On 02/12/2017 07:01 p.m., John Broughton wrote:
Here is a copy of our transmissions. Your call showed up as TI3/W7RI
on your CQ. The generated messages from me just had W7RI in them,
except my 73 message which had TI3/W7RI. Your responses during the QSO
showed W7RI with TI3/W7RI showing up again in your 73. I assume this is
the way it is supposed to work.
183015 8 1.0 1607 ~ CQ TI3/W7RI EJ89
171202_183030 Transmitting 21.074 MHz FT8: W7RI WB9VGJ DM34
171202_183100 Transmitting 21.074 MHz FT8: W7RI WB9VGJ DM34
183115 7 1.0 1607 ~ WB9VGJ W7RI +11
171202_183130 Transmitting 21.074 MHz FT8: W7RI WB9VGJ R+07
183145 10 1.0 1607 ~ WB9VGJ W7RI RRR
171202_183200 Transmitting 21.074 MHz FT8: TI3/W7RI 73
183215 5 1.0 1607 ~ DE TI3/W7RI 73
BTW, thanks for the QSO.
My pleasure, John.
Yes, that's the way it's supposed to work with compound call signs. And
as long as everyone uses the standard messages with the current
software, everything works just fine with them. The problems that arise
happen when calls used are not in a standard message, or are not in a
standard autosequence series. You were not answered on the first try
because someone else in the pileup decoded before you did, and got
worked before you were. I'm really looking forward to the "fox and
hound" protocol for working pileups, which account for the bulk of
stations I work. It should speed things up considerably and increase my
QSO throughput considerably from what I am hearing about it. Other
stations here locally I have talked to have expressed similar eagerness
for it.
Technically, FT8 and similar protocols are of questionable legality
here, since our local rules stipulate that the full, unabbreviated call
signs of the station being worked, as well as my full, unabbreviated
call sign must be transmitted at the beginning and end of a series of
transmissions, and "frequently" in between - but they don't say anything
about the use of abbreviated calls during a series. But since no one
here has yet been cited for identification infractions using FT8 or
other WSJT modes, I suspect that it's not being considered by them to be
a problem, since my full call sign is transmitted during the CQ, and
during the 73 sequence, and the other station's full call is transmitted
by me at some point in between. Presumably, that seems to satisfy the
regulator here locally, as they have not yet said anything about it.
The exception would arise when I, with my compound call, will be working
another station with a compound call. Haven't encountered that one yet
to see how that one works out.
73,
Scott Bidstrup
TI3/W7RI
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
