RR73 is also a valid grid square and could cause confusion in software.


George J Molnar
KF2T | AFA9GM
Twitter: @GJMolnar

SUPPORT HR-1301 & S-1685
http://www.arrl.org/amateur-radio-parity-act



> On Aug 24, 2015, at 15:40, Jay Hainline <ka9...@mtcnow.net> wrote:
> 
> Just to clarify, the line contained both calls and RR73. This was AFTER 
> reports had been sent both ways. So I don't know what the difference would be 
> in receiving 2 "Rogers" instead of 3. :-)
> 
> 
> 
> Jay KA9CFD 
> 
> Sent from my U.S. Cellular® Smartphone
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: George J Molnar <geo...@molnar.com> 
> Date: 08/24/2015 5:23 PM (GMT-06:00) 
> To: Bill Ockert - ND0B <n...@ockert.us>, WSJT software development 
> <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> 
> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Fw: sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto  
> sequencer 
> 
> Agree, Bill. Auto-sequence should be the same as manual, and RR73 isn't a 
> good way to complete, nor is anything else that fails to include your 
> callsign.
> 
> 
> 
> George J Molnar, CEM, CHPP
> Nevada Statewide Interoperability Coordinator
> @GJMolnar | KF2T | AFA9GM
> 
> On Aug 24, 2015, at 3:18 PM, Bill Ockert - ND0B <n...@ockert.us 
> <mailto:n...@ockert.us>> wrote:
> 
>> Mike,
>>  
>> No   I do treat RRR 73 as a valid ending when I handle it manually.  I treat 
>> RR73 as improper in both in content and in white space.     
>>  
>> Bill
>>  
>> From: Michael Black <mailto:mdblac...@gmail.com>
>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 4:53 PM
>> To: Bill Ockert - ND0B <mailto:n...@ockert.us> ; WSJT software development 
>> <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer
>>  
>> Just curious Bill -- do you treat RR73 as a valid QSO ending?
>> About 7% of users use that according to my logs.
>> 
>> Mike W9MDB
>>  
>> On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 3:40 PM, Bill Ockert - ND0B <n...@ockert.us 
>> <mailto:n...@ockert.us>> wrote:
>> Jay,
>> 
>> I do not view it as harsh.  Harsh was when I went off HF JT modes completely
>> for well over a year
>> because of it.   I am one of about five stations in ND that are on JT HF
>> modes, one
>> of about three on both JT HF modes and LOTW and one of  one on JT HF modes,
>> LOTW
>> and 12 and 160 meters.    I get on about twice a year to help folks with
>> WAS,  I am
>> not a fan of HF period so it is generally not an enjoyable experience and I
>> get a
>> resentful when folks start counting teeth...  I already know I am about
>> ready for McDonalds
>> or the glue factory.
>> 
>> Both the WSJT and WSJTX manual clearly state what is considered a minimal
>> QSO
>> and I am in complete agreement with it.   A QSO is complete when all of the
>> essential elements of if are complete and that includes one station
>> receiving an RRR.
>> 
>> If others choose to use a different format that is purely their business
>> just as it
>> is mine to choose not to accept less than the published minimal contact.
>> At one point
>> I had a much more lenient policy about that which included sending TX3 a
>> second
>> time then emailing the station letting them know what the issue was and
>> offering a
>> retry.   However I was point blank told that I had no right to tell other
>> stations what
>> to transmit, I capitulated completely and now have a policy where I
>> terminate the contact
>> immediately upon deviation from the minimal QSO and do not offer a retry.
>> The person
>> who was doing the complaining called me a crazy old ^&%$#$% when I made the
>> change
>> so it must have been exactly the right thing to do.
>> 
>> As a personal side note I was hoping to make it to 60 before that happened
>> but oh well...
>> 
>> I believe if there is going to be an auto sequencer one of its functions
>> should be to
>> enforce the minimal QSO and not facilitate less than minimal QSOs.   That is
>> both
>> for integrity of the QSO reasons and because it would be a pain to program
>> all of the
>> variations that are floating around out there.   The only question mark
>> there should
>> be for an auto sequencer is how to gracefully shut down the contact.  There
>> is a catch 22 in the logic to handle 73's that I believe is handled
>> reasonably well in the WSJT
>> ISCAT auto sequencer that I hope to move over the WSJTX.
>> 
>> For those users who feel otherwise they can always override the auto
>> sequencer and advance
>> if they feel the auto sequencer was being too strict.
>> 
>> 73 de Bill ND0B
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jay Hainline
>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 2:13 PM
>> To: WSJT software development
>> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer
>> 
>> Not logging it? That seems a little harsh. The sequencing was correct up to
>> that point. He had already received my R-signal report from me and just
>> bunched the RR73 into one transmit sequence. All I wanted to do was send the
>> 73 transmission but for QSO purposes, it was complete at that point. I did
>> manually send the 73 sequence and the QSO was logged.
>> 
>> 73 Jay
>> 
>> Jay Hainline KA9CFD
>> Colchester, IL EN40om
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bill Ockert - ND0B
>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 15:54
>> To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
>> <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer
>> 
>> The auto sequencer, while it should not have gone back to TX2, actually
>> acted in a
>> benign manner compared to what I would have done manually, namely ended the
>> contact
>> without the  benefit of logging it.
>> 
>> 73 de Bill ND0B
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Jay Hainline
>> Sent: Monday, August 24, 2015 6:56 AM
>> To: wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net 
>> <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> Subject: [wsjt-devel] sending RR73 message on JT9H with auto sequencer
>> 
>> I had a small issue this morning working a station on 6 meters using
>> WSJTX-devel r5808 using JT9H mode and auto sequencing. The station I was
>> running with sent calls followed by RR73 programmed in the TX4 message
>> button. The auto sequencer on my end got confused by this and went back to
>> TX2 to send the report again. I was wondering if this is something where the
>> auto sequencer can be programmed to be a little more flexible? I think if I
>> copy either RRR or RR73, it should go to transmit TX5 which I have as
>> sending calls and 73.
>> 
>> The station I ran with says he is using version r5803 and claims RR73 was
>> pre-set for TX4 inside that particular version he downloaded. My WSJTX 1.6.1
>> copy has always had TX4 programmed with calls and RRR.
>> 
>> 73 Jay
>> 
>> Jay Hainline KA9CFD
>> Colchester, IL EN40om
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 
>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 
>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 
>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>> 
>> 
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 
>> <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel>
>>  
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> _______________________________________________
>> wsjt-devel mailing list
>> wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel 
>> <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

Reply via email to