Gary, you very correct. I'm with you on that. Slow down. Enjoy the
program for what it is.
Bruce WA1YZN
On 10/4/2021 16:50, Gary McDuffie via wsjt-devel wrote:
On Oct 4, 2021, at 13:09, Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel
wrote:
This is a different situation than working strong signals on HF,
> On Oct 4, 2021, at 13:09, Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel
> wrote:
>
> This is a different situation than working strong signals on HF, where I
> rarely operate FT8, so my experience is different. So, when another station
> sends 73, and my station does not automatically respond, I'll
> On Oct 4, 2021, at 07:18, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel
> wrote:
>
> When you send RR73, when the Tx Enable turns off, the operator has the OPTION
> to click it back on, select the Tx5 message, and have it go out.
>
> See ... already implemented. Just takes TWO clicks.
Yep, takes
On 10/3/21 at 10:50 PM, wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net (Alex
via wsjt-devel) wrote:
Even though I had let go of this rule, I think I will reinstate
it again. No 73, no QSO. I really don't care if that means my
log will be a few Q's short. The world is already rude enough
as it is. We can
Since I started this discussion, and have now read all the comments, some
clarification is probably in order.
Most of my operating is on vhf, and the majority of that on 2M. So, I am often
dealing with very weak signals, many can't be heard, many of those at the edge
of the capability of
: Mon, Oct 4, 2021 12:39 pm
Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Question, FT8
Yes, that was exactly my point. Thanks for setting me straight. How could I
have been so stupid to miss that.
73,
--Alex KR1STOn Oct 4, 2021, at 9:33 AM, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel
wrote:
It's currently optional
Yes, that was exactly my point. Thanks for setting me straight. How could I
have been so stupid to miss that.
73,
--Alex KR1ST
On Oct 4, 2021, 9:33 AM, at 9:33 AM, Neil Zampella via wsjt-devel
wrote:
>It's currently optional ...
>
>When you send RR73, when the Tx Enable turns off, the
It's currently optional ...
When you send RR73, when the Tx Enable turns off, the operator has the
OPTION to click it back on, select the Tx5 message, and have it go out.
See ... already implemented. Just takes TWO clicks.
Neil, KN3ILZ
On 10/4/2021 7:21 AM, Alex wrote:
Hi Jim,
Hence the
Hi Jim,
Hence the suggestion to make it optional.
Perhaps there should be a penalty for not being courteous on the bands. I can
live with that.
I always had to laugh when I read the discussions on the RTTY lists after a
contest. It's full of complaints about operators sending a character too
On 10/4/21 1:17 AM, Allan Downie via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hi Allen, Bill & all,
Technically the return 73 is not
required for a valid QSO, however it is the polite thing to do. At the
very least if confirms to your operating partner that all was received.
I would like to at least see it as an
On 10/3/2021 7:50 PM, Alex via wsjt-devel wrote:
No 73, no QSO. I really don't care if that means my log will be a few
Q's short. The world is already rude enough as it is. We can take a few
moments to be courteous.
Not when there's short band opening for DX, and not in a contest. :)
When
Hi Andy,
It would be nice if the software would allow the operator determine if the 73
message should always be part of the automatic exchange. In almost any other
mode you can make that choice.
A few folks called me a few times during the 2m and 222 sprints even though I
thought we already
-devel
*Inviato:* domenica 3 ottobre 2021, 20:37
*A:* WSJT software development
*Cc:* Adrian
*Oggetto:* Re: [wsjt-devel] Question, FT8
Use RR73 instead of RRR and there is no issue, with one side saying RR
with 73, and the other then 73.
It is all there, I do not see the issue.
vk4tux
On 4/10/21 9
Android<https://aka.ms/AAb9ysg>
Da: Adrian via wsjt-devel
Inviato: domenica 3 ottobre 2021, 20:37
A: WSJT software development
Cc: Adrian
Oggetto: Re: [wsjt-devel] Question, FT8
Use RR73 instead of RRR and there is no issue, with one side saying RR w
If you really want to send a 73, you can, you select the call , enable
TX and select TX5.
Manual sends like this are doable, after the auto sequencing has finished.
vk4tux
On 4/10/21 12:08 pm, Andrew Neumeier via wsjt-devel wrote:
Thanks to all who responded to my question.
I suspected
Thanks to all who responded to my question.
I suspected that this would be the answer. I've found that often a station not
receiving the 73 from me in return, then sends 73 again sometimes until I
respond in kind with a 73. And I generally don't use RR73.
It's not a bug and by design.
The S9OK DXpedition ops guide specifically states "Once you decode the message
‘ S9OK ... RR73' (also called the TX4 message) from us, you should
log the QSO."
73
-Jim
NU0C
On Sun, 3 Oct 2021 19:33:27 -0400
Gene Marsh via wsjt-devel wrote:
> Allen and Andy,
>
> Yes, it is not required.
Allen and Andy,
Yes, it is not required. However, many stations (especially fox and hound)
MUST receive a 73 to acknowledge a contact for a card.
73 de W8NET Miles “Gene” Marsh
> On Oct 3, 2021, at 7:20 PM, Allan Downie via wsjt-devel
> wrote:
>
> Hi Andy...Yes it happens all the
Use RR73 instead of RRR and there is no issue, with one side saying RR
with 73, and the other then 73.
It is all there, I do not see the issue.
vk4tux
On 4/10/21 9:17 am, Allan Downie via wsjt-devel wrote:
Hi Andy...Yes it happens all the time..BY DESIGN, apparently. I find
it most
Hi Andy...Yes it happens all the time..BY DESIGN, apparently. I find it
most frustrating and bordering on rude. Technically the return 73 is not
required for a valid QSO, however it is the polite thing to do. At the
very least if confirms to your operating partner that all was received.
I
Hello to the group,
I am using WSJTx, version 2.5, using the version for Ubuntu 20.04. When
operating FT8 and in contact with a station, once that station sends 73 my
transmit becomes disabled, so my station does not send 73 unless I manually
send it. I am using auto sequence. So, the
21 matches
Mail list logo
