Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Please remove Fred Schmidt from email list (fred8...@yahoo.com) as he passed away. Thank you. Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone On Sunday, October 22, 2023, 2:41 PM, Grant via wsjt-devel wrote: Folks, I can vouch for the usefulness of RRR on FT8 in certain situations, such as running QRP 5 Watts. I often found, as a QRP station, that I needed to run with RRR as my default TX4 message to ensure the other end heard my reply and confirm a contact, otherwise they may miss the RR73 and are then unsure if I ever heard them at all. (QSO lacks 2-way confirmation). This if course reflects the intent in the manual as well. I, in fact, have just spent 6 weeks on air as a QRP portable station operating around the UK and often found I had to switch TX4 to RRR mode to complete QSOs reliably, so I can vouch for this from firsthand experience. I agree that the [xxx] [xxx] 73 TX5 message is (or can be) somewhat redundant and should not be relied upon as a QSO log indicator. If you have seen or sent RR73 then the QSO should be logged at that point, and not wait for the 73. However, if there was any improvement, my suggestion would be to amend the automation so that if you sent someone an RR73 (Tx4), and the next over they replied with the TX3 message again, that the automation automatically switch TX4 to RRR mode. Further, at that point, it should keep responding to the TX3 each over until either an over passes where no TX3 is received, a watchdog timeout occurs, or the sending station finally replies with a TX5. As soon as a new QSO starts, then revert TX4 back to RR73 mode. This should in my opinion increase the QSO completion chances under challenging weak signal/channel congestion circumstances. Next, as for abandoning TX5 completely, it is useful to send free text, particularly if you are running a compound call (as I was recently as M/VK5GR/P). In that case TX5 was used to send strings like “IO70 QRP 73” or “GFF-0247 73” to inform the station being worked of the extra QSO data that is lost (like GRID for example) when you are running a compound call. I would therefore not advocate for removal of TX5. It has its place, although I agree it is probably being mis-handled by many currently. Finally, the automation protocol change I outlined above is something I would like to see added to FT4 as well. The reason is again many times using FT4 I have replied with RR73 in TX4 to someone and the very next over they still send me TX3 – to which I will simply not reply without manual intervention. Manual intervention in FT4 is hard to get the right settings in place to send the correct answer in time for the next over (e.g. reactivate the TX in the inter-frame TX gap). It would help potentially reduce the chaos when contesting with FT4 as well IMHO as there would be less “broken” QSOs (where one end things the other end hasn’t logged the exchange) while the original station was happy after sending RR73 and has moved onto the next QSO. It might slow QSO over rate down, but it might also improve QSO completion reliability. This probably could be open to some more debate that, but it is something I suggest should be considered. Regards, Grant VK5GR From: Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 12:50 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Sam W2JDB Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? >From the WSJT-X User guide: Section 7.1 : Standard messages - " The RR73 message should be used only if you are reasonably confident that no repetitions will be required." Section 7.4 : Contest messages - "Always log a QSO when you have received RRR, RR73, or 73 from a station you are working." "Log a QSO when you send RR73 or 73 if you are reasonably confident it will be copied. But be sure to watch for any indication that it was not copied, and then take appropriate action. For example, if you receive the Tx3 message (R plus contest exchange) again, and if you have activated the Alternate F1-F6 bindings, hit F4 to re-send your RR73." 73, Sam W2JDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 08:58:15 AM EDT, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote: It's not a waste of time Here's why (especially on weak signals or when the band is flaky or QRM). .start of QSO W9MDB W0YK R-13 W0YK W9MDB RR73 -- band goes flaky but I'm supposed to think the QSO is done...but you don't decode the RR73. W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat because you didn't get the RR73 but since our path is flaky I don't get this R-13 so I still think I'm done. W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat again -- I still don't receive you ad nauseum until you give up. I logged you because I sent RR73 and got no other message from you. You didn't log me as you never received RR73. If had sent RRR instead I would repeat 73 until I got your 73.
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Folks, I can vouch for the usefulness of RRR on FT8 in certain situations, such as running QRP 5 Watts. I often found, as a QRP station, that I needed to run with RRR as my default TX4 message to ensure the other end heard my reply and confirm a contact, otherwise they may miss the RR73 and are then unsure if I ever heard them at all. (QSO lacks 2-way confirmation). This if course reflects the intent in the manual as well. I, in fact, have just spent 6 weeks on air as a QRP portable station operating around the UK and often found I had to switch TX4 to RRR mode to complete QSOs reliably, so I can vouch for this from firsthand experience. I agree that the [xxx] [xxx] 73 TX5 message is (or can be) somewhat redundant and should not be relied upon as a QSO log indicator. If you have seen or sent RR73 then the QSO should be logged at that point, and not wait for the 73. However, if there was any improvement, my suggestion would be to amend the automation so that if you sent someone an RR73 (Tx4), and the next over they replied with the TX3 message again, that the automation automatically switch TX4 to RRR mode. Further, at that point, it should keep responding to the TX3 each over until either an over passes where no TX3 is received, a watchdog timeout occurs, or the sending station finally replies with a TX5. As soon as a new QSO starts, then revert TX4 back to RR73 mode. This should in my opinion increase the QSO completion chances under challenging weak signal/channel congestion circumstances. Next, as for abandoning TX5 completely, it is useful to send free text, particularly if you are running a compound call (as I was recently as M/VK5GR/P). In that case TX5 was used to send strings like “IO70 QRP 73” or “GFF-0247 73” to inform the station being worked of the extra QSO data that is lost (like GRID for example) when you are running a compound call. I would therefore not advocate for removal of TX5. It has its place, although I agree it is probably being mis-handled by many currently. Finally, the automation protocol change I outlined above is something I would like to see added to FT4 as well. The reason is again many times using FT4 I have replied with RR73 in TX4 to someone and the very next over they still send me TX3 – to which I will simply not reply without manual intervention. Manual intervention in FT4 is hard to get the right settings in place to send the correct answer in time for the next over (e.g. reactivate the TX in the inter-frame TX gap). It would help potentially reduce the chaos when contesting with FT4 as well IMHO as there would be less “broken” QSOs (where one end things the other end hasn’t logged the exchange) while the original station was happy after sending RR73 and has moved onto the next QSO. It might slow QSO over rate down, but it might also improve QSO completion reliability. This probably could be open to some more debate that, but it is something I suggest should be considered. Regards, Grant VK5GR From: Sam W2JDB via wsjt-devel Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 12:50 AM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Sam W2JDB Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? >From the WSJT-X User guide: Section 7.1 : Standard messages - " The RR73 message should be used only if you are reasonably confident that no repetitions will be required." Section 7.4 : Contest messages - "Always log a QSO when you have received RRR, RR73, or 73 from a station you are working." "Log a QSO when you send RR73 or 73 if you are reasonably confident it will be copied. But be sure to watch for any indication that it was not copied, and then take appropriate action. For example, if you receive the Tx3 message (R plus contest exchange) again, and if you have activated the Alternate F1-F6 bindings, hit F4 to re-send your RR73." 73, Sam W2JDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 08:58:15 AM EDT, Black Michael via wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > wrote: It's not a waste of time Here's why (especially on weak signals or when the band is flaky or QRM). .start of QSO W9MDB W0YK R-13 W0YK W9MDB RR73 -- band goes flaky but I'm supposed to think the QSO is done...but you don't decode the RR73. W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat because you didn't get the RR73 but since our path is flaky I don't get this R-13 so I still think I'm done. W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat again -- I still don't receive you ad nauseum until you give up. I logged you because I sent RR73 and got no other message from you. You didn't log me as you never received RR73. If had sent RRR instead I would repeat 73 until I got your 73. That's why it says only use RR73 on a strong signal that you don't expect to have any problems with. Mike W9MDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:09:40 AM C
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
>From the WSJT-X User guide: Section 7.1 : Standard messages -" The RR73 message should be used only if you are reasonably confident that no repetitions will be required." Section 7.4 : Contest messages -"Always log a QSO when you have received RRR, RR73, or 73 from a station you are working." "Log a QSO when you send RR73 or 73 if you are reasonably confident it will be copied. But be sure to watch for any indication that it was not copied, and then take appropriate action. For example, if you receive the Tx3 message (R plus contest exchange) again, and if you have activated the Alternate F1-F6 bindings, hit F4 to re-send your RR73." 73, Sam W2JDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 08:58:15 AM EDT, Black Michael via wsjt-devel wrote: It's not a waste of time Here's why (especially on weak signals or when the band is flaky or QRM). .start of QSOW9MDB W0YK R-13W0YK W9MDB RR73 -- band goes flaky but I'm supposed to think the QSO is done...but you don't decode the RR73.W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat because you didn't get the RR73 but since our path is flaky I don't get this R-13 so I still think I'm done.W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat again -- I still don't receive youad nauseum until you give up. I logged you because I sent RR73 and got no other message from you. You didn't log me as you never received RR73.If had sent RRR instead I would repeat 73 until I got your 73. That's why it says only use RR73 on a strong signal that you don't expect to have any problems with. Mike W9MDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:09:40 AM CDT, Ed W0YK via wsjt-devel wrote: RR73 completes the QSO. Both QSO partners have sent calls, exchanges and QSLs. Am additional 73 message is a waste of time. 73,Ed W0YK Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 13:18 (GMT-08:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? I don't know what F/H is, but i have seen wsjtx hang and not complete the qso after RR73. Stan DeGroff W8SRD Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 3:49 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73,Andy, k3wyc___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
I actually see RRR fairly often. In many cases I think it is newbies who have not read the manual. The thing that puzzles me a bit is that occasionally I will work an op who sends RR73 and then after my 73 he also sends a 73. At that point it starts to feel a little like a Alphonse and Gaston cartoon. :) 73 -Jim On Sun, 22 Oct 2023 10:08:05 +0300 OG55W via wsjt-devel wrote: > Last two months I have had about 5000 FT8/FT4 QSOs. I have received just one > RRR, all the others were RR73. So RRR is not in use very much… > > 73 Keijo OG5O > > Lähetetty Windowsin Sähköpostiista > > Lähettäjä: Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel > Lähetetty: sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2023 8.49 > Vastaanottaja: 'WSJT software development' > Kopio: Reino Talarmo > Aihe: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? > > Hi Andy and all, > The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do > contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO > happy. > The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is > not needed to keep the QSO time short. > > 73, Reino OH3mA > > From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel > [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM > To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel > Cc: Andrew Neumeier > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? > > In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost > exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, > and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there > is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for > a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done > once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue > sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off > working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is > incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. > > On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just > out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. > > When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never > use it myself. > > 73, > Andy, ka2uqw ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
It's not a waste of time Here's why (especially on weak signals or when the band is flaky or QRM). .start of QSOW9MDB W0YK R-13W0YK W9MDB RR73 -- band goes flaky but I'm supposed to think the QSO is done...but you don't decode the RR73.W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat because you didn't get the RR73 but since our path is flaky I don't get this R-13 so I still think I'm done.W9MDB W0YK R-13 -- you repeat again -- I still don't receive youad nauseum until you give up. I logged you because I sent RR73 and got no other message from you. You didn't log me as you never received RR73.If had sent RRR instead I would repeat 73 until I got your 73. That's why it says only use RR73 on a strong signal that you don't expect to have any problems with. Mike W9MDB On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 12:09:40 AM CDT, Ed W0YK via wsjt-devel wrote: RR73 completes the QSO. Both QSO partners have sent calls, exchanges and QSLs. Am additional 73 message is a waste of time. 73,Ed W0YK Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 13:18 (GMT-08:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? I don't know what F/H is, but i have seen wsjtx hang and not complete the qso after RR73. Stan DeGroff W8SRD Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 3:49 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73,Andy, k3wyc___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Hi Reino, Not to beat the issue to death but this does not always work. A strong signal may dissipate. Some months ago, there was a nice 2 meter band opening into Texas from here in NJ. I worked several FT8 stations. Signals were strong, but the band just dropped out, suddenly. I wasmid-qso with a Texas station. I abandoned the qso after not receiving a RRR and sending the signal report multiple times. Some time later I got a qsl card from the station, from the abandoned qso. He was seeking confirmation. I emailed him, told him I could not confirm it. He had sent a RR73, which I never received. He thought the qso was complete, but it was not. So I wonder, how many qso's are in logs that cannot be confirmed? This is why I always send RRR and confirm a 73 with one of my own, as a courtesy. It's just my choice to do it that way. I also have no need to keep a qso short. Yesterday, a band opening on six meters happened, to South America. Signals were poor, to say the least, with often only partial signals on the waterfall. I saw plenty of RR73 there too. So, while the use of RR73might be flexible, it is often not used in that way on strong signals only. 73,Andy, ka2uqw On Sunday, October 22, 2023 at 01:49:57 AM EDT, Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel wrote: Hi Andy and all, The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO happy. The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is not needed to keep the QSO time short. 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel Cc: Andrew Neumeier Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73, Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
ThxSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Black Michael via wsjt-devel Date: 10/22/23 12:28 AM (GMT-05:00) To: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Cc: Black Michael Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Fox/HoundFor dxpeditions...see the HelpMike W9MDB On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:24:46 PM CDT, sdegroff via wsjt-devel wrote: What is F/H mode ?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 11:22 PM (GMT-05:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Huh?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73, Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___wsjt-devel mailing listwsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
ThxSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Hasan N0AN via wsjt-devel Date: 10/22/23 6:49 AM (GMT-05:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: Hasan N0AN Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Fox/Hound modeHasanOn Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 11:20 PM sdegroff via wsjt-devel wrote:What is F/H mode ?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 11:22 PM (GMT-05:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Huh?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73, Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Fox/Hound mode Hasan On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 11:20 PM sdegroff via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > What is F/H mode ? > > > > Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone > > > Original message > From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel > Date: 10/21/23 11:22 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: WSJT software development > Cc: sdegroff > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? > > Huh? > > > > Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone > > > Original message > From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel > Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) > To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Cc: Andy Durbin > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? > > After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use > of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto > sequenced after RR73 was received. > > I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. > > 73, > Andy, k3wyc > > > > > -- > *From:* Andy Durbin > *Sent:* Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM > *To:* wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > *Subject:* No 73 allowed after RR73? > > WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. > > I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending > 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H > active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched > in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not > re-started. > > Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? > > 73, > Andy, k3wyc > ___ > 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
1,8 – 70 MHz Lähetetty Windowsin Sähköpostiista Lähettäjä: Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel Lähetetty: sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2023 12.56 Vastaanottaja: 'WSJT software development' Kopio: Reino Talarmo Aihe: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Keijo, which bands you have used? Perhaps HF and 6 m during Es propagation? 73, Reino OH3mA From: OG55W via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 10:08 AM To: WSJT software development Cc: OG55W Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Last two months I have had about 5000 FT8/FT4 QSOs. I have received just one RRR, all the others were RR73. So RRR is not in use very much… 73 Keijo OG5O Lähetetty Windowsin Sähköpostiista Lähettäjä: Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel Lähetetty: sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2023 8.49 Vastaanottaja: 'WSJT software development' Kopio: Reino Talarmo Aihe: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Hi Andy and all, The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO happy. The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is not needed to keep the QSO time short. 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel Cc: Andrew Neumeier Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73, Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Agree 100%. The number of ops who refuse to be control operators and just log and move on because, “the software didn’t tell me the QSO is complete” is staggering.On Oct 22, 2023, at 1:06 AM, Ed W0YK via wsjt-devel wrote:+173,Ed W0YK Original message From: Ron WV4P via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 13:02 (GMT-08:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: Ron WV4P Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? I wish this was THE way, the useless final 73 should have never existed and is the bain of the mode. Ron, WV4P On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 2:55 PM Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ___wsjt-devel mailing listwsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Keijo, which bands you have used? Perhaps HF and 6 m during Es propagation? 73, Reino OH3mA From: OG55W via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 10:08 AM To: WSJT software development Cc: OG55W Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Last two months I have had about 5000 FT8/FT4 QSOs. I have received just one RRR, all the others were RR73. So RRR is not in use very much… 73 Keijo OG5O Lähetetty Windowsin Sähköposti <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986> ista Lähettäjä: Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Lähetetty: sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2023 8.49 Vastaanottaja: 'WSJT software development' <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Kopio: Reino Talarmo <mailto:reino.tala...@kolumbus.fi> Aihe: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Hi Andy and all, The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO happy. The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is not needed to keep the QSO time short. 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourcefo <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> rge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > Cc: Andrew Neumeier mailto:ka2...@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73, Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto: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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Last two months I have had about 5000 FT8/FT4 QSOs. I have received just one RRR, all the others were RR73. So RRR is not in use very much… 73 Keijo OG5O Lähetetty Windowsin Sähköpostiista Lähettäjä: Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel Lähetetty: sunnuntai 22. lokakuuta 2023 8.49 Vastaanottaja: 'WSJT software development' Kopio: Reino Talarmo Aihe: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Hi Andy and all, The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO happy. The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is not needed to keep the QSO time short. 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel Cc: Andrew Neumeier Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73, Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Hi Andy and all, The protocol is flexible on that issue. The original weak signal QSO do contain a “RRR” that is “confirmed” by a “73” to keep both sizes of the QSO happy. The “RR73” is really intended for “strong signal” QSO’s and then the “73” is not needed to keep the QSO time short. 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2023 1:05 AM To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel Cc: Andrew Neumeier Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, there is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continue sending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73, Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto: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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
If you don't print the RR73, then repeat your QSL/exchange message. If you never receive the RR73, then don't log the QSO. How many times you repeat your QSL/exchange message is a judgment call. It's a tradeoff between completing the QSO and moving on to the next one.73,Ed W0YK Original message From: Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 15:08 (GMT-08:00) To: Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel Cc: Andrew Neumeier Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, thereis a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continuesending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73,Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___wsjt-devel mailing listwsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
RR73 completes the QSO. Both QSO partners have sent calls, exchanges and QSLs. Am additional 73 message is a waste of time.73,Ed W0YK Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 13:18 (GMT-08:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? I don't know what F/H is, but i have seen wsjtx hang and not complete the qso after RR73.Stan DeGroff W8SRDSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 3:49 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
+173,Ed W0YK Original message From: Ron WV4P via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 13:02 (GMT-08:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: Ron WV4P Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? I wish this was THE way, the useless final 73 should have never existed and is the bain of the mode. Ron, WV4P On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 2:55 PM Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
You CQ DX message should be in TX6. 73 -Jim NU0C On Sat, 21 Oct 2023 19:33:18 + Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel wrote: > After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of > F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced > after RR73 was received. > > I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. > > 73, > Andy, k3wyc > > > ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Fox/Hound For dxpeditions...see the Help Mike W9MDB On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 11:24:46 PM CDT, sdegroff via wsjt-devel wrote: What is F/H mode ? Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 11:22 PM (GMT-05:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Huh? Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73,Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73,Andy, k3wyc___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
What is F/H mode ?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: sdegroff via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 11:22 PM (GMT-05:00) To: WSJT software development Cc: sdegroff Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? Huh?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73, Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
Huh?Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 7:06 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73, Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
After a review of ALL.TXT I no longer think this was related to prior use of F/H mode. I had set TX5 to a "CQ DX message" and that was auto sequenced after RR73 was received. I'll need to be careful to ensure TX5 is set correctly when in QSO. 73, Andy, k3wyc From: Andy Durbin Sent: Saturday, October 21, 2023 12:14 PM To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
> On Oct 21, 2023, at 16:04, Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel > wrote: > > If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 > instead of 73, there > is a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for > a qsb peak on the signal. And that’s why RR73 isn’t supposed to be used on weak signal work. Specifically, RR73 is for use when a repeat transmission will not be called for. QSB should obviously negate that thought. That said, I sometimes send RR73 when I don’t mean to because I moved off of a stable band to one that is questionable and don’t realize it (not think to check it). It only happens once, as I noticed it immediately and make the change before the next contact. 73, Gary ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
In some cases the use of RR73 is problematic. I operate FT8 almost exclusively on 2 meters, weak signal. If I am working a very weak station, and that station chooses to use RR73 instead of 73, thereis a good chance that I have not received it, especially if I am waiting for a qsb peak on the signal. By sending RR73 that station assumes we are done once RR73 is sent, but we may not be done. I continuesending a signal report, while the station I was in contact with is off working another station. I may then fail to log that qso, since it is incomplete, unless the station realizes the mistake and continues the qso. On occasion I have even seen RR73 used in MSK144 or even Q65 which is just out of line in weak signal, or meteor scatter work. When working weak signals I don't think RR73 should ever be used and I never use it myself. 73,Andy, ka2uqw On Saturday, October 21, 2023 at 04:53:15 PM EDT, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel wrote: FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ 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
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
FWIW ... if you received an RR73 .. there is no need to reply. The station is saying that RR I got your last, and 'over and out' ... The other party is not waiting for your reply, they're on to another contact. Neil, KN3ILZ On 10/21/2023 1:14 PM, Andy Durbin wrote: WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
I don't know what F/H is, but i have seen wsjtx hang and not complete the qso after RR73.Stan DeGroff W8SRDSent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone Original message From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel Date: 10/21/23 3:49 PM (GMT-05:00) To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Cc: Andy Durbin Subject: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73? WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not re-started. Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? 73, Andy, k3wyc ___ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
Re: [wsjt-devel] No 73 allowed after RR73?
I wish this was THE way, the useless final 73 should have never existed and is the bain of the mode. Ron, WV4P On Sat, Oct 21, 2023 at 2:55 PM Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel < wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> wrote: > WSJT-X ver 2.6.1, Win 8.1. > > I have observed several times that I could not complete a QSO by sending > 73 after I had received an RR73. This is expected operation with F/H > active but not when F/H is not active. I suspect that something is latched > in software if F/H mode has been used but is then exited and WSJT-X is not > re-started. > > Has anyone else seen this or have an explanation? > > 73, > Andy, k3wyc > ___ > 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
