect #2 is annoying but becomes harmless after the full callsign has been
decoded.
Defects #3 and #4 can cause degraded sensitivity by failing to allow decodes of
type q3.
These problems have all been fixed, and a version 2.5.1 could be made available
soon. But, is there any way to get it to Lance? Failing that, I think his
best bet may be to use JT65 while in FO, and whoever sends message Tx2 will
need to edit it manually to one of the forms
K1ABC FO/W7GJ OOO
FO/W7GJ K1ABC OOO
Does all of this make sense to you?
-- Joe, K1JT
On 10/18/2021 6:09 AM, 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
