Hi Bruce,
Yes, RR73 is kind of like (in networking) a UDP datagram - you send it
and hope for the best. Or a more real world example would be a letter
sent first class through the mail.
There used to be ops who would forego the R, RRR or RR73 and just log
the QSO and hope for the best. YOu probably are encountering some of
those OR bad propagation.
I manually monitor each of my FT8 exchanges.
So it's not quite automated robowars like the FUD would indicate.
73
Ria, N2RJ
On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 21:56, Bruce Horn <bhorn@hornucopia.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Ria,
>
> Thanks for your reply. It represents the practice implemented by WSJT-X when
> the standard messages and sequence are used. However, here are several common
> examples I experienced today during the contest:
>
> Example 1: - very common
> CQ TEST WA7BNM DM04
> WA7BNM K1ABCD EM01
> K1ABCD WA7BNM R DM04
> K1ABCD WA7BNM R DM04
> K1ABCD WA7BNM R DM04
> (and so on until I terminate the QSO because no RR73, etc was received, or
> maybe K1ABCD finally sends RR73.)
>
> Example 2: - frequent
> CQ TEST WA7BNM DM04
> WA7BNM K2ABCD EM01
> K2ABCD WA7BNM R DM04
> WA7BNM K2ABCD EM01
> K2ABCD WA7BNM R DM04
> (and so on)
>
> Example 3: - probably why you need a confirmation
> CQ TEST WA7BNM DM04
> WA7BNM K3ABCD EM03
> K3ABC WA7BNM R DM04
> DX1ABC K3ABC RR73
> CQ TEST K3ABC EM03
> (huh? what happened?)
>
> In Example 1, I believe the respondent (K1ABCD) believes that all they need
> is my acknowledgement of their exchange ("R" and then my grid). This is
> equivalent to the typical contest exchange like CQWW. So they think the QSO
> is complete. The fact that WSJT-X provides the exchange (grid) in the CQ
> message starts the QSO "dance" differently than the typical CW/SSB contest:
> WA7BNM sends: CQ TEST WA7BNM
> K1ABCD sends: K1ABCD
> WA7BNM sends: K1ABCD 599 03
> K1ABCD sends: 599 05
> WA7BNM sends: TU CQ TEST WA7BNM
>
> It would be beneficial if WSJT-X more closely followed the typical contest
> practice, or it needs to be widely publicized whether WA7BNM should have
> treated the QSO as complete after K1ABCD's first transmission in Example 1.
>
> 73 de Bruce, WA7BNM (bhorn@hornucopia.com)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Ria Jairam" <rjairam@gmail.com>
> To: "Edward Sawyer" <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>
> Cc: "Bruce Horn" <bhorn@hornucopia.com>, "cq-contest"
> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 9:45:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] When is a FTn Contest QSO Complete?
>
> The accepted norm is already there.
>
> It's when each side gets one of an "R, RRR or RR73."
>
> The software can be configured to pop up the logging window when this
> condition is met and is the most common mode of operation.
>
> Contest mode even logs automatically.
>
> Yes there are some hams who insist on a 73 but there are also hams who
> will try to ask your name or the weather during a SSB contest. Log it
> and move on.
>
> 73
> Ria, N2RJ
>
> On Sat, 31 Aug 2019 at 00:41, Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com> wrote:
> >
> > Like existing contests not using FT4/8 - over time an accepted norm will
> > end up occurring. At the end of the day, if you have it in your log and
> > they have it in their log, with the right information, it's a good Q,
> > right? Many of us have logged a Q that we were 95% sure was good and 95%
> > of the time - it's a verified Q on the other end. Will the software
> > actually allow such judgment calls? Not sure.
> >
> > The way Bruce describes it, sure sounds like a lot of QRM causing
> > inefficiency happening.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Ed N1UR
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> > rjairam@gmail.com
> > Sent: Friday, August 30, 2019 10:07 PM
> > To: Bruce Horn
> > Cc: cq-contest
> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] When is a FTn Contest QSO Complete?
> >
> > QSO is over when each side acknowledges receipt.
> >
> > This can be RR73, RRR or 73.
> >
> > Not before.
> >
> > Ria
> > N2RJ
> >
> > On Fri, 30 Aug 2019 at 21:50, Bruce Horn <bhorn@hornucopia.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > OK, I'm a newbie at FTn, but managed a few QSOs the last couple of days.
> > > During today's practice session I noticed that some never completed the
> > > QSO with an acknowledgement like (R or 73) for FT4 in contest mode. As a
> > > result the WSJT-X sequencer kept sending the grid, looking for a
> > > response, and no logging was initiated. This seemed like the other
> > > station was trying to save a cycle. Should such QSOs be logged, or are
> > > they incomplete? Thanks.
> > >
> > > 73 de Bruce, WA7BNM (bhorn@hornucopia.com)
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|