Hi Bill,
could it be implemented it such that, if set, "Skip Tx 1" is simply
ignored if the dx call is a compound callsign?
In fact the whole Tx1/RR73 thing might be boiled down to a more generic
option, like "minimal", or "optimise", or similar - i.e. attempt to use
the least number of exchanges to achieve a valid qso, that would
automatically take things like compound callsigns into account. Sounds
very tweaky though...
Regards, Mark
On 20/07/2017 17:27, Bill Somerville wrote:
On 20/07/2017 17:19, AB1NJ wrote:
I see the discussion on the RR73, but possibly more important is a
easy way to skip TX1 message, in order to send a report (normally
TX2) on first reply to CQ instead of grid. A checkbox would be
obvious solution. Thoughts?
Hi Rob,
I am considering it. Like the RR73 issue, some investigation needs to
be done into how it might work for those with compound callsigns.
Skipping Tx1 may lock out compound callsign holders in several
scenarios which seems harsh to me especially if it is combined with
using RR73 to truncate QSOs.
Clearly 6m multi-hop Es and similar on other bands could be a driving
force to skip Tx1 but if that were to exclude compound call holders
then I would probably prefer to use FT8 for stronger signal openings
and JT65/9/QRA64 for weaker signal openings/paths.
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
