Hi Mike,
On 07/02/2017 04:45, Black Michael wrote:
In that case it could be simplified to just the start of Tx 2 or 3.
CQ/Tx 1 still not being even close in too many circumstances.
Why is Tx 1 not the start of a QSO?
I'd like to see exactly what is being reported as inaccurate and what
they are claiming is the "correct" time since it is rather subjective.
It is because the current implementation attempts to backdate QSO start
in a way that is error prone, for example it assumes a CQ but a sked has
no CQ call. Result is that many start times are two periods before the
first transmission, maybe even when the band or frequency is elsewhere
or the computer and radio not even switched on.
The way I see it is on tx/rx of 1st message.
I'm not sure Rx time of the first message should really be considered,
for example I could decode a station calling me but ignore it while
doing something else that might include me making other QSOs or I could
just be leaving the shack for a meal. That Rx message is not the start
of any subsequent QSO.
What do you think of my suggestion to Andy?
"Maybe something like:
The time of the first transmission of a standard message that is not CQ
or QRZ for a new DX call. DX call here being defined as the base call to
allow for the discovery of a compound call part way through a QSO."
73
Bill
G4WJS.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
