Bill..have you found the FT-818ND to be compatible with the FT-817ND
backend?Perhaps should add that to the riglist so they don't feel like orphans.
Mike W9MDB
On Thursday, July 2, 2020, 07:15:04 AM CDT, Bill Somerville
<g4...@classdesign.com> wrote:
On 02/07/2020 13:02, Claude Frantz wrote:
On 7/2/20 1:27 PM, Bill Somerville wrote:
Many thanks, Bill !
there are several issues with that series of rigs (you can include the new
FT-818ND in the list too), as there are with almost all rigs. All have
workarounds, why are you asking please, that will help focus on how to answer?
I do not have any rig from this series. I'm only asking in order to remain
informed. I have observed many work, in the recent past.
Thank you !
Best wishes,
Claude (DJ0OT)
Hi Claude,
there are a few specific issues with CAT control of these rigs, which all
essentially have identical CAT protocols.
- The CAT command set is small and many rig functions cannot be queried or
set.
- There is no easy way to determine whether VFO A, VFO B, or memory is
current, just a CAT command swap them over. The basic queries of frequency and
mode simply return that of the current VFO or memory.
- The CAT command to determine if the rig is in SEND mode does not work as
advertised.
- CAT commands to change frequency are rejected if the rig is in SEND mode,
despite the fact that the rig can be tuned with the front panel VFO knob when
transmitting.
As I said, most rigs have a number of limitations and quirks, these ones are
not particularly better or worse than others.
73
Bill
G4WJS.
_______________________________________________
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
