I'm not sure what good this would do. I exchanged reports with the operation twice on 17M and once on 20M. One of the 17M contacts did not result in the RR73, just an exchange of signal reports. Of course, that exchange did not end up in the Club Log, which means it was not a valid QSO.  So, I don't see what good logging a contact without the RR73 does.

The other two contacts did show up in the Club Log. Also, the fox never sent a CQ that I heard in any of the three times I had a full or partial contact. I was copying him with a decent signal. On the 17M contact, he called me after my call was sent five times. On 20M it was after eight times. Pretty nice for a rare one. I'm not sure how much putting my transmit frequency above 3,000 Hz helped, but I tend to think it did help.

I just hope I will be able to copy them loud enough on SSB for a contact, but so far, they have not been that strong when I m on the air.

73,

John, WB9VGJ

John L. Broughton
www.wb9vgj.us
wb9...@arrl.net
2silverhon...@gmail.com

On 7/2/2018 12:57 PM, David Tiller wrote:
At least with this current dxpedition, I suggest you at least tentatively log contacts as soon as you have received a report from the fox and have sent yours.

I had been trying to contact KH1/KH7Z on 20m but the only success I had were 2 'busted' sequences. I never saw a RR73 for either of them but lo and behold both tries were logged on their side.

On Jul 2, 2018, at 15:49, Joshua B Nass <josh.n...@gmail.com <mailto:josh.n...@gmail.com>> wrote:

I let it run six attempts then I stop it. Since the RR73 is incoming from the Fox and I have all the details I need for entry into my log, I log it, then wait for the Club Log verification.  If I am in the fox log on the that band I will upload my log.

On Mon, Jul 2, 2018 at 3:07 AM, Charles Suckling <char...@sucklingfamily.free-online.co.uk <mailto:char...@sucklingfamily.free-online.co.uk>> wrote:

    Hi All

    20m conditions were a bit better today and I finally managed to
    work Baker with 100W, lots of feeder loss and a sloping dipole.

    The problem I had was, after receiving my report from KH7Z, I
    failed to receive RR73.  Thanks to Bill’s advice to start over
    again (TX1 message), on the 4^th QSO attempt (this time with
    G4KGC in the shack)  I finally got my RR73.  Within about 5
    sequences they came back again with a report again, and QSO
    attempts proceeded normally.

    Decoding was reasonably reliable at the time.  It seems  they did
    not receive my TX3 message, hence did not send RR73, rather than
    me not decoding the RR73.

    What became apparent was that under these circumstances my TX
    freq was shifted three times, then stuck on the final frequency
    and transmissions would have continued at infinitum:

    I guess this is what is expected as the User guide para 14 says:

    <image002.jpg>

    Here is an example of one of the failed attempts:

    083545 Tx 3056 ~ KH7Z G3WDG IO92

    083630 -13 -0.5 390 ~ G3WDG KH7Z -15

    083645 Tx 390 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-13

    083700 -16 -0.6 389 ~ G3WDG KH7Z -15

    083715 Tx 389 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-16

    083730 -14 -0.6 330 ~ G3WDG KH7Z -15

    083745 Tx 330 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    083815 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    083845 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    083915 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    083945 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    084015 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    084045 Tx 630 ~ KH7Z G3WDG R-14

    After moving to 630 it stayed there and continued transmitting
    until I intervened, thinking that the QSO had failed and I was
    unnecessarily causing QRM.

    Should I have waited longer for Fox to respond?

    In the situation where hounds to not receive their  RR73,
     presumably  a wall of QRM below 1000 develops for Fox making it
    more difficult for QSOs to complete?  I saw other stations in the
    same fix as I was, repeating their TX3 messages for many periods.

    73

    Charlie



    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Avast logo
    
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
        

    This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
    www.avast.com
    
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>




    
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
    engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://Slashdot.org>!
    http://sdm.link/slashdot <http://sdm.link/slashdot>
    _______________________________________________
    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>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org <http://Slashdot.org>! http://sdm.link/slashdot <http://sdm.link/slashdot>
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
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
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
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
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel

Reply via email to