Hi!
Funny I had to read Alan's reply from mail archive (web), I did not get
that mail at all.
if you calling CQ (TX1) and someone(s) answer to it qso starts from
point you start first TX2 transmission (to any of answering stations).
It is very clear. There is no exchange happened yet, and your TX2 will
start the exchange chain (= qso).
Same if you try to answer someones CQ. Once he sends first TX2 qso begins.
In case of missed TX2 receive you will get different start time than the
opponent, that is true. How ever the base of qso starting definition is
clear.
End time of qso is more or less unclear. It is clear (by rules) when
both sides have exchanged reports and got confirmation to them.
You get confirmation with report as "R-xx" and you confirm it by sending
"RRR" or "RR73".
What I mean "unclear" is that someone requires 73 after RRR or RR73 to
see the qso complete, someone else do not.
There has been lot of conversation about this in past and I do not want
to make another "split argue" with this.
My 5 cents is that _/qso /__/start time is easier to define/_ so that
all can agree with definition and should be used with Cabrillo, like it
is used with CW and phone, too.
How ever the periodical exchange and poor conditions can make big
differences in log times. That is the thing that contest log checkers
should take account when defining accepted time windows for qso checks
with FT8 qsos. It is different than with CW/Phone.
And it is not getting any easier of one logging program uses "time_on"
and other "time_off" when producing Cabrillo log.
--
Saku
OH1KH
Reino Talarmo via wsjt-devel kirjoitti 11.5.2023 klo 10.08:
Hi Saku and Alan,
I think that Alan already pointed a least indirectly that the definition of
the actual start time is a bit more difficult than a defining end time.
_______________________________________________
wsjt-devel mailing list
wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel
