Menu
▾
▴
Re: [wsjt-devel] strange response
|
From: Al <K0...@ar...> - 2020-07-13 20:34:38
|
Ok... Just wanted to bring it to your attention.. AL, K0VM On 7/13/2020 2:10 PM, Bill Somerville wrote: > Hi Frode and Al, > > OK, I missed that obvious issue. WSJT-X has interpreted the > non-standard free text message as containing two calls 'R' and '1W'. > This is an unfortunate side effect of allowing free text messages > containing the word 73 to be substitutable with standard 73 messages. > > I think this is a case where the operator must be attentive, the Log > QSO window is displayed just for this sort of circumstance. > > 73 > Bill > G4WJS. > > On 13/07/2020 18:01, Frode Igland wrote: >> In the Log QSO window the call sign is changed from W5KDJ to 1W. Did >> that happen automatically as that was the "call sign" in the RR73 >> message that initiated the logging procedure, or is that entered >> manually by K0VM? >> >> 73 Frode LA6VQ >> >> man. 13. jul. 2020 kl. 17:56 skrev Bill Somerville >> <g4...@cl... <mailto:g4...@cl...>>: >> >> On 13/07/2020 16:44, Bill Somerville wrote: >>> On 13/07/2020 16:21, Al wrote: >>>> (wsjt-x 2.2.2 Win10 2004 ) >>>> FYI.. >>>> This sequence ended strangely.. >>>> >>>> >>>> AL, K0VM >>> >>> Hi Al, >>> >>> nothing strange there. You QSO partner acknowledged your report >>> to him, on the third resend with a non-standard message, >>> something he can do as his callsign is sufficiently short and he >>> chose not to address it to your callsign. He has sent the >>> equivalent of an RR73 message and can be seen going immediately >>> on to working another station, so I think you are perfectly OK >>> to log the QSO as complete two-way. There must always be some >>> doubt that the message "R 1W W5KDJ 73" was actually addressed to >>> you, but given the context it is probably fine. >>> >>> 73 >>> Bill >>> G4WJS. >>> >> Hi Al, >> >> note that, critically, if there had been an extra pair of periods >> between the CQ by W5KDJ at 151200, and his response at 151230, >> with no decoded message from W5KDJ. Then you could make no such >> assumption since he could be signing off with a completely >> different station, i.e. not with you. >> >> 73 >> Bill >> G4WJS. >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > wsjt-devel mailing list > wsj...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/wsjt-devel |
