Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?

Expand Messages
  • Randy Tipton
    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
    Message 1 of 18 , Aug 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      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
      location
      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
      advantage
      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
      copied
      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
      them
      the "unknown information" is not an element of the contact. Thus I believe
      the
      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 of
      26 & 27 at will. The 26 / 27 is really not so much a "report" bur rather the
      "unknown" information exchanged to make a legal completion.

      That being said; I believe that contacts especially on two meters and above
      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 meters.
      That is why I went to two meters because of the lack of operators on six
      meters.
      After going to two meters I discovered how important it was to keep message
      lengths short as possible and use those single tones because they shorten
      contacts.
      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 does
      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 weaker
      signals with the ears than wsjt decodes. So this is an advantage also being
      my ole ears can not decode the first grid square. hi

      Sorry for the rambling and hope this helps...

      Tip





      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
      To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
      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
      > confusing.
      > 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
      > on
      > 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
      > up
      > 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
      > the
      > other op to send his grid to me. Having only one reporting system that is
      > consistent with other VHF/UHF operations makes a lot more sense to me.
      > BTW,
      > 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
      > grid
      > allowed me to move the beam and increase the probability of completing the
      > contact in a short time (I have long boom antennas on 6M and 2M with
      > narrow
      > beamwidths). This is good for everyone because more contacts can be made
      > in
      > the small frequency range that is used during the relatively short MS
      > window
      > each day.
      >
      > Am I the only one who thinks this is logical?
      >
      > 73,
      > Clay W7CE
      >
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: "Jim Kennedy" <kennedyjp@...>
      > To: "'Al'" <wa4ewv@...>; <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On
      >> Behalf Of Al
      >> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 9:05 PM
      >> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com; 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.
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> 73,
      >>
      >> Al
      >>
      >> WA4EWV
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >>
      >> From: Randy Tipton <mailto:wa5ufh@...>
      >>
      >> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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
      >> bring
      >> 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)
      >> latter..
      >> 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.
      >> I
      >> 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
      >>
      >> contact...
      >>
      >> I assume K5ME is "Portable" or "Using Grids as a Reports ... "This
      >> should
      >> 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
      >> a
      >> 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
      >> two
      >> good uses.
      >>
      >> Grids are used as reports in most contests and by rovers but notice they
      >> are
      >> not necessary in message Tx1 even for these situations. Not all rovers
      >> are
      >> using PJ and the Grid as a Report works great to let the other person
      >> know
      >> I am possibly in a new grid or am a new initial contact for them while
      >> providing
      >> that "Unknown" piece of information required for a "contact". In this
      >> case
      >> the
      >> 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
      >> grids
      >> and I captured all those grids in his "Report" or "CQ". Rovers may wish
      >> to
      >> 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
      >> important.
      >> I have had busted contacts on two meters because I never got Both Calls
      >> but
      >> 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
      >>
      >> calls
      >> and had the ping width large enough to get the missing "W" but instead I
      >> got
      >> 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
      >> both
      >> 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,
      >> first
      >> 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
      >> station
      >> not using
      >> PJ. Rovers or Portable stations using "PJ assist" generally use standard
      >>
      >> messages
      >> and share the Grid location on the logger.
      >>
      >> When using Grid as a report, only use the first (4) characters. I have
      >> copied
      >> 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
      >> clearly
      >> is not needed or required and can only add confusion. I would be
      >> interested
      >> 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
      >> message
      >> for all situations.
      >>
      >> Tip
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
      > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Clay W7CE
      While 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
      Message 2 of 18 , Aug 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        While 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
        absolutely sure.

        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
        station.

        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.

        73,
        Clay W7CE


        ----- Original Message -----
        From: "Randy Tipton" <wa5ufh@...>
        To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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
        > location
        > 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
        > advantage
        > 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
        > copied
        > 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
        > them
        > the "unknown information" is not an element of the contact. Thus I believe
        > the
        > 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
        > of
        > 26 & 27 at will. The 26 / 27 is really not so much a "report" bur rather
        > the
        > "unknown" information exchanged to make a legal completion.
        >
        > That being said; I believe that contacts especially on two meters and
        > above
        > 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
        > meters.
        > That is why I went to two meters because of the lack of operators on six
        > meters.
        > After going to two meters I discovered how important it was to keep
        > message
        > lengths short as possible and use those single tones because they shorten
        > contacts.
        > 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
        > does
        > 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
        > weaker
        > signals with the ears than wsjt decodes. So this is an advantage also
        > being
        > my ole ears can not decode the first grid square. hi
        >
        > Sorry for the rambling and hope this helps...
        >
        > Tip
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ----- Original Message -----
        > From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
        > To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
        > 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
        >> confusing.
        >> 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
        >> on
        >> 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
        >> up
        >> 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
        >> the
        >> other op to send his grid to me. Having only one reporting system that
        >> is
        >> consistent with other VHF/UHF operations makes a lot more sense to me.
        >> BTW,
        >> 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
        >> grid
        >> allowed me to move the beam and increase the probability of completing
        >> the
        >> contact in a short time (I have long boom antennas on 6M and 2M with
        >> narrow
        >> beamwidths). This is good for everyone because more contacts can be made
        >> in
        >> the small frequency range that is used during the relatively short MS
        >> window
        >> each day.
        >>
        >> Am I the only one who thinks this is logical?
        >>
        >> 73,
        >> Clay W7CE
        >>
        >>
        >> ----- Original Message -----
        >> From: "Jim Kennedy" <kennedyjp@...>
        >> To: "'Al'" <wa4ewv@...>; <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On
        >>> Behalf Of Al
        >>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 9:05 PM
        >>> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com; 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.
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>> 73,
        >>>
        >>> Al
        >>>
        >>> WA4EWV
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>> ----- Original Message -----
        >>>
        >>> From: Randy Tipton <mailto:wa5ufh@...>
        >>>
        >>> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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
        >>> bring
        >>> 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)
        >>> latter..
        >>> 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.
        >>> I
        >>> 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
        >>>
        >>> contact...
        >>>
        >>> I assume K5ME is "Portable" or "Using Grids as a Reports ... "This
        >>> should
        >>> 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
        >>> a
        >>> 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
        >>> two
        >>> good uses.
        >>>
        >>> Grids are used as reports in most contests and by rovers but notice they
        >>> are
        >>> not necessary in message Tx1 even for these situations. Not all rovers
        >>> are
        >>> using PJ and the Grid as a Report works great to let the other person
        >>> know
        >>> I am possibly in a new grid or am a new initial contact for them while
        >>> providing
        >>> that "Unknown" piece of information required for a "contact". In this
        >>> case
        >>> the
        >>> 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
        >>> grids
        >>> and I captured all those grids in his "Report" or "CQ". Rovers may wish
        >>> to
        >>> 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
        >>> important.
        >>> I have had busted contacts on two meters because I never got Both Calls
        >>> but
        >>> 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
        >>>
        >>> calls
        >>> and had the ping width large enough to get the missing "W" but instead I
        >>> got
        >>> 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
        >>> both
        >>> 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,
        >>> first
        >>> 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
        >>> station
        >>> not using
        >>> PJ. Rovers or Portable stations using "PJ assist" generally use standard
        >>>
        >>> messages
        >>> and share the Grid location on the logger.
        >>>
        >>> When using Grid as a report, only use the first (4) characters. I have
        >>> copied
        >>> 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
        >>> clearly
        >>> is not needed or required and can only add confusion. I would be
        >>> interested
        >>> 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
        >>> message
        >>> for all situations.
        >>>
        >>> Tip
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> ------------------------------------
        >>
        >> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
        >> wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
        >>
        >> WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> Yahoo! Groups Links
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
      • Randy Tipton
        Clay, interesting data you have shared. I believe if WSJT had been the first HSMS program developed we probably wouldn t be having this conversation. The three
        Message 3 of 18 , Aug 2, 2009
        • 0 Attachment
          Clay, interesting data you have shared. I believe if WSJT had been the first
          HSMS program developed we probably wouldn't be having this conversation. The
          three different definitions of signal reports you found are over a period of
          time prior to WSJT. You are probably right that most operators today are
          unfamiliar with that concept of reporting. It is interesting to to look back
          to see how the report was once figured. If WSJT had been the first HSMS
          program the reports would have probably been 26 or 27 period. With HSCW
          there were no Short Hand Messages (single tones) to my knowledge. I only
          used HSCW about 6 months then WSJT was introduced, difference between night
          and day. (Thanks to Joe!) Because of WSJT many new operators joined the
          ranks, not so much because they didn't know code, because you could slow it
          down to whatever speed you wanted after receiving a ping, but because the
          new WSJT decoded pings "in print" and the user screens was simple compared
          to the older programs. Also the older HSCW program was not updated and
          didn't work on latter versions of windows. The program also was not free, if
          I remember seems like it cost about fifty dollars. (sorry getting off topic)

          Actually with WSJT in the column under "Rpt" it calculates a recommended
          report for the user to send. It often times is something besides the
          traditional 26 or 27. I forget how Joe figured that variable but I believe
          it is published somewhere. I have no problem receiving "Grids" as a report.
          In fact that was my initial statement that having the Grid as part of Tx1
          had fooled me several times because I though it was the report being sent to
          me. If someone used 26 in msg # 1 that would cause me confusion just like
          using the "Grid" in message #1.

          I copied the below our of the WSJT Users Guide & Reference Manual. In the
          manual it mentions the use of Appended messages on frequencies where
          activity levels are high. I believe that statement would have been better
          written "on any shared frequency short hand messages should be avoided".
          That would certainly include the calling frequencies. I agree with you that
          "only appended messages" should be used on the calling frequency. I realize
          that I am probably alone on this but in my opinion the call frequency should
          be for calling only with the exception of activity periods like random hour.
          In fact at the top of the PJ page we all see the statement "Remember, in
          North America, 50.260MHz and 144.140MHz are calling not operating
          frequencies".

          Snip:
          FSK441 also provides a special shorthand format to transmit a few simple
          messages in a highly efficient way. Check Sh Msg to enable shorthand
          messages. The supported shorthands are R26, R27, RRR, and 73, and FSK441
          sends pure tones at 882, 1323, 1764, or 2205 Hz to convey these messages. If
          activity levels are high enough that there could be some doubt about who has
          transmitted a shorthand message, it is better to use normal messages tagged
          with callsigns or portions thereof.

          A typical minimal QSO in FSK441 or JT6M modes might look something like the
          following:
          1. CQ K1JT
          2. K1JT W8WN
          3. W8WN K1JT 27
          4. JT R26
          5. WN RRR
          6. 73 W8WN

          Clay thanks for all your input, at 1872 miles we will never work via meteor
          scatter but if we could, I would be ready to accept "Grids" as reports. Hi

          Tip
          WA5UFH


          ----- Original Message -----
          From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
          To: "Randy Tipton" <wa5ufh@...>; <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
          Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 3:00 PM
          Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?


          > While 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
          > absolutely sure.
          >
          > 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
          > station.
          >
          > 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.
          >
          > 73,
          > Clay W7CE
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          > From: "Randy Tipton" <wa5ufh@...>
          > To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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
          >> location
          >> 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
          >> advantage
          >> 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
          >> copied
          >> 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
          >> them
          >> the "unknown information" is not an element of the contact. Thus I
          >> believe the
          >> 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
          >> of
          >> 26 & 27 at will. The 26 / 27 is really not so much a "report" bur rather
          >> the
          >> "unknown" information exchanged to make a legal completion.
          >>
          >> That being said; I believe that contacts especially on two meters and
          >> above
          >> 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
          >> meters.
          >> That is why I went to two meters because of the lack of operators on six
          >> meters.
          >> After going to two meters I discovered how important it was to keep
          >> message
          >> lengths short as possible and use those single tones because they shorten
          >> contacts.
          >> 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
          >> does
          >> 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
          >> weaker
          >> signals with the ears than wsjt decodes. So this is an advantage also
          >> being
          >> my ole ears can not decode the first grid square. hi
          >>
          >> Sorry for the rambling and hope this helps...
          >>
          >> Tip
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >>
          >> ----- Original Message -----
          >> From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
          >> To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
          >> 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
          >>> confusing.
          >>> 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
          >>> on
          >>> 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 up
          >>> 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
          >>> the
          >>> other op to send his grid to me. Having only one reporting system that
          >>> is
          >>> consistent with other VHF/UHF operations makes a lot more sense to me.
          >>> BTW,
          >>> 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
          >>> grid
          >>> allowed me to move the beam and increase the probability of completing
          >>> the
          >>> contact in a short time (I have long boom antennas on 6M and 2M with
          >>> narrow
          >>> beamwidths). This is good for everyone because more contacts can be
          >>> made in
          >>> the small frequency range that is used during the relatively short MS
          >>> window
          >>> each day.
          >>>
          >>> Am I the only one who thinks this is logical?
          >>>
          >>> 73,
          >>> Clay W7CE
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> ----- Original Message -----
          >>> From: "Jim Kennedy" <kennedyjp@...>
          >>> To: "'Al'" <wa4ewv@...>; <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On
          >>>> Behalf Of Al
          >>>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 9:05 PM
          >>>> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com; 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.
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> 73,
          >>>>
          >>>> Al
          >>>>
          >>>> WA4EWV
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>> ----- Original Message -----
          >>>>
          >>>> From: Randy Tipton <mailto:wa5ufh@...>
          >>>>
          >>>> To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.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
          >>>> bring
          >>>> 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)
          >>>> latter..
          >>>> 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.
          >>>> I
          >>>> 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
          >>>>
          >>>> contact...
          >>>>
          >>>> I assume K5ME is "Portable" or "Using Grids as a Reports ... "This
          >>>> should
          >>>> 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
          >>>> a
          >>>> 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
          >>>> two
          >>>> good uses.
          >>>>
          >>>> Grids are used as reports in most contests and by rovers but notice
          >>>> they
          >>>> are
          >>>> not necessary in message Tx1 even for these situations. Not all rovers
          >>>> are
          >>>> using PJ and the Grid as a Report works great to let the other person
          >>>> know
          >>>> I am possibly in a new grid or am a new initial contact for them while
          >>>> providing
          >>>> that "Unknown" piece of information required for a "contact". In this
          >>>> case
          >>>> the
          >>>> 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
          >>>> grids
          >>>> and I captured all those grids in his "Report" or "CQ". Rovers may wish
          >>>> to
          >>>> 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
          >>>> important.
          >>>> I have had busted contacts on two meters because I never got Both Calls
          >>>> but
          >>>> 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
          >>>>
          >>>> calls
          >>>> and had the ping width large enough to get the missing "W" but instead
          >>>> I
          >>>> got
          >>>> 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
          >>>> both
          >>>> 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,
          >>>> first
          >>>> 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
          >>>> station
          >>>> not using
          >>>> PJ. Rovers or Portable stations using "PJ assist" generally use
          >>>> standard
          >>>>
          >>>> messages
          >>>> and share the Grid location on the logger.
          >>>>
          >>>> When using Grid as a report, only use the first (4) characters. I have
          >>>> copied
          >>>> 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
          >>>> clearly
          >>>> is not needed or required and can only add confusion. I would be
          >>>> interested
          >>>> 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
          >>>> message
          >>>> for all situations.
          >>>>
          >>>> Tip
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> ------------------------------------
          >>>
          >>> To unsubscribe, send an email to:
          >>> wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
          >>>
          >>> WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> Yahoo! Groups Links
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>
          >
          >
        • Dave Miller
          Tip, r u keeping score on this one. I have absolutely no problem with grids in a CQ, in fact I prefer them for proper beam positioning. I don t send grids
          Message 4 of 18 , Aug 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Tip,

            r u keeping score on this one. I have absolutely no problem with grids in a CQ, in fact I prefer them for proper beam positioning. I don't send grids in TX1 cause they are not part of the SOP template and might cause confusion at this point. But what is the consensus here concerning the report, grid report or signal report or both?

            Dave N9SS
          • Randy Tipton
            Dave, no score keeping ... It will always be an option I suppose that the user has. In set-up /options most will probably stick with the reports because it
            Message 5 of 18 , Aug 3, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              Dave, no score keeping ... It will always be an option I suppose that the
              user has. In set-up /options most will probably stick with the "reports"
              because it is the default when the program is first loaded and what the
              majority are using.


              I accept "Grids" as the unknown piece of information for the contact.

              If I am running a sked that will be "new / special to me" I will want to use
              the single tone short hand messages. The Grid as report might be the cause
              of a busted contact? We have all noticed that when we get to the single tone
              messages the contact progresses faster. i.e. more pings are heard.

              My concern was using what is an "option for reports" in Tx 1 message Grids.
              I have no problem with the Grid in the CQ especially for rovers / portable
              stations without PJ assistance. But if I was calling CQ on two meters I
              personally would not use it because of the added text length that must be
              decoded. CQ D7 WA5UFH EL19 vs. CQ D7 WA5UFH

              So no score card Dave, but I do hope those using the Grid in Tx1 give it
              some consideration. Thanks for your comments.

              Tip



              ----- Original Message -----
              From: "Dave Miller" <n9ssham@...>
              To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Sunday, August 02, 2009 10:10 PM
              Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it? Why not?


              > Tip,
              >
              > r u keeping score on this one. I have absolutely no problem with grids in
              > a CQ, in fact I prefer them for proper beam positioning. I don't send
              > grids in TX1 cause they are not part of the SOP template and might cause
              > confusion at this point. But what is the consensus here concerning the
              > report, grid report or signal report or both?
              >
              > Dave N9SS
              >
              >
              >
              > ------------------------------------
              >
              > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
              > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Russ K2TXB
              Hi Randy. I agree with you 100%. Grid square should never be included in the TX1 message. And I think the main reasons people do it are either that they are
              Message 6 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi Randy. I agree with you 100%. Grid square should never be included in the TX1 message.  And I think the main reasons people do it are either that they are copying someone else who does it, or that they are trying to 'shorten' the QSO by sending the report along with the calls.  But the accepted format for making a contact in this country is to only send the report when you have successfully copied both his call and your call.  Thus sending the report prior to the reception of calls is totally confusing to those who try to abide by the rules.  The rules are simple:
                 
                1. Prior to receiving both calls, only send both calls (or CQ plus your call). *
                2. After receiving both calls (but not a report) only send both calls plus report.
                3. After receiving both calls and the report, send only RRR.
                4. When both stations receive RRR, the contact is complete.
                 
                The exchange of 73 facilitates making sure that the RRR has been received by both.  If you receive 73 then it is clear that the other station has received your rogers.  That makes it easier to know when it is ok to quit.  But it is in no way necessary to send or receive 73 for it to be a good contact.  If you receive a QSL card from the other station then that is your confirmation that he received your RRR.  Of course there are numerous other ways to find out if the RRR's were received, and all of them are legal and above board.  Some of those methods are via chat page, by cluster, by email, by telephone, etc.  But you should never check those channels until you have received RRR yourself.  Why not?  Because if you check the chat page when you have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements.  At that point it is a busted contact and must be done over.
                 
                Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is complete, or you have given up...
                 
                * For random contacts it is acceptable to send your grid with the CQ, but in that case the grid square must NEVER be used as the report.
                 
                73, Russ K2TXB 


                From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Randy Tipton
                Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2009 2:47 PM
                To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                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 bring
                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)
                latter..
                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. I
                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
                contact...

                I assume K5ME is "Portable" or "Using Grids as a Reports ... "This should
                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 a
                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 two
                good uses.

                Grids are used as reports in most contests and by rovers but notice they are
                not necessary in message Tx1 even for these situations. Not all rovers are
                using PJ and the Grid as a Report works great to let the other person know
                I am possibly in a new grid or am a new initial contact for them while
                providing
                that "Unknown" piece of information required for a "contact". In this case
                the
                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 grids
                and I captured all those grids in his "Report" or "CQ". Rovers may wish to
                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 important.
                I have had busted contacts on two meters because I never got Both Calls but
                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
                calls
                and had the ping width large enough to get the missing "W" but instead I got
                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 both
                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, first
                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 station
                not using
                PJ. Rovers or Portable stations using "PJ assist" generally use standard
                messages
                and share the Grid location on the logger.

                When using Grid as a report, only use the first (4) characters. I have
                copied
                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 clearly
                is not needed or required and can only add confusion. I would be interested
                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 message
                for all situations.

                Tip

              • Clay W7CE
                ... Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting option (necessary for contest Q s) can never be used if you sent your grid with
                Message 7 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  > 1. Prior to receiving both calls, only send both calls (or CQ plus your
                  > call). *
                  >
                  > * For random contacts it is acceptable to send your grid with the CQ, but
                  > in
                  > that case the grid square must NEVER be used as the report.
                  >
                  > 73, Russ K2TXB
                  >

                  Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting
                  option (necessary for contest Q's) can never be used if you sent your grid
                  with the CQ. In grid reporting, you report your grid in either TX2 or TX3
                  as part of the normal sequence. In either reporting system there is nothing
                  wrong with sending your grid along with the CQ. The redundancy of sending
                  it with the CQ and then later with TX2 does not invalidate the contact or
                  make it confusing.

                  Likewise, if you're in the normal reporting system, then sending your grid
                  along with TX1 has no impact on the remainder of the exchange. It's simply
                  an extra piece of unrequired info. No different then sending "73 Tnx" for
                  TX5. It may require longer pings for a good decode, but that should be left
                  up to the operators and the conditions to determine. I don't see any need
                  for a hard and fast rule here. I suppose some might be confused by this (is
                  it TX1 normal report, or TX2 grid report?). However, if someone answers my
                  "CQ W7CE CN87" with "W7CE K7*** DN13" this is no room for confusion. The
                  only valid possibility is that they are sending TX1, since TX2 can only be
                  sent after both calls have been copied.

                  73,
                  Clay W7CE
                • nz3m_dave
                  Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the other station reports on the chat that he received it, it s a QSO. I don t know
                  Message 8 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't know what you are trying to say here.

                    Dave NZ3M



                    --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@...> wrote:
                    But you should never check those channels until you have
                    received RRR yourself. Why not? Because if you check the chat page when you have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements. At that point it is a busted contact and must be done over.

                    Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is
                    complete, or you have given up...

                    > 73, Russ K2TXB
                    >
                  • Russ K2TXB
                    Clay said: Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting option (necessary for contest Q s) can never be used if you sent your
                    Message 9 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Clay said:
                       
                      Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting
                      option (necessary for contest Q's) can never be used if you sent your grid
                      with the CQ. In grid reporting, you report your grid in either TX2 or TX3
                      as part of the normal sequence. In either reporting system there is nothing
                      wrong with sending your grid along with the CQ. The redundancy of sending
                      it with the CQ and then later with TX2 does not invalidate the contact or
                      make it confusing.
                      It can.  The other station already knows your report before he ever receives it from you, if he copied it with your CQ. This means that if he only copies part of the grid, he might consider he has it and skip directly to RRR.  Of course you are right if you assume that everyone will patiently wait until they have recevied the grid again, but how many contesters have that patience in the heat of the contest.  I never send my grid with CQ in a contest.  Not necessary since it is the report too.
                       
                      I think that too many operators are sliding down the slippery slope of taking shortcuts with the procedure for contacts.  Just look at HF DXing!  I would bet that 60% of contacts made are not valid due to the loose procedures used.  (If you do not understand what I mean, I will provide examples...)  I'd hate to see VHF operators start doing the same things.  Strict adherence to the rules is the best answer.
                       
                      73, Russ K2TXB


                      From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Clay W7CE
                      Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 10:17 AM
                      To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?

                       

                      > 1. Prior to receiving both calls, only send both calls (or CQ plus your
                      > call). *
                      >
                      > * For random contacts it is acceptable to send your grid with the CQ, but
                      > in
                      > that case the grid square must NEVER be used as the report.
                      >
                      > 73, Russ K2TXB
                      >

                      Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting
                      option (necessary for contest Q's) can never be used if you sent your grid
                      with the CQ. In grid reporting, you report your grid in either TX2 or TX3
                      as part of the normal sequence. In either reporting system there is nothing
                      wrong with sending your grid along with the CQ. The redundancy of sending
                      it with the CQ and then later with TX2 does not invalidate the contact or
                      make it confusing.

                      Likewise, if you're in the normal reporting system, then sending your grid
                      along with TX1 has no impact on the remainder of the exchange. It's simply
                      an extra piece of unrequired info. No different then sending "73 Tnx" for
                      TX5. It may require longer pings for a good decode, but that should be left
                      up to the operators and the conditions to determine. I don't see any need
                      for a hard and fast rule here. I suppose some might be confused by this (is
                      it TX1 normal report, or TX2 grid report?). However, if someone answers my
                      "CQ W7CE CN87" with "W7CE K7*** DN13" this is no room for confusion. The
                      only valid possibility is that they are sending TX1, since TX2 can only be
                      sent after both calls have been copied.

                      73,
                      Clay W7CE

                    • Russ K2TXB
                      Dave said: Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the other station reports on the chat that he received it, it s a QSO. I
                      Message 10 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Dave said:
                         
                        Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't know what you are trying to say here.

                        That is not right.  The rules clearly state that BOTH stations must receive rogers in order for the contact to be valid.  If you receive RRR and have not yet sent them, the contact is not complete and does not count.  Further if you receive RRR and send your own RRR, but the other station never copies it, the contact is likewise void.
                         
                        I once almost completed a meteor scatter contact with a station in Colorado, a distance of over 1900 miles from my FM29 location.  It would have been a world record 2 meter MS contact, and would probably have stood for many many years.  But I never received his RRR.  Everything else was complete, we had both calls each way, full reports, and he got my RRR.  I can assure you that it was very tempting to claim it as a complete QSO - especially as I had been trying to make that path for many years.  But it never happened and most likely never will (for me).  That is the nature of meteor scatter - you can not make all the contacts, and if you want to be proud of the contacts you have made it is essential that, in your own heart, you know that every claimed QSO was done with strict adherence to the rules and that no one can legitimately question your accomplishment.
                         
                        73, Russ K2TXB



                        From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of nz3m_dave
                        Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 10:20 AM
                        To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?

                         

                        Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't know what you are trying to say here.

                        Dave NZ3M

                        --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com, "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@...> wrote:
                        But you should never check those channels until you have
                        received RRR yourself. Why not? Because if you check the chat page when you have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements. At that point it is a busted contact and must be done over.

                        Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is
                        complete, or you have given up...

                        > 73, Russ K2TXB
                        >

                      • nz3m_dave
                        Russ, TX3 is the first roger (R26). Both stations don t need to receive RRR or TX4 73 Dave NZ3M
                        Message 11 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Russ,

                          TX3 is the first "roger" (R26). Both stations don't need to receive RRR or TX4

                          73
                          Dave NZ3M





                          --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com, "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > Dave said:
                          >
                          > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                          > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                          > know what you are trying to say here.
                          >
                          > That is not right. The rules clearly state that BOTH stations must receive
                          > rogers in order for the contact to be valid. If you receive RRR and have
                          > not yet sent them, the contact is not complete and does not count. Further
                          > if you receive RRR and send your own RRR, but the other station never copies
                          > it, the contact is likewise void.
                          >
                          > I once almost completed a meteor scatter contact with a station in Colorado,
                          > a distance of over 1900 miles from my FM29 location. It would have been a
                          > world record 2 meter MS contact, and would probably have stood for many many
                          > years. But I never received his RRR. Everything else was complete, we had
                          > both calls each way, full reports, and he got my RRR. I can assure you that
                          > it was very tempting to claim it as a complete QSO - especially as I had
                          > been trying to make that path for many years. But it never happened and
                          > most likely never will (for me). That is the nature of meteor scatter - you
                          > can not make all the contacts, and if you want to be proud of the contacts
                          > you have made it is essential that, in your own heart, you know that every
                          > claimed QSO was done with strict adherence to the rules and that no one can
                          > legitimately question your accomplishment.
                          >
                          > 73, Russ K2TXB
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > _____
                          >
                          > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                          > Of nz3m_dave
                          > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 10:20 AM
                          > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                          > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                          > know what you are trying to say here.
                          >
                          > Dave NZ3M
                          >
                          > --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup%40yahoogroups.com> ps.com,
                          > "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@> wrote:
                          > But you should never check those channels until you have
                          > received RRR yourself. Why not? Because if you check the chat page when you
                          > have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received
                          > the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a
                          > means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements. At that point it is a
                          > busted contact and must be done over.
                          >
                          > Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is
                          > complete, or you have given up...
                          >
                          > > 73, Russ K2TXB
                          > >
                          >
                        • Bill W5WVO
                          Reading through this thread, this is clearly the misunderstanding that Russ has. Both stations do not need to (nor should they) send every message. The
                          Message 12 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Reading through this thread, this is clearly the misunderstanding that Russ has. Both stations do not need to (nor should they) send every message. The messages alternate. Only one station sends R26 (which contains that station's "roger"). Then the other station sends RRR. And that's it. It's a QSO.
                             
                            If you press the F5 key in WSJT, you will see Joe Taylor's very clear explanation of who sends what when.
                             
                            Bill W5WVO
                             
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: nz3m_dave
                            Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 11:09 AM
                            Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?

                             

                            Russ,

                            TX3 is the first "roger" (R26). Both stations don't need to receive RRR or TX4

                            73
                            Dave NZ3M

                            --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com, "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Dave said:
                            >
                            > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                            > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                            > know what you are trying to say here.
                            >
                            > That is not right. The rules clearly state that BOTH stations must receive
                            > rogers in order for the contact to be valid. If you receive RRR and have
                            > not yet sent them, the contact is not complete and does not count. Further
                            > if you receive RRR and send your own RRR, but the other station never copies
                            > it, the contact is likewise void.
                            >
                            > I once almost completed a meteor scatter contact with a station in Colorado,
                            > a distance of over 1900 miles from my FM29 location. It would have been a
                            > world record 2 meter MS contact, and would probably have stood for many many
                            > years. But I never received his RRR. Everything else was complete, we had
                            > both calls each way, full reports, and he got my RRR. I can assure you that
                            > it was very tempting to claim it as a complete QSO - especially as I had
                            > been trying to make that path for many years. But it never happened and
                            > most likely never will (for me). That is the nature of meteor scatter - you
                            > can not make all the contacts, and if you want to be proud of the contacts
                            > you have made it is essential that, in your own heart, you know that every
                            > claimed QSO was done with strict adherence to the rules and that no one can
                            > legitimately question your accomplishment.
                            >
                            > 73, Russ K2TXB
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > _____
                            >
                            > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com] On Behalf
                            > Of nz3m_dave
                            > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 10:20 AM
                            > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com
                            > Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                            > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                            > know what you are trying to say here.
                            >
                            > Dave NZ3M
                            >
                            > --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup% 40yahoogroups. com> ps.com,
                            > "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@> wrote:
                            > But you should never check those channels until you have
                            > received RRR yourself. Why not? Because if you check the chat page when you
                            > have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received
                            > the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a
                            > means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements. At that point it is a
                            > busted contact and must be done over.
                            >
                            > Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is
                            > complete, or you have given up...
                            >
                            > > 73, Russ K2TXB
                            > >
                            >

                          • Russ K2TXB
                            Bill wrote: Reading through this thread, this is clearly the misunderstanding that Russ has. Both stations do not need to (nor should they) send every message.
                            Message 13 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Bill wrote:
                               
                              Reading through this thread, this is clearly the misunderstanding that Russ has. Both stations do not need to (nor should they) send every message. The messages alternate. Only one station sends R26 (which contains that station's "roger"). Then the other station sends RRR. And that's it. It's a QSO.
                               
                              Oh Boy!  Sorry Bill and others.  I forget that I have not been too active here, and on the air, since my move in 2007.  So I could not rightfully expect you to know of my history or accomplishments.  As one who started trying HSMS in the 1970's, using slowed down and speeded up tape recorders to send and receive CW at a couple of hundred WPM, and was very active in with the first HSMS computer programs, and who worked his way through all of the various renditions of FSK441, once it became available, I can assure you that I know exactly what the procedures are, what the rules are, and how to use them to best advantage.
                               
                              That said, I can see nothing in my previous comments to lead anyone to think that I think that every message has to be used by both stations.  Believe me, I know very well that is untrue.  Perhaps your misunderstanding arises from my use of RRR to represent sending of rogers.  OF COURSE sending R26 also sends rogers.  R26 means, exactly, RRR (got your report{and calls}), and your report is 26.  So, of course, when you receive R26 you are receiving the RRR signal!!!!!
                               
                              However one person I replied to said that it was good enough that only one side of the QSO received RRR.  That is completely untrue.
                               
                              Regards, Russ K2TXB   (FM29PT - WAS, WAC, 44 DXCC, 419 Grids, 597 MS contacts - all on 2 meters - now moved to FN20MB).
                               
                               


                              From: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Bill W5WVO
                              Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 1:30 PM
                              To: wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com; nz3m_dave
                              Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?

                               

                              Reading through this thread, this is clearly the misunderstanding that Russ has. Both stations do not need to (nor should they) send every message. The messages alternate. Only one station sends R26 (which contains that station's "roger"). Then the other station sends RRR. And that's it. It's a QSO.
                               
                              If you press the F5 key in WSJT, you will see Joe Taylor's very clear explanation of who sends what when.
                               
                              Bill W5WVO
                               
                              ----- Original Message -----
                              From: nz3m_dave
                              Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 11:09 AM
                              Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?

                               

                              Russ,

                              TX3 is the first "roger" (R26). Both stations don't need to receive RRR or TX4

                              73
                              Dave NZ3M

                              --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com, "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@...> wrote:
                              >
                              > Dave said:
                              >
                              > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                              > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                              > know what you are trying to say here.
                              >
                              > That is not right. The rules clearly state that BOTH stations must receive
                              > rogers in order for the contact to be valid. If you receive RRR and have
                              > not yet sent them, the contact is not complete and does not count. Further
                              > if you receive RRR and send your own RRR, but the other station never copies
                              > it, the contact is likewise void.
                              >
                              > I once almost completed a meteor scatter contact with a station in Colorado,
                              > a distance of over 1900 miles from my FM29 location. It would have been a
                              > world record 2 meter MS contact, and would probably have stood for many many
                              > years. But I never received his RRR. Everything else was complete, we had
                              > both calls each way, full reports, and he got my RRR. I can assure you that
                              > it was very tempting to claim it as a complete QSO - especially as I had
                              > been trying to make that path for many years. But it never happened and
                              > most likely never will (for me). That is the nature of meteor scatter - you
                              > can not make all the contacts, and if you want to be proud of the contacts
                              > you have made it is essential that, in your own heart, you know that every
                              > claimed QSO was done with strict adherence to the rules and that no one can
                              > legitimately question your accomplishment.
                              >
                              > 73, Russ K2TXB
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > _____
                              >
                              > From: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com [mailto:wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com] On Behalf
                              > Of nz3m_dave
                              > Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 10:20 AM
                              > To: wsjtgroup@yahoogrou ps.com
                              > Subject: [wsjtgroup] Re: Tx1 ... Why add to it?
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Only one received RRR makes a complete QSO. If you are sending RRR and the
                              > other station reports on the chat that he received it, it's a QSO. I' don't
                              > know what you are trying to say here.
                              >
                              > Dave NZ3M
                              >
                              > --- In wsjtgroup@yahoogrou <mailto:wsjtgroup% 40yahoogroups. com> ps.com,
                              > "Russ K2TXB" <k2txb@> wrote:
                              > But you should never check those channels until you have
                              > received RRR yourself. Why not? Because if you check the chat page when you
                              > have not received RRR, and you see that your partner is saying he received
                              > the RRR, then you have received part of the necessary QSO information via a
                              > means that is not part of the legal QSO requirements. At that point it is a
                              > busted contact and must be done over.
                              >
                              > Therefore it is wise to never look at the chat page until your QSO is
                              > complete, or you have given up...
                              >
                              > > 73, Russ K2TXB
                              > >
                              >

                            • Randy Tipton
                              When there is any douby it is best to refer back to the SOP. The SOP has been around a long time for Meteor Scatter operators. I feel we should all adhere not
                              Message 14 of 18 , Aug 8, 2009
                              • 0 Attachment
                                When there is any douby it is best to refer back to the SOP. The SOP has
                                been around
                                a long time for Meteor Scatter operators. I feel we should all adhere not
                                only to the SOP
                                but also the operating suggestions given at the top of the PJ page. These
                                page instructions
                                are actually well thought out and enhance the pj process for all of us. (The
                                PJ operating
                                instructions was not part of this thed so just a side thought)

                                One thing I believe should be changed is the Link found at the top of
                                PJ page to the SOP. Contacts today are using FSK or JT6M modes and the link
                                should be
                                changed to ... http://www.qsl.net/w8wn/hscw/papers/fsk-sop.html If others
                                agree, maybe Chris can make that change.

                                Several years ago we simplified the SOP and several stations in the group
                                assisted ...
                                it is posted here... http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/Misc/ShortSOP.htm The intent
                                was not to
                                change a single element but to simplify it for newbie's.

                                When you read the SOP there are a few exceptions for changing messages. They
                                are related to message Tx2 and CQ. This relates to some of the discussion on
                                going.

                                Clearly the Grid in the CQ is for portable / MM stations.
                                The Grid square is to be used as reports in contests.
                                Tx2 Msg may be changed to shorten the msg length for low power stations.
                                Both stations receive the "Roger" and it is suggested 'to be sure' by
                                receiving it twice!

                                The SOP recommendation for Low Power Stations copied...
                                "Note on WSJT's FSK441 North American reporting: The #2 Standard Text Box
                                defaults to "Firstcall report Secondcall report report" (e.g., K1JT 26 W8WN
                                2626). The reason for this format is to allow monitoring stations to tell
                                which station they're hearing. Since the pair of calls is the longest string
                                of text to exchange, lower-power stations may find it advantageous to change
                                this to "Firstcall report Secondcall report" or even "Firstcall Secondcall
                                report."

                                This change is definitely recommended for contests when the Grid Square is
                                required for the report."

                                (Note: I take advantage of the above, it has been helpful I believe
                                especially on two meters.)

                                Copied from the SOP:
                                "Other sometimes-used exchanges:
                                Burst length "S" report. Standard in North America since the 1950's for slow
                                CW and later for SSB.
                                Grid square. Required for most contests. Sometimes used by portable or /MM
                                stations; however, on FSK441, it is becomming common for the portable or /MM
                                station to include their current grid in the CQ . The grid square normally
                                should not be used on HSMS for the report except for contests."

                                Concerning sending the Grid in a CQ the SOP States...
                                "CQ with GRID SQUARE - It is now common for /MM, /M, and portable stations
                                (who may change locations) to include their Grid Square in the CQ. This
                                enables the receiving stations to know the location of the portable/mobile
                                station, and whether or not they need that particular grid square. Thus,
                                W1LP/MM might call "CQ W1LP EL62". This is not recommended for fixed
                                stations - it adds unnecessary information to the CQ, as the locations of
                                most fixed stations are usually already known."

                                Concerning the receipt of two "Rogers"
                                Copied from the SOP:
                                "When both get a pair of Rogers (you usually need at least two to be
                                sure!), the QSO is officially complete. However, the other station will not
                                know this. So it is customary to then send "73" to let the other station
                                know that it's complete, even though the "73" is not required for a complete
                                QSO."

                                The Required Protocol is:
                                REQUIREMENTS FOR A QSO:
                                The same as for any mode of operation or propagation - an exchange of both
                                call signs, an exchange of some type of information or report, and an
                                exchange of confirmation of the same.
                                When a station copies both calls, he sends calls and report.
                                If he gets both calls and a report, he sends his report & Roger.
                                If he gets report and Roger, he sends Rogers.
                                When both get a pair of Rogers (you usually need at least two to be sure!),
                                the QSO is officially complete. However, the other station will not know
                                this. So it is customary to then send "73" to let the other station know
                                that it's complete, even though the "73" is not required for a complete QSO.




                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: "Clay W7CE" <w7ce@...>
                                To: <wsjtgroup@yahoogroups.com>
                                Sent: Saturday, August 08, 2009 9:17 AM
                                Subject: Re: [wsjtgroup] Tx1 ... Why add to it?


                                >> 1. Prior to receiving both calls, only send both calls (or CQ plus your
                                >> call). *
                                >>
                                >> * For random contacts it is acceptable to send your grid with the CQ, but
                                >> in
                                >> that case the grid square must NEVER be used as the report.
                                >>
                                >> 73, Russ K2TXB
                                >>
                                >
                                > Your explanation of how things should work implies that the grid reporting
                                > option (necessary for contest Q's) can never be used if you sent your grid
                                > with the CQ. In grid reporting, you report your grid in either TX2 or TX3
                                > as part of the normal sequence. In either reporting system there is
                                > nothing
                                > wrong with sending your grid along with the CQ. The redundancy of sending
                                > it with the CQ and then later with TX2 does not invalidate the contact or
                                > make it confusing.
                                >
                                > Likewise, if you're in the normal reporting system, then sending your grid
                                > along with TX1 has no impact on the remainder of the exchange. It's
                                > simply
                                > an extra piece of unrequired info. No different then sending "73 Tnx" for
                                > TX5. It may require longer pings for a good decode, but that should be
                                > left
                                > up to the operators and the conditions to determine. I don't see any need
                                > for a hard and fast rule here. I suppose some might be confused by this
                                > (is
                                > it TX1 normal report, or TX2 grid report?). However, if someone answers
                                > my
                                > "CQ W7CE CN87" with "W7CE K7*** DN13" this is no room for confusion. The
                                > only valid possibility is that they are sending TX1, since TX2 can only be
                                > sent after both calls have been copied.
                                >
                                > 73,
                                > Clay W7CE
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > ------------------------------------
                                >
                                > To unsubscribe, send an email to:
                                > wsjtgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                                >
                                > WSJTGroup HomePage http://www.ykc.com/wa5ufh/
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                >
                                >
                                >
                                >
                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.