CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?

To: k9yc@arrl.net
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?
From: "Alan M. Eshleman" <doctore@well.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 16:27:19 -0800 (PST)
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
anything can be rewritten--any system can be subverted.  

----- Original Message -----
From: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: cq-contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 12:08:38 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Robotic contest operating, why knot?

On 12/18/2018 11:41 AM, Alan M. Eshleman wrote:
>   If I had an automated CQ (which doesn't seem that technically difficult) 
> that would have been a fully computer controlled QSO.  What am I missing here?

WSJT-X was intentionally written so that operator intervention is 
required before you can have another QSO.

73, Jim K9YC
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>