On Tuesday 21 February 2006 19:41, Dave Bernstein wrote: > There are straightforward ways to successfully deal with this > scenario a large percentage of the time. After noting the transition > of a previously-busy frequency to not busy, an automatic station > would wait some period of time - say 3 minutes. If the frequency > remained clear during that interval, the automatic station would > send QRL? in CW. If the frequency remained clear for 15 seconds, the > automatic station would send QRL? in CW again. If the frequency > remained clear for another 15 seconds, the automatic station could > initiate transmission, or accept activation from remote stations.
I'm sorry but you are tilting with a windmill. You just added 4.5 to 5 minutes to every session request, even for messages that shouldn't take more than 90sec to complete. That means this recommendation will require 3 times the number of channels to handle the same amount of traffic. That's not an effective way to do things. In addition, I sincerely doubt that a RTTY station, for instance, will recognize the CW QRL request and reply in 30 seconds. It would be much better if the automatic station could respond to a standard QRL signal during receive periods (wasn't it you that suggested that to me at some time in the past?). tim ab0wr Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org Other areas of interest: The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/ DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion) Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
