6254Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
- Aug 2, 2009While in theory, the report could be useful as an unknown piece of
information, in practice I've only received a non-26 report a couple of
times out of hundreds of MS contacts. If everyone sends 26 all the time,
then the report is not an unknown piece of information. Very few WSJT users
have ever take the time to understand what the report even means. Searching
the Internet for the HSMS reporting standard, I found three different sets
of info on the first three web sites that I visited. The only agreement was
that the the first number is always in the range 2-5 and the second number
is in the range 6-9. This means that in addition to 26 and 27, there have
been occasions when I should have sent 37 or 49 or 59 depending on which the
of the below tables you believe. Of course, that would confuse even the
most experienced WSJT users who apparently believe that the only valid
report is 26 or 27.
The 3 different definitions of signal report that I found are (first number
in the first column, 2nd number in the second column):
2 : up to 0.5 sec. 6 : below S2 or below 5dB
3 : 0.5 - 1 sec. 7 : from S2 to S3 or from 5 dB to 10 dB
4 : 1 - 5 sec. 8 : from S4 to S5 or from 10 db to 15 dB
5 : longer than 5 sec. 9 : above S5 or above 15 dB
2 : up to 5 sec. 6 : up to S3
3 : 5 - 15 sec. 7 : S4 - S5
4 : 15 - 60 sec. 8 : S6 - S7
5 : longer than 60 sec. 9 : S8 and stronger
2 : up to 5 sec. 6 : up to S3
3 : 5 - 20 sec. 7 : S4 - S5
4 : 20 - 120 sec. 8 : S6 - S7
5 : longer than 120 sec. 9 : S8 and stronger
I think the middle table is the most common for Region 2, but I'm not
Your argument about usage of shorthands is a good one, although I try not to
use them more often than absolutely necessary. I've observed too many
occasions where I could decode two or more separate QSOs on the same
frequency (usually the calling frequency). Shorthand messages make it
impossible to be sure whose report you are receiving. In general, I think
that shorthand transmissions should not be acceptable on the calling
frequency. It's just too easy to receive a SH message from the wrong
WSJT definitely makes HSMS contacts easier for most of us who don't copy
40-60WPM CW. However, we have to be careful that we don't have a system in
place where it is too easy to complete QSOs without an actual valid
exchange. We see the same thing on HF DXpeditions where the CW ops only
send their callsign once every 5-10 minutes and always give a 599 report.
The only real exchange you get is hearing your callsign repeated back to
you. It doesn't feel like a valid contact, although it ends up in the log.
I still prefer using grids because if you get a full decode on the callsigns
and grid square then you know you've had a valid contact. Decoding 26 from
every station is about as satisfying as receiving a 599 from a CW op who
still doesn't have your callsign correct.
That said, I still use the report method most often, because I find many ops
aren't familar with the grid reporting system and don't even know that WSJT
supports it. I would like it if we could develop one reporting system that
is acceptable to most and works for daily QSOs and contest QSOs. I usually
work several WSJT contacts during each contest, but it's definitely not easy
with the current dual-report system.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Randy Tipton" <wa5ufh@...>
To: <email@example.com>; "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
> Clay, both wsjt meteor modes default to 26 or 27. The use of "Grid" as a
> report is
> for contests & rover contacts where the station calling does not know the
> of the rover station.
> I believe the 26 / 27 reports are very useful for high speed meteor
> scatter contacts.
> For two meters more so than six meters, the decoded pings could be in
> total time
> less than 2 - 3 seconds. The standard reports when sent as "single tones"
> have about
> a 3 dB advantage over the multitone 26 or 27. Thus you have a significant
> over sending multitones. The two stations do not know what report they
> will receive
> prior to the contact attempt starting. In other words you don't say Joe
> you go first
> on 144.119 and we will use 26 as reports.
> The definition of a "contacts" is that some piece of information must be
> that is unknown before the "contact attempt" starts.
> In my mind here is the problem with using "Grids" as a report. Unless both
> stations are "rover" and the grids are unknown before the contact starts
> the "unknown information" is not an element of the contact. Thus I believe
> use of 26 or 27 is better suited for reports.
> What is the difference between 26 and 27. Some would say "one". However
> I do not know the answer to that question and for me I alternate the use
> 26 & 27 at will. The 26 / 27 is really not so much a "report" bur rather
> "unknown" information exchanged to make a legal completion.
> That being said; I believe that contacts especially on two meters and
> are hard enough and the use of the single tone messages enhances the
> chances of a contact.
> When I personally started operating meteor scatter, I was only making six
> meter contacts. By the way, very few hsms operators initially on six
> That is why I went to two meters because of the lack of operators on six
> After going to two meters I discovered how important it was to keep
> lengths short as possible and use those single tones because they shorten
> On six meters this is not as critical, you generally get plenty of long
> burns, and
> fewer pings. The difference is like day and dark. That is why JT6M just
> not work on two meters, ping width is too short.
> Yet another reason to use the standard reports is I can decode RRR , 26
> and 27 via my ears. If you're not tone deaf, you can actually decode
> signals with the ears than wsjt decodes. So this is an advantage also
> my ole ears can not decode the first grid square. hi
> Sorry for the rambling and hope this helps...
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
> To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 10:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
>> Having two different options for exchanges on FSK441 and JT6M is
>> In reality, the standard report doesn't provide any useful signal report
>> info, since most ops never send anything other than 26 (sort of like 5NN
>> CW). The only purpose it serves is to differentiate between TX2 and TX3.
>> Personally, I'd like to see only grid reports used. Grids are unique and
>> provide a real, unique report that is consistent with the way most 6M and
>> QSOs are reported. It also eliminates the confusion that I've seen in
>> contests when one person is using the grid system and the other person is
>> using the signal report system (usually an op who is not in the contest).
>> I've had to reject good contacts during a contest because I couldn't get
>> other op to send his grid to me. Having only one reporting system that
>> consistent with other VHF/UHF operations makes a lot more sense to me.
>> I think having the grid included with the CQ is useful. I've decoded
>> signals from a good rock when I was pointed the wrong way. Knowing the
>> allowed me to move the beam and increase the probability of completing
>> contact in a short time (I have long boom antennas on 6M and 2M with
>> beamwidths). This is good for everyone because more contacts can be made
>> the small frequency range that is used during the relatively short MS
>> each day.
>> Am I the only one who thinks this is logical?
>> Clay W7CE
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jim Kennedy" <kennedyjp@...>
>> To: "'Al'" <wa4ewv@...>; <email@example.com>; "'Randy
>> Tipton'" <wa5ufh@...>
>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 2:39 PM
>> Subject: RE: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
>>> Hi Gang, I agree with both Tip and Al for the same reasons. The pings
>>> are short enough in most cases without cluttering it up with unnecessary
>>> data. The WSJT manual was well thought out and is effective whether
>>> using the grid or signal report format. Use what is recommended in the
>>> manual and you can't go wrong. My nickels worth.
>>> Jim W6OUU DN22sn
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com] On
>>> Behalf Of Al
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 9:05 PM
>>> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; Randy Tipton
>>> Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
>>> Hi Tip and the MS gang:
>>> I do not see how a grid gets into TX1 except in JT65B. The options menu
>>> plainly states that the two message templates are for FSK441 and JT6M,
>>> and neither message template puts the grid in TX1. SO, anyone sending
>>> their grid in TX1 has entered it manually - either in the template area
>>> or by typing it into TX1. Not good.
>>> Like you said, the grid can be seen in TX2 or TX3 if the grid option is
>>> chosen. It does not belong in TX1.
>>> Consider this "mind set":
>>> I work a lot of EME. JT65 A B C etc. has the grid in TX1. "Hmmm, I
>>> wonder why it isn't in TX1 on FSK441 or JT6M -- I'll just put it there
>>> -- if it is good for EME then it must be good for HSMS." NOT!
>>> Anyhow, I couldn't help but agree with you and throw in my two cents in.
>>> Use the canned messages only.
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: Randy Tipton <mailto:wa5ufh@...>
>>> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:email@example.com> ps.com
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 1:47 PM
>>> Subject: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?
>>> Not a big issue but lets consider this...
>>> The use of the "Grid" square in Tx1 message has fooled me a few times.
>>> The SOP & messages as designed are supposed to be bullet proof. That is
>>> there should be no reason to doubt any message received provided the SOP
>>> is being followed.
>>> I know several are using the "Grid" format in Tx1. I am not "picking on
>>> anyone" but am questioning the practice. (If it is good we should all be
>>> using it) Could be I am missing something and it is a good thing adding
>>> to messages. I am interested in hearing what others think.
>>> I believe we are 'drifting' away from the SOP and that I believe will
>>> question to our contacts and accomplishments.
>>> Lets say a station K5ME is sending CQ. I answer him with Tx1. After 20
>>> minutes I receive partial calls and 10 minutes latter I receive his call
>>> plus grid.
>>> It might look like this...
>>> KGME WA5UFH (First Decode after 20 minutes or more)
>>> K5ME EM00 (second ping received ...)
>>> Now I think, ok he is using "Grid" as report. A complete message would
>>> be in my mind at the time that he is sending ...
>>> WA5UFH EM00 K5ME EM00EM00
>>> I now have both calls and it appears he is sending something different.
>>> really don't know what is going on except to assume he is using "Grids"
>>> as reports or he has a "non-standard" message Tx1entered.
>>> If I assumed the EM00 was his report and start sending His Rgr plus
>>> Report I
>>> am wrong... he is still sending Tx1 with a "non-standard msg" ... busted
>>> I assume K5ME is "Portable" or "Using Grids as a Reports ... "This
>>> not happen... If I assume it is part of msg tx2 them I move to tx3 ...
>>> bottom line is a busted contact.
>>> I believe the use of "Grid" in Tx1 serves no purpose. If the contact is
>>> schedule the other station already knows your Grid. If a Random contact
>>> it doesn't matter since the station decoding already has a good enough
>>> antenna az direction to complete a qso and decode because he already
>>> has decoded both calls. Antenna az pointing is not that critical but
>>> that is
>>> another issue.
>>> The use of grids as a report does have a place in HSMS. I believe it has
>>> good uses.
>>> Grids are used as reports in most contests and by rovers but notice they
>>> not necessary in message Tx1 even for these situations. Not all rovers
>>> using PJ and the Grid as a Report works great to let the other person
>>> I am possibly in a new grid or am a new initial contact for them while
>>> that "Unknown" piece of information required for a "contact". In this
>>> standard reports 26 and 27 are not exchanged.
>>> During contests it is a required part of the contact exchange so using
>>> it as a "Rpt" serves both purposes. I have worked N5SIX rover in many
>>> and I captured all those grids in his "Report" or "CQ". Rovers may wish
>>> use their grid
>>> in a CQ but it can cause confusion if repeated in Tx1.
>>> With six meters there might be less concern for message length but the
>>> SOP should be followed. For two meters the message length is more
>>> I have had busted contacts on two meters because I never got Both Calls
>>> did get a single call with a "Grid"! Receiving A5UFH K5ME EM00 is
>>> frustrating after running 20 - 30 minutes into a schedule. I needed both
>>> and had the ping width large enough to get the missing "W" but instead I
>>> a "Grid".
>>> The below is copied from the SOP:
>>> "REQUIREMENTS FOR A QSO:
>>> The same as for any mode of operation or propagation - an exchange of
>>> call signs, an exchange of some type of information or report, and an
>>> exchange of confirmation of reception of the report or information."
>>> (Somewhere the ARRL has documented what constitutes a contact. I could
>>> not find that definition but the above is close to its wording.
>>> The "Some type of information" could be a wx report, single report,
>>> name, State etc. but with HSMS using FSK441 it is 26 or 27. The
>>> exception is
>>> during a contest requiring grid square exchange or maybe a portable
>>> not using
>>> PJ. Rovers or Portable stations using "PJ assist" generally use standard
>>> and share the Grid location on the logger.
>>> When using Grid as a report, only use the first (4) characters. I have
>>> some who sent (6)! Example: R EL19pa R EL19pa ... too much hi
>>> I believe we should reframe from using the Grid in Tx1 because it
>>> is not needed or required and can only add confusion. I would be
>>> in seeing how others feel about this issue.
>>> We all have taken the liberty of using the 73 message or after the final
>>> Rogers are received by both stations to send short messages. TNX QSO
>>> or NICE PINGS etc.
>>> My thoughts on Tx1 msg's in a nut shell... Use only the Tx1 canned
>>> for all situations.
>> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
>> WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>