Hi, I think that the Fox simply ignores the “R+rpt” part of the message and takes it to be a Tx1 message. So Fox sends a report. The Hound station autoseq may not work correctly as it has not sent the Tx1 at all. A resending of the “R+rpt” should be a correct message. The Hound station sends only Tx1 and Tx3 in the protocol. Fox should not response by RR73, if it has not sent a Tx2 and received after that a R+rpt. No short-cuts allowed.
Well, it is another issue how to get operators to read user guides! 73, Reino OH3mA From: Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel [mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net] Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 5:48 PM To: Brian Moran <brian.mo...@gmail.com>; WSJT software development <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> Cc: Andy Durbin <a.dur...@msn.com> Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Making F/H idiot proof Hi Brian, The screen shot and the discussion are in the Clipperton groups.io messages. Clipperton is certainly using WSJT-X and operating as Fox. It appears the "user" saw a TX5S CQ and replied with TX3. TX5S responded with TX2. ref - https://groups.io/g/Clipperton-2024/message/388 You may need to sign up for the group to read messages. Private email if you like me to send a copy of the screen shot. I don't think this "list" will allow images. 73, Andy, k3wyc _____ From: Brian Moran <brian.mo...@gmail.com <mailto:brian.mo...@gmail.com> > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2024 8:36 AM To: WSJT software development <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > Cc: Andy Durbin <a.dur...@msn.com <mailto:a.dur...@msn.com> > Subject: Re: [wsjt-devel] Making F/H idiot proof Hi Andy; can you please help me understand the circumstances better? Under “normal” f/h operation, the hound calls with a grid. WSJT-X in fox mode can queue a caller with a grid. WSJT-X in fox mode doesn’t queue non-grid-supplying callers. If the “fox” replied to a signal report message as the first call, perhaps the fox wasn’t using f/h mode? Perhaps not using wsjt-x? The calling operator could have used the manual message selection buttons to change their message to the “fox” reflecting the circumstances, and they could have manually logged the station at the appropriate point in the sequence. It seems they might have partially done that, since if I understand what you are writing, they found and started with the TX3 message. If you could point me to more information and the screenshot, I’d like to follow up to understand this situation better. Thanks, -Brian N9ADG Sent via iPhone On Jan 24, 2024, at 7:16 AM, Andy Durbin via wsjt-devel <wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net> > wrote: As implemented in WSJT-X ver 2.6.1 the hound is able to select TX3 as their first transmission. One user has posted a screen shot showing that fox replied with a signal report but the QSO could not be completed. Since new WSJT-X ops seem reluctant to read the instructions would the developers please consider making TX3 unselectable until a signal report has been received. Thanks and 73, Andy, k3wyc _______________________________________________ wsjt-devel mailing list wsjt-devel@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto: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
